Note: This article is not intended for children or for sensitive people. The editor

Note: This article is not intended for children or for sensitive people. The editor

Why do people use Fox News? There are several explanations usually given: "It is fair and balanced" one might say: "It goes against the mainstream media." Others cite Fox News' extensive popularity, having been the most-used news source since at least the 2016 election. Also, for the conservative element of the American public, it is used because it is largely intended for them. Fox News' website is visited millions of times each day, and its various television programming —News, talk shows, business and economic discussions —appeal to a wide audience.

Yet there are other reasons for the success of Fox News. I believe the real source of Fox News' success is its "sex appeal". The heavy emphasis on sexuality by Fox News makes Fox News a pseudo-pornographic enterprise. At best, it is immodest; at worst it is "softcore" pornography —at least, it is by the standards of our ancestors and of Catholic morals. To use the vulgar expression of our time: "Sex sells". Of course, I will explain why I believe this is the case.

Our Lady of Good Success and of Fatima both warned against immodest dress

Our Lady of Good Success and of Fatima both warned against immodest dress

Our Lady of Good Success and of Fatima both warned against immodest dress

Our Lady of Good Success warned that modesty would largely be lost among women beginning in the 20th century. Our Lady of Fatima repeated the warning against immodesty, in particular immodesty in dress: "Certain fashions will be introduced that will offend Our Lord very much".

While preparing this article, I decided to do a small experiment. I visited Google Images and typed "Fox News" in the search bar. The results were relatively innocuous: the Fox News logo and pictures of Sean Hannity, mostly. Of course, scrolling down, I found some more problematic images. But I noticed something far more interesting:

While preparing this article, I decided to do a small experiment. I visited Google Images and typed "Fox News" in the search bar. The results were relatively innocuous: the Fox News logo and pictures of Sean Hannity, mostly. Of course, scrolling down, I found some more problematic images. But I noticed something far more interesting:

While preparing this article, I decided to do a small experiment. I visited Google Images and typed "Fox News" in the search bar. The results were relatively innocuous: the Fox News logo and pictures of Sean Hannity, mostly. Of course, scrolling down, I found some more problematic images. But I noticed something far more interesting:

While preparing this article, I decided to do a small experiment. I visited Google Images and typed "Fox News" in the search bar. The results were relatively innocuous: the Fox News logo and pictures of Sean Hannity, mostly. Of course, scrolling down, I found some more problematic images. But I noticed something far more interesting:

While preparing this article, I decided to do a small experiment. I visited Google Images and typed "Fox News" in the search bar. The results were relatively innocuous: the Fox News logo and pictures of Sean Hannity, mostly. Of course, scrolling down, I found some more problematic images. But I noticed something far more interesting:

While preparing this article, I decided to do a small experiment. I visited Google Images and typed "Fox News" in the search bar. The results were relatively innocuous: the Fox News logo and pictures of Sean Hannity, mostly. Of course, scrolling down, I found some more problematic images. But I noticed something far more interesting:

While preparing this article, I decided to do a small experiment. I visited Google Images and typed "Fox News" in the search bar. The results were relatively innocuous: the Fox News logo and pictures of Sean Hannity, mostly. Of course, scrolling down, I found some more problematic images. But I noticed something far more interesting:

While preparing this article, I decided to do a small experiment. I visited Google Images and typed "Fox News" in the search bar. The results were relatively innocuous: the Fox News logo and pictures of Sean Hannity, mostly. Of course, scrolling down, I found some more problematic images. But I noticed something far more interesting:

While preparing this article, I decided to do a small experiment. I visited Google Images and typed "Fox News" in the search bar. The results were relatively innocuous: the Fox News logo and pictures of Sean Hannity, mostly. Of course, scrolling down, I found some more problematic images. But I noticed something far more interesting:

In addition to unacceptable dress, there are other censurable things: the makeup applied, no doubt layer-by-layer, to the point of disgust and tackiness, and unrecognisability when compared to the original face; and the general bad customs and way of speaking promoted by the Fox News hosts. Watch a recording of a typical Fox News program, and the women have a loud and imperious tone of voice. It is a contradiction: the women speak in a manner as if they were social equals, but dress in a manner as if they were concubines. Which is it, Fox News?

