Stay updated with breaking news from Opinion shows. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
respond to our their continuance. l respond to our their continuance. that— respond to our their continuance. that what— respond to our their continuance. that what i— respond to our their continuance. that what i mean _ respond to our their continuance. that what i mean is— respond to our their continuance. that what i mean is those - respond to our their continuance. that what i mean is those votersl that what i mean is those voters they— that what i mean is those voters they represent, _ that what i mean is those voters they represent, and _ that what i mean is those voters i they represent, and congressional districts— they represent, and congressional districts that — they represent, and congressional districts that are _ they represent, and congressional districts that are drawn _ they represent, and congressional districts that are drawn up. - they represent, and congressional districts that are drawn up. they l districts that are drawn up. they only hear— districts that are drawn up. they only hear from _ districts that are drawn up. they only hear from their— districts that are drawn up. they only hear from their publishing i districts that are drawn up. they . only hear from their publishing but that part _ only hear from their publishing but that part of— only hear from their publishing but that part of population _ only hear from their publishing but that part of population is— only hear from their publishing but that part of population is loud - only hear from their publishing but that part of population is loud and | that part of population is loud and it's what— that part of population is loud and it's what republicans _ that part of population is loud and it's what republicans respond - that part of population is loud and it's what republicans respond to. i that part of population is loud and i it's what republicans respond to. if you hear— it's what republicans respond to. if you hear a — it's what republicans respond to. if you hear a lot — it's what republicans respond to. if you hear a lot of— it's what republicans respond to. if you hear a lot of the _ it's what republicans respond to. if you hear a lot of the opinion- it's what republicans respond to. if you hear a lot of the opinion showsj you hear a lot of the opinion shows say don't _ you hear a lot of the opinion shows say don't do — you hear a lot of the opinion shows say don't do anything _ you hear a lot of the opinion shows say don't do anything on _ you hear a lot of the opinion shows say don't do anything on the - you hear a lot of the opinion shows say don't do anything on the debt i say don't do anything on the debt ceiling _ say don't do anything on the debt ceiling for— say don't do anything on the debt ceiling for instance, _ say don't do anything on the debt ceiling for instance, that - say don't do anything on the debt ceiling for instance, that has- say don't do anything on the debt ceiling for instance, that has an l ceiling for instance, that has an effect _ ceiling for instance, that has an effect on — ceiling for instance, that has an effect on policies _ ceiling for instance, that has an effect on policies and _ ceiling for instance, that has an effect on policies and politics. i ceiling for instance, that has an . effect on policies and politics. the amount— effect on policies and politics. the amount of— effect on policies and politics. the amount of airtime _ effect on policies and politics. the amount of airtime that _ effect on policies and politics. the amount of airtime that donald - effect on policies and politics. the i amount of airtime that donald trump received _ amount of airtime that donald trump received had — amount of airtime that donald trump received had an— amount of airtime that donald trump received had an impact— amount of airtime that donald trump received had an impact on— amount of airtime that donald trump received had an impact on our- received had an impact on our politics— received had an impact on our politics as _ received had an impact on our politics as well— received had an impact on our politics as well when - received had an impact on our politics as well when he - received had an impact on our politics as well when he didn't received had an impact on our- politics as well when he didn't have to necessarily— politics as well when he didn't have to necessarily go _ politics as well when he didn't have to necessarily go to _ politics as well when he didn't have to necessarily go to a _ politics as well when he didn't have to necessarily go to a studio - politics as well when he didn't have to necessarily go to a studio for - politics as well when he didn't have to necessarily go to a studio for anl to necessarily go to a studio for an interview. — to necessarily go to a studio for an interview. and _ to necessarily go to a studio for an interview, and just _ to necessarily go to a studio for an interview, and just made - to necessarily go to a studio for an interview, and just made a - to necessarily go to a studio for an interview, and just made a phonel interview, and just made a phone call where — interview, and just made a phone call where the _ interview, and just made a phone call where the rules _ interview, and just made a phone call where the rules existed - interview, and just made a phone call where the rules existed for l interview, and just made a phone . call where the rules existed for him that they— call where the rules existed for him that they didn't _ call where the rules existed for him that they didn't for— call where the rules existed for him that they didn't for anyone - call where the rules existed for him that they didn't for anyone else. . that they didn't for anyone else. there _ that they didn't for anyone else. there is— that they didn't for anyone else. there is no— that they didn't for anyone else. there is no one _ that they didn't for anyone else. there is no one in _ that they didn't for anyone else. there is no one in congress - that they didn't for anyone else. . there is no one in congress saying that rupert murdoch had a major problem in the uk over phone talk hacking and close down news of the world and here again has been caught pushing fake news for fox news.
