Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

First off CW why not watch Tucker for yourself so that you understand, what examples did TarHeel put up, the court case surrounding McDonald, a woman looking to cash in on exploiting a paid sexual relationship with Trump, and that is what it was and yes, using a bit of creative license Tucker characterized her a bit inaccurately, but that was not necessarily the point he was making. The lawyer used wh**ever legal tactic he felt would get the case dismissed, and that was the end result. Tucker has never claimed that his show is part of the hard news division at Fox. The other story that the Tarheel throws out is the left pressuring his advertisers because he told the t***h about B*M, the left has a militant faction whose job it is is to go after large corporations pressuring them in instances such as these, much easier to pull advertising then to put up with the harassment coming from these organized groups. I watch Tucker quite a bit and though I have seen some of his interviews where I thought that he looked bad, badgering the guest that he disagreed with, but that is somewhat rare and I left those particular shows feeling that Tucker looked a fool in those instances, but that is not generally the case. Tucker looks at things that other media personalities won't touch, he does so with research and a bunch of common sense and he reports on things that the general public has no idea is taking place.

Now, I find it really ironic that folks such as yourself and the Tarheel still question the integrity of Fox News as if they are somehow worse than the other outlets, when just the opposite is true..... Here take a look at this, BTW Veritas is winning lawsuits stemming from the media's misrepresentations of them.

https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1382000630567469060

DukeTarHeel Loc: NC's "Research Triangle"

Blurry, you are being disingenuous. You should and can do better than that. While I don't agree with you, I still think yo are a reflective person. You can do belter the to adulate trump the liar?

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I don't believe so, I certainly don't believe that Trump lied as much as Biden lies, the big difference is that you had the entire MSM evaluating everything that Trump said and calling it lies, when Biden lies they simply call it political speech.

DukeTarHeel Loc: NC's "Research Triangle"

Blurry, here is just a recent example of Carlson's disinformation efforts.

"Tucker Carlson, the Fox News host, has run at least six segments on her since January. He erroneously claimed that she had been the president of the “Black Studies Association” at Harvard in the 1990s, as if she’d been a professor. In fact, she’d been the 19-year-old president of the Black Students Association."

He deliberately spreads disinformation; why do you buy into it?

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/14/opinion/tucker-carlson-kristen-clarke-v****g-rights.html?campaign_id=39&emc=edit_ty_20210414&instance_id=29214&nl=opinion-today&regi_id=66055870&segment_id=55544&te=1&user_id=c77eeae2064fac3255ee118e7c122403

CWGordon

Blurryeyed: I appreciate that you are trying to communicate with some of us. However, I believe whenever you have a show that appears to be a news show, they need to live up to the very high burden thatt comes with that denomination. If they feel it is ok to deviate from that they really need to disclose when they are deviating. Alternatively, they could redesignate the show as an opinion show or some other classification that provides the listener with the information that the content is not to be considered hard news, but is being Tuckers’ view of the real news. I believe anything less is disingenuous and leads to dangerous misleading information to the viewer. You write that the Karen McDougal situation is the only time he got it wrong. In essence, it appears you are, at one and the same time, stating he is straight hard news and also stating that the show is only entertainment and not hard news. I do not believe he can have it both ways.
You suggest I watch his show. I agree. I have watched it on numerous occassions. Usually, I don’t watch the whole show. Fifteen, maybe 20 minutes here and there. I might tune out and come back later for a few minutes. I do not watch daily or regularly. I found that he presents his news as news. I don’t find much humor there. I do see his personal opinions color much of what he says. I don’t hear him identify when he says those things. I often am surprised that he doesn’t back his opinions up with the real evidence if there is/was evidence. I find the show has a lot of bias, but I am sure my shows would strike you the same. You certainly can find entertaining wh**ever you feel to be so. I hope you fact check whenever he provides information w/o backing it up with data, evidence, or documentation.
I would request or suggest you watch some of the more main stream media. You will find bias, of course. Generally, it is either very obvious or identified as such. Panel members are asked if the lead-in statements by host for each and every segment are accurate and reflect what the facts are or whether they need to modify that which they have just stated. Once a panelist speaks they are expected and generally do provide “back up” data or evidence immediately. They identify where there is no proof of parts or portions of what they are speaking about. They are quite clear with what is news, conjecture, or necessary to complete the story. They have been incredibly fair and objective in covering the Matt Gaetz story. I am hopeful that media other than my primary sources for news would be as fair and objective in covering the story from their perspective. I think I am more impressed with shows other than Tucker for their fair and relatively straightforward coverage of events, issues, and politics.
I feel saddened when you state you have fear regarding the Democratic Administration. That bothers me a lot. I believe they are truly trying to do what is good for you, me, and the Country. I believe the Democratic Party has its’ own issues, but realizes how critical this next 2-4 years will be for our Country.
Four to five years ago I was a pretty conservative guy. I did not ever watch CNN, MSNBC, Fox or any other political type of news. I did not know who Rachel Maddow was nor which side a Bill O’Reilly might be on. I starte out watching conservative media and not the other stations/channels. Over time I watched both. Many of my very strong conservative ideas and thoughts began to change as I weighed the philosophies of both sides and parties. I had v**ed for Reagan, for both Bush candidates. I started to change a wee bit during the second 4 years of the second Bush. I’d have gladly v**ed for him again after I saw the devisiveness of this last Administration. I understand the attraction of many conservative positions. I just decided that I believed in different ways and approaches to these same issues.
That’s just me, Blurryeyed, but I want us all to work together to make this place great for all of us.