In addition to unacceptable dress, there are other censurable things: the makeup applied, no doubt layer-by-layer, to the point of disgust and tackiness, and unrecognisability when compared to the original face; and the general bad customs and way of speaking promoted by the Fox News hosts. Watch a recording of a typical Fox News program, and the women have a loud and imperious tone of voice. It is a contradiction: the women speak in a manner as if they were social equals, but dress in a manner as if they were concubines. Which is it, Fox News?

In addition to unacceptable dress, there are other censurable things: the makeup applied, no doubt layer-by-layer, to the point of disgust and tackiness, and unrecognisability when compared to the original face; and the general bad customs and way of speaking promoted by the Fox News hosts. Watch a recording of a typical Fox News program, and the women have a loud and imperious tone of voice. It is a contradiction: the women speak in a manner as if they were social equals, but dress in a manner as if they were concubines. Which is it, Fox News?

In addition to unacceptable dress, there are other censurable things: the makeup applied, no doubt layer-by-layer, to the point of disgust and tackiness, and unrecognisability when compared to the original face; and the general bad customs and way of speaking promoted by the Fox News hosts. Watch a recording of a typical Fox News program, and the women have a loud and imperious tone of voice. It is a contradiction: the women speak in a manner as if they were social equals, but dress in a manner as if they were concubines. Which is it, Fox News?

In addition to unacceptable dress, there are other censurable things: the makeup applied, no doubt layer-by-layer, to the point of disgust and tackiness, and unrecognisability when compared to the original face; and the general bad customs and way of speaking promoted by the Fox News hosts. Watch a recording of a typical Fox News program, and the women have a loud and imperious tone of voice. It is a contradiction: the women speak in a manner as if they were social equals, but dress in a manner as if they were concubines. Which is it, Fox News?

In addition to unacceptable dress, there are other censurable things: the makeup applied, no doubt layer-by-layer, to the point of disgust and tackiness, and unrecognisability when compared to the original face; and the general bad customs and way of speaking promoted by the Fox News hosts. Watch a recording of a typical Fox News program, and the women have a loud and imperious tone of voice. It is a contradiction: the women speak in a manner as if they were social equals, but dress in a manner as if they were concubines. Which is it, Fox News?

In addition to unacceptable dress, there are other censurable things: the makeup applied, no doubt layer-by-layer, to the point of disgust and tackiness, and unrecognisability when compared to the original face; and the general bad customs and way of speaking promoted by the Fox News hosts. Watch a recording of a typical Fox News program, and the women have a loud and imperious tone of voice. It is a contradiction: the women speak in a manner as if they were social equals, but dress in a manner as if they were concubines. Which is it, Fox News?

In addition to unacceptable dress, there are other censurable things: the makeup applied, no doubt layer-by-layer, to the point of disgust and tackiness, and unrecognisability when compared to the original face; and the general bad customs and way of speaking promoted by the Fox News hosts. Watch a recording of a typical Fox News program, and the women have a loud and imperious tone of voice. It is a contradiction: the women speak in a manner as if they were social equals, but dress in a manner as if they were concubines. Which is it, Fox News?

In addition to unacceptable dress, there are other censurable things: the makeup applied, no doubt layer-by-layer, to the point of disgust and tackiness, and unrecognisability when compared to the original face; and the general bad customs and way of speaking promoted by the Fox News hosts. Watch a recording of a typical Fox News program, and the women have a loud and imperious tone of voice. It is a contradiction: the women speak in a manner as if they were social equals, but dress in a manner as if they were concubines. Which is it, Fox News?

