• smokin_shinobi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    237
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Harris should refuse Fox because they have claimed in court to be an entertainment channel and not a news organization. If she does use her ABC time she should post that on a giant screen behind her podium.

    • mad_asshatter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      124
      ·
      3 months ago

      She should agree to Fox if:

      1. It takes place after ABC (so Trump doesn’t bail)

      2. Fox airs an explanation, immediately before and after the debate, for the $750 million+ settlement concerning the Big Lie.

      • SeaJ@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        51
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Considering how quick they are to point out that Biden legitimately won the 2020 election now that they had to pay out, Harris should hammer the point that Biden won in 2020 to poke the bear that is Trump. We’ll see if Fox is willing to be sued again and not call him on it or cut him off.

        • Vanon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          ·
          3 months ago

          This is a very good point. If she ever ends up on Fox (hope not), it would be negligent not to use this attack. T**** lost, and he still can’t admit this basic, important fact. A fact his lawyers, all around the country, could not escape, in even the most friendly jurisdiction. Some of them are now disbarred because of this. Fox News paid an incredible sum (and lost Cucker) because of this.

    • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Read article that she refused and told Trump he needs to stick to the debate he already agreed to on a prime time channel. Not all of us have cable but lots of people can pick up ABC. She said she be there whether he is or not.

    • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      ·
      3 months ago

      They have already responded. Flat out said stop playing games and show up on the 10th or I’ll use that prime time spot on my own. Perfectly executed.

      • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        3 months ago

        “We’re happy to discuss further debates after the one both campaigns have already agreed to,” he added. “Mr. Anytime, anywhere, anyplace should have no problem with that unless he’s too scared to show up on the 10th.”

        Gold.

    • takeda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      3 months ago

      She already is sticking to the scheduled debate that will be next week and starting that they can schedule additional ones. The whole Fox News stunt likely is an attempt to avoid debate at all.

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      3 months ago

      To be clear Fox has never argued that their entire network is entertainment and not news. They have made that distinction between what they call opinion shows like Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity’s old shows and their actual news segments. Fox does produce a legitimate news broadcast that is considerably less biased and inflammatory than those opinion shows. Unfortunately that broadcast is not nearly as popular as the garbage shows they’ve had to make the arguments you’re referencing about.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I don’t give a flying fuck about the bullshit excuses of lying propagandists. And no, their “news” segments are not “legitimate:” the fact that they’re “considerably less biased” than the rest of it is just damning with faint praise. The “news” segments may not tell outright lies like the talking-head shows do, but they damn well lie by omission in terms of which stories they choose to cover and who they choose to quote.

        • krashmo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          3 months ago

          I don’t think anything I said could be considered praise of Fox News. It’s simply more factual and measured than the profanity laden emotional outburst you chose to go with. Fox can suck a whole bag of dicks for all I care, I just think it’s important to have your facts straight. After all, not doing so is exactly why most of us have a problem with Fox to begin with.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I just think it’s important to have your facts straight.

            Then why didn’t you? The fact is that even what they call “news” is still extremely biased. The fact that it’s “less” so, compared to commentary shows that are so far off the deep end that I’d have to invent new superlatives to adequately express how biased they are, does not change its position on an absolute bias scale.

            You called that shit “legitimate,” and that just isn’t true.

            • krashmo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              3 months ago

              Are you really getting your panties in a bunch because I’m not agreeing with you hard enough? Or is it that you’d rather virtue signal than acknowledge facts? The main takeaway of what I originally said is that Fox has never said in court that their news segments are entertainment that has no obligation to stick to the truth. The person I responded to made that claim and it is factually incorrect. That argument only applies to what they call their opinion segments. If you take issue with that then you’re ignorant of the facts and that’s all there is to it.

              If you want to interpret the rest of what I said as an endorsement of the quality of their news segments then that’s your own business. Those were clearly relative statements which you are choosing to be intentionally obtuse about so please take this opportunity to take the rest of your unnecessarily hostile comments with you when you fuck off.

      • orbitz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Not entire network of shows is entertainment there’s the 2 hours a day when they give their preferred hosts a break. I don’t really know the hours spent on actual news but I have the impression it’s in low single digit hours. I also assume they put more emphasis on right wing topics during those times, as factual as they may be rather than a balanced news source. If I’m wrong I’ll gladly be corrected since I don’t really watch broadcast TV anyways (corrected typo)