From the June 10 edition of Fox News' Outnumbered:
Loading the player reg...
Fox News excitedly reported on new smart gun technology that increases firearm lethality through improved target accuracy, enthusiasm that stands in stark contrast to the network's earlier criticism of smart gun technology aimed at increasing gun safety.
The TrackingPoint rifle, a new smart gun that debuted last summer from a startup gun company in Texas, uses lasers and computers to increase shot accuracy, enabling even novice shooters to hit a target over 1,000 yards away. The technology has been criticized for decreasing gun safety by making it easier for a criminal, murderer, or terrorist to kill from a distance without detection. Now novice shooters have the ability to hit a target from 1,000 yards away, a distance experts say only a handful of highly trained shooters can normally hit.
Such safety concerns didn't stop Fox News from championing the smart aim technology and even sending one of their own hosts to try it out.
On the May 6 edition of Fox & Friends, anchor Ainsley Earhardt reported on the new smart gun, emphasizing how easy the technology makes target accuracy for someone "who doesn't shoot regularly," when "normally it takes years of practice, patience, and devoted diligence." Earhardt admitted that some people are concerned "that it could turn someone into a killing machine," but downplayed these safety issues by citing the manufacturer's promise that buyers must be approved through a background check. Hosts Steve Doocy, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, and Brian Kilmeade called the smart gun technology "amazing" and "incredible," noting that despite the gun's high cost, the $27,000 price tag is worthwhile because "you never miss":
Fox News promoted what they called a "blistering report" on Benghazi released by the Citizens' Committee on Benghazi, a group comprised of birthers, conspiracy theorists, and fringe right-wing activists.
Fox figures praised armed supporters of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy as good, patriotic, hard-working Americans, ignoring their threats of violence against Bureau of Land Management (BLM) agents and indications that they were willing to put women in children in the line of fire.
From the April 18 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:
Loading the player reg...
Conservative media's recent smear that surgeon general nominee Dr. Vivek Murthy is controversial because he supports doctors discussing safe gun ownership with their patients is curious given frequent complaints from right-wing media -- albeit false -- that health care reform posed a threat to the inviolable doctor-patient relationship.
From the March 20 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:
Loading the player reg...
Fox News baselessly claimed that newly-released photographs of the aftermath of the Benghazi attacks reveal a "level of devastation" which contradicts the Obama administration's "original story of what happened" -- without explaining how the photos provided new insight or how they contradicted the administration's position on the destruction of the attacks.
On the November 20 edition of Fox & Friends First, co-host Ainsley Earhardt highlighted photos of the U.S. compound in Benghazi, Libya, following the September 11, 2012 attacks which were recently obtained by the conservative group Judicial Watch. The photos depict a car on fire, burnt furniture, and graffiti on the walls of the compound, and Earhardt claimed they revealed "a new level of devastation, contradicting the Obama administration's original story of what happened":
EARHARDT: New images of the aftermath of last year's September 11th terrorist attacks on U.S. compounds in Benghazi, Libya. The new pictures show a new level of devastation, contradicting the Obama administration's original story of what happened. The State Department gave 30 pages of records and 14 pictures to the conservative group Judicial Watch. That group is suing after requesting public materials through the Freedom of Information Act and not receiving them.
Earhardt did not explain how the photos contradicted anything the Obama administration had previously said about the attack, nor did she provide any evidence that administration officials previously downplayed or diminished the damage in Benghazi.
Her attack on the administration did, however, mirror comments made by Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, who claimed the "photos reveal a level of total devastation thoroughly belying Obama's original cover story that the carnage was perpetrated by a bunch of random malcontents upset over an unpleasant video."
But as Media Matters has repeatedly documented, there was no cover story -- Then-U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice made clear during her initial comments on the attack that they were based on the administration's "current best assessment" of the situation, which was that the attacks were not premeditated. She acknowledged that the perpetrators were "extremists" and said that future investigations and analyses by intelligence services "will tell us with certainty what transpired." It would later be revealed that her suggestion that the attack was linked to an anti-Islam video that had embroiled the Middle East came from talking points generated by the CIA.
