• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is this Media Matters claim fact, or fiction?

Is the Media Matters story below fact or fiction?

  • Fact - Glenn Beck reported the woman's story as fact

    Votes: 7 58.3%

  • Fiction - The Media Matters assertion is false. Beck did not report the woman's claim as fact

    Votes: 5 41.7%
  • Total voters
    12
  • Poll closed .
Grim17 said:
I realize this is an old story, but it was recently revived and unfortunately the discussion reached a stalemate... so I thought I'd let the members of the forum decide the issue.

Media Matters back in 2009 posted a story in which the headline read:

"Fox News reports fake murder story from ACORN video as fact"


An ACORN worker said on an undercover video that 10 year ago, she had shot and killer her abusive husband. The very first example they used to support their allegation was from Glenn Beck's show the day the video was released. Media Matters posted a partial transcript from the show where he had played the video and was discussing it's content. At the end of that partial transcript, they included the following quote from Beck:

"...but we haven't been even able to confirm from the state of California whether Tresa's husband from 10 years ago was killed, or if he's dead, or if she even had a husband. Did she make the story up? I don't know."


So the question is....

Is that quote from Glenn Beck an example of Fox News reporting that woman's murder claim as fact, or is this an example of Media Matters fiction?



The video of that woman's claim is included in the YouTube clip of that segment from Glenn Beck's show, which you can view here:
Prostitute Hannah and Pimp expose even more ACORN corruption in San Bernardino with Tresa Kaelke - YouTube
Click to expand...

I see. So Beck did the "I'm just asking questions" gimmick in lieu of actual journalism. Why do you watch him?
 
The fact they aired it is proof. What did MM make up?
Moon said:
I'm sure then that you'll have no problem proving there was an intent to deceive.
Click to expand...
 
mak2 said:
The fact they aired it is proof. What did MM make up?
Click to expand...

You claimed they intended to deceive their audience. I'm asking you to back up your claim.
 
Middleground said:
What is your opinion of people posing as a pimp and a ho with a story about bringing minors into a life of prostitution?
Click to expand...

what about the price of tea in china?
 
mak2 said:
The fact they aired it is proof. What did MM make up?
Click to expand...

Fox News reports fake murder story from ACORN video as fact
 
Here we go again... Another round of Pete refusing to see words that don't fit his agenda.



Hello boys and girls, and welcome basic English 101... Have a seat and open your books to Chapter 1.

pbrauer said:
Beck: "I'm not a lawyer. I'm not a jury. But gosh, even to me, it seems like this is a potential admission of murder." After airing video of Tresa Kaelke stating that she shot her ex-husband, Beck stated, "This is twisted, bizarre, macabre -- I mean, is this theater? I'm not a lawyer. I'm not a jury. But, gosh, even to me, it seems like this is a potential admission of murder. And the way she was describing doing some groundwork beforehand, you know, so everybody in town knew exactly what was going on, a case might be made for premeditated murder." Beck later added, "[W]e we haven't been even able to confirm from the state of California whether Tresa's husband from 10 years ago was killed, or if he's dead, or if she even had a husband. Did she make the story up? I don't know. Nobody's asking questions." [Glenn Beck, 9/15/09]
Click to expand...

Question 1: What does the word "admission" mean pertaining to the above paragraph?
A: It means that they are discussing what the person has claimed to have done, as opposed to discussing what the person actually did. It means that the action claimed is alleged, rather than established to have taken place.

Question 2: What does the phrase "we haven't been even able to confirm" mean?
A: It means that himself and the network didn't know whether the list of claims that followed, were true or false.

Question 3: What does "Did she make the story up? I don't know" in the above paragraph mean?
A: It means that he did not know whether the woman's many claims in the video were true, or merely fabrications on her part.

Question 4: What was determined in the above paragraph pertaining to the veracity of claims made by the woman on the video tape?
A: It was clearly stated that they had no information that either confirmed, or refuted the claims made by the woman, which is why no determination was made.





OK, let's move on to chapter 2:

Rove: ACORN must have "terrific ... human resources department to hire people like that." Karl Rove stated that Kaelke "admitted to -- or claimed to have killed her husband because she thought he was going to abuse her at some point. So, she's claimed that she shot him in the head. I mean, this is an organization that really must have a terrific human relations -- human resources department to hire people like that." [On the Record, 9/15/09]
Click to expand...

Question 1: When Mr. Rove said "people like that" who was he referring to?
A: As he stated, he was referring to the woman from the video who "claimed to have killed her husband" and "claimed that she shot him in the head".

