Sheppard Smith hosts “Shepard Smith Reporting” every weekday from 3pm – 4pm EST.
The difference between Sheppard Smith and many other shows on FoxNews is that Shep is what they call a “straight” newsman. Meaning his role is to deliver news in a “just the facts” manner. Objectively and without bias.
This is unlike opinion journalists like Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, The Five, Outnumbered, etc. They give their opinions all the time. And that’s fine. They do not represent as if they are straight news.
But Sheppard does give his opinions. On multiple occasions and sometimes in demonstrable ways. This is deceptive to the public.
By no means is Shep the only straight news reporter who displays bias. Truly straight news reporters are hard to come by these days. But contrast Shep with host of FoxNews Sunday Chris Wallace.
I recently learned that Chris Wallace is a Democrat. I have watched his show occasionally throughout the years. I never knew he was a Democrat. That shows he’s doing a great job keeping his opinions hidden. As is part of his job as a straight news man.
On the other hand, I am aware Sheppard Smith is a Democrat. One that is very much against Trump.
On Thursday, Shepard Smith responded to some of Trump’s press conference remarks: “It is crazy what we are watching every day, it is absolutely crazy. He keeps repeating ridiculous throwaway lines that are not true at all and sort of avoiding this issue of Russia as if we are some kind of fools for asking the question.”
Sheppard did not indicate which specific lines in Trump’s speech he objected to except for balking at Trump using the phrase “fake news”.
CNN does frequently engage in fake news.
But fine, Sheppard Smith doesn’t like Trump using the term “fake news”. Ok, that’s his opinion. He’s entitled to it.
However, he should not be giving his opinion in his role as a straight news man.
This isn’t the first time Smith injected his opinion into his show.
— In 2012 Sheppard said Obama was on the “right side of the 21st Century” in terms of the gay marriage debate. While characterizing Republicans as “sitting very firmly, without much question, on the wrong side of history on it.” He went further by comparing people not wanting the government to sanction gay marriage to Sharia law. Calling those people “haters”.
— Questioning Governor Bobby Jindal when he used the term “All Lives Matter”
— Called Trump “Almost Fascist” for saying he would prosecute and Jail Hillary Clinton
— Characterized voter ID laws as a way for the GOP to “keep minorities from coming out to vote.”
— Claiming anyone who is against taking in Syrian refugees is “extreme forces within our own political system” that lead us “towards self-destruction”.
— in 2009 on the subject of torture Shep Smith lost his temper and said “I don’t give a rats a** if it helps, we are America! We do not f****** torture!” As he slammed his hands down on the desk like Hitler.
Of course anyone is entitled to a mistake. A bad day.
If this was one or two mistakes, I would let it go. But Sheppard Smith’s Anti-Trump bias has reached critical mass. It has been apparent all throughout the campaign and now.
Maybe I can understand why Sheppard is sensitive about the term “fake news”. Giving ones opinion under the guise of objective reporting.
Is that not what Sheppard Smith is doing? If it’s fake news when Russia does it, it’s fake news when Sheppard does it.
Its false pretenses. It is deception. It is propaganda. It has no place in honest reporting. For this reason, FoxNews should fire Sheppard Smith.
I don’t know why they didn’t do this long ago. FoxNews did cancel Sheppard Smith’s 7:00 pm EST “straight news” show a few years ago, leaving him with only his 3:00 pm EST time slot. It’s time for Fox to pull the plug completely. If they want to salvage some credibility over this issue. Not sure what else Sheppard could do that would be worse than openly opposing a sitting president.
And besides which, how is it a smart business decision to display the same liberally biased phony-straight news reporting? Didn’t FoxNews get popular by railing against that type of corruption? Stunning.
E-mail FoxNews at: firstname.lastname@example.org and make your opinion known.
I would accept if they simply just changed Shep’s show into an opinion show. He has strong opinions. Here is Sheppard Smith getting a Democrat to answer a question. A little rough, but I like that he held someone accountable for what they said. He may have talent with it:
2 thoughts on “Is Sheppard Smith Trying to get fired?”
Just terminate the arrogant little prick!
He was not reporting unbiased news facts, he was giving an opinion. Had this been an editorial it might be different but not to me.
