Faux News Kills

[RebLem]

Fox News Lies; An Elderly Woman Dies

By karoli | Crooks and Liars | March 20, 2012 09:00 AM

When I first saw this image on Facebook, I wasn't sure how on earth Fox News could have killed someone's mother. And then I read the message that went with the photo. Tracy Knauss posted it on his Facebook page along with a message which said in part:

I know this personally. FOX News killed my precious mother, Hallie. She watched FOX religiously. And when she fell ten days before she died, she refused to go to the doctor because, "I don't want Obamacare to get all of my information! she declared, recalling the warnings from FOX News "anchors." She was emphatic. She was not going to consort with the muslim enemy. As she made out her will she told her lawyer, "I don't want any of my money going to the Muslim Brotherhood!" And her last protestation dealt with "Obama's death panels." Mother died just days later. I hold FOX News responsible for my mother's death.

Hallie Jean Mayes Knauss Culpepper passed away on February 16, 2012. Ten days earlier, she had fallen, but as Knauss says, refused to see a doctor. Her obituary notes that she was a "lifelong, dyed-in-the-wool Republican" who at one time had also been a business owner (TECO Products, now Griffin Products).

And it seems, she got her news from Fox. It's not hard to understand where she got the idea that "Obamacare" had death panels. Just three days before Mrs. Culpepper's death, they were still calling them death panels. Republicans have been working hard (with the cooperation of some turncoat Democrats) to repeal that board, which is really the last best hope we have for keeping Medicare out of the crosshairs of budget hawks.

The death panel lie has been around since the roll-out of the Affordable Care Act in 2009, when Liberty Council first started circulating emails to seniors and Sarah Palin amplified it. Then we had the Fox News Parade of Idiots saying it over and over again, along with the usual complement of birthers. Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that a lifelong Republican who entered the age of television with the Fairness Doctrine where fair coverage and truth telling was part of the mix, would believe what Fox told her?

Don't write this woman off as some ignorant back-country hick. She clearly wasn't. She owned a company at one time. She paid attention to events and politics in the news, or at least, in the news as she understood it. She, like most of her neighbors, voted Republican. But until Fox News came along, Republicans weren't stupid. They had different philosophies about government and its role, but they weren't blatantly invested in advancing a lie-based ideology until Fox News came along.

It isn't hyperbole to say Fox News killed her. She fell and feared the doctor would kill her. That fear can be laid at the feet of Roger Ailes and his obsession with advancing lies to promote his agenda. When are they going to be held accountable for this?

http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/fox...rly-woman-dies

[Szykneij]

RebLem posted that Fox news kills people, so because I didn't want to die, I stopped watching Fox news. If I hadn't, I would have heard the news report that there was a traffic jam on the highway and I wouldn't have been late for work and got fired. RebLem makes people lose their jobs. When is he going to be held accountable for this?

If indeed the Facebook  story is true (which mine isn't), the son should be the one held accountable for not insisting his mother be treated for her injuries instead of watching her make out her will and die.

[RebLem]

RebLem posted that Fox news kills people, so because I didn't want to die, I stopped watching Fox news. If I hadn't, I would have heard the news report that there was a traffic jam on the highway and I wouldn't have been late for work and got fired. RebLem makes people lose their jobs. When is he going to be held accountable for this?

If indeed the Facebook  story is true (which mine isn't), the son should be the one held accountable for not insisting his mother be treated for her injuries instead of watching her make out her will and die.

Tell me, exactly how do  you do that?  If the doctor says she has a right not to be treated if she does not want to be treated, as my doctor would, how do you force her or the doctor?  And don't you think the lawyer thought about that as ( s )he was drafting the will?  Do you think the lawyer should be sued for malpractice? 

The situation about the traffic report is unreal.  Most places have more than one source of news about traffic.  In each market, there is usually one station that has a reputation for being especially assiduous about traffic reports and putting a lot of resources into it, and people who are concerned about traffic listen to it.  It is seldom a FAUX News station.

American pols don't have the spine to deal with people like Rupert Murdoch.  But the Brits do, and under a government led by the Conservative Party, too. 

[Todd]

It isn't hyperbole to say Fox News killed her.

Of course it is.  (And this assumes the story is true.)

American pols don't have the spine to deal with people like Rupert Murdoch.

Alas, the First Amendment is a roadblock to those who wish to silence opponents.

[drogulus]

     Page not found

     The requested page could not be found. 

     This proves that while Fox has fake news they have real lawyers.

[snyprrr]

     Page not found

     The requested page could not be found. 

     This proves that while Fox has fake news they have real lawyers.

Beautiful!

