Key is the 80% anti-Obama slant during the "news" portions of their daily broadcast (I'm assuming the 20% was more neutral than positive), as they pretend to differentiate from the opinion, which is often actually dangerous to the physical survival of our fairly elected President.
What's interesting to me is how the Washington Times person starts off talking like a concern troll that the Admin has made a bad move, that it's backfiring, rather than engaging with the substance of the charge, and continues that tack most of the rest of the piece. Interestingly enough, Jane Hall who left Fox may not appear to agree with everything Pitney says, but her reasons for quitting back him up completely.
And please, no more false equivalencies with MSNBC. Sure, Maddow and Olbermann lean left, but they back it up with real facts, not innuendo and smears, often using the GOP politicos' own words, while at the same time MSNBC gives the entire morning to Joe Scarborough, former GOP Congressman. And they actually practice reasonably objective journalism, the traditional kind, during their news coverage. FNC is actually run by the most successful Republican campaign strategist of the past thirty years, for an avowedly conservative mogul from Australia who's key holdings includes the coarse muckraking rag, The New York Post and the conservative (editorial) Wall Street Journal. Oh, and they called the 2000 election for George Bush before the Florida results were final, influencing the election finish -- that was George's cousin John Ellis who made the call -- talking to George five times that night.
My take: the Obama Administration is right to call out FNC for being different than the others and give them the asterisk. It rallies the true believers and forces a lot of others to spend time defending FNC, which only creates a smoke/fire perception and opportunities for guys like Pitney to go on the air and point out the FNC bias.
Since Obama always thinks long strategy rather than short news cycle, those decrying the wasted time and effort by the Admin now don't see how the set up is long-haul. The tarnish on FNC isn't going to go away after a week. It's just defining it now and forever. Or at least until Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch buy the farm, and new owners move in.
But anyone would be foolish to lose that loyal 2-3 million viewer audience that keeps paying the bills. The business model works for FNC. It just doesn't work for America.
1 comment:
I don't even mind FNC's anti-BHO slant. The real problem is that they make stuff up out of thin air and prey on the most weak-minded and poorly educated of the public.
Besides the relentless personal slanders, survey after survey shows Fox's viewers to be consistently and monumentally misinformed about urgent and important issues of both domestic and foreign policy.
For instance, Fox viewers overwhelmingly believe:
- We found WMD in Iraq
- Saddam was in cahoots w/ bin Laden
- Climate change is a hoax & needn't be addressed
- Various hard working gov't officials ("Czars") are some kind of commie plot or illegal power grab
- Health care = death panels
- Wall Street is just fine as it is, and the meltdown was caused by too much regulation.
- And my own personal favorite: that the stock market collapsed in 2008 because of BHO but has rebounded in 2009 because of GWB
An informed electorate is crucial to democracy, and Fox is a 24/7 font of disinformation. There's no reason BHO should legitimize it or treat it like an actual journalistic enterprise. It exists to pump out whatever bilge Rupert Murdoch thinks will make him a buck on any given day, and the more people who understand that the better off this country will be.
Years ago, FNC was just staunchly RW; now, of course, it's become the info clearinghouse for the woefully ignorant -- and IMHO mentally ill -- "patriot" crowd.
Post a Comment