Sean Hannity's message to the press: You've been exposed as fake

Joe Scarbrough has been all over this message too.

a reply to: StolidPanda

I am not deflecting from the point of the thread. I am merely saying that Hannity is in no position to comment on the matter since he is also a purveyor of lies and misrepresentation.

Its a legitimate call, and a full discussion of the topic at hand cannot be had, unless that is understood by all. It would be all too easy to assume, were this not pointed out, that Fox and pretty much its entire structure are not ALSO guilty of the precise same thing, are just as fake as CNN, and have no value to the people watching their content, other than as a pacifier for under developed minds.

If you think that a balanced and legitimate discussion can be had on this topic without someone pointing that out, showing that the propagandism is bipartisan, not one way, and pointing out that the source of the statement is one of its very worst offenders, then your bias is clearly skewing your attitude to the matter, and I would advise you to take a look at your position more honestly and objectively.

what you think of him doesnt matter..

what he said was true and we've all been saying it!!

If you have a media organisation deliberately & knowingly lying to its audience, it should have its licence revoked and shut down!

a reply to: Agit8dChop

what he said was true and we've all been saying it!!

It's hypocritical when Hannity and his cohorts are part of that very problem.

If you have a media organisation deliberately & knowingly lying to its audience, it should have its licence revoked and shut down!

No. That would violate the right to freedom of the press.

Nah, I don't buy Sean Hannity or FoxNews having a right to call other news outlets out like this. They are the same. They report the same fake crap just with a different smell to it.

I see this as Fox and the conservative news industry staking its leverage as a result of winning the presidency. "Fake News" is a trendy topic right now and since their side won and the left got caught with mud on their face they are just piling it on while they can.

The pendulum swings to the right. The money goes with it.

Just my 2 cents.

a reply to: SoulSurfer

Lmao, Sean Hannity exposes fake news? Talk about irons and kettles calling each other names.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
Hannity, the same Hannity that is guilty of everything he is supposedly against now.

He is the last person that should make such a speech.

I dont sgree with you much but yeah that sounds about right.


clearly he is trying to get on the anti establishment band wagon. he is as full of bs as the rest.

one key indicator of bs MSM is being too one way leaning to the right or the left. fox and sean hanity is the cnn equivalent but in the right side.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Agit8dChop

what he said was true and we've all been saying it!!

It's hypocritical when Hannity and his cohorts are part of that very problem.

If you have a media organisation deliberately & knowingly lying to its audience, it should have its licence revoked and shut down!

No. That would violate the right to freedom of the press.

To lie is to break trust, and frankly noone should trust anything or anyone for lying. So yes it should be outlawed and no, it is not a violation. It is morally wrong to lie and it's even been stated in the first commandment. Thou shall not lie.

As a News organization, they are responsible for keeping the public informed with the truth. If they are unable to perform their duties then they should be shut down for being FAKE NEWS. They are technically under oath by swearing to be a truth organization, and if so then it counts as perjury. Aside from perjury; If they are not speaking the truth then this also counts as Fraud. (Both are and should be illegal.)

per·ju·ry
ˈpərj(ə)rē/
nounLAW
the offense of willfully telling an untruth in a court after having taken an oath or affirmation.
synonyms: lying under oath, giving false evidence/testimony, making false statements, willful falsehood
"she was found guilty of perjury"

fraud
frôd/Submit
noun
wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain.
"he was convicted of fraud"
synonyms: fraudulence, cheating, swindling, embezzlement, deceit, deception, double-dealing, chicanery, sharp practice; More
a person or thing intended to deceive others, typically by unjustifiably claiming or being credited with accomplishments or qualities.
"mediums exposed as tricksters and frauds"

There is a reason why reporters have to triple check the facts. It is called responsible reporting.

a reply to: introvert

No. That would violate the right to freedom of the press.

Great right !!!!

Approved lying and dissemination of false narrative with a goal to poison public opinion.

I'm glad you support that.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

You don't support Freedom of the Press?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Exactly what part of "Congress shall make no law.... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press" are you having trouble with?

I've been waiting to turn that phrasing back on Conservatives for about 30 years now.

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

You don't support Freedom of the Press?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Exactly what part of "Congress shall make no law.... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press" are you having trouble with?

I've been waiting to turn that phrasing back on Conservatives for about 30 years now.

Problem is, where do we morally draw the line when it comes to the lies, fraud and deceit? The only other alternative is for the people to simply turn their backs and boycott such organizations if they aren't being truthful.

If there is no law, then the will of the people and creating an uprising against the lying media is the only option.

a reply to: SoulSurfer

The free market answer would be to let the consumer decide. Regulating things isn't what the Government is supposed to do. Right?

