Looks like he simply had had enough of his network lying to the public.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle...story.html

I had never heard of him until I read the linked article.

That is a man with a lot of integrity, it seems.

Apparently, there's been a fair bit of friction lately between Fox's news people and the opinion people.  This may be because Fox hasn't got a separate division called 'Fox Lunatics and Pathological Liars Spreading Conspiracy Theories.'

Boru

(October 11, 2019 at 5:16 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Apparently, there's been a fair bit of friction lately between Fox's news people and the opinion people.  This may be because Fox hasn't got a separate division called 'Fox Lunatics and Pathological Liars Spreading Conspiracy Theories.'

Boru

Fox is the division called  'Fox Lunatics and Pathological Liars Spreading Conspiracy Theories.'     Occasionally a contagion consisting of grains of truth temporarily gains entry, but is swiftly eradicated or expelled to ensure the integrity of its lies.

(October 11, 2019 at 4:53 pm)The Valkyrie Wrote: I had never heard of him until I read the linked article.

That is a man with a lot of integrity, it seems.

News junkies on both sides of the isle and journalists that far up all know who he is.

He was actually the one voice on that network I could handle, and every time he told the truth I kept pulling my hair out, thinking,  "Damn dude, why do you work there, you are a man with integrity?"

Rupert Murdoch  CEO of FUCKS NEWS, has to be the single man most responsible over the past 20 years of destroying the idea of honest journalism. Shep's absence is going to be a loss to journalism. 

But the bright side to all this is that Trump is coming so unhinged to the point even Fox had a few there saying, "What the fuck?"

But Shep was really the only one consistently challenging Trump.

Quote:Shep's absence is going to be a loss to journalism. 

Not necessarily.  Because he's leaving Fox doesn't mean he's leaving journalism.

Boru

(October 12, 2019 at 6:36 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

Quote:Shep's absence is going to be a loss to journalism. 

Not necessarily.  Because he's leaving Fox doesn't mean he's leaving journalism.

Boru

He even implied he'd be back, but not in the near future. Contract crap. I wouldn't be surprised to see him end up on MSNBC or CNN. 

It is still damaging to have that absence in the meantime. In this age of instant media we need constant daily watchdogs.

(October 12, 2019 at 8:02 am)Brian37 Wrote:

(October 12, 2019 at 6:36 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Not necessarily.  Because he's leaving Fox doesn't mean he's leaving journalism.

Boru

He even implied he'd be back, but not in the near future. Contract crap. I wouldn't be surprised to see him end up on MSNBC or CNN. 

It is still damaging to have that absence in the meantime. In this age of instant media we need constant daily watchdogs.

Google was kind enough to inform me that there are something over 49 000 broadcast journalists in the US.  I don't think Mr. Smith's absence is going to seriously damage anything.

Boru

(October 12, 2019 at 8:08 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(October 12, 2019 at 8:02 am)Brian37 Wrote: He even implied he'd be back, but not in the near future. Contract crap. I wouldn't be surprised to see him end up on MSNBC or CNN. 

It is still damaging to have that absence in the meantime. In this age of instant media we need constant daily watchdogs.

Google was kind enough to inform me that there are something over 49 000 broadcast journalists in the US.  I don't think Mr. Smith's absence is going to seriously damage anything.

Boru

Boru still not the point.

You are making the false assumption that journalism is a given, and in reality, if a disturbed person in a position of power can convince enough people to follow them, that can be destroyed. We have seen that before in human history, I wouldn't assume journalism is a given. Like any society, it still depends on enough people wanting to defend it, and it is paramount to fight those in power who attack the institutions that act as a check on power.

Free and open societies are not something you take for granted, they take constant vigilance to defend. 

There are journalists in western history that set a positive model such as Walter Cronkite and Murrow. But not all journalists have big bullhorns, and constantly have to fight people like Murdoch who seek to destroy journalistic objectivity. Shep had a bigger bullhorn than say, a small town reporter or small town newspaper reporter. 

Yes we have tons of journalists, but it still takes a society to want to defend them. And right now we have a POTUS who is seeking to destroy any challenge to his power, and I take that very seriously.

(October 12, 2019 at 8:22 am)Brian37 Wrote:

(October 12, 2019 at 8:08 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Google was kind enough to inform me that there are something over 49 000 broadcast journalists in the US.  I don't think Mr. Smith's absence is going to seriously damage anything.

Boru

Boru still not the point.

You are making the false assumption that journalism is a given, and in reality, if a disturbed person in a position of power can convince enough people to follow them, that can be destroyed. We have seen that before in human history, I wouldn't assume journalism is a given. Like any society, it still depends on enough people wanting to defend it, and it is paramount to fight those in power who attack the institutions that act as a check on power.

Free and open societies are not something you take for granted, they take constant vigilance to defend. 

There are journalists in western history that set a positive model such as Walter Cronkite and Murrow. But not all journalists have big bullhorns, and constantly have to fight people like Murdoch who seek to destroy journalistic objectivity. Shep had a bigger bullhorn than say, a small town reporter or small town newspaper reporter. 

Yes we have tons of journalists, but it still takes a society to want to defend them. And right now we have a POTUS who is seeking to destroy any challenge to his power, and I take that very seriously.

How can it not be the point?  I addressed the exact point that you made - that Smith's absence is somehow going to damage journalism. 

Boru