Fox News has often claimed that "liberals" stopped using the term "global warming" in favor of the term "climate change" because the planet is no longer warming. Fox News' The Five, for instance, celebrated Earth Day 2013 by trotting out this talking point to deny global warming - even though 2000-2009 was the warmest decade on record and each of the 12 hottest years on record have come in the last 15 years. In reality, it was Republican consultant Frank Luntz -- now a Fox News contributor -- who advised Republicans in a 2002 memo to use the term "climate change" because "'climate change' is less frightening than 'global warming.'"
The term "climate change" was used long before Luntz's memo, particularly in the scientific literature. For instance, a 1970 paper published in the prestigious journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences was titled "Carbon Dioxide and its Role in Climate Change" and discussed how emissions of carbon dioxide warm the atmosphere.
Scientists use "global warming" when speaking about the increase in average global surface temperatures. They use "climate change" to refer to all the other disruptions that greenhouse gas emissions are causing -- from rising sea levels, to abruptly changing precipitation patterns that increase the likelihood of droughts and wildfires in certain areas and extreme flooding in others, to acidifying oceans that disturb the marine food web.
John Kerr created the video in this report.
From the April 17 edition of Fox News' The Five:
Loading the player reg...
Fox News' The Five complained that the media had devoted significant time to the murder trial of Jodi Arias while avoiding that of Dr. Kermit Gosnell. The program's hosts had previously spent 21 minutes covering the Arias trial over seven episodes, but had never mentioned the Gosnell trial until levying their criticism of the media for ignoring the case.
Gosnell is currently on trial for murder and accused of grotesque and barbaric behavior in the course of providing illegal late-term abortions. Conservatives have been engaged in a campaign to pressure the media for providing what they term insufficient coverage to the trial.
During the April 12 program, co-host Eric Bolling complained that the trial "isn't getting much attention in the press" because it "raises inconvenient issues,"while the Arias trial has received lots of coverage. He asked, "where is the liberal media now?" Promoting the upcoming segment, co-host Kimberly Guilfoyle described the case as an issue "that the mainstream media isn't reporting on."
A series of chyrons during the segment reinforced Bolling's attack: "Media cover Arias trial while ignoring trial of abortion doctor," "MSM turns blind eye to abortion horrors," "Mainstream media ignores trial of abortion Dr. Kermit Gosnell."
The April 12 episode of The Five is the first time the Gosnell trial, which began March 18, has been mentioned on the program. By contrast, the hosts havecovered the Arias case over seven episodes for a total of 21 minutes and 33 seconds, according to a Media Matters review of Fox's programming.
Bolling's complaints echo those of the News Corp. owned New York Post, who complained about the "liberal media" ignoring the story while failing to cover it themselves. Salon.com's Alex Seitz-Wald has noted the conservative media's pattern of criticizing the mainstream media for not covering the trial even as they have only begun to mention the case over the past few days.
Other Fox News programs, including The O'Reilly Factor, Special Report, andHuckabee have covered the Gosnell trial.
From the January 17 edition of Fox News' The Five:
Loading the player reg...
Fox News hosts echoed Rush Limbaugh's accusation that President Obama will use children as "human shields" at a White House event on stronger gun laws. However, President Bush also had children in attendance during bill signings and announcements.
Limbaugh and Fox News attacked Obama over the announcement that the president will propose measures to reduce gun violence on Wednesday at the White House. The administration invited children to the event who had written Obama about their safety concerns following the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.
On the Tuesday edition of The Five, the co-hosts aired Limbaugh's "human shields" accusation, then voiced their own disgust. Co-host Kimberly Guilfoyle said the children were being used as "political pawns," while Eric Bolling said the event was in "bad taste" and "offensive."
But as co-hosts Dana Perino and Bob Beckel noted, this is not in any way an unprecedented event. In fact, Perino's former boss, President George W. Bush, had children attend the signing of the No Child Left Behind law in 2002:
In addition, Bush invited the families of so-called "snowflake" babies to the White House when he vetoed federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.