After all that's what I'm currently being told regarding guns, medical care, food inspections, education, environmental issues, energy... and the list goes on and on and on.

Yet, for some reason this is where people with right leaning dispositions choose to draw the line. The one thing that is quite literally the lynch pin of a free peoples. Losing a free and open media will collapse everything else.

That doesn't even address the fact that despite what one may read on sites like ATS - media shenanigans are not at all restricted to "liberal" or "mainstream" news. Conservative sources lie at least as much. For example... I've seen Alex Jones mentioned in this thread. So explain... If he's a bastion of truth, then why did I not get tossed into a FEMA camp during Jade Helm?

Oh, and to directly answer your interrogative... The US has been down this road before. A problem that was solved - for many years. Sadly that solution went away a few years ago.

a reply to: TrueBrit

He is in no position to comment on the matter except that he is and he just did. Impugning his consistency is one thing, but the old tu quoque, "he's a hypocrite therefor he shouldn't talk" argument, is played out, especially considering that minds change and hypocrisy has no bearing on the validity of what was just said.

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: SoulSurfer

The free market answer would be to let the consumer decide. Regulating things isn't what the Government is supposed to do. Right?

After all that's what I'm currently being told regarding guns, medical care, food inspections, education, environmental issues, energy... and the list goes on and on and on.

Yet, for some reason this is where people with right leaning dispositions choose to draw the line. The one thing that is quite literally the lynch pin of a free peoples. Losing a free and open media will collapse everything else.

That doesn't even address the fact that despite what one may read on sites like ATS - media shenanigans are not at all restricted to "liberal" or "mainstream" news. Conservative sources lie at least as much. For example... I've seen Alex Jones mentioned in this thread. So explain... If he's a bastion of truth, then why did I not get tossed into a FEMA camp during Jade Helm?

Oh, and to directly answer your interrogative... The US has been down this road before. A problem that was solved - for many years. Sadly that solution went away a few years ago.

You are completely correct, and yes I see that it would collapse everything else, and no doubt both sides do make mistakes with the inability to provide credible sources and facts. (Though some in the alternative media are spot on but that is just my opinion.)

I remember reading that story on the lift on propaganda ban. Back then it was labeled as "Legalizing lies." I really wish this to be overturned because atleast before this was lifted; people thought twice before spreading propaganda. The ban lift only made the situation worse and turned the field into the wild wild west.

I'm with you on this, because I know this is the truth of the matter. And yes it is indeed sad that it went away.
Maybe it can be overturned in the future? But I wouldn't hold my breath on that...

Thank you for the info and confirming a thought I had. It also confirms that in the end it is up to the will of the people to decide.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

It absolutely does make a difference to validity.

Its about intent. If he said what he said to deflect attention from his own behaviour in the minds of a notoriously forgetful population, then it is more obfuscation. So no matter how true the statement, the fact that he only made it for nefarious purpose ought to detract from the weight, the gravitas involved with the reading of that statement.

Simply put, if both sides are using the same cheat, then it levels the playing field. But onlookers are still being screwed by both teams. People need to demand a refund on their tickets to this crapshow!

a reply to: SoulSurfer

To lie is to break trust, and frankly noone should trust anything or anyone for lying. So yes it should be outlawed and no, it is not a violation

It would be a violation. We all have the freedom of the press and no where does it state that right can be revoked due to being untruthful.

It is morally wrong to lie and it's even been stated in the first commandment. Thou shall not lie.

The commandments have nothing to do with the constitution.

As a News organization, they are responsible for keeping the public informed with the truth.

No, they are not. That is our responsibility.

There is a reason why reporters have to triple check the facts. It is called responsible reporting.

True, but that does not mean we can revoke their right to free press if they get the facts wrong.

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: introvert

No. That would violate the right to freedom of the press.

Great right !!!!

Approved lying and dissemination of false narrative with a goal to poison public opinion.

I'm glad you support that.

I support our constitutional rights and we must keep those rights. That does not mean I support what others may do with that right.

originally posted by: introvert


No, they are not. That is our responsibility.

In the United States, the media is often called the fourth branch of government (or "fourth estate"). That's because it monitors the political process in order to ensure that political players don't abuse the democratic process.

a reply to: TrueBrit

There is a tendency among those who assume the lowest possible motives to believe they have found right ones. That sounds like an illness more than a valid concern. It isn't a fact he made the statement for nefarious purposes.

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: introvert


No, they are not. That is our responsibility.

In the United States, the media is often called the fourth branch of government (or "fourth estate"). That's because it monitors the political process in order to ensure that political players don't abuse the democratic process.

Sounds like an excuse for the intellectually lazy to be, well, lazy.