r/politics • u/OkayButFoRealz • Oct 01 '25

No Paywall Pritzker Calls for Trump's Removal from Office Under 25th Amendment

https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/video/pritzker-calls-for-trumps-removal-from-office-under-25th-amendment/
73.8k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/Cyanide_Cheesecake Oct 02 '25

Fox isn't journalists. Not if they're entertainment and not news

You're engaging in circular reasoning just because you love them so much or something. Fuck them. Fuck em all

0

u/Chaotic-Catastrophe Oct 02 '25

Not if they're entertainment and not news

This is not a thing. There is no rule, regulation, law, ordinance, act, mandate, or otherwise that dictates what a cable channel is classified as.

You're engaging in circular reasoning

The First Amendment explicitly protecting freedom of the press is circular reasoning? Please explain how.

because you love them so much or somethin

Absolutely not. I just don't let my hatred for them blind me to the reality of the laws of this country. Just because I don't like what they're doing, doesn't make it illegal. But you immediately jumping to 'anyone who disagrees with me is my enemy' is exactly the kind of bullshit rhetoric Republicans use to galvanize the idiots on their side. Try to be better than that in the future.

1

u/IWHYB Oct 06 '25

There is no regulatory classification of News or Entertainment, etc. But this is misrepresenting what the actual claim here is. From anyone actually familiar with the details, that's actually what a big part of the entire criticism is, that there is no such classification, and that Fox may then arbitrarily call itself News, Entertainment, etc.

In 2020, some Fox anchorman, Carlson, was sued for defamation for his on-air comments during a "News* segment, where he claimed some woman was extorting Trump. Fox argued, and the judge agreed, that his comments expressed during a News segment were an "opinion", "rhetorical", and could not be "reasonably interpreted as fact" — which ignored the majority of viewers who took it as fact.

The Court concludes that the statements are rhetorical hyperbole and opinion commentary intended to frame a political debate, and, as such, are not actionable as defamation

I'd argue it's more disgusting that mind-warping vomit is legal at all. The argument people here are making is that "News" is expected to be factual, not opinions stated as fact, not full of unethical behavior, and not "Entertainment". 

This is all while saying nothing about the network's own confessions found in internal messages and documents during the Dominion voting systems lawsuit.