FOX KNEW !!!! (Page 7): You are so closed minded or you just are too ignorant to get it. "Because a episode, a company, a person, ect "operates" under a name "Bozo", doesn't mean they...

microphor Loc: Home is TN

Milosia2 wrote:

Excerpt br *** Excerpt br ***** Fox News Channel... (show quote)

You are so closed minded or you just are too ignorant to get it. "Because a episode, a company, a person, ect "operates" under a name "Bozo", doesn't mean they have a "Bozo" license! Get it!

America 1 Loc: South Miami

Milosia2 wrote:

Court logs .

Show those logs.

EmilyD

Milosia2 wrote:

Excerpt br *** Excerpt br ***** Fox News Channel... (show quote)

EmilyD

microphor wrote:

You are so closed minded or you just are too ignorant to get it. "Because a episode, a company, a person, ect "operates" under a name "Bozo", doesn't mean they have a "Bozo" license! Get it!

No...apparently she can't understand the difference.

microphor Loc: Home is TN

If the left wasn't lying, they'd die out

Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio

EmilyD wrote:

No...apparently she can't understand the difference.

The difference is that Roger Ailes sued the
Supreme court for open dialogue.
Ailes stated to the supreme court that
Fox News was operating under the umbrella of
Fox Entertainment Network.
Arguing it was not a news agency .
In spite of the name Fox News .
Ailes wanted to be identified as an entertainment channel.
This would allow him to say whatever he wanted on the air.
Roger ailes told the dupreme court he wanted to broadcast Opinions of News.
AKA- propaganda.

Rose42

Milosia2 wrote:

The difference is that Roger Ailes sued the
Supreme court for open dialogue.
Ailes stated to the supreme court that
Fox News was operating under the umbrella of
Fox Entertainment Network.
Arguing it was not a news agency .
In spite of the name Fox News .
Ailes wanted to be identified as an entertainment channel.
This would allow him to say whatever he wanted on the air.
Roger ailes told the dupreme court he wanted to broadcast Opinions of News.
AKA- propaganda.

Yet again…how did he manage to sue the Supreme Court when it can’t be sued? You keep repeating it but its not true.

EmilyD

Milosia2 wrote:

The difference is that Roger Ailes sued the
Supreme court for open dialogue.
Ailes stated to the supreme court that
Fox News was operating under the umbrella of
Fox Entertainment Network.
Arguing it was not a news agency .
In spite of the name Fox News .
Ailes wanted to be identified as an entertainment channel.
This would allow him to say whatever he wanted on the air.
Roger ailes told the dupreme court he wanted to broadcast Opinions of News.
AKA- propaganda.

Where are you getting this? I have posted several articles debunking this lie, yet you persist on saying it is true. Since you are posting this lie all over OPP (and probably other places you infest) I challenge you to provide the court documents and anything else that LEGITIMATELY (meaning NOT an opinion, but a fact) that says that Fox News now has a license that says it is an entertainment network.

If you don't do this, I will insist that you are lying to CYA....

BRING IT OR SHUT IT.

America 1 Loc: South Miami

EmilyD wrote:

Where are you getting this? I have posted several ... (show quote)

Arguing with a concrete wall would get better results.

EmilyD

America 1 wrote:

Arguing with a concrete wall would get better results.

I think this is in the vicinity of "if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it" category.... I sincerely believe that's what Milosia2 is trying to do here.

America 1 Loc: South Miami

EmilyD wrote:

I think this is in the vicinity of "if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it" category... I sincerely believe that's what Milosia2 is trying to do here.

It seems doubtful it or what it is could be that dumb.

EmilyD

America 1 wrote:

It seems doubtful it or what it is could be that dumb.

Maybe she doesn't know what "satire" means..... 😐

Free Wood Post, a parody news website, published the satirical article about Fox News changing its accreditation from “news” to “satire” in 2013.

EmilyD

Milosia2 wrote:

The difference is that Roger Ailes sued the
Supreme court for open dialogue.
Ailes stated to the supreme court that
Fox News was operating under the umbrella of
Fox Entertainment Network.
Arguing it was not a news agency .
In spite of the name Fox News .
Ailes wanted to be identified as an entertainment channel.
This would allow him to say whatever he wanted on the air.
Roger ailes told the dupreme court he wanted to broadcast Opinions of News.
AKA- propaganda.

.....

America 1 Loc: South Miami

EmilyD wrote:

Maybe she doesn't know what "satire" means..... 😐

Free Wood Post, a parody news website, published a satirical article about Fox News changing its accreditation from “news” to “satire” in 2013.

Send a reminder on beating a dead horse; this one died long ago.

EmilyD

Milosia2 wrote:

The difference is that Roger Ailes sued the
Supreme court for open dialogue.
Ailes stated to the supreme court that
Fox News was operating under the umbrella of
Fox Entertainment Network.
Arguing it was not a news agency .
In spite of the name Fox News .
Ailes wanted to be identified as an entertainment channel.
This would allow him to say whatever he wanted on the air.
Roger ailes told the dupreme court he wanted to broadcast Opinions of News.
AKA- propaganda.

AGAIN:

• “Networks” don’t have FCC licenses, only stations do.

• Cable stations don’t have FCC licenses, only over-the-air broadcast stations do.

• Station licenses don’t specify “news” or “entertainment”. A licensed station can swap from an “entertainment” (music, for instance) format to a “news” format at any time, just as it can switch from a rock music format to a country music format. There’s no change to the license required.