some ways, because what you have is so many accounts of so many various people at fox who are speaking amongst themselves and talking about how they know these things are false, how they know that their audience is wanting something that is a comforting narrative, but has no basis in reality, and how because they are eager to do the bidding of a failed president, and because they're eager to make sure that they continue to have this marketshare, that they're going to do it anyway. that they're not going to care about the truth, that they're not going to care about freedom of expression, that they're going to care mostly about profits and market share. >> fox news reveals they were merely reporting on something that was newsworthy and much of the voter fraud conversations happened on opinion shows, which aren't a forum for actual facts. do you think there's any merit to that argument? >> there's a real fine line sometimes between newsworthiness and defamation, but newsworthiness is something along the lines of reporting on the controversy. the president is making these
but they absolutely knew they were false and nonetheless decided toto promote that narrative. >> what sticks out to you as the most damming evidence here in. >> it's really hard to pick in some ways, because what you have is so many accounts of so many various people at fox who are speaking amongst themselves and talking about how they know these things are false, how they know that their audience is wanting something that is a comforting narrative that has no basis in reality, and how because they are eager to do the bidding of a failed president and because they're eager to make sure that they continue to have this market share, that they're going to do it anyway, that they're not going to care about the truth, that they're not going to care about freedom of expression, but they're going to care mostly about profits and, market share. >> fox news argues that they were merely reporting on something that was newsworthy and that much of the voter fraud conversations happened on opinion shows which aren't a forum for actual facts. do you think there's any merit to that arguments?
voter fraud never happens. of course it happens. they knew it happened when they told us it would never happen because they're liars. so we know that. >> a news operation told the truth, biden's the next president. but the opinion division doubled and tripled down on conspiracy, on confusion about the result. >> and fox starts stripping out hours of news programming and turning it over into opinion shows. >> nearly 80% of trump voters believe this election was tainted with fraud and you have every right not to have faith and confidence. >> and in the days and weeks and months after the election, fox echoes the president's claims the election has been stolen, that the democrats cheated. >> thousands of votes were switched from president trump to joe biden. >> now is the time to stand and fight for what's right. >> and not only is fox now realigning itself with trump, it is also returning to what it does best, which is to foment rage, to foment anger, that the democrats are cheating, the democrats are lying, the democrats are ruining this country and we need to take it back. >> stop the steal! stop the steal! >> we want the [ bleep ]ing
they knew it happened when they told us it would never happen because they're liars. so we know that. >> a news operation told the truth, biden's the next president. but the opinion division doubled and tripled down on conspiracy, on confusion about the result. >> and fox starts stripping out hours of news programming and turning it over into opinion shows. >> nearly 80% of trump voters believe this election was tainted with fraud and you have every right not to have faith and confidence. >> and in the days and weeks and months after the election, fox echoes the president's claims the election has been stolen, that the democrats cheated. >> thousands of votes were switched from president trump to joe biden. >> now is the time to stand and fight for what's right. >> and not only is fox now realigning itself with trump, it is also returning to what it does best, which is to foment rage, to foment anger, that the democrats are cheating, the democrats are lying, the democrats are ruining this country and we need to take it
