Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Home of the Whopper

Fox Nation is renowned for its distorted headlines, but this one really takes the cake. It isn’t a simple distortion; it’s a bald-faced lie.

The story that Fox links to, titled “Mom With Cancer Gets Insurance Help For Transplant”, comes from the CBS affiliate in Ft. Lauderdale, FL. It’s one of those “We’re on your side” stories that local TV stations like to do and concerns a young mother who was denied cancer treatment when her Medicaid policy was canceled. The story doesn’t even mention the healthcare bill, much less any death panels.

And why not? Because the new healthcare bill had absolutely nothing to do with this. The young woman’s Medicaid policy was canceled when she began receiving Social Security disability benefits for her 3-year-old son, which pushed her income over the Medicaid limit. At that point, the hospital decided not to offer the operation, due primarily to liability issues:

The problem is Jackson Memorial Hospital could not provide the procedure because the risk is too high. The universal policy from Medicaid helps shield the hospital from liability in this kind of case. Without it, they are subject to liability issues.

So the problem here was existing Medicaid rules—not the new healthcare bill—and the decision was made by the hospital—not a government panel. But does that deter Fox Nation? Noooo. It is simply breathtaking.

The most worrisome thing is that the FNatics don’t seem to care when FN lies to them. They simply don’t give a rat’s ass. Read the comments, you’ll see. It causes them not a moment’s concern. It is completely irrelevant. It doesn’t even make them think, “Gee, I wonder if maybe there’s anything else they’ve ever told me that might not be 100% accurate?”

It is baffling.

Hmm. Here’s the actual quote from Brokaw’s Today show interview:

[Republicans] know the public is very confused and very anxious about cost [of the health care bill].

He says they’re confused. Not stupid. Who isn’t confused by the healthcare debate?

So I’ve been trying to think of an adjective I could use to describe a headline writer who thinks these two sentences mean the same thing:

1. “The public is confused about the very complex healthcare debate.”

2. “Americans are stupid.”

Ah! I’ve got it. See if you can guess:

S T _ P _ D

Creative Headlining 101

Tim Nicholson feels strongly about climate change. He will not, for example, travel by air. Nicholson’s views on the environment put him into frequent conflict with his employer, UK property investment firm Grainger PLC, which terminated his employment in July, 2008, due to his “philosophical belief about climate change and the environment”.

Last March, Nicholson requested permission to sue Grainger for unfair dismissal, and that request has now been granted. Mr Justice Burton of the UK Employment Appeal Tribunal ruled on November 3 that “a belief in man-made climate change … is capable, if genuinely held, of being a philosophical belief for the purpose of the 2003 Religion and Belief Regulations”.  This means that, in legal matters, an individual’s genuinely-held beliefs on the environment have the same weight as his religious or philosophical beliefs. (It should be noted that Justice Burton is no environmental whacko; he’s the same judge who ruled in 2007 that Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth is partisan and political.)

The UK’s Telegraph published an article about the hearing with this reasonable headline:

telegraph

Fox Nation linked to the article, but apparently decided that the Telegraph‘s headline was too accurate and insufficiently incendiary. Fox needed a better one.

fn

Yes, you read that correctly. The ruling gives an individual’s environmental beliefs the same status as a religion; Fox claims that it says environmentalism is a religion. No disconnect from reality there, eh? Who are these people?

It’s also interesting to note that the justice mentioned both religion and philosophy, but Fox singled out only religion. I guess “U.K Judge Rules Climate Change a ‘Philosophy’” just didn’t cut it.

Asked and Answered

They’re talking about President Obama’s activities on the 9/11 anniversary. It would be funny if it weren’t quite so pathetic. (And I’m not talking about the part where he’s apparently never met the Cronkite memorial.)

Guess whose claim of being “Fair & Balanced” rolled over and sank with all hands?

Need more?

A Convenient Omission

Shockingly, this isn’t true. Details here, where we do climate….

Victory?

I love the smell of hubris in the morning.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.