Quote:
Originally Posted by [Phill]
You dont think its the very definition of dishonest reporting to remove the laughter and applause after a joke and then attack the president for making a joke that no one laughed at or applauded? It is implied, and then reinforced by the hosts, that the jokes were not well received and the only thing they did was add in the crickets. Clearly no one at MM was like "****, we need to double check if there were actual crickets there!"
Sure, its a soft ball, but lets not pretend there is no value in media matters attacking Fox for the soft balls as well as the deeper ones that take more than a minute or two on youtube to debunk.
I think it was a joke, and a pretty obvious one at that. About as good as the president's, but not quite (I sort of supplied my own punchline to the Salmon one, and I know there was a bit of a response...).
Personally, I think the definition of 'dishonest reporting' is attempting to pass something false off as true. As such, I don't think that was 'dishonest reporting', at least the sound effects. Though, maybe I am focusing on the sound effects (but that was what the headline was about). But I also don't remember a huge reply to the jokes during the SOTU.
OK, watching the link Phil provided there was a bit more response than I remembered--I was probably lost in thought.