Furthermore, the photos released by Judicial Watch and billed as groundbreaking are actually similar to pictures which have been available online since the day after the attacks. On September 12, 2012, Buzzfeed posted photos showing the destruction at the compound, including a burnt car, graffiti, and broken windows. The next day, Daily Mail Online posted more photos of the burnt interiors of the compound.
For more on conservative media myths about the September 2012 attacks, read The Benghazi Hoax, the new e-book by Media Matters' David Brock and Ari Rabin-Havt.
Fox News and serial health care misinformer Betsy McCaughey are baselessly stoking fears that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) will force doctors to ask "intrusive" sexual history questions that are already standard medical practice.
In a New York Post op-ed, McCaughey claimed that the health care law will "turn doctors into government agents" by requiring them to ask supposedly "intrusive" questions about their patients' sexual history. McCaughey's op-ed, which cited no evidence to support her claims, was parroted by Fox & Friends First co-host Ainsley Earhardt who said, "Thanks to Obamacare, doctors will be forced to ask patients about their sex life, even if it has nothing to do with the medical treatment that they are seeking at the time":
As Wonkette pointed out, McCaughey offered no evidence for her claims that the ACA changes existing practices. In fact, despite her fearmongering, sexual history questions are routine medical practice. The Centers For Disease Control calls such questions "an important part of a regular medical exam or physical history" and recommends that "[a] sexual history needs to be taken during a patient's initial visit, during routine preventive exams, and when you see signs of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)." In fact, the very questions that McCaughey claims doctors will now be pressured to ask are the exact questions the CDC recommends doctors ask their patients.
Fox News host Ainsley Earhardt misled viewers to believe that the U.S. Postal Service used taxpayer dollars to provide upscale accommodations and activities for a leadership conference, even though the USPS does not receive taxpayer funds for operational costs, and conference attendees have to finance their own entertainment.
In an effort to deal with budget shortfalls, the USPS has used its annual National Postal Forum Conference as "a revenue-generating opportunity," Postal Service spokeswoman Zy Richardson told Government Executive. The agency said that last year's conference brought in about $160 million in revenue from new sales.
But Fox hosts highlighted the conference as a waste of taxpayer dollars, focusing on the supposed extravagance of the event and mocking its stated goal of developing "sales leads":
STEVE DOOCY: Because let's face it, it's so depressing, demoralizing, working at the Postal Service these days. Don't you think those guys should just be able to go out and, you know, blow a bunch of dough, and blow off some steam?
BRIAN KILMEADE: Not really.
EARHARDT: Your money, your tax dollars.
According to the USPS website, the agency does not receive any taxpayer dollars to cover its operational costs. Like other expenses, the National Postal Forum Conference is funded by the agency's $65 billion in annual revenue from the sale of postage, products, and services.
The National Postal Forum, a nonprofit organization dedicated to improving the responsiveness and efficiency of the U.S. mail system, designed the conference "to find innovative solutions and learn about the latest technologies that are shaping the mailing industry's future." Richardson emphasized that the conference "is a public event that anyone can attend. It's not a secret, internal event."
Doocy's suggestion that the conference's cost covers expensive activities like golf is also incorrect. As Government Executive reported:
[T]he golfing is not included in the registration fees for the conference and any Postal Service employee participating must pay his or her own way to participate.
Fox News misleadingly invoked the 9-11 terrorist attacks to pillory President Obama's immigration policy, falsely claiming that the hijackers entered the United States illegally, and therefore would not have been arrested had they been detained in 2001 under Obama's immigration policy.
Citing a former Bush Immigration and Customs Enforcement official's February 2012 congressional testimony, Fox & Friends First co-host Ainsely Earhardt claimed that Obama's immigration policy would have allowed the perpetrators of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks to remain in the United States had the policy been in effect in 2001, claiming his "policy prevents agents from arresting people solely for entering the country illegally."
