because they aren't competent. They're commentators, not journalists, they don't have to be.

I see a pattern here. You have an accusation from a biased source and no information from its opposing side. Instead of asking the obvious question, "how does the accused answer?", you simply assume the accuser to be correct.

So how can you call Fox "fair and balanced" when they used 8 yo video instead of something recent? I see a pattern too; you assume Fox to have the purest of motives (unlike any other network, LOL) and that any and all allegations against them are bogus. Yet you have not given a credible explanation why they would use old video footage instead of something recent.

__________________
January 20, 2009 - The end of an error.

I assume nothing of FNC. But again, it’s not up to me to find the opposing view from the story. It is the responsibility of the journalist who wrote the piece. My responsibility is to point out the hypocrisy of the journalist that fails to do so while maintaining that he is “fair and balanced”.

You keep dodging when I try to get you to explain what is "right" with FNC using an 8 yo video instead of a recent one. How on earth can you not see something fraudulent in doing that? Really, an 8 yo video clip is not news; it's history.

__________________
January 20, 2009 - The end of an error.

You call it dodging- I call it insisting on standards before I play the game.

Having not seen the video or heard opposing comment I don't have a clue why they used it. But if they intended to be fraudulent, why would they show the "2000" sign? The snide excuse that they were "incompetent" doesn't wash.

Why would they use old video footage while covering a current event? And do you assume that they'd have the foresight to get rid of the parts that contain the McCain 2000 signs, especially after the way they labeled Mark Foley a "Democrat?"

__________________
January 20, 2009 - The end of an error.

Again, I don't have a clue. Why not ask FNC, like the writer of the original piece should have done.

It's far too easy to make a sensational news story when you only tell half of it. Doesn't it bother you that the "journalist" was lazy?

Where FNC is concerned, they seem to have a habit of "laziness." And coincidentally, their laziness always favors the GOP and tries to pin all the bad stuff on Democrats (as in, "Mark Foley - Democrat").

__________________
January 20, 2009 - The end of an error.

Do you have any evidence of this to share besides the obvious error of Foley?