President Trump is our President, our Commander in Chief, get over it!
We were forced to put up with the most divisive, destructive, evil and vile POS Obama for eight long years.
Killery lost, get over it all you snow flakes… President Trump has done more in 30 days than any prior POTUS in 20 years!
The following article was written Jan 2011: certainly it fits and is most relative to what is happening with the bombs- the sad part…. the perpetrator (trump) of this form of TERRORIST tactic, KNOWS exactly what he’s doing!!!! And does it knowing he is ‘flipping the switch’ in someone…
“THE STOCHASTIC TERRORIST is the person who is responsible for the incitement. For example they go on radio or television and stir up hatred toward a particular person or group.
The random actor, or “lone wolf” as the term is used in law enforcement and intel, is the person who responds to the incitement by carrying out the violent or terrorist act against the target person or group. For example they shoot someone or detonate a bomb. While their action may have been statistically predictable (e.g. “given sufficient provocation, someone will probably do such-and-such”), the specific person and the specific act are not yet predictable.
There may be intermediaries in the chain of cause and effect. For example person A hires person B to go on television and incite hatred of group C; and then person D “pops up out of nowhere” and attacks one or more members of group C.
At each step, plausible deniability increases through the diffusion of responsibility. “Oh, it was just a lone nut, nobody could have predicted he would do that, and I’m not responsible for what people in my audience do.”
The random actor gets captured and sentenced to life in prison, while the stochastic terrorist keeps his prime time slot and goes on to incite more lone wolves.
The stochastic terrorist may be acting either negligently or deliberately, or may be in complete denial of their impact, just like a drunk driver who runs over a pedestrian without even realizing it.
Finally, there is no need for conspiracy here: merely the twisted acts of individuals who are promoting hatred and extremism, and who get access to national media in which to do it. The rest follows naturally, just as an increase in violent storms follows from an increase in average global temperature.
The lone wolves:
The term “lone wolf” is used in law enforcement and intel to refer to an individual who is emotionally unstable, who lacks obvious ties to known criminal gangs or terrorist groups, and who pops up seemingly out of nowhere to commit a violent or terrorist act.
The three-letter agencies can keep an eye on organized groups, and do a damn good job at stopping violent actors associated with those groups. At least three intended car bombings were stopped last year by the FBI intercepting the bombers and substituting fake explosives in time to save hundreds of lives and arrest the would-be bombers.
Lone wolves don’t have obvious connections through which they can be discovered. They don’t communicate much if at all about their intentions. They keep their plans to themselves. And then, apparently at random, they pop up from obscurity and commit murder. They are law enforcement’s and intel’s worst nightmare, and on the 8th of January one of them became America’s nightmare.
Stirring the pot:
At any given time there are hundreds of thousands of Americans with combinations of personality characteristics (such as emotional instability, a paranoid ideology, and a propensity for violence) that put them at risk of going off the deep end and becoming lone wolves. All it takes is the right push, the right nudge at the right time, to dislodge a few of them and send them on their way to fifteen minutes of fame surrounded by dead bodies.
There’s nothing mysterious about this process. It is not much different to other instances where a person is almost ready to make a decision, and the right combination of inputs makes them act. For example you have an old car and it begins to break down more often: now you’re thinking about replacing it, and you might be swayed by something in an automobile advertisement. Anyone who is familiar with marketing and advertising knows how this works, and advertisers often target their messages to people who are “ready to buy” and just need a little persuading. Political candidates often target their ads to the undecideds, hoping that a little nudge will win them some votes. This is perfectly normal and hardly insidious.
It becomes insidious when these practices are used in such a manner as to deliberately or negligently stir up lone wolf violence.
So let’s take Beck, Hannity, and O’Reilly. There is no question that their emotional rhetoric appeals to people who are emotionally unstable. And, since their audiences are tracked and analyzed in detail, there is no question that they know it.
When they go on TV and shout and sputter, rant and rave, and weep and wail, they are not expecting to persuade liberals or even undecideds to change their votes. They are “playing to their base,” that they know includes people who are emotionally unstable. In short they are “stirring the pot.” And if you turn up the temperature and keep stirring, you know that the pot will boil. Bubbles will come up from the depths and pop.”