It's been documented time after time after time why the label Faux fits. Course if you want to keep the blinders on....

Just watch the documentary Outfoxed. Some of the statements the talking heads made on air went beyond distgusting as far as I'm concerned. Of one in particular that left my mouth open was something to the effect of "The pentagon has announced casualities for the month in Iraq at x amount dead. This means you are 10 times more likely to die in a car accident in California".

Not to forget the documents shown on Smokinggun.com on cheney's travel itinerary. All tv's turned to Faux. Wonder why?

>>Wait a sec. You're going to use a propaganda term for Fox News ("Fauxnews") and then complain about the propaganda??? How Orwellian is that??? How can I argue a point with someone who refers to sources in those terms? Your mind is made up, dude, you have drank the koolaid. No matter what I say it's going to come down to "faux" so why bother?
>
>I think that the outlet in case has long ago merited the loss of the benefit of the doubt. They're doing this for years, it was documented extensively, and they haven't retracted one bit. And I think I'm also prone to use the term "Faux News", because it's not news, and it's not to be confused with VFP.
>
>Just can't bring myself to, all of a sudden, forget what they were doing ever since I laid my channel selector on them. Probably longer than that. The news outlet which went all the way through the courts to defend its right to lie to the public because it was paid by corporate interests not to publish any truth that may hurt them (the Akre case, qv).