They said the city of Birmingham in the UK was a place "where non-Muslims just simply don't go".
Here's a sampling of 50 pretty obvious lies:
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/article/2015/feb/26/50-...
An aside, I've literally read a story about a guy who writes "fake news" just for cash, and one of the headlines he made up for clicks, is the exact same as something that was actually said on Fox news:
"Says Colorado food stamp recipients can use ATMs to get cash to buy marijuana."
Here's an NPR story about the fake news creator, when he mentions this:
http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/11/23/503...
Ironically the last bit of Fox News I actually watched was a "fact-check" segment.
In it, the first lady's claim that slaves had built the white house was "fact-checked". By which they meant they didn't actually contradict the fact (because it was true) but minimized it as much as possible, including throwing in the unsupported lie that the slaves were "well treated".
We actually have documentary evidence written by the first lady that was in the white house at the time, that the slaves she saw building the white house were in fact poorly treated.
But even if they were, why would you bring this up? Well-treated slaves are still slaves.
It's not what they say, it's what they leave out. Those soothing dulcet tones are half way to hypnosis.
I give you little credit for recognize Fox News propaganda because it's entry level manipulation. Most people who visit Huffpo know what it is. Organizations like the New York Times, NPR, The Economist and National Review have refined it to an art form.
I take the latter group more seriously because large numbers of people buy into their lines but Fox and Huffpo are what WWF is to armed conflict.
The New York Times is a Communist organization. That is not hyperbole, it is the truth. It's not well hidden if you go and look. They have always supported Communism. Likewise The Economist has always supported Fascist and other authoritarian dictatorships. Inside every friendly, well mannered, articulate moderate is an extremist trying to claw out.
Us Westerners support all manner of extraordinary adventures because for ourselves at the center of world power this is a game that doesn't involve high stakes. The voters are complicit of course, we have prospered greatly over the centuries and like our comfortable lives that don't involve thorny questions.
I don't feel bad about this, it's the same as every other civilization in history. Perhaps we ought to restrain ourselves more from saving the world if only to halt our plumbing the depths of grandiose neurosis. I think I've offended everybody now so I'll shut up.
Was I unclear?
Lies = fiction
Fiction = fake
Selective/subjectively editorialized truth = biased/misleading, but not fake
Objective unbiased truth = not fake
I'm not debating the ratios of any such types of news on any network.
They don't often do that.
Fox News is deeply biased, that isn't in dispute. Only if they or another news outlet lie can the label "fake news" rightfully be applied. Fake = fictional. Anything else is a version of the truth. Biased <> fake.
Haven't heard a good one like that in a while. Here is Bill O' Reilly on Amsterdam, with factual counterpoints: https://youtu.be/sTPsFIsxM3w
When any news outlet reports news objectively and factually, that reporting is not fake. When they report it with subjective editorialization, it's BIASED, but if it's TECHNICALLY TRUE, it's NOT FAKE.
If it's a lie, it's fake. If it's fictional, it's fake. Your quote of my message, for example, was fictional.
Is Fox News "fake news"? More often, it's simply blatant BIAS, but yes, certain hosts are well-known purveyors or FAKE news.
There is zero reason for the issue to be political. Either it's falsified on purpose and with an intent to deceive the consumer (a'la "Fake Gucci Purse") or it's not.