[Wendell_E]

     Page not found

     The requested page could not be found. 

     This proves that while Fox has fake news they have real lawyers.

Try this: http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/fox-news-lies-elderly-woman-dies

[Bulldog]

Fox News Lies; An Elderly Woman Dies

By karoli | Crooks and Liars | March 20, 2012 09:00 AM

When I first saw this image on Facebook, I wasn't sure how on earth Fox News could have killed someone's mother. And then I read the message that went with the photo. Tracy Knauss posted it on his Facebook page along with a message which said in part:

I know this personally. FOX News killed my precious mother, Hallie. She watched FOX religiously. And when she fell ten days before she died, she refused to go to the doctor because, "I don't want Obamacare to get all of my information! she declared, recalling the warnings from FOX News "anchors." She was emphatic. She was not going to consort with the muslim enemy. As she made out her will she told her lawyer, "I don't want any of my money going to the Muslim Brotherhood!" And her last protestation dealt with "Obama's death panels." Mother died just days later. I hold FOX News responsible for my mother's death.

Hallie Jean Mayes Knauss Culpepper passed away on February 16, 2012. Ten days earlier, she had fallen, but as Knauss says, refused to see a doctor. Her obituary notes that she was a "lifelong, dyed-in-the-wool Republican" who at one time had also been a business owner (TECO Products, now Griffin Products).

And it seems, she got her news from Fox. It's not hard to understand where she got the idea that "Obamacare" had death panels. Just three days before Mrs. Culpepper's death, they were still calling them death panels. Republicans have been working hard (with the cooperation of some turncoat Democrats) to repeal that board, which is really the last best hope we have for keeping Medicare out of the crosshairs of budget hawks.

The death panel lie has been around since the roll-out of the Affordable Care Act in 2009, when Liberty Council first started circulating emails to seniors and Sarah Palin amplified it. Then we had the Fox News Parade of Idiots saying it over and over again, along with the usual complement of birthers. Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that a lifelong Republican who entered the age of television with the Fairness Doctrine where fair coverage and truth telling was part of the mix, would believe what Fox told her?

Don't write this woman off as some ignorant back-country hick. She clearly wasn't. She owned a company at one time. She paid attention to events and politics in the news, or at least, in the news as she understood it. She, like most of her neighbors, voted Republican. But until Fox News came along, Republicans weren't stupid. They had different philosophies about government and its role, but they weren't blatantly invested in advancing a lie-based ideology until Fox News came along.

It isn't hyperbole to say Fox News killed her. She fell and feared the doctor would kill her. That fear can be laid at the feet of Roger Ailes and his obsession with advancing lies to promote his agenda. When are they going to be held accountable for this?

http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/fox...rly-woman-dies

Sorry, your arguments are colored by your usual liberal blinders.  The woman is responsible for her own death; to say that Fox is responsible totally avoids the fact that she had freedom of choice and made a very poor decision.

[Szykneij]

Tell me, exactly how do  you do that?  If the doctor says she has a right not to be treated if she does not want to be treated, as my doctor would, how do you force her or the doctor?

You say "You're my mother and I love you so we have to get that taken care of" and you then convince her to get the help she requires, just as you would when any elderly loved one starts making decisions that are harmful.

The situation about the traffic report is unreal.  Most places have more than one source of news about traffic.

And even more places have multiple sources of news about politics. I don't think there is anywhere where Fox is the only source of news. For me locally, I read the Globe and get the liberal slant and I read the Herald and get the conservative slant and then I form my own opinions. I watch Fox news and I listen to NPR. I consider opposing views, but I don't pay much attention to the Rush Limbaughs, Michael Savages, Bill O'Reillys, Al Frankens, or forum posters of the world who are only interested in promoting their personal agendas.

[drogulus]

    I can understand objecting to Al Franken on ideological grounds, or even the grounds of taste, but I don't think he displays ignorance. His agenda is roughly that of a liberal democrat. He isn't IMO a mirror of Savage, O'Reilly or Limbaugh. I feel free to disagree with Franken, as I sometimes do on war and peace questions, without calling into question his portrayal of facts, as I routinely do with the others. This is part of the conflict between left and right, to be sure. I think it's generally the case that the further from the center right/left you go, the more facts you have to ignore or misstate. In our time the right is more extreme than the left, and they appear to use fake facts or ignore real ones. I can remember a time when it was the other way round.

Try this: http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/fox-news-lies-elderly-woman-dies

      I said the lawyers were real, not that they weren't stupid.

Sorry, your arguments are colored by your usual liberal blinders.  The woman is responsible for her own death; to say that Fox is responsible totally avoids the fact that she had freedom of choice and made a very poor decision.