now, host laura ingraham did not ask oz about the dog story, even though it might been the biggest development of his race that day. she gave him plenty of chances to attack his opponent. even labeling him doctor mehmet oz, republican running against john fetterman. interviewing candidates for office, we've come to midterms quite a bit on the show, but i want to be clear, fox's coverage different both in tone and the sheer amount of it. fox news is essentially an arm of the 24-hour public relations channel four of the republican senate candidates, interrupted periodically by ads from mike pillow. no other way to put it. according to a new report from -- in the four weeks since labor day, fox news primetime opinion shows have covered the midterm races twice as often as this network and cnn combined. fox functions as the communications are the gop and it's because stars are working to ensure the republicans take
day, fox news primetime opinion shows have covered the midterm races twice as often as this network and cnn combined. fox functions as the communications are the gop and it's because stars are working to ensure the republicans take over than it and have an opportunity to implement a hard right agenda. networks proud right-wing agenda bombarding their audiences with a stream of attacks on democratic nominees you can see this all over fox's coverage in case you don't know. to some hyperbolic graphics portraying democratic candidates as losers, dangerous animals hell-bent on destroying the country. the undisputed king of the stuff is fox anchor john hannity. he is a unique figure. here he is openly partisan, even among his colleagues, a plea appeared at a trump rally in 2020. what exactly is sean hannity's job? as far as we can tell it's getting republicans elected. here's sean hannity with a graphic of radical raphael warnock. he was hannity labeling john fetterman as john the socialist, even photoshop-ing him in front of some communist iconography. here's a scrolling graphic titled raphael warnock's extremism composed exposed, with a ton of stuff going by the screen and one called fetterman's extremism exposed,
post," "the new york times," all the dominant mainstream media which are all in decline have become the most opinionated. conservative media is booming, but the mainstream media's in decline. howard: you write that the press is not the enemy of the people, to use donald trump's phrase, but they sure can be their own worst enemy. i agree with that, but i was going to push back on what you wrote next. you say that the american people want to get their news straight, they want honest reporting based on facts. some do, but i think -- and you alluded to this -- increasingly many people want to see their own views reflected back to them, and that's true for viewers of cnn, msnbc and fox. >> yeah, but i think it falls into segments. i think viewers have an understanding that nighttime shows are opinion shows and it's like reading the editorial page in the newspaper. the daytime shows are suppose to be fair, straight, neutral
janine, maria in the morning, sean hannity, laura ingraham. they were all acting as advisers oftentimes. in fact, on election night, the night before he took the stage, judge janine and laura ingraham were in the room. i'm not going to say fox as a whole was advising him or the line was too blurred there. but certainly the evening more opinion shows. >> you know, stephanie, we've talked a lot. we talked after your book came out about you reflecting on your role in the trump administration. you've said things like you're not sure that you will ever be redeemed for your participation in the trump administration. you know, you really have soul searched in the wake of leaving. i do wonder what you think is next and if there's anything that you can shed light on on what comes ahead? . >> absolutely. and i'mst ill not looking for redemption. i'm actually just looking
mobilize. so i think the idea is that we're seeing right-wing pundits in the u.s. seeing this as a way to encourage sort of massive action and mobilization, you know, in sort of response to the biden administration and the democrats in general. this could have pay-offs in the midterm elections and looking ahead to 2024. >> it's ironic, and we talk about this all the time, the anti-vaccprogramming on fox news considering all those hosts are essentially vaccinated. 90% of fox news employees are vaccinated but they fail to mention that. you have been monitoring and reporting closely on their vaccine coverage or anti-vax coverage, and you report it's getting worse. >> yeah, it's pretty interesting, and it's worrying. so a lot of people may not know this, but fox news is not actually sort of totally a monolith. they have their opinion shows, like tucker carlson, that a lot of people know about, that are