From the January 10 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
Loading the player reg...
The co-hosts of Fox News' The Five attempted to defend their mockery of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's recent concussion by dismissing their remarks as mere "skepticism."
On December 15, The Washington Post reported that Clinton sustained a concussion after she fainted due to dehydration. After the incident, the State Department explained that due to the concussion, Clinton would have to postpone her testimony on the attack in Benghazi, Libya.
On Friday, The Five co-host Greg Gutfeld asked why it was considered "offensive to question the odd timing of an illness," and insisted that he and his Fox colleagues were simply "exercising of our First Amendment right to ask questions." He accused journalists of "ginning up fake hatred, or outrage, towards skeptics," and claimed "skepticism" was on "life support."
Co-host Andrea Tantaros further accused Clinton of "a history" of "being a professional victim." Tantaros concluded that though some want her and others to apologize for their Clinton remarks, she does not think it's necessary.
However, the previous remarks from The Five co-hosts on Clinton's concussion were not merely skepticism, but outright mockery. They suggested Clinton faked her condition to avoid giving testimony on the Benghazi attack. On December 19, The Five co-host Kimberly Guilfoyle accused Clinton of a "duck and cover," and Gutfeld asked, "How could she get a concussion when she's been ducking everything [related to Benghazi]?"
These remarks were echoed by other Fox figures, who accused Clinton of having "Benghazi allergy" and faking a "diplomatic illness."
Nearly all of Fox News' evening news shows ridiculed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for having to postpone her testimony on the Benghazi attack because of a concussion she suffered after fainting due to dehydration. Their mockery was an attempt to downplay the concussion and suggest Clinton was faking injury to avoid giving testimony, a notion the State Department has called "wild speculation based on no information."
The Washington Post reported on December 15 that Clinton sustained a concussion after she fainted due to dehydration while at home a week prior. After the incident, the State Department explained that Clinton would have to postpone her testimony about the attack on Benghazi due to the concussion.
Following the State Department's announcement, Fox News contributor John Bolton, appearing on On The Record, suggested Clinton was faking "diplomatic illness" to avoid testifying about Benghazi. The State Department's Victoria Nuland lashed out at Bolton for his remarks, labeling them "wild speculation based on no information."
Now Fox News' evening shows have decided to join Bolton in accusing Clinton of faking her condition and make it seem she is trying to avoid giving her testimony. Co-host of Fox News' The Five, Kimberly Guilfoyle, accused Clinton of running "a duck and cover" after suffering the concussion. Co-host Greg Gutfeld went on to ask, "How can she get a concussion when she has been ducking everything [related to Benghazi]?"
From the December 19 edition of Fox News' The Five:
Loading the player reg...
Fox News' The Five argued that petitions created and signed by people calling for secession from the United States following President Obama's re-election were justified because conservative-leaning "red states" are more financially responsible than liberal-leaning "blue states." But data shows that secession would lead to what is being called a "Confederacy of Takers" because "red states" tend to receive more in federal benefits than they pay in taxes, while "blue states" typically receive less.
In 2011, Obama established a mechanism for people to create and sign petitions on the White House website, and if any petition receives 25,000 or more signatures within 30 days, White House officials will respond to the petition. In the days following Obama's re-election, people have filed secession petitions for several states, including Mississippi and Alabama.
Fox's The Five gave credence to the states calling for secession, suggesting that some of the red states that filed the petitions have an economic argument. Co-host Greg Gutfeld proposed pitting "red states" featured in the secession petitions -- such as Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas -- against "blue states" and seeing who succeeds financially. Guest co-host and Fox regular KT McFarland suggested it was the "richer states," particularly the Southern states, that will have to bail out "bankrupt" states like California. Co-host Kimberly Guilfoyle was similarly frustrated at states "sponging off the states that are making money."