It is unbelievable how quickly Westerners embraced Nudism. "Nudism?" one will say. "They are still dressed, aren't they?" So is a savage Indian wearing only a loincloth. He is still "dressed", if by dress we mean purely covering private parts... How our standards have changed.

It is unbelievable how quickly Westerners embraced Nudism. "Nudism?" one will say. "They are still dressed, aren't they?" So is a savage Indian wearing only a loincloth. He is still "dressed", if by dress we mean purely covering private parts... How our standards have changed.

It is unbelievable how quickly Westerners embraced Nudism. "Nudism?" one will say. "They are still dressed, aren't they?" So is a savage Indian wearing only a loincloth. He is still "dressed", if by dress we mean purely covering private parts... How our standards have changed.

It is unbelievable how quickly Westerners embraced Nudism. "Nudism?" one will say. "They are still dressed, aren't they?" So is a savage Indian wearing only a loincloth. He is still "dressed", if by dress we mean purely covering private parts... How our standards have changed.

It is unbelievable how quickly Westerners embraced Nudism. "Nudism?" one will say. "They are still dressed, aren't they?" So is a savage Indian wearing only a loincloth. He is still "dressed", if by dress we mean purely covering private parts... How our standards have changed.

It is unbelievable how quickly Westerners embraced Nudism. "Nudism?" one will say. "They are still dressed, aren't they?" So is a savage Indian wearing only a loincloth. He is still "dressed", if by dress we mean purely covering private parts... How our standards have changed.

It is unbelievable how quickly Westerners embraced Nudism. "Nudism?" one will say. "They are still dressed, aren't they?" So is a savage Indian wearing only a loincloth. He is still "dressed", if by dress we mean purely covering private parts... How our standards have changed.

It is unbelievable how quickly Westerners embraced Nudism. "Nudism?" one will say. "They are still dressed, aren't they?" So is a savage Indian wearing only a loincloth. He is still "dressed", if by dress we mean purely covering private parts... How our standards have changed.

It is unbelievable how quickly Westerners embraced Nudism. "Nudism?" one will say. "They are still dressed, aren't they?" So is a savage Indian wearing only a loincloth. He is still "dressed", if by dress we mean purely covering private parts... How our standards have changed.

The dress of Fox News hostesses can only be described as resembling that of prostitutes . Unfortunately, however, in the modern era this form of dress is widely acceptable socially, even among Catholics (for this dress is often seen even in traditional Catholic churches). The dress of Fox News hostesses are not greatly different from a typical young woman going to a dance or a party. However accepted it is socially, the purpose has not changed: women who dress immodestly today, socially acceptable or not, even if at the direction of supervisors, do so for very particular reasons.

The dress of Fox News hostesses can only be described as resembling that of prostitutes . Unfortunately, however, in the modern era this form of dress is widely acceptable socially, even among Catholics (for this dress is often seen even in traditional Catholic churches). The dress of Fox News hostesses are not greatly different from a typical young woman going to a dance or a party. However accepted it is socially, the purpose has not changed: women who dress immodestly today, socially acceptable or not, even if at the direction of supervisors, do so for very particular reasons.

The dress of Fox News hostesses can only be described as resembling that of prostitutes . Unfortunately, however, in the modern era this form of dress is widely acceptable socially, even among Catholics (for this dress is often seen even in traditional Catholic churches). The dress of Fox News hostesses are not greatly different from a typical young woman going to a dance or a party. However accepted it is socially, the purpose has not changed: women who dress immodestly today, socially acceptable or not, even if at the direction of supervisors, do so for very particular reasons.

The dress of Fox News hostesses can only be described as resembling that of prostitutes . Unfortunately, however, in the modern era this form of dress is widely acceptable socially, even among Catholics (for this dress is often seen even in traditional Catholic churches). The dress of Fox News hostesses are not greatly different from a typical young woman going to a dance or a party. However accepted it is socially, the purpose has not changed: women who dress immodestly today, socially acceptable or not, even if at the direction of supervisors, do so for very particular reasons.