     I think you're right about the principle responsibility. Vulnerable people, handicapped in a variety of ways, can be preyed on with impunity and it's legally, technically that is, their own fault. Otherwise society is infantilized. That's a good conservative point, but what does that say about the toxic propaganda Fox emits? Nothing good, I warrant.

[Szykneij]

Isn't the story in the op emitting propaganda as well?

It was reported that the unfortunate woman had several health issues at the time of her accident. She passed away ten days after she fell, and her son claims that her death was Fox's fault, but the story only implies and never gives evidence that untreated injuries from the fall caused her death.

At least this source, although obviously sympathetic, gives some additional pertinent information to consider regarding the agenda of the claimant.

http://www.examiner.com/social-justice-in-national/fox-news-literally-scares-woman-to-death

Tracy Knauss, a publisher and an Occupy activist was no fan of Fox News before he lost his mother. "FOX News is no more than an arm of the Republican Party and a mouthpiece of the 1%ers in the plutocrat's attempt to own and control America. Fox's short-term objectives of using propaganda and misinformation to gain viewer loyalty, have worked toward their long term goal of a symbolic Plantation America, home of greed and land of the slave."


"Fox has become America's blinders, keeping citizens focused on their agenda while preventing them from looking elsewhere, just like the way we treat draft horses. Beasts of burden. That's what we've become."

[drogulus]

Isn't the story in the op emitting propaganda as well?

     Yes, but it isn't a news source.

     Let me put it this way, there are all sorts of fake news sites on the web which are even more cavalier about facts than Fox news. They are, if you like, worse than Fox. But it's entirely correct to compare Fox to these horridly unreliable sites, and not at all correct to compare CNN to the sites in question. I see the difference as not ideological (that is, the ideological difference between Fox and CNN is far less important than the substantive difference). Put simply CNN is a liberally biased news network, while Fox is not a news network, and the question of bias is irrelevent to the distinction. This is often reduced to a question of dueling biases, which is beside the point.

[Todd]

while Fox is not a news network

Fox News Channel is indeed a news network, with a well known right wing bias.  Claiming otherwise is foolish.  It's true antipode is not CNN or MSNBC, but rather RT TV, which I discovered while travelling.  Like Fox, it can induce chuckles. 

[drogulus]

     I think that's wrong. Fox has some news on it, but it isn't true that it otherwise behaves like CNN. A more conservative version of CNN would still be devoted to news.

[drogulus]

     Suppose there was a tsunami or an assassination or Israel attacked the Iranian nuclear sites, can you imagine anyone saying "Quick, put on Fox News to see what's happening"? To put it mildly, that would be strange. Even conservatives know that channel switching reveals all, that CNN covers news and Fox is a comment shop on the news that other outlets report. Is there anyone who doesn't know this? C'mon now, really?

[Bulldog]

I think you're right about the principle responsibility. Vulnerable people, handicapped in a variety of ways, can be preyed on with impunity and it's legally, technically that is, their own fault. Otherwise society is infantilized. That's a good conservative point, but what does that say about the toxic propaganda Fox emits? Nothing good, I warrant.

The liberal/leftist press is no stranger to toxic presentations.  By the way, Fox News is a news network.  Of course, it's a mouthpiece for the Republican Party just as MSNBC is a mouthpiece for the Democrats.

Speaking of MSNBC, they are still going nuts about the killing of the teenager in Florida.  And Fox News is going nuts about the innocuous comments Obama make about the tragedy.  The Country would likely be better off if both networks bit the dust.

[drogulus]

     And, before anyone else says it, MSNBC is also a comment shop. They aren't as dumbed down as Fox, though Ed Schultz is getting on my nerves. I like Rachel Maddow, she's very smart and funny. On Fox humor is super unintentional.

     Edit: And smart is.....yeah.

[drogulus]

By the way, Fox News is a news network.  Of course, it's a mouthpiece for the Republican Party just as MSNBC is a mouthpiece for the Democrats.

      Quite so, and that's how they aren't news networks, that and there's not much actual news. Don't make this harder than it is.

[drogulus]

Speaking of MSNBC, they are still going nuts about the killing of the teenager in Florida.  And Fox News is going nuts about the innocuous comments Obama make about the tragedy.  The Country would likely be better off if both networks bit the dust.

     I would go for that trade in a minute. But do you really think conservatives would trade Fox for MSNBC? I don't. MSNBC is vestigial for liberals, an indulgence we easily can do without. All we need is straight news, which we can get from many sources. But the right needs its simulacrum. It wants its fair'n'balanced Bizarro World.

[drogulus]

     ......where female anchors look like porn stars (I.....think).