Shirley Sherrod: An interesting Timeline of events (wow its not fox new's fault)

[boedicca]

Apparently some of you can't read.

Paperview posted the evidence.

On the 19th, Fox Nation twittered at 10:36 AM about an article posted on Fox Nation.

The Fox Nation article linked to an article at Fox News.

This means that that Fox News reported the Sherrod tape on its website on or before 10:36 AM on the 19th...well before Sherrod resigned.

Therefore any claims by FOX that they didn't report the story before her resignation are false.

Fox News subsequently changed the original article's date to the 20th...to cover itself? We report, you decide.

Fox Nation is not Fox News.

It's a discussion forum.

 

[ConHog]

I'll save you some time - as I said earlier:

if you click on that twit link, it goes to the Fox Nation page, and at the end of the News story, it says in the last line and link "Read more ..."
That goes to the Fox News site, and the story.
(which they changed later, and did not show they had edited it and changed the dates.)

Are they required to? I surf a lot of web sites, many of them are dynamic and change hourly, I have yet to see a website that advertises when it changes content on one of its pages.

you are a liar, and hereby written off

 

[ConHog]

Timeline of when Fox News reported on this. Oooo, sorry folks it's GLENN BECK! Run away, run away!!!

YouTube - Glenn Beck-07/22/10-E

Hey he had more info than me there.....ugh whats with beck being all sane and accurate lately?

Beck is and always was accurate when it comes to facts. Sane? hmm well ummmm

 

[edthecynic]

Can you admit that FoxNation is a blog in which contributing bloggers starts threads and there is NO evidence at all that FoxNews controls , edits, or cares what those bloggers write about? of course it's obvious they choose who gets to blog, but that is the case with everyone who owns a blog site and so faulting FoxNews for that would be stupid.

If you can't admit that is true, I will simply write you off as a fucking Ravi type liar who the world would be better off without. If you will admit that is true, then we can continue this discussion.

I have already debunked your above lie in this thread with a pull quote from the link ConHog posted.
Please come up with a new lie, before we continue this "discussion."
Thank you.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

A Fox News.com story was UP at 10:36AM.

The twitter post/link proves it.

That link was to foxnation not foxnews.

 

[Ravi]

Apparently some of you can't read.

Paperview posted the evidence.

On the 19th, Fox Nation twittered at 10:36 AM about an article posted on Fox Nation.

The Fox Nation article linked to an article at Fox News.

This means that that Fox News reported the Sherrod tape on its website on or before 10:36 AM on the 19th...well before Sherrod resigned.

Therefore any claims by FOX that they didn't report the story before her resignation are false.

Fox News subsequently changed the original article's date to the 20th...to cover itself? We report, you decide.

Fox Nation is not Fox News.

It's a discussion forum.

You're still missing the point. The Fox Nation article linked to a Fox News article as its source at "read more".

And btw, it isn't a discussion forum. It is a place where "news" is posted and people comment on the articles.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

...........

And Breibert =/= FoxNews, so admit that even if Breibert did do it, FN did not.

But Foxnews.com did.

Thats not a working link its just underlined.

 

[DiveCon]

I'll save you some time - as I said earlier:

if you click on that twit link, it goes to the Fox Nation page, and at the end of the News story, it says in the last line and link "Read more ..."
That goes to the Fox News site, and the story.
(which they changed later, and did not show they had edited it and changed the dates.)

Are they required to? I surf a lot of web sites, many of them are dynamic and change hourly, I have yet to see a website that advertises when it changes content on one of its pages.

you are a liar, and hereby written off

required to note when it was edited?
no, but they SHOULD
otherwise things look shady

 

[The Infidel]

you are a liar, and hereby written off

Yeah, I give up.... let them have their fun.

They thrive on misinformation.

 

[boedicca]

I'll save you some time - as I said earlier:

if you click on that twit link, it goes to the Fox Nation page, and at the end of the News story, it says in the last line and link "Read more ..."
That goes to the Fox News site, and the story.
(which they changed later, and did not show they had edited it and changed the dates.)

Are they required to? I surf a lot of web sites, many of them are dynamic and change hourly, I have yet to see a website that advertises when it changes content on one of its pages.

you are a liar, and hereby written off

Uh. Fox did change the date. The original story was posted on July 19th. The expanded version at the link is now dated July 20th.

No news site, or other site, for that matter provides a full audit trail that is obvious to the reader of all content updates. The internet would be unreadable if they did. The date change on the article itself is sufficient to indicate revised content.

 

[Ravi]

Most news sites do note updates and edits.

PP, are you being willfully ignorant?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Got any proof?

Nope, pure speculation on my part. I'm just hanging out here waiting for PP to admit he was wrong.

I'm not wrong.

Click it again, little child. --->Twitter / The FOXNation: Caught on Tape: Obama Offi ...

