NASA's foremost mission? Improve relations with Muslims.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Do you get a nickel every time you say faux news?

It's the most popular nick name among subversives.

Is there are reason it bothers you? They aren't exactly known for real reporting.

 

[Pardalis]

Maybe using French makes you look smart to other anglophones, but to a francophone, the nickname "faux" doesn't even work, because it doesn't sound anything like "fox". I wish you'd stop using it.

 

[Chris L]

Have you read any comments in the Muslim press suggesting the comments sounded condescending?

No, but on the other hand, I haven't read any comments thanking the wise and wonderful Americans for including the humble peoples of the Middle East in their plans for space exploration. It's called common sense. If you tell someone (and if you listen very carefully, this is exactly what Bolden says) that one of your main aims is to make them feel good about themselves, you come off as condescending. It doesn't matter how you really meant it, it just is what it is.

If you disagree, kindly tell me what you think those words mean.

 

[rwguinn]

Maybe using French makes you look smart to other anglophones, but to a francophone, the nickname "faux" doesn't even work, because it doesn't sound anything like "fox". I wish you'd stop using it.

You mean "Foe Pa" ain't pronounciated "Fox paws"?
who'da thunk it!

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Maybe using French makes you look smart to other anglophones, but to a francophone, the nickname "faux" doesn't even work, because it doesn't sound anything like "fox". I wish you'd stop using it.

I could call it 'fake news' if it's English you prefer.

 

[GrouchoMarxist]

I could call it 'fake news' if it's English you prefer.

If it's not too much trouble, could you call it
supercalifragilisticFOXpialidocious??? Please!!!!!!

 

[Chris L]

I could call it 'fake news' if it's English you prefer.

Ah, but then you'd lose that "I'm so much smarter than you are because I use clever puns" meme and have to actually deal with other people's arguments. You might not want to go down that road.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Ah, but then you'd lose that "I'm so much smarter than you are because I use clever puns" meme and have to actually deal with other people's arguments. You might not want to go down that road.

Give me a break. Talk about reading crap that isn't there into a post.

Faux News is primarily a propaganda broadcast station masquerading as a news station. They mislabel op ed pieces as "fair and balanced news" and pundits as newscasters. They promote right wing talking points throughout the day (revealed as a formal practice in the documentary, "Out Foxed"). As such it is appropriate to call them what they are, propaganda disguised as fake news. Using the name "Faux" is simply one of several ways to address that point without a tedious discussion like this one.

I've not shied away from any arguments in this thread and if you think the very commonly used in English word, faux, is somehow a snobby choice, well that's just bizarre.

 

[Chris L]

No I don't think it is a snobby choice. I just think you have latched onto a rather cliched piece of silliness that you think sounds clever. My arguments have been about what Bolden actually said and what I know of human nature. I have not actually seen the Fox reports on the subject. Yet, you seem to insist on bringing them into the discussion. Unless you are claiming that they doctored the tape and Bolden did not say what he said, it is not relevant.

 

[Mycroft]

Give me a break. Talk about reading crap that isn't there into a post.

Faux News is primarily a propaganda broadcast station masquerading as a news station. They mislabel op ed pieces as "fair and balanced news" and pundits as newscasters. They promote right wing talking points throughout the day (revealed as a formal practice in the documentary, "Out Foxed"). As such it is appropriate to call them what they are, propaganda disguised as fake news. Using the name "Faux" is simply one of several ways to address that point without a tedious discussion like this one.

I've not shied away from any arguments in this thread and if you think the very commonly used in English word, faux, is somehow a snobby choice, well that's just bizarre.

I also find Fox's conservative bias annoying, but I don't think they are as biased as Democracy Now.

 

[Frank Newgent]

We could give the Martians towels to wear on their head (heads?) and that would make the Muslims happy.

Know you're not advocating for the Virgin Mary but have you noticed her look is about as traditional Muslim woman as it gets

 

[Skeptic]

It's the most popular nick name among subversives.

What's so "subversive" about what you do? It's practically established dogma in certain social circles that Bush / Republicans / America / the US Armed forces are evil and disgusting.

