Obama vs. Faux News
26 October 2009 by Stardust
So much hubbub recently making it all the way to the walls of Facebook about Obama’s little “war” with Faux News. I have heard phrases that made me laugh like, “Fox News is the most fair and balanced news program on television.” If this is true, why is Fox’s audience predominently right wing, conservative Republicans? Recent polling says that:
72% of self-identified FOX News viewers believe the health-care plan will give coverage to illegal immigrants, 79% of them say it will lead to a government takeover, 69% think that it will use taxpayer dollars to pay for abortions, and 75% believe that it will allow the government to make decisions about when to stop providing care for the elderly.
(I have been reading a lot of posts from the Faux News-watching family fundies about this evil government take-over plot. They are scaring each other shitless.)
According to SourceWatch.com:
Fox News Channel promotes itself under the slogan “fair and balanced”, but examinations of the channel’s guest selection have found notable imbalances towards Republicans and conservatives. In 2001, media watch group Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting studied the guestlist of FNC’s flagship news program, Special Report, it found that Republicans made up 89 percent of Fox News’ partisan guests, outnumbering Democrats 50 to 6. Avowed conservatives made up 71 percent of guests.
Then there are the absurd claims about Obama and his administration about him being a socialist, communist, racist, etc. Fox host Glenn Beck stated that Obama has “a deep-seated hatred for white people.”
A. P. Reporter David Bauder wrote:
President Barack Obama’s communications director says it was Fox News Channel, not the White House, that picked a fight.
Yet it was Anita Dunn’s words during a CNN interview last week, saying Fox is like “a wing of the Republican Party,” that ignited one of the most unusual verbal volleys between a presidential administration and journalists since Vice President Spiro Agnew complained during the Nixon years about the “nattering nabobs of negativism.”
Dunn’s stance cheered many of the president’s supporters who seethe over anti-Obama stories on Fox opinion shows, but has caused a backlash among some who say it exposed the administration as thin-skinned.
I do think the Obama administration has a right to defend itself when false accusations are being spread around and misrepresentation of the administration’s policies and proposals are being fed to a large portion of the American people. In all honesty I would not shed a tear if Fox News failed and went off the air this instant. IMO this hype and hysteria is all a manipulation by Fox News to rile the already paranoid viewing audience using scare tactics and dramatic embellishment to rally up the Republicans who tune into their station. (I am not a fan of any sort of television “dramatics and theatrics” of either party affiliation, but Faux News is the worst.)
News media networks CNN, CBS, NBC, and others have joined in to agree with Fox News that an attempt to block one certain network is wrong.
“Whether or not you like Fox News, all of us in the press need to be concerned about the administration of President Barack Obama trying to `punish’ the cable news channel for its point of view,” wrote television critic David Zurawik in the Baltimore Sun.
The latest news update is that while Obama will not be giving any television interviews on Fox News through the end of the year, Fox news reporters will not be excluded from interviews with Kenneth Feinberg.
The administration went way too far last week, trying to block a Fox reporter from a round of interviews with “pay czar” Kenneth Feinberg. The networks that were not excluded, presumably because the White House approved of their reporting, refused to participate. The White House backed down.
What is your opinion? Did the Obama administration go to far?
26 October 2009, on 9:06 pm
And whatever Obama does will be bad as far as Faux News is concerned, whether he shows up or allows interviews or not. Glad people in this administration have finally shown some kind of balls.
26 October 2009, on 9:14 pm
The administration stepped way over the line here and fair play to the other networks for not playing ball when it was undoubtedly in their short-term interests to do so.
Fox is horribly partisan, but so is 40-ish percent of the country, sometimes you have to take it like a man.
26 October 2009, on 9:14 pm
Please. If the media was a courtroom, Fox News (R, NY) would have long ago been declared a hostile witness.
If they were fair and balanced, only half of their “mistakes” that they’ve had to retract would favor the Republicans. Instead, nearly all of them go that way. Astounding coincidence.
26 October 2009, on 11:22 pm
^^ I have to agree with Stardust regarding her “administration balls” comment.
