Sean Hannity admits under oath he “didn’t believe” Trump election lies - but aired them anyway

Reporting for the New York Times on December 21, journalist Jeremy Peters explains, "On November 30, 2020, Sean Hannity hosted Sidney Powell on his prime-time Fox News program. As she had in many other interviews around that time — on Fox and elsewhere in right-wing media — Ms. Powell, a former federal prosecutor, spun wild conspiracy theories about what she said was 'corruption all across the country, in countless districts,' in a plot to steal reelection from the president, Donald J. Trump. At the center of this imagined plot were machines from Dominion Voting Systems, which Ms. Powell claimed ran an algorithm that switched votes for Mr. Trump to votes for Joseph R. Biden Jr. Dominion machines, she insisted, were being used 'to trash large batches of votes.'"

But when Hannity gave a deposition two years later on Wednesday, December 21, 2022 and was under oath, he admitted, "I did not believe it for one second."

https://www.salon.com/2022/12/22/se...-believe-lies--but-aired-them-anyway_partner/

___________________________________________

Imagine the level of intellectual dishonesty required to be a pundit on Fox.

Like Carlson and the others, Hannity lies to his listeners on a daily basis for the sole purpose of boosting ratings and incidentally, advancing the conservative agenda in the country.

They fit the definition of parasites perfectly.

Thoughts ?

 

I am enjoying the take down of Trump and his minions BS, brick by brick. !!!!

 

These people sell victimology and then dramatize the hate and vitriol that they spew. Then it becomes a pusher/junkie relationship that Murdoch has exploited for profit in every country he has a "news" business. It's tabloid "journalism" designed to hook the target market. The side effect is radicalization from the lies and vitriol.

 

So he tried to rig the election! Prison!

 

I really do not have a problem with this. Hannity has said he is not a journalist but instead offers opinion and entertainment. He knows his audience enjoys these type of guests and makes them available to them. I don't think it is a requirement that the host believes what his guest says. It is like an atheist interviewing a religious figure or interviewing someone of a different religion. It may be like interviewing a scientist about some new work that you do not believe in such as the pyramids were created by a civilization predating the Egyptians. I think the whole point of being a TV host is to present material that your AUDIENCE wants to see regardless of your views on the individual.

 

He does not sell his show as entertainment.

His credibility comes from the fact that he speaks his mind and that it is based on facts.

However, when these pundits find themselves in front of a judge and to avoid a heavy civil sentence, they willingly accept that their intellectual dishonesty be exposed.

How do you justify this morally?

 

Morality is not in the picture period, it's about money, power and influence.

 

I think they do sell it as entertainment and opinion. It is not under the news umbrella like Wallace, Smith and Baier. They are part of the opinion and entertainment arm. It is like the history channel showing shows or programs about aliens and Noah's ark. If you were to ask a History Channel producer if they believe in Aliens or Noah's ark would it be damning if they said they didn't?

 

its all about the $$$, they don't believe even half of what they peddle

 

You are correct the program is licensed as entertainment and opinion, but Hannity and company have a more sober persona in regards to their so called entertainment and they certainly use that program as an outlet to Republican policy, which IMO undercuts that official entertainment lean.

 

Yeah, but he sold a **** ton of advertising for urinary catheters and generic Viagra.

 

If you people wish to keep complaining about right-wing sources you should stop linking such completely left-wing sites such as salon....

 

Oh, totally. And that Hannity, great source.

 

True...
That said: Even for a RW Rat Scumbag (who nobody takes seriously) like Hannity, this is prettty freakin' egregious...

 

I'm sure you prefer people like the karate kid Rachel maddow and Don lemon... Totally more credible...

 

Lol love it.
It’s the democrats fault that Republicans believe opinion is fact. You cannot make this **** up

They take responsibility for nothing

 

Oh, totally. You can tell by all the times I quoted or defended them, with a grand total of zero.

You nailed it bro!

 

Hannity and crew know their audience, got to admit that, lol

many on the right want someone that lies to them, they deliever

 

Winding up grumpy old polite racists seems to be the forte of Fox talk shows.

 

Yup...
It's The FAUX "News" Way...

 

All I want for Christmas is a convicted Murdoch

Oooh oooh oooh! An’ I wanna Faux news to actually be held accountable and stop telling so many freaking lies!

 

Actually they are since both do RESEARCH!

 

They lie to their audience on a news channel.

This is morally indefensible.

 

AGREED!! There must be a journalistic standard of integrity. This is no different from false advertising as what they are “ selling” is supposed to be truthful and accurate

 

This reminds me of something, recently, similar to this...........what was it?
Oh yeah, Twitter helping liberals!
It's a difficult problem, but one that's been a problem as long as we've been a country.
How much influence should the "news" have?
Even in this day and age, how do we get news that's not tainted in some way?
By being better consumers. It takes some work, some practice, and some time. Most Americans aren't going to put in those, so we have entertainment news. Put on for the entertainment of the audience they have or seek. For money.
People need to be smarter consumers, but there is a market for this, and it will continue.
Viewer beware....................