Question 2: Did Mr. Rove indicate that her assertions were true?
A: No he didn't. Both times he commented on what the woman said, he referred to them as her claims, not her actions.

Question 3: What was determined in the above paragraph pertaining to the veracity of claims made by the woman on the video tape?
A: Nothing was determined. What the woman said was only referred to as her "claims", indicating that the veracity of those claims had not yet been determined.




Let's move on to the last chapter we're covering today... Turn to the first page in chapter 3 boys and girls, and lets examine that first paragraph.

Hannity: "She's on tape admitting that she plotted to kill and had her husband killed, but we don't know if it's true yet." Hannity asked Hannah Giles, the woman who posed as a prostitute, "Have you ever checked to see if in fact she had a husband who was killed?" Giles stated, "We're working on that." Hannity later stated, "So she's on tape admitting that she plotted to kill and had her husband killed, but we don't know if it's true yet." During a later segment, country music singer John Rich said, "[W]hat kind of screening process are they going through that they let a lady who admits to killing her husband standing right there?" [Hannity, 9/15/09]
Click to expand...

Question 1: What does the word "admitting" mean pertaining to the above paragraph?
A: It means "claimed to have done".

Question 2: What does the phrase "but we don't know if it's true yet" mean, and who is it referring to?
A: It's referring to the woman on the video tape and it means that both himself as well as the network, didn't know whether the claims she made on that tape were true or false. In other words, the veracity of her claims at that point, hadn't been determined

Question 3: Does the last sentence in the above paragraph indicate that the woman's claims are factual?
A: No they don't. She was never referred to as a killer or murderer, just as someone who claims to be.




OK boys and girls, it's final exam time... Put away your books.

Question 1: Did anyone who was quoted above refer to the woman in the video tape as a "Killer" or "murderer"?
A: No

Question 2: Did anyone who was quoted above, indicate that that the woman's claims were factual, and that she did in fact shoot her husband in the head, killing him?
A: No

Question 3: Does a claim of action, constitute proof of action?
A: No

Question 4: Do any of the quotes above, which were taken from shows that aired on Fox News, substantiate the claim made by Media Matters that "Fox News reports fake murder story from ACORN video as fact"?
A: Absolutely not.


I hope you've learned just how valuable an education is Pete... and always remember these 2, very important things:

"The mind, it's a terrible thing to waste"

and

Reading is Fundamental
 
Last edited:
APACHERAT said:
I seem to remember back when Glen Beck was part of Fox News Channel, Beck would have a disclaimer on every episode that went something like this. > "Don't take my word for being fact, do your own research."<
Click to expand...

I remember that, but it wasn't a show disclaimer, it was just what Beck told his audience to do.

As for the issue at hand, there wasn't anything he said that was false.
 
Cardinal said:
I see. So Beck did the "I'm just asking questions" gimmick in lieu of actual journalism. Why do you watch him?
Click to expand...

1. Saying "Did she make the story up... I don't know." is no gimmick... The only way it would be a gimmick, is if he asked a leading question and didn't provide the answer, leaving it to his audience to fill in the blanks. What Beck said was EXACTTLY the same as saying "I don't know if she make the story up.." There is nothing misleading or deceiving about that at all.

2. I haven't watched or listened to him for probably a good year now.
 
mak2 said:
Of course there isnt. When you pesent something intended to decieve, it is a lie, even on Fox.
Click to expand...

How does telling there audience that they don't know if her claims are true, deceiving them into thinking they are true?

You must be talking about children who've yet to reach the 3rd grade, or immigrants who don't have a firm grasp of the English language, because it just wasn't deceptive.
 
Grim17 said:
1. Saying "Did she make the story up... I don't know." is no gimmick... The only way it would be a gimmick, is if he asked a leading question and didn't provide the answer, leaving it to his audience to fill in the blanks. What Beck said was EXACTTLY the same as saying "I don't know if she make the story up.." There is nothing misleading or deceiving about that at all.

2. I haven't watched or listened to him for probably a good year now.
Click to expand...

Why would he even air the report if he hadn't done enough investigation to find out?
 
Cardinal said:
Why would he even air the report if he hadn't done enough investigation to find out?
Click to expand...

Is that the standard you apply just to Beck?

And you understand he wasn't reporting the news, but make a comment on an opinion show, right?
 
Because the people that watch Beck need beck to tell them what to think, he does. It cracks me up the party that used to call itself the party of morals and ethics dont even recognize lying anymore.
Grim17 said:
How does telling there audience that they don't know if her claims are true, deceiving them into thinking they are true?

You must be talking about children who've yet to reach the 3rd grade, or immigrants who don't have a firm grasp of the English language, because it just wasn't deceptive.
Click to expand...
 
 
Cardinal said:
Why would you even ask that?
Click to expand...

I hear lots of stories on the news where they report information as it's available. I was just curious if you applied the same standard to actual news reporting, or if it's reserved for Beck's opinion show.
 
Moon said:
I hear lots of stories on the news where they report information as it's available. I was just curious if you applied the same standard to actual news reporting, or if it's reserved for Beck's opinion show.
Click to expand...

I consider all news that's reported "as it's available" to be laziness incarnate. Ratings and the need to be the first to release a scoop is why so much inaccuracy gets spread, and it's why such "journalists" have an increasingly terrible reputation. Add to that the need to cater an ideology to your audience and the format becomes utter garbage. And yes, I consider sites like Huffingtonpost and MM to be just as deplorable.

They're all brain rot.
 
You really dont get it, do you? It is wrong no matter who does it. There are mitigating circumstances, such as imminent danger like not confirming a tornado is coming, but just in case, but it is the same responsibility even if you are talking to your buddies at the water cooler. You should make a reasonable attempt to ensure what you spread is true. Lying is wrong, even for RWers.
Moon said:
I hear lots of stories on the news where they report information as it's available. I was just curious if you applied the same standard to actual news reporting, or if it's reserved for Beck's opinion show.
Click to expand...
 
mak2 said:
Because the people that watch Beck need beck to tell them what to think, he does. It cracks me up the party that used to call itself the party of morals and ethics dont even recognize lying anymore.
Click to expand...

You mean Media Matters needs Beck to tell them what to think? Too funny.
 
mak2 said:
You really dont get it, do you? It is wrong no matter who does it. There are mitigating circumstances, such as imminent danger like not confirming a tornado is coming, but just in case, but it is the same responsibility even if you are talking to your buddies at the water cooler. You should make a reasonable attempt to ensure what you spread is true. Lying is wrong, even for RWers.
Click to expand...

Except he didn't lie. Stop letting MM do your thinking for you.
 
Media matters stated mission is to expose RW media lies. They are honest about it, that is why they exist. IF they called themselves fair and balance and only attacked the RWers I would have the EXACT same problem with them I do with Fox. Lying is lying.
Moon said:
You mean Media Matters needs Beck to tell them what to think? Too funny.
Click to expand...
 
Cardinal said:
Why would he even air the report if he hadn't done enough investigation to find out?
Click to expand...

I asked the same question.

I recently watched a special on Walter Cronkite and his reporting of Kennedy's assassination. It talked about how he refused to report that Kennedy had died until it could be 100% confirmed. Even though this meant someone else said it on air first. If that is true, and I like to think it is, I don't see that kind of integrity in our journalism now. Stations like FOX and MSNBC has degenerated to nothing but opinion media. It is ultimately destructive and divisive unless you are capable of listening with an objective ear and do a little research on your own.
 
mak2 said:
Because the people that watch Beck need beck to tell them what to think, he does. It cracks me up the party that used to call itself the party of morals and ethics dont even recognize lying anymore.
Click to expand...

If that's true then explain to me why it is, that those who didn't understand the english language and rediculously asserted that the Media Matters claim was correct when it wasn't, all seem to be from your side of the fence?
 
opendebate said:
I asked the same question.

I recently watched a special on Walter Cronkite and his reporting of Kennedy's assassination. It talked about how he refused to report that Kennedy had died until he could be 100% confirmed. If that is true, and I like to think it is, I don't see that kind of integrity in our journalism now. Stations like FOX and MSNBC has degenerated to nothing but opinion media. It is ultimately destructive and divisive.
Click to expand...

Tell me about it. The standards have dropped such that one crap journalist can quote another crap journalist site and that somehow qualifies as news.
 
Moon said:
I hear lots of stories on the news where they report information as it's available. I was just curious if you applied the same standard to actual news reporting, or if it's reserved for Beck's opinion show.
Click to expand...

I didn't hear too much bitching when the media reported on wikileaks and Snowden's claims before they were verified.
 
He presented a message with the intent to deceive.
Grim17 said:
If that's true then explain to me why it is, that those who didn't understand the english language and rediculously asserted that the Media Matters claim was correct when it wasn't, all seem to be from your side of the fence?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom