More:

The court did not dispute the heart of Akre's claim, that Fox pressured her to broadcast a false story to protect the broadcaster from having to defend the truth in court, as well as suffer the ire of irate advertisers. Fox argued from the first, and failed on three separate occasions, in front of three different judges, to have the case tossed out on the grounds there is no hard, fast, and written rule against deliberate distortion of the news.…

In its six-page written decision, the Court of Appeals held that the Federal Communications Commission position against news distortion is only a "policy," not a promulgated law, rule, or regulation. Fox aired a report after the ruling saying it was "totally vindicated" by the verdict.

I tried watching CNN the other day, but the headlines were something like this: "Yesterday’s big news: Obama swats fly. Today’s big news: Obama ties own shoe."

I mean, c'mon, if I wanted to know that, I'd watch Keith Olderwomann.

Given a choice between "overly focused on trivial matters" and "actively lying and distorting the news", I know which one I consider a bigger problem.

I mean, c'mon, if I wanted to know that, I'd watch Keith Olderwomann.

Ageist, sexist, and an ad hominem – a trifecta! Deftly done. Now cut it out, or at least take it elsewhere.

I really don't get you sometimes, clip-on-tie. You're smart, you're funny, and you're obviously capable of holding your own in a real discussion, but so often you descend to using insults and mockery instead. I think it's because I do have a certain degree of respect for you that I find it so frustrating.