Noory in denial

[QED]

George Noory, host of the nationally syndicated program, Coast to Coast AM, keeps comparing the C-19 virus to seasonal flu. He continually says the US should return to work.

Conservative talk radio feels they must remain in denial and it's an embarrassment to the industry.

 

[davideduardo]

George Noory, host of the nationally syndicated program, Coast to Coast AM, keeps comparing the C-19 virus to seasonal flu. He continually says the US should return to work.

Conservative talk radio feels they must remain in denial and it's an embarrassment to the industry.

Noory does not represent most conservative talk show hosts. He tends to deal, like his predecessor, in aliens, pseudo-science and downright hoaxes; the stuff is presented in a way that the listener can evaluate and make their own decision.

That's really not politically conservative content... it's more off-the-wall strange stuff for the overnight audience.

And yeah, his view on the virus is simply wrong. Hopefully, neither he nor any of his friends and family get it. Too bad he is not right, but he isn't.

 

[crainbebo]

And Art Bell rolls in his grave. How the mighty have fallen. I like when the show talks about the paranormal and UFOs, but his opinions on COVID-19 suck.

 

[gr8oldies]

Sick as he is, Rush Limbaugh is saying the same thing.

 

[frankberry]

Anyone disbursing false or misleading information should be taken off the air.

This is from the FCC:

Broadcasting false information that causes substantial 'public harm'
The FCC prohibits broadcasting false information about a crime or a catastrophe if the broadcaster knows the information is false and will cause substantial "public harm" if aired.
FCC rules specifically say that "the public harm: must begin immediately and cause direct and actual damage to property or the health or safety of the general public; or divert law enforcement or public health and safety authorities from their duties."

 

[TheBigA]

Anyone disbursing false or misleading information should be taken off the air.

I agree with what you're saying, but Noory is walking a fine line. He's stating his opinion. Is his opinion false? It's just his opinion. That gets back to the lawsuit being filed against various news organizations that certain opinion columns, clearly marked at opinion, were defamatory because they're based on false information. Using that viewpoint, ANY opinion could be defamatory. Not just opinion we don't like.

The fine line that Noory walks is he states his opinion, but doesn't tell you to agree. He doesn't say you should break the law. Of course, the government has been careful not to institute laws that someone who agrees with Noory would break. If he says don't wear a face covering, that's OK because the president himself said the same thing. If he says this is like the flu, that's OK because the president said the exact same thing, and has not taken any of that back. So legally, Noory is OK to say what he says because the head of the government has said the same thing. Having said that, it could be justification for not broadcasting ANYTHING the president says, because it's ALL his opinion, not based on facts, and the people around him will be the first to say that.

 

[tbolt909]

Anyone disbursing false or misleading information should be taken off the air.

This is from the FCC:

Broadcasting false information that causes substantial 'public harm'
The FCC prohibits broadcasting false information about a crime or a catastrophe if the broadcaster knows the information is false and will cause substantial "public harm" if aired.
FCC rules specifically say that "the public harm: must begin immediately and cause direct and actual damage to property or the health or safety of the general public; or divert law enforcement or public health and safety authorities from their duties."

Fox News was saying COVID 19 was a hoax until a couple weeks ago. This was common on Right Wing radio programming also. Limbaugh was guilty of this.

Broadcasters have a responsibility to give out factual information in a crisis like this. Unfortunately, the irresponsible ones cling to their dogma. Have any of the people who have violated this FCC rule been removed?
All I have seen is "walking back" previous comments...

 

[TheBigA]

Fox News was saying COVID 19 was a hoax until a couple weeks ago.

But they were just repeating what the head of the government was saying. They didn't invent it. It was coming from a position of authority. They're not responsible if the leader of the government isn't interested in science or facts or truth, and is using his position to dismantle any science or intelligence in the government. If Fox was the source for that, I'd agree. But they're just reporting what the elected leader of the government is saying.

This gets to a fundamental problem: What do you do when someone gets elected to the highest office in the land who believes and perpetuates conspiracy theories rather than facts or truth? How do we as the media handle that? I think what we've concluded is we have to put it out there, but also present the facts. Or as someone said, "alternative facts." That's what we've been living with for the past 3 years.