However, according to 2010 data compiled by Talking Points Memo from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis and the Internal Revenue Service, "red states" generally are receiving more from the federal government in benefits than they pay in taxes when compared to "blue states." Indeed, a chart made by TPM shows that several of the states calling for secession (and defended by Fox News) pay on average less in taxes than they receive in federal benefits:
Fox News hosts and contributors are manufacturing panic over the arrival of election monitors from the UN-affiliated Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), insinuating that they will interfere with the November 6 election. But the OSCE has monitored elections in the United States since 2002, without any complaints that they meddled in the election.
As Think Progress has noted, the observers are coming at the invitation of the State Department after a number of civil rights organizations requested their presence due, in part, to new voter ID laws that threaten to disenfranchise young, minority, and elderly voters.
Several days earlier, the Drudge Report and Fox Nation highlighted a story from The Hill about the presence of international election monitors arriving for the 2012 election. On Tuesday, Fox News' evening shows began fearmongering about the observers.
During Tuesday's edition of The O'Reilly Factor, Fox host Kimberly Guilfoyle called the election monitoring "meddling of a bizarre nature," and said there are "members from terrorist countries that are amongst" the election monitors. On Wednesday, conservative radio host Dennis Miller -- who has a regular segment on the Factor -- claimed that the OSCE monitors are "going to make sure Jews don't vote." On both nights, O'Reilly imagined a scenario of New Black Panther members assaulting the observers.
On Thursday, Fox Business host Lou Dobbs highlighted Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott's threat to arrest the OSCE observers if they come near or enter a polling place, summing it up as: "Don't mess with Texas."
On Friday, Fox News contributor Dick Morris released a video claiming that election monitoring and other UN actions might figuratively constitute a UN coup d'etat. Morris stated:
The threat we face is from the United Nations. Now, I'm not literally suggesting that black helicopters are going to land on the Rose Garden and blue-helmeted UN troops are going to do a coup d'etat. But figuratively speaking, that is a metaphor for what's going on at this point. Just two weeks ago, or last week, the United Nations announced -- get this -- they are going to send monitors to observe elections in the United States to determine that our elections are fair and free.
This unwarranted wave of panic is undermined by the fact that the OSCE has been monitoring U.S. elections by invitation since 2002. Conservatives are upset that OSCE representatives recently met with civil liberties groups concerned about voter suppression, even though that is not the organization's primary mission. An October 20 report from The Hill explains:
The observers, from countries such as Germany, France, Serbia, Belarus, Ukraine and Kazakhstan, will observe voting at polling places and other political activity.
"They [will] observe the overall election process, not just the ballot casting," said Giovanna Maiola, spokeswoman for OSCE. "They are focusing on a number of areas on the state level, including the legal system, election administration, the campaign, the campaign financing [and] new voting technologies used in the different states."
In a follow-up e-mail, Maiola noted that it is a limited election-observation mission. She said "the OSCE has regularly been invited to observe elections in the United States, in line with OSCE commitments."
The OSCE has 56 participating states from Europe, Central Asia and North America, including the United States and Canada. It has assessed elections in the United States since 2002.
Fox News hosts and contributors repeatedly suggested that the Obama administration made a "political decision" to allow Americans to be killed in the September 11 Benghazi, Libya, attack on an American compound. But U.S. agents and the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli rushed to the aid of the compound during the attack, and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has said that the attack was over before the U.S. military had sufficient information on which to act.
From the October 22 edition of Fox News' The Five:
Loading the player reg...
Conservative media outlets pushed at least eleven misleading attacks on President Obama's energy policies that have become talking points used by Mitt Romney's campaign. The conservative media bubble has largely prevented voters from hearing the facts about clean energy programs, fossil fuel production and environmental regulation under the Obama administration.
Fox's Eric Bolling relied on a Republican-commissioned study on federal spending for social benefit programs to claim the government spends more than $1 trillion on welfare. In fact, spending on welfare comprises less than two-tenths of a percent of the federal budget.