At this point (speaking of balls?), it’s ‘hard’ for me to remember exactly when I totally stopped watching the Faux News channel. I vaguely remember watching “O’Really!” when he first started on Faux, with his bullshit “Fair & Balanced” mantra. Gradually, of course, during the Bush-whack years, it was obvious that Faux was totally Right Wing; and, for me, became absolutely obnoxious to watch.
I’m reminded of when I first got on the Internet, at the end of 1999, and discovered the “Newshounds” Site; with their relief bestowing ‘motto’:
“We watch Fox, so you don’t have to!”
For anyone not familiar; or like me, have gotten so far away from watching, or even THINKING about watching Faux News that I feel sort of “dirty” if my index finger slips up and accidentally channel surfs the Comcast tuner into their unholy “abyss”…Check out:
http://www.newshounds.us/
These days, IMO, with the advent of Glenn, fucktard, “Schmuck”; they’ve definitely entered “The Twilight Zone” (apologies to the very late Rod Serling?)…or is it more like…”Beyond The Outer Limits”?
Tangentially…
I don’t know about youse “guys”; but whenever I accidently catch a clip/glimpse of Faux News, I DO notice they seem to be requiring that all the gals wear (conveniently?) short skirts; and like to emphasize that fact with certain strategic camera angles.
However, I haven’t heard any complaints about that from the Xtian fundie crowd; so I COULD be wrong…i.e…
that might just be horny old me imagining that?
Anyway…
No surprise…as old “Progressive Liberals”, my life companion and I are regular Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow viewers. And lately, we’ve added Ed Schultz into our unabashedly favored MSNBC mix.
27 October 2009, on 7:28 am
In their own words. I respectfully submit an audio clip. http://drop.io/2uinwr2
It’s the entire Bush family calling Rush Limbaugh. What does Rush Limbaugh have to do with Fox News you say? In it, the elder war criminal George Bush Senior asks Rush about “Our Man Ailes.” He was referring to Roger Ailes, from wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Ailes Roger Eugene Ailes (born May 15, 1940) is the American president of Fox News Channel and chairman of the Fox Television Stations Group. He was a media consultant for Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George H. W. Bush, as well as Rudy Giuliani’s first mayoral campaign in 1989. Fox and the rest of the right wing media are as thick as thieves. It’s about time their rock was turned over and they were exposed to sunlight.
27 October 2009, on 7:40 am
Personally, the administration did go too far. It’s one thing to not give interviews on their channel, quite another to exclude their reporters from a press conference. Like them or not, Faux News is a news source, and they have as much right to be there as any other network.
Kudos to the other networks for doing the right thing here. I’ll leave you all with this thought;
The price of freedom is coexisting with that which you hate.
27 October 2009, on 12:58 pm
I have mixed feelings on blocking a reporter. This certainly violates the freedom of the press, but I’m also not entirely convinced Fixed News should be considered part of the press. I entirely agree with the idea that they seem more like the public relations wing for the more conservative elements of the Republican party. Much of their ‘reporting’ takes the form of actively campaigning for various causes. I do not believe that journalism, or anything for that matter, can or should be entirely objective, but at what point does bias transcend journalism and become something else entirely? There is a difference between fielding difficult, probing questions from a reporter and dealing with someone who is there only to espouse a particular ideology. Crying oppression here is like Miss California claiming she was persecuted for persecuting.
27 October 2009, on 1:43 pm
I am hearing now that Dubya never pulled a stunt like this. Am trying to find some sources about his media tactics that had everyone pissed off.
27 October 2009, on 2:48 pm
Diplomacy with Ahmadinejad – yes
Diplomacy with Hamas – yes
Diplomacy with Fox News – no
How does it look that Obama is more afraid of Fox News than of radical Islamic groups? That said, Ahmadinejad and Hamas probably aren’t nearly as much of a threat the the fabric of our nation as FNC. But, it makes him look petty and is further proof that the Constitutional Law scholar has little more regard for the old rag than GWB did.
Freedom of the press:
