Zoom Call Leaked Detailing Panic When Fox Called AZ for Trump

[DCGeneral]

If one likes Fox News coverage, that is fine. But there is no debate that they are not a credible news organization. Having partisan commentators is one thing. Actually having their leaders openly debating to reverse the correct decision to call AZ for Trump shows they've sunken to a new low.

Baier and others on the call actually said they should air a retraction because calling AZ for Trump was costing them viewers..

Great reporting by the Times (cue the obligatory response from MAGA lovers who discredit the Times for factual reporting).

Inside the Panic at Fox News After the 2020 Election

“If we hadn’t called Arizona,” said Suzanne Scott, the network’s chief executive, according to a recording reviewed by The New York Times, “our ratings would have been bigger.”

www.nytimes.com

 

[Ohio Guy]

Imagine what Trump, Guiliani, My Pillow Guy and every other far-right, stop-the-steal conspiracy theorist would say if MSNBC or CNN had prematurely called a closely contested state. They'd be accused of coordinating their effort to dissuade Trump voters from getting out to vote. There would be calls for legal action and an all out ban on them staying on the air. It's be sheer and utter pandemonium. It'd be unequivocal proof that there was large and indisputable efforts to rig the election and steal it from ol' Donald T. And it probably would be surmised that it's all spelled out on Hunter Biden's laptop.

Nevermind the fact that Fox News actually did this, and unintended or not, could have caused Trump and probably Lake some potentially meaningful votes. It wasn't in 2000 Mules so no one gives a crap about it.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Imagine what Trump, Guiliani, My Pillow Guy and every other far-right, stop-the-steal conspiracy theorist would say if MSNBC or CNN had prematurely called a closely contested state. They'd be accused of coordinating their effort to dissuade Trump voters from getting out to vote. There would be calls for legal action and an all out ban on them staying on the air. It's be sheer and utter pandemonium. It'd be unequivocal proof that there was large and indisputable efforts to rig the election and steal it from ol' Donald T. And it probably would be surmised that it's all spelled out on Hunter Biden's laptop.

Nevermind the fact that Fox News actually did this, and unintended or not, could have caused Trump and probably Lake some potentially meaningful votes. It wasn't in 2000 Mules so no one gives a crap about it.

How did it cost Trump or Lake votes?

 

[Marvin the Martian]

How did it cost Trump or Lake votes?

It was called after the polls closed in most states, I think it was called at midnight eastern. Maybe Hawaii and Alaska still had voting still open? Neither would have mattered in any significant way.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

Imagine what Trump, Guiliani, My Pillow Guy and every other far-right, stop-the-steal conspiracy theorist would say if MSNBC or CNN had prematurely called a closely contested state. They'd be accused of coordinating their effort to dissuade Trump voters from getting out to vote. There would be calls for legal action and an all out ban on them staying on the air. It's be sheer and utter pandemonium. It'd be unequivocal proof that there was large and indisputable efforts to rig the election and steal it from ol' Donald T. And it probably would be surmised that it's all spelled out on Hunter Biden's laptop.

Nevermind the fact that Fox News actually did this, and unintended or not, could have caused Trump and probably Lake some potentially meaningful votes. It wasn't in 2000 Mules so no one gives a crap about it.

That happened in 2000 when Florida was called for Gore while the polls were still open in the panhandle. Cost Bush a lot of votes and the call was wrong anyway.

 

[Ohio Guy]

How did it cost Trump or Lake votes?

I was working on the assumption that calling a state would make someone less likely to vote since their vote wouldn't seem to matter.

 

[Spartans9312]

I was working on the assumption that calling a state would make someone less likely to vote since their vote wouldn't seem to matter.

Were the polls still open?

 

[Indianaftw]

But there is no debate that they are not a credible news organization.

What are the credible news organizations?

 

[UncleMark]

That happened in 2000 when Florida was called for Gore while the polls were still open in the panhandle. Cost Bush a lot of votes and the call was wrong anyway.

I was working on the assumption that calling a state would make someone less likely to vote since their vote wouldn't seem to matter.

I'm pretty certain that since FL in 2000 all the networks wait to make a call until after the polls have closed.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

Baier and others on the call actually said they should air a retraction because calling AZ for Trump was costing them voters.

important correction,

not because it was costing them voters.

but because it was costing them viewers and potentially hurting the stock price.

it wasn't personal. just business.

 

[Ohio Guy]

Were the polls still open?

Now that I'm looking more into this and reading another article about it, probably not. It looks like what Fox was actually mad about was that they felt like they shot themselves in the foot by calling Arizona. They felt like leaving it open could have fed into the narrative that the presidential election was still very much in play and that Arizona was a toss up.

That said, I do think my original point that if these court depositions were coming from almost any other network Trump, Guiliani, Lindell and all the others would be pumping up the outrage over it.

 

[UncleMark]

Imagine what Trump, Guiliani, My Pillow Guy and every other far-right, stop-the-steal conspiracy theorist would say if MSNBC or CNN had prematurely called a closely contested state.

That said, I do think my original point that if these court depositions were coming from almost any other network Trump, Guiliani, Lindell and all the others would be pumping up the outrage over it.

Where you're stumbling is saying it was a premature call. I don't remember if Fox was the first, but it doesn't matter -- it wasn't premature and it wasn't wrong.

 

[Ohio Guy]

Where you're stumbling is saying it was a premature call. I don't remember if Fox was the first, but it doesn't matter -- it wasn't premature and it wasn't wrong.

Yeah...I think you're right.

 

[IU_Hickory]

If one likes Fox News coverage, that is fine. But there is no debate that they are not a credible news organization. Having partisan commentators is one thing. Actually having their leaders openly debating to reverse the correct decision to call AZ for Trump shows they've sunken to a new low.

Baier and others on the call actually said they should air a retraction because calling AZ for Trump was costing them voters.

Great reporting by the Times (cue the obligatory response from MAGA lovers who discredit the Times for factual reporting).

Inside the Panic at Fox News After the 2020 Election

“If we hadn’t called Arizona,” said Suzanne Scott, the network’s chief executive, according to a recording reviewed by The New York Times, “our ratings would have been bigger.”

www.nytimes.com

Do you mean when they correctly called it for biden?

 

[sku]

What are the credible news organizations?

I doubt there are any, you cannot trust the mainstream media, CNN, MSNBC, etc. Now you can start on the newspapers like New York Times. USA Today and on and on. You can go on both sides and have a hard time finding truth on everything

 

[DCGeneral]

important correction,

not because it was costing them voters.

but because it was costing them viewers and potentially hurting the stock price.

it wasn't personal. just business.

Absolutely. For some reason I typed "voters" when I meant "viewers". Old age. I will fix it now.

 

[IUINSB]

Absolutely. For some reason I typed "voters" when I meant "viewers". Old age. I will fix it now.

Please, please, let me know how to fix it.

 

[NPT]

What are the credible news organizations?

Here is a list of them:

 

[twenty02]

I doubt there are any, you cannot trust the mainstream media, CNN, MSNBC, etc. Now you can start on the newspapers like New York Times. USA Today and on and on. You can go on both sides and have a hard time finding truth on everything

Probably true if you have an IQ of 60, and can't digest info from multiple of sources and come to any reasonable conclusion using your own brain.

If you need spoonfed information like my 4 year old, yeah you'll probably have trouble with any media outlet

 

[i'vegotwinners]

Imagine what Trump, Guiliani, My Pillow Guy and every other far-right, stop-the-steal conspiracy theorist would say if MSNBC or CNN had prematurely called a closely contested state. They'd be accused of coordinating their effort to dissuade Trump voters from getting out to vote. There would be calls for legal action and an all out ban on them staying on the air. It's be sheer and utter pandemonium. It'd be unequivocal proof that there was large and indisputable efforts to rig the election and steal it from ol' Donald T. And it probably would be surmised that it's all spelled out on Hunter Biden's laptop.

Nevermind the fact that Fox News actually did this, and unintended or not, could have caused Trump and probably Lake some potentially meaningful votes. It wasn't in 2000 Mules so no one gives a crap about it.

Comcast/NBC and AT&T/CNN stood on the scales with all their weight in the 2016 and 2020 primaries.

they are no more "journalist" or less "capitalist" than Fox.

we just haven't gotten to see all those emails like we have Foxes'.

the idiocracy still doesn't grasp what corps are, or the only agenda they are allowed to have, by the very fact that they are corporations.

the social media party propagandists aren't about to shed light on what the parties absolutely don't want light shed on.

in reality, Comcast/NBC and AT&T/CNN are even more slave to what they can and can't do than Fox, due to Rupert still controlling the News Corp/Fox voting shares, while Vanguard, BlackRock, and State St, fund managers control Comcast's and AT&T's voting shares. and big techs'.

it's not journalism, it's just business.

an entity can't be both journalistic on economic matters of weight, and corporate, not possible.

especially now that hedge fund managers working for corporate entities themselves, and not individuals across the US, now control the voting shares.

things just can't work that way, even if the CEO and all the C-suite execs wanted it to.

 

[Standard Issue]

Props for drunk posting on a Thursday night/ Friday morning. Now say "Moneyed Interests" three times and go to sleep.