 

[tbolt909]

But they were just repeating what the head of the government was saying. They didn't invent it. It was coming from a position of authority. They're not responsible if the leader of the government isn't interested in science or facts or truth, and is using his position to dismantle any science or intelligence in the government. If Fox was the source for that, I'd agree. But they're just reporting what the elected leader of the government is saying.

It's still naive and irresponsible. Reputable news outlets have been fact checking the President on his lies. FOX just marches in lock step with the leader. That's not responsible journalism. It's dangerous propaganda...

 

[TheBigA]

It's still naive and irresponsible. Reputable news outlets have been fact checking the President on his lies. FOX just marches in lock step with the leader. That's not responsible journalism. It's dangerous propaganda...

That's your opinion. Journalism is reporting what the elected leaders say. Not doing that is placing one's own opinion over the story. Fox has been airing the daily briefings in their entirety, including the scientists and the journalist questions. In that way, the people get the facts, and they get to see the president respond to questions about his opinions. Fox News is a commercial outlet, supported by advertising. Statistically a large percentage of the country agrees with the what they say. That's good business. They're making money. That's what a commercial operation does.

 

[tbolt909]

That's your opinion. Journalism is reporting what the elected leaders say. Not doing that is placing one's own opinion over the story. Fox has been airing the daily briefings in their entirety, including the scientists and the journalist questions. In that way, the people get the facts, and they get to see the president respond to questions about his opinions. Fox News is a commercial outlet, supported by advertising. Statistically a large percentage of the country agrees with the what they say. That's good business. They're making money. That's what a commercial operation does.

Is this post a "parody"? Journalists have a responsibility to do more than just regurgitate what the leader says. If he says something that is knowingly false, you're okay with that? They aren't supposed to challenge it with facts?
News organizations were once about more than making money.

Since you say that making money is all that matters, why are we bothering with shutting down the economy? We can save the lives of all the doctors and health care workers by closing the hospitals. No treatment for anybody. Thin the herd of the weaker members and move on. (No I don't actually condone this)...

 

[TheBigA]

Is this post a "parody"? Journalists have a responsibility to do more than just regurgitate what the leader says. If he says something that is knowingly false, you're okay with that? They aren't supposed to challenge it with facts

Reporters are doing that, and they get attacked by the president as "nasty" or various other things. Then they put out their stories, and it gets labeled as "lamestream media." So it's obviously become a game. But if you're a journalist covering the white house, you can't choose to not report something just because you disagree with it. They challenge what is said, and report the response. That's where it's up to the people to decide.

Since you say that making money is all that matters, why are we bothering with shutting down the economy?

We're talking about Fox here, right? Fox is a commercial news operation. They are the #1 news network in the country. In my view, they're popular because they're entertaining, not because they're factual. Entertainment news beats straight hard news every day. You want straight hard news? Lots of other places to get it. But a big chunk seems to love what they're getting from Fox, and view everything else as "liberal propaganda."

Keep in mind the government is facing the same conundrum that the media faces. Dr. Fauci would like to say we should have a national stay in place rule. But the president doesn't want to tell people what to do. So he's stuck standing there like a potted plant.

 

[QED]

For the record I happen to like Noory and think he's a pretty good broadcaster. I really don't care about his opinions. But this was different. ER MD's and nurses have died. They are setting up morgues outside of NY hospitals.

He can't be this stupid.

 

[TheBigA]

He can't be this stupid.

As long as people listen, and the checks still clear the bank, he's got a gig. It's all entertainment. Mother Goose.

Consider music. A lot of people call rap music crap music. But the guys who do it seem to be fairly well off.

 

[davideduardo]

Fox News was saying COVID 19 was a hoax until a couple weeks ago.

I watch a variety of news channels, from the BBC to Fox. They were not saying that the Coronavirus was a hoax "until a couple of weeks ago". They were, in the news based segments (I don't spend much time with the evening commentators there), reporting on the progression of the disease and giving fairly good information on the results in Italy, China, Spain and other focal points.