However, the 9-11 hijackers did not enter the country illegally, so any immigration policy changes dealing with people entering the country illegally would not apply. The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks reported that the hijackers entered the United States legally via visas issued by the State Department:
Beginning in 1997, the 19 hijackers submitted 24 applications and received 23 visas. The pilots acquired most of theirs in the year 2000. The other hijackers, with two exceptions, obtained their visas between the fall of 2000 and June 2001. Two of the visas were issued in Berlin, and two were issued in the United Arab Emirates. The rest were issued in Saudi Arabia. One of the pilots, Hani Hanjour, had an application denied in September 2000 for lack of adequate documentation. He then produced more evidence in support of his student visa application, and it was approved.
And while several of the hijackers had overstayed their visas, the Obama administration has taken steps to crack down on those who stay when their visas expire, focusing on security risks. From an Associated Press report in September 2011:
The Obama administration is cracking down on immigrants in the U.S. who have overstayed the terms of their visas by using a system that automatically checks multiple national security, immigration and law enforcement databases at the same time, a senior Homeland Security Department official said.
The common practice has been to make manual checks of individual databases. The new system already has identified dozens of investigative leads, said John Cohen, deputy counterterrorism coordinator at the Homeland Security Department.
The immediate focus is to identify people who have overstayed their visas and who pose potential threats to national security or public safety, Cohen said.
The department also is checking regularly the systems for people whose visas have not expired -- in some cases, as often as daily or weekly, Cohen said.
Such a review process deals with the reality that information about a person's potential terrorism ties might not be clear to the intelligence community until after a visa has been issued.
A Fox News report dishonestly pegged a decline in median household income to the beginning of President Obama's first term. In fact, median income has trended downward since 1999.
Fox News is deflecting attention from Mitt Romney's failure to release his tax returns by promoting his call for other people to "put up or shut up." But while Fox ran defense for him, they left out that Romney has still released only two years of tax returns -- contrary to modern presidential standards and growing bipartisan calls for transparency.
Earlier this week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid claimed an investor from Bain Capital had told him that Romney "hasn't paid any taxes for 10 years," although Reid could not verify whether the information was accurate. Romney appeared on Sean Hannity's radio show and responded by calling on Reid to "put up or shut up":
ROMNEY: It's time for Harry to put up or shut up. Harry is going to have to describe who it is he spoke with because that's totally and completely wrong. It's untrue, dishonest, and inaccurate. It's wrong. So I'm -- I'm looking forward to have Harry reveal his sources and we will probably find out it's the White House. Look the Obama campaign is going to do everything in its power to try and talk about anything besides the president's record.
On this morning's edition of Fox & Friends, co-host Steve Doocy aired Romney's comments and responded by claiming Romney was "absolutely right." Doocy went on to quote GOP Sen. Mitch McConnell, saying "you know what Mitch McConnell, who is Harry Reid's counterpart, yesterday said on the floor of the Senate? He said it's 'beneath the dignity of his office' and essentially said, 'Harry, shut up with the secret source.'"
But what was missing from Fox & Friends' attack on Reid is that Romney hasn't "put up or shut up" himself. The candidate has consistently ignored mounting calls to release the tax returns that would clear up the matter once and for all. Romney has tried to claim that releasing two years of tax returns is enough, but as FactCheck.org pointed out recently, "In more than three decades, no other nominees for either party have released fewer than five years' worth of returns. Romney's own father released a dozen years' worth when he ran for the GOP nomination in 1968."
Right-wing media have attacked a contract between the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and a public relations firm to raise awareness of health and preventive care opportunities as a "propaganda piece" for the health care law that "violates many of the procurement laws." But PR campaigns like this are nothing new; in fact, the Bush administration spent $1.6 billion dollars over a 30-month span promoting its policies.
From the March 5 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends First:
Loading the player reg...