Wow are people just plain dumb.

Fox news actually admitted in open court that they don't feel like they have to tell the truth.

http://www.relfe.com/media_can_legally_lie.html

Good luck with that.  The CEO of CNN just got replaced with the CEO of HLN.   Headline News.

It will be MSNBC esque by fall.

Also... there is a very simple reason why Fox News is the most trusted cable news source in the country.

1)  Every other Cable News network leans Leftwing at least some... and are going even more that way for ratings.  The only real exception when it comes to Newscasters everyone likes is Anderson Cooper... and he doesn't get the ratings people want him to.  He's one of Republican's favorite newscasters and I mean... he's gay.

The era of the unbiased news reporter is long gone.  I mean, look at Glenn Beck and Keith Olberman.  Both used to be funny entertaining slightly right and slightly left of center politicians who were willing to rib both sides.

Now both are crazd nutballs.  Beck in his Paranoia, and Olberman in his over the top strawman ignoring the facts if they get in the way of a good story attitude.

However with there being multiple Liberal News stations.  It means liberal viewpoints are more split.  AS such, you aren't going to trust news stations you don't watch probably.  And you make even distrust it if you've watched it once or twice and didn't like the guy on air at the time.

Fox news being the only conservatives news station with a lack of a moderate news station means there is no other choice for anyone even slightly right of center.

That's... not actually what happened.

Which is why internet news is even worse then Cable Network news.  It goes from one source through 12 blogs and you end up with a story not like the actual one.

Check the Wiki on the Lawsuit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Akre#Whistleblower_lawsuit

The courts ruled against all of their lower charges.  In otherwords agreeing they didn't lie.

That's why "inexplicably" Wilson didn't win anything. 

Then they appealed the whistleblower clause to get back the 400,000 dollars they lost because she didn't have a standing under that clause.

That doesn't change the fact that Fox (WTVT) argued (and the court agreed) that distorting the news is not illegal:

"We agree with WTVT that the FCC's policy against the intentional falsification of the news-which the FCC has called its “news distortion policy”-does not qualify as the required “law, rule, or regulation” under section 448.102."

Then those 12% are not very smart. They are probably the same people who think freaked out over swine flu.

Which you know... doesn't actually mean anything.  They did it to prevent a pointless lawsuit without merit.  Any newstation would of done the same.

Also, they didn't even argue that it wasn't illegal.  They argued that it wasn't against section 448.102 of the whistleblower law.

In otherwords Whatever... it'd be like if you were accused of (and lets say innocent) of punching a pregnant woman in the stomach and causing her to miscarriage her baby.

Furthermore, you were charged with murder.  Then you were to argue that it's not murder....

and a bunch of media outlets said "Whatever wins case saying punching women in stomach so mother miscaries = Not a crime.  He clearly did it!"

When all you did was prove that it wasn't murder.

How do you come to the conclusion that it doesn't mean anything?  It can certainly be used as precedent in future cases.  It sets a chilling precedent that will affect others from becoming whistleblowers.

Chilling precedent on what?   To qualify to be a whisleblower and still protect your job you have to be blow the whistle on something illegal.  What's wrong with that?

Why would you even want to work for someone who was forcing you to lie?

I mean, did you read the actual reasoning for the judgement... or are you still talking of the news from the site that complains Kellog's serial has metal in it.

http://www.2dca.org/opinions/Opinion_Pages/Opinion_Page_2003/February/February 14, 2003/2D01-529.pdf

IS the actual brief.

There needs to be set standards otherwise anyone fired could just accuse their employer of "slanting the truth".

Also, you know this only applies to Florida.  Not the rest of the nation.