“Gender affirming care” was replaced with “sex change” or “sex reassignment” in at least 19 articles.
Jesus, this is just about as blatant as you can get. I honestly can’t imagine how people can eat up such clearly dehumanizing politics and not get a bad taste in their mouth…
Here’s how you can tell if you’re the baddy: Do you support policies to spite or “own” others? Do you think, “fuck ‘em, I don’t care,” “they’re disgusting,” or “they’ve gotta be taught a lesson?”
Then you’re probably the baddy, stop it! Dehumanization, even casually, is the root of all evil.
It doesn’t necessarily mean you’re wrong, obviously — you might’ve stumbled into being right for the wrong reasons — but wow, is it a huge red flag!
Do you think, “fuck ‘em, I don’t care,” “they’re disgusting,” or “they’ve gotta be taught a lesson?”
I often think this way about Fox News, and Health Insurance Companies, and Gab, and kiwifarms
Is it even legal for news media to misquote someone, especially an elected official?
I can’t speak to the legality, but it sure sounds like they violated the terms and agreement in place with AP repeatedly. I wonder what recourse AP has and if they could choose to disallow their content entirely on Fox? It seems like most news organizations get a majority of reporting from AP. I can only imagine the detrimental impact to Fox News if that came to pass.
I mean, it’s not like anyone goes to Fox for real news anyways. I doubt any of their userbase would complain.
It does sound like it could be defamation again, which they’d probably lose again to in court. They knowingly misquoted information.
They’re not a “news” organization. They’re corporate media, entertainment. They even lost one of their certifications as a “trusted news source” for blatantly lying and regurgitating internet memes without checking their sources.
Please share the source for your claim about certification? My searching left me nothing but a snopes article debunking similar claims.
Ironic
That’s great and all, but their behavior and actions are that of a news agency regardless, so wouldn’t they have to face the same scrutiny as a news agency?
They were even inconsistent in the changes in their own articles, ha
They were even inconsistent in the changes in their own articles, ha
…are we really that surprised at this point though?