Posted on 04/01/2020 9:42:35 PM PDT by map
"We are writing to inform you that the WHCA Board has voted this evening to remove a news outlet from the rotation for a seat in the briefing room. We did this because a report for this outlet twice attended press briefings in contravention of this policy. ... We do not take this action lightly. This is a matter of public safety."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
That’s great. SO they’re on such solid ground with real news they don’t need to invent fake news and if one of their reporters does it without their knowledge, they would only enhance their credibility by issuing a correction and taking it down, even though they would lose a lot of clicks. I alerted them to the error multiple times but they refuse to correct an obviously fake story. Kinda like what the New York Times does.
Been here for about 15 years, so you'll have plenty of posts to choose from to prove that I'm a "liar". Click "in forum" and let me know.
That's nice. But that doesn't really make me a "lefty troll".
Uhm. No. It isn't. Not even close. Do you have any source for your very specific assertion?
And now that you read the article did you see the references to "as of February 26th" and the statement that the article was published on February 28th?
Which would mean that these are not Fauci's "latest statements".
And now that you read the article did you see the references to "as of February 26th" and the statement that the article was published on February 28th?
Which would mean that these are not Fauci's "latest statements".
No, I will not play your silly game. I pointed out proof that you are wrong and now you come back with unintelligible bull. I don't know why anyone would find an issue that someone got a date wrong by two days in the past when the information was correct. It could even have been a typo. You have made a few typos right here yourself. Splitting hairs is not anything I care much about. It's stupid and infantile.
yes! and TRUMP Loves OAN. He tells the rest of the press how much he loves OAN.
1. “I pointed out proof that you are wrong”
Actually you didn’t point to any proof at all. You made an assertion, to wit “OANN just editorially added the .28% which is the official fatality percentages of those two pandemics.”
Shall we check that assertion?
Case fatality rate 1957 pandemic: .019%
Case fatality rate 1957 pandemic: .005%
So far from being proof your assertion is what’s known in logic as the opposite of proof, namely: false.
My only point of curiosity is whether you found the false information online somewhere, or you just made it up. But actually don’t tell me. It can be your secret.
2. “ I don’t know why anyone would find an issue that someone got a date wrong by two days”
February 28th to March 26 is not equal to “two days”. It’s more than that. I think its actually more than 25 days. Is that relevant?
Well, using the correct date puts Fauci’s claims before the March 11 testimony that COVID may be 10 times worse than the flu, thus showing that Fauci originally thought the virus was not much worse than the flu but later came to believe that it was much worse which totally eviscerates the fake news story, that “Dr. Anthony Fauci Backtracks On Deadliness Of Virus”, because, like, he didn’t.
When correcting a “typo” guts your whole story and makes it the exact opposite of your headline, you should pull the story. (Unless you need the clicks). Especially when it gives people the false impression that they shouldn’t worry about contracting a deadly disease.\
Which they should.
And now that you read the article did you see the references to "as of February 26th" and the statement that the article was published on February 28th?My response: “ I don’t know why anyone would find an issue that someone got a date wrong by two days”
Your current comment:
February 28th to March 26 is not equal to “two days”. It’s more than that. I think its actually more than 25 days. Is that relevant?You bounce off of the walls. If you wish to be understood you should collect your thoughts before you make the attempt.
I, as others have pointed out, would rather watch OANN proclaim that Elvis has come back to meet President Trump in the White House or hear OANN tell me that UFOs have landed on the lawn of the White House than listen to the lies and spin other so called "news networks" spew from their mouthpieces.
Case fatality rate 1957 pandemic: .019%
Case fatality rate 1957 pandemic: .005%
Yeah, well, just like how the unspoken purpose of feminism has always been ugly women trying to neutralize the natural advantages that hot women have.
“And now that you read the article did you see the references to “as of February 26th” and the statement that the article was published on February 28th?”
That’s not an error. The data in the article is as of Feb 26th and the article was published two days later on Feb 28th.
That’s two facts both of which prove that the article does not Fauci’s “latest comments” as of March 26th.
Even if OAN didn’t read all the way to the bottom to see the publication date (Feb 28th), if they merely read the actual words of the article itself, they would have seen that it was reflecting the situation as of Feb 26th. Not March 26th.
Not sure how adding additional facts to provide definitive proof is “bouncing off walls” but actually now that you mention it that is psychologically how those (for example but not exclusively) on the left perceive facts that challenge their world view. A bit disorienting and then it leads them to their best defense, which is name calling and making up fake facts out of thin air. I got pretty good at calling them on it since they do it so often.
I wrote:
Case fatality rate 1957 pandemic: .019%
Case fatality rate 1957 pandemic: .005%
The correct information:
Case fatality rate 1957 pandemic: .019%
Case fatality rate 1968 pandemic: .005%
An actual typo. Well spotted.
And now that you’re good at spotting errors let’s categorize this one shall we?
“.28% [] is the official fatality percentages of those two pandemics.”
How shall we classify that one? I’d classify it as the kind of blatant fabrication I was objecting to in the first place. The kind of blatant fabrication the left pulls out from wherever when someone challenges their worldview. And usually just before or after they start calling people names.
I don't give a care what you think.
Excellent! Perfect meme about the WHCA and the MSM.
WINNING! Chanel just asked a question while standing in the same corner. We win; WHCA loses.
Trump controls the room. He is our president.
:)
She can sit on my lap... heh heh
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.