What time does it say? What headline does it read?

What place does it link to????

Again thats foxnation not foxnews.

BTW everyone should read edthecynic's sig line, the first sentance is very relevant.

 

[The Infidel]

...........

And Breibert =/= FoxNews, so admit that even if Breibert did do it, FN did not.

But Foxnews.com did.

Thats not a working link its just underlined.

Just more evidence of their tricky ways

"If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside... every positive has its negative."

 

[boedicca]

Apparently some of you can't read.

Paperview posted the evidence.

On the 19th, Fox Nation twittered at 10:36 AM about an article posted on Fox Nation.

The Fox Nation article linked to an article at Fox News.

This means that that Fox News reported the Sherrod tape on its website on or before 10:36 AM on the 19th...well before Sherrod resigned.

Therefore any claims by FOX that they didn't report the story before her resignation are false.

Fox News subsequently changed the original article's date to the 20th...to cover itself? We report, you decide.

Fox Nation is not Fox News.

It's a discussion forum.

You're still missing the point. The Fox Nation article linked to a Fox News article as its source at "read more".

And btw, it isn't a discussion forum. It is a place where "news" is posted and people comment on the articles.

It's a discussion forum. Fox posts news on it's news site - Fox Nation is a site for members to discuss the news.

I commented on the revised content at the link in my prior post to this one.

 

[edthecynic]

Apparently some of you can't read.

Paperview posted the evidence.

On the 19th, Fox Nation twittered at 10:36 AM about an article posted on Fox Nation.

The Fox Nation article linked to an article at Fox News.

This means that that Fox News reported the Sherrod tape on its website on or before 10:36 AM on the 19th...well before Sherrod resigned.

Therefore any claims by FOX that they didn't report the story before her resignation are false.

Fox News subsequently changed the original article's date to the 20th...to cover itself? We report, you decide.

Fox Nation is not Fox News.

It's a discussion forum.

How many times are you drones going to repeat this lie that I already debunked using the link ConHog posted earlier in this thread????????

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

When foxnews.com posted it, they included a note that it was just a portion of a video, and that they didn't know what the point of Breitbart's story was.

Yeah. Didn't know the point. LOLOLOL

Yep. That's what they included in the story. You'd know this if you actually bothered reading anything before pontificating about it.

The point of the story wasn't entirely clear; only an excerpt of the speech is included in the video clip.

FOXNews.com - Video Shows USDA Official Saying She Didn't Give 'Full Force' of Help to White Farmer

THat link is from july 20th, the day after she resigned.

Still waiting for the foxnews, either foxnews.com or foxnews channel, story from before she resigned.

 

[edthecynic]

Nope, pure speculation on my part. I'm just hanging out here waiting for PP to admit he was wrong.

I'm not wrong.

Click it again, little child. --->Twitter / The FOXNation: Caught on Tape: Obama Offi ...

What time does it say? What headline does it read?

What place does it link to????

Again thats foxnation not foxnews.

BTW everyone should read edthecynic's sig line, the first sentance is very relevant.

FOXnation is CONTROLLED by the FOXgossip channel according to the link posted by ConHog earlier in this thread..

 

[boedicca]

I must note the irony of people who supported passage of ObamaCare on the basis of finding out what's in it after it's passed having a hissy fit because Fox News updated a story as more details became available and changed the date on the article from July 19th to July 20th.

To those of us with full functioning logic processors, it's much ado about nothing. Whatever and whenever Fox posted doesn't excuse the Obama Administration from firing an employee without due process. Considering that the Obama Administration loathes Fox News, claiming that they did something just because Fox posted a story on a website is beyond inane.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I'll save you some time - as I said earlier:

if you click on that twit link, it goes to the Fox Nation page, and at the end of the News story, it says in the last line and link "Read more ..."
That goes to the Fox News site, and the story.
(which they changed later, and did not show they had edited it and changed the dates.)

That link is from july 20th, the day after the resignation was asked for by the Obama admin.

I want one that shows it was fox news' fault that the obama admin asked her to resign which means it needs to be from earlier in the day on the 19th then around 5pm when she was asked to pull over and resign.

 

[Ravi]

I must note the irony of people who supported passage of ObamaCare on the basis of finding out what's in it after it's passed having a hissy fit because Fox News updated a story as more details became available and changed the date on the article from July 19th to July 20th.

To those of us with full functioning logic processors, it's much ado about nothing. Whatever and whenever Fox posted doesn't excuse the Obama Administration from firing an employee without due process. Considering that the Obama Administration loathes Fox News, claiming that they did something just because Fox posted a story on a website in beyond inane.

Who is upset about it?

I just think it adds more doubt to their credibility. They and all of you are all over the place insisting they didn't report the Sherrod tape until after she resigned.

They are full of shit and Vilsack should be fired for taking them with any credibility.