3 ms·
Fox are corporate, pharma-funded and biased, but looking objectively at the last 6-10 years they've proven more credible than the legacy networks, let alone the
by CaptWillard 4y ago
Fox are corporate, pharma-funded and biased, but looking objectively at the last 6-10 years they've proven more credible than the legacy networks, let alone their cable peers.
- MichaelCollins 4y agoIf you really think Fox are credible, then swap MSNBC into my comment instead, the point stands. Or Graham Hancock and the ancient aliens sphere of influencers. Or Ben Shapiro or Richard Spencer. No matter which way you slice it, the twitter check has never been a mark of credibility.
- CaptWillard 4y agoAgreed on that point. I just thought it was a good time to point out that the popular opinion about their relative credibility is outdated. Look at the big stories of the last 6-10 years. How many did Chuck Todd or NPR get totally wrong? And this is the important part: They got a lot wrong by simply not asking obvious questions, let alone any that would require the skepticism or curiosity that used to be requisite to the profession.