The dress of Fox News hostesses can only be described as resembling that of prostitutes . Unfortunately, however, in the modern era this form of dress is widely acceptable socially, even among Catholics (for this dress is often seen even in traditional Catholic churches). The dress of Fox News hostesses are not greatly different from a typical young woman going to a dance or a party. However accepted it is socially, the purpose has not changed: women who dress immodestly today, socially acceptable or not, even if at the direction of supervisors, do so for very particular reasons.

The dress of Fox News hostesses can only be described as resembling that of prostitutes . Unfortunately, however, in the modern era this form of dress is widely acceptable socially, even among Catholics (for this dress is often seen even in traditional Catholic churches). The dress of Fox News hostesses are not greatly different from a typical young woman going to a dance or a party. However accepted it is socially, the purpose has not changed: women who dress immodestly today, socially acceptable or not, even if at the direction of supervisors, do so for very particular reasons.

The dress of Fox News hostesses can only be described as resembling that of prostitutes . Unfortunately, however, in the modern era this form of dress is widely acceptable socially, even among Catholics (for this dress is often seen even in traditional Catholic churches). The dress of Fox News hostesses are not greatly different from a typical young woman going to a dance or a party. However accepted it is socially, the purpose has not changed: women who dress immodestly today, socially acceptable or not, even if at the direction of supervisors, do so for very particular reasons.

The dress of Fox News hostesses can only be described as resembling that of prostitutes . Unfortunately, however, in the modern era this form of dress is widely acceptable socially, even among Catholics (for this dress is often seen even in traditional Catholic churches). The dress of Fox News hostesses are not greatly different from a typical young woman going to a dance or a party. However accepted it is socially, the purpose has not changed: women who dress immodestly today, socially acceptable or not, even if at the direction of supervisors, do so for very particular reasons.

The dress of Fox News hostesses can only be described as resembling that of prostitutes . Unfortunately, however, in the modern era this form of dress is widely acceptable socially, even among Catholics (for this dress is often seen even in traditional Catholic churches). The dress of Fox News hostesses are not greatly different from a typical young woman going to a dance or a party. However accepted it is socially, the purpose has not changed: women who dress immodestly today, socially acceptable or not, even if at the direction of supervisors, do so for very particular reasons.

Above , the men dress modestly, the women rarely so: note the exposed shoulders, thighs and the crossed-for-effect legs; Below , a very unflattering Fox Business host Trish Regan, wearing what resembles more a one piece swimsuit than a dress

Above , the men dress modestly, the women rarely so: note the exposed shoulders, thighs and the crossed-for-effect legs; Below , a very unflattering Fox Business host Trish Regan, wearing what resembles more a one piece swimsuit than a dress

Above , the men dress modestly, the women rarely so: note the exposed shoulders, thighs and the crossed-for-effect legs; Below , a very unflattering Fox Business host Trish Regan, wearing what resembles more a one piece swimsuit than a dress

—than the dress and mannerisms of their female counterparts.

—than the dress and mannerisms of their female counterparts.

—than the dress and mannerisms of their female counterparts.

—than the dress and mannerisms of their female counterparts.

—than the dress and mannerisms of their female counterparts.

—than the dress and mannerisms of their female counterparts.

—than the dress and mannerisms of their female counterparts.

—than the dress and mannerisms of their female counterparts.

—than the dress and mannerisms of their female counterparts.