The best accessible news coverage was on the BBC international service. It was the only one showing how the disease "crept up" on nations and affected them severely if they did not take precautions.

Broadcasters have a responsibility to give out factual information in a crisis like this. Unfortunately, the irresponsible ones cling to their dogma. Have any of the people who have violated this FCC rule been removed? All I have seen is "walking back" previous comments...

A lot of things have been "walked back". Health experts and professionals were, first, saying that masks were not needed. As they learned more about the new disease, they changed their opinions. We are still learning about distances to keep, endurance on different substances, transmittability via methods other than airborne moisture, etc.

In fact, two states prohibited medications that may significantly reduce the extent and mortality of the disease in individuals. As more research indicated that hose meds might help and did not hurt, they were forced to change their mind. This is a very fluid situation as we have seen nothing similar for over a century.

At any given time over the last few weeks we have had some states on total and early lock-down, others with restrictions, and still others with no significant restrictions. Some nations outside the US have curfews; part of my family lives in Ecuador where there is a 2 PM to 6 AM curfew and supermarkets let nobody in but staff fills orders in the parking lot.

The news media everywhere colors reports based on their own individual perspective. When living outside the US, I was always fascinated by how foreign media reported through a different colored lens about things going on in the country where I lived and owned a news station; the reports in some US media seemed to have been in a parallel universe!

My point is that there is no perfect response, no perfect answer, no perfect solution. Trump supporters think he is doing a good job; his detractors think he is terrible. Nothing new.

 

[CTListener]

My point is that there is no perfect response, no perfect answer, no perfect solution. Trump supporters think he is doing a good job; his detractors think he is terrible. Nothing new.

At what point, though, does it become evident that the "good job" that some believe the leader is doing is resulting, albeit indirectly, in the deaths of those who believe he is terrible? Does it have to reach the Hitler/Stalin/Amin/Mao level of actually putting out orders, enforceable by the military or other agents of the leader, that directly effect the lives of opponents? At what point do most journalists stop pretending that what the government is saying and doing and what the opposition -- or innocent parties -- are doing must be reported with equivalent impartiality?

 

[TheBigA]

At what point, though, does it become evident that the "good job" that some believe the leader is doing is resulting, albeit indirectly, in the deaths of those who believe he is terrible?

My sense is that will be covered in the election.

At what point do most journalists stop pretending that what the government is saying and doing and what the opposition -- or innocent parties -- are doing must be reported with equivalent impartiality?

The government hasn't presented a single unified view, and that's what most journalists are saying. Even Fox News has interviewed Fauci, and Fauci told them everyone should stay at home. The opinion hosts at MSNBC and CNN are decrying this lack of unified response. Fox News is mostly taking a populist approach, looking to cast blame on others.

 

[TheBigA]

We've been through this before. Not the first time we had to question what we see or hear:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThB0uAbjhGY&feature=youtu.be

 

[BamaTX]

I think we still don't know enough about the virus in order to make any claim. It's irresponsible to make any conclusion until all of this is said and done due to the nature of this virus. All we can do is take caution and report the opinions of experts, scientific studies, and what our federal, state and local governments are doing.

Having said that, I've been bothered by news outlets in how they have "sensationalized" this event for their own ratings and agenda. The pissing match between the president and the media about Hydroxychloroquine was absolutely ridiculous. And it was mind boggling to see outlets such as Fox News and CNN even waste time discussing the name fiasco. Coronavirus, Covid-19, Wuhan Coronavirus, China Virus....?*♂️. It's almost as if they're trying to please China in order to protect their Chinese interests....almost

My personal opinion of the president is that he's incompetent. But the media right now...oh boy. They're just more interested in getting in their licks instead of holding their journalistic integrity. Sometimes I wish we had a government funded news organization that was independent and free from commercialization. An organization not beholden to commercial or foreign government interests. Although, I'm not too sure how long that would last before it became corrupted.

 

[TheBigA]

I wish we had a government funded news organization that was independent and free from commercialization. An organization not beholden to commercial or foreign government interests.

That was the idea behind public broadcasting in the 60s. But Reagan pulled the plug on most of the gov't funding. So now we have a hybrid.