It would be much more "subversive" on your part to actually do something shocking, like sing The Star Spangled Banner with real feeling, or wear an American flag lapel pin.

Now that would really shock your social circle, I'm sure, if you feel like being subversive...

Is there are reason it bothers you? They aren't exactly known for real reporting.

It annoys because it's childish. It's a "clever" name that's actually just a cliche, which pretends to show the concern of the person who uses the expression with truth and accuracy in the media.

But in reality, most of those who use this term take long-discredited far-left loony publications (The Nation, Harper's) and clearly left-leaning so-called "mainstream" sources (The New York Times, Newsweek) seriously, despite the fact that these sources had ground whatever was left of their credibility to shreds in their all-out pro-Obama coverage before the elections, if not long before. Or is claiming that Obama is "a sort of God" objective factual reporting?

So it's not really a matter of care for accuracy; it's a matter of showing you are on the side of the angels, that is, left-wing, by making childish insults.

 

[Ziggurat]

So it's not really a matter of care for accuracy; it's a matter of showing you are on the side of the angels, that is, left-wing, by making childish insults.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

"Body piercings are a good thing. That way, you can tell if something's not right with a person." - Hank Hill

 

[NoScotsman]

Maybe...in the spirit of friendship...NASA can send a Muslim to the moon.

And then, one day, NASA can send all Muslims to the moon.

(thank you Sarah Silverman)

 

[Pardalis]

Maybe...in the spirit of friendship...NASA can send a Muslim to the moon.

And then, one day, NASA can send all Muslims to the moon.

(thank you Sarah Silverman)

Well their symbol is the crescent after all.

 

[Christa]

The idea of helping the Muslim world enter the 21st century is a good one.

I was in Dubai recently. I doubt they'd like us to help them back into the 21st century.

 

[Chris L]

I was in Dubai recently. I doubt they'd like us to help them back into the 21st century.

That is a legitimate issue. Not all Arab countries are the same, and in any case, most would (I suspect) resent our presumption that we could lead them into or out of anything. Goes along with the arrogance of thinking we can make them feel better about themselves and their contributions to science.

 

[Skeptic]

About the Media grinding their credibility to shreds just to get Obama elected, here is some more proof -- not that anybody thought otherwise. Funny how the real conspiracies to suppress damning evidence, or to smear the opponents with lies, (e.g., Bush's non-existent AWOL "discovered" by CBS) are usually the left's doing.

But, you see, they are allowed to do so -- when they lie and suppress and make up stuff, it's just to protect us poor plebes from the awful, awful right-wingers.

The scary thing is, before the internet, this sort of thing was probably de rigeour in most "progressive" newspapers, only nobody could prove it.

If your old enough for your progressive views to have been formed by reading the papers or watching TV before the internet era, perhaps you need to re-form your views.

There is ample evidence you have systematically been lied to so as to make your views as similar as possible to those of the 90% or so of reporters who are "progressives".

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I also find Fox's conservative bias annoying, but I don't think they are as biased as Democracy Now.

Democracy Now does not manufacture false stories. Faux News does.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

What's so "subversive" about what you do? It's practically established dogma in certain social circles that [GW] Bush / [some] Republicans / America / the US Armed forces are evil and disgusting. [snipped absurdities]

Your comments are like many of the right wingers. If one is critical of anything then one must be a commie who hates America. It's baloney.

But in reality, most of those who use this term take long-discredited far-left loony publications (The Nation, Harper's) and clearly left-leaning so-called "mainstream" sources (The New York Times, Newsweek) seriously, despite the fact that these sources had ground whatever was left of their credibility to shreds in their all-out pro-Obama coverage before the elections, if not long before. Or is claiming that Obama is "a sort of God" objective factual reporting?

So it's not really a matter of care for accuracy; it's a matter of showing you are on the side of the angels, that is, left-wing, by making childish insults.

Faux News makes no effort to report the news honestly. It's one thing to report the news with a right wing point of view. It's quite another to produce a purposeful propaganda product and pretend it is news programming.