There can be no other reason for the immodest dress of the Fox News program hostesses than attracting a male audience, for men are obviously very attracted to revealing and immodest dress, as a result of our fallen nature. Meanwhile, the male hosts on Fox News do not dress immodestly, as a general rule: they are usually seen wearing quite conservative suits and ties, often complete with a pocket square. Their dress and mannerisms are far more acceptable and far more pleasing to Catholic sensibilities

There can be no other reason for the immodest dress of the Fox News program hostesses than attracting a male audience, for men are obviously very attracted to revealing and immodest dress, as a result of our fallen nature. Meanwhile, the male hosts on Fox News do not dress immodestly, as a general rule: they are usually seen wearing quite conservative suits and ties, often complete with a pocket square. Their dress and mannerisms are far more acceptable and far more pleasing to Catholic sensibilities

There can be no other reason for the immodest dress of the Fox News program hostesses than attracting a male audience, for men are obviously very attracted to revealing and immodest dress, as a result of our fallen nature. Meanwhile, the male hosts on Fox News do not dress immodestly, as a general rule: they are usually seen wearing quite conservative suits and ties, often complete with a pocket square. Their dress and mannerisms are far more acceptable and far more pleasing to Catholic sensibilities

The most obvious example of this

We needn't waste time in proving Fox News is pornographic. If anything, it is offensive to Our Lord and Our Lady.

Most people who search for "Fox News" are really looking for pictures of the Fox News hostesses

Google Images has the useful feature of suggesting similar topics to the keywords you searched. Searching "Donald Trump", for instance, will yield buttons for "Ivanka Trump" (his daughter), "president", "debate", "Barack Obama", "White House", etc. Clicking these buttons will refine the search: only images associated with both Donald Trump and White House will be displayed. A helpful feature, since it shows what people usually search for in connection with "Donald Trump".





So what do people usually search for when they go on Google Images and search "Fox News"? They definitely aren't looking for pictures of the Fox News logo: instead, they search for pictures of the Fox News hostesses: the ones listed above include Abby Huntsman, Trish Regan, Kimberly Guilfoyle and Jenna Lee, all of whom are undoubtedly attractive women. Clicking on any of their names will yield pictures of them in connection with their roles at Fox News.





It could not be more clear: Fox News is pornographic. Its male hosts actually fulfill Fox News' ostensible role of delivering news and making opinions. The female hosts, on the other hand, only serve to attract male audiences and to promote immodesty. The role played by female hosts is indistinguishable from that of pornographic actors. Their sole, or at least primary, objective is to dress inappropriately and to attract millions of men to watch them, while ostensibly acting as newscasters.

Fox News' openly pornographic Web site





Typical Fox News promotions

—however immodest and unacceptable in the first place

—are considered relevant to a Supreme Court hearing is beyond me. I took the liberty of editing some of the images in the picture, since they are worse (though not far worse) than the dress of Fox News hosts...

—(however immodest and inappropriate, it is poetic justice that Pope John Paul II, a heretic who caused much damage to the Catholic Church, is simply another shred of gossip in the eyes of the "conservative" Fox News website).

The exact opposite of what a reader will find on Reign of Mary

Controlled opposition?

—that is, it gives its viewers the perception they are viewing conservative content and being indoctrinated with conservative principles, but in reality, they are simply receiving another form of liberalism.

The show "Archer", affiliated with Fox, ridicules the Church

The vulgar and loudmouthed Tomi Lahren urges

conservatives to abandon "social issues" and accept abortion

—usually just her loudly and imperiously repeating Republican Party talking points

—reflect the gradual shift in conservatism from true conservatism to liberalism.

It is not a surprise, of course. The Republican Party that Tomi Lahren belongs to and is allied with is the same Republican Party that, with standing ovation, enthusiastically cheered then-nominee Donald Trump's pledge to support the "LGBT community". More concerned with winning elections, individuals like Tomi Lahren encourage conservatives not to bother with social issues. Lahren has repeatedly defended abortion and attacked those who seek to overturn the infamous Roe v. Wade decision:

[T]o use conservatives’ new-found power and pull to challenge a decision that — according to a new Quinnipiac poll — most Americans support, would be a mistake. [...]

I’m saying this as someone who would personally choose life, but also feels it’s not the government’s place to dictate. This isn’t a black and white issue and I would never judge anyone in that position. [Source]

The fact that Fox News producers approved Lahren's remarks totally destroy the façade of Fox News being "conservative". Coupled with Fox News' promotion of pornography and milquetoast "conservatism", it is clear that it is merely a controlled opposition that helps conservatives to become addicted to vice and become liberals in both their actions and beliefs.

