Faux News’ Lauren Ashburn Says It’s Not Fair to Blame Faux News for Misinformation

From the "You've got to be kidding, right!?" Department:

Lauren Ashburn says it's not Faux News that spread misinformation but paid contributors and that Faux News is therefore free of blame…

 

Move over “You didn’t build that.” It’s time for “Faux News didn’t say that.”

Faux News apparently feels the same way about the quality of their on-air programming as many big corporations do about the quality of their manufactured products. In other words, people have no right to question their ingredients. No matter how substandard or even harmful they may be.

Lauren Ashburn, who, with Howard Kurtz, co-hosts MediaBuzz (Sundays 11AM-12PM/ET) “to discuss the state of the news media and the media’s shaping of current events and their role in politics, culture, business, technology and sports,” said that, “it’s just not fair” to blame Faux News for misinformation presented on their programming:

(Speaking of misinformation and media buzz, there have been some questions about Ashburn’s own credentials, though I am certain none of that is the fault of Faux News either. They can hardly be blamed for what they tell you on air.)

That’s right. Faux News is not responsible for its own content. The buck stops…nowhere.

Specifically, Ashburn was whining about fallout from her network’s recent miscue surrounding the capture of Benghazi suspect Ahmet Abu Khattala. You’ll remember that Khattala was inconveniently and suspiciously captured on June 17.

For no reason I can discern other than because Obama is black and it was a Tuesday, Faux News immediately suggested the timing of the capture was almighty convenient for Hilary Clinton, coinciding as it did with the release of her new book, Hard Choices (published June 10) and book tour (which also kicked off June 10 at the Union Square Barnes & Noble store in New York City).

Justin Baragona discussed Faux News’ reaction to Khattala’s capture on June 17:

Over at Faux News, the network both downplayed the news and provided commentary suggesting this was either a distraction or a way to help Hillary Clinton’s book sales. On Faux News’ panel discussion show Outnumbered, contributors Kennedy (of MTV infamy) and Peter Hegseth both suggested that Clinton’s book tour and potential 2016 Presidential run provided the impetus for Khattala’s capture and this news being broken now. Faux News anchor Jon Scott also questioned the timing of the capture and wondered if the United States could have brought in Khattala at any time but decided to wait for the most politically advantageous moment.

So even a Faux News anchor isn’t responsible for what he says on-air? Then who is? And don’t forget Dimbulb:

Of course, El Lushbo had to chime in and offer his two cents. Lush Dimbulb not only claimed that the timing was peculiar, but that Obama would make Khattala claim that the anti-mulsim video that sparked protests across the Middle East was the cause of the Benghazi attacks, therefore ‘vindicating’ the administration.

Ashburn’s defense of Faux News strains credulity almost as much as Faux News itself:

[T]he more outlandish the comments, the more the websites are going to say ‘oh my gosh, Faux News said this, and they made this point,’ and it’s funny because Faux News didn’t say that, those individual contributors said that. It’s just not fair to do that.

Ashburn has some peculiar ideas about fairness. Besides the presentation of her own credentials, there is her disturbing fixation with President Obama shopping habits.

You seriously have to question the acumen of a person who turns President Obama’s purchase of pink sweaters for his daughters into an accusation, saying Obama has “got to learn to take his lumps.”

I do think Ashburn forgot the saying about people living in glass houses.

I absolutely do not think it is Obama who has to learn to take his lumps, but clearly, Faux News (and by extension, Lauren Ashburn), ever so sensitive to criticism of the shoddy quality of its content.

Back in December 2013, Dave Weigel at Slate opined that Ashburn “has almost nothing to say about anything.” He is right that she has nothing meaningful to say, but consider if you will that she works for a network that questions why anyone would bother to tell the truth about anything when it can just as easily make up outrageous lies instead.

And look, it is hardly surprising that a network that prefers lies to facts would shy away from taking responsibility for those lies when, inevitably, they are questioned.

Ashburn’s complaint that her network not be held responsible for the content it airs not only contrasts unfavorably with our president’s willingness to accept personal responsibility, but it is yet another nail in Faux News’ self-made reality bubble, which can more reasonably be thought of as a coffin full of angry old white people eager to embrace irrelevance as the price of doing business.