Shocking, Even for Fox

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • toasty
    Sir Toastiness
    • Jun 2004
    • 6585

    Shocking, Even for Fox

    In case there was any doubt about whether Fox News was an actual news outlet as opposed to a propaganda throughput, Fox has stooped to altering photos of reporters with whom they disagree to make them look older, balder, and in the case of the dude on the left, borderline retarded. Check this out:



    Just when you think they've hit rock bottom, they prove you wrong. It's actually a little funny, until you consider that the #1 "News" channel in the country actually had a meeting where they decided to alter photos of NYT reporters to get back at them for negative press. Staggering.

  • MJDub
    Are you Kidding me??
    • Jun 2004
    • 2765

    #2
    Re: Shocking, Even for Fox

    Fuck Fox.
    http://www.myspace.com/mjdubmusic

    You can't have manslaughter without laughter.

    "Son," he said without preamble, "never trust a man who doesn't drink because he's probably a self-righteous sort, a man who thinks he knows right from wrong all the time. Some of them are good men, but in the name of goodness, they cause most of the suffering in the world. They're the judges, the meddlers. And, son, never trust a man who drinks but refuses to get drunk. They're usually afraid of something deep down inside, either that they're a coward or a fool or mean and violent. You can't trust a man who's afraid of himself. But sometimes, son, you can trust a man who occasionally kneels before a toilet. The chances are that he is learning something about humility and his natural human foolishness, about how to survive himself. It's damned hard for a man to take himself too seriously when he's heaving his guts into a dirty toilet bowl."

    Comment

    • shosh
      Banned
      • Jun 2004
      • 4668

      #3
      Re: Shocking, Even for Fox

      i lol'ed irl

      retarded for a news channel to do this kind of shit... btw doesnt the owner of fox own the nyt too?

      Comment

      • toasty
        Sir Toastiness
        • Jun 2004
        • 6585

        #4
        Re: Shocking, Even for Fox

        ^^I think Murdoch has been gunning for the NYT, but I didn't think that went through. Could be wrong, though.

        Comment

        • shosh
          Banned
          • Jun 2004
          • 4668

          #5
          Re: Shocking, Even for Fox

          ^ i think i might have been wrong. he bought the wsj

          Comment

          • tiddles
            Encryption, Jr.
            • Jun 2004
            • 6861

            #6
            Re: Shocking, Even for Fox

            isn't this borderline libel?

            Comment

            Working...