How to fight this evil?





Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira

—

conservative in the modern sense of the word, because conservatism is not founded on principles, but on habits, and habits change. Nor must we be purely traditionalists, for we must not simply have our traditions for ourselves, but we must openly confront the world. We must rather become —is to become a counter-revolutionary Catholic. We must not bein the modern sense of the word, because conservatism is not founded on principles, but on habits, and habits change. Nor must we be purely, for we must not simply have our traditions for ourselves, but we must openly confront the world. We must rather become counter-revolutionaries (following the example of Prof. Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira) by fighting the bad tendencies in all aspects of life, including in our personal life.





So what ought we to do about Fox News? We should all use it far more sparingly (if at all) than we do currently. We should seek Catholic, counter-revolutionary news sources instead. Install advertisement-blocking plugins in your computer to help censor immodest promotions not just on Fox News, but on other Web sites too. We must escape the false dichotomy of "liberal vs conservative"

—both liberals and modern conservatives are enemies of the counter-revolutionary. We should also support Web sites like Reign of Mary with donations and with patronage and promotion of their articles.

Above all, we should pray the Rosary every day, as Our Lady of Fatima requested. Only then will the true Reign of Mary

—the destruction of the Revolution (the very Revolution Fox News has accepted)

—finally become a reality, in our hearts and minds, and in our civilisation.





Posted 4 September 2018

While the immodest dress of female hosts is certainly good evidence Fox News is driven by an evil agenda, this is not the only evidence. A visit to the Fox News internet homepage should be the proverbial "nail in the coffin" for anyone who tries to defend Fox News. One might argue: "Yes, the dress of the Fox News hosts is immoral. But perhaps Fox News executives don't know about proper morality in dress. Perhaps they don't even agree with it, but they know their hosts should dress the way most women dress today." There are people who will make this argument. Perhaps they are right in that particular point. But how will they defend Fox News' openly pornographic Web site, FoxNews.com?At, is a typical "sidebar" used on Fox News articles for any subject. I made this particular screenshot on an article regarding the confirmation hearings for Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. How these various articles and topics: swimsuit models, porno actorsThe celebrity gossip is also a permanent fixture on the Fox News website. It is prominently featured, intended to cover the width of a computer screen, half-way down Fox News' website. Here is a typical caseHowever, I believe there is a far more sinister force driving Fox News, and it is not simply a desire to make lots of money by using immodesty to attract viewers. I believe Fox News, which is known for being "conservative" is really a "controlled opposition"It is important to remember that Fox News itself does not stand alone. It is a subsidiarity of 21st Century Fox, which owns other operations, like FX, an "entertainment" television channel that produces degenerate content like, etc. The endless emasculating sports programming also comes from 21st Century Fox's many subsidiary affiliates. In passing, I invite people to research this, but I wouldn't be surprised if 21st Century Fox has a significant percentage of Jewish shareholders.... I believe the objective behind Fox News' use of immodest women and inappropriate imagery (and that of the Fox News affiliates like FX) is to accustom its primarily conservative audiences to accept immodesty and pornography as part of everyday life. This ensures conservatives will accept the Sexual Revolution, and gradually the Revolution itself in all aspects of life. Gradually, conservatives will become more and more leftist. The end result is a "conservatism" of today that is essentially a liberalism of 10 years ago. Some conservatives will become liberals, others will become libertarians. There is very little difference.It is easy to see this in action. Take the latest "Barbie Doll" Fox News host, trotted out to promote false conservatism to millions of Fox News viewers. Tomi Lahren is her name, and she is the product of Fox's tried-and-true formula: take a woman, dress her in very little, and have her read from a script. Her shows, which feature her "profound" opinionsThe only way to fight the evil produced by Fox News and its mainstream media allies(Fox News is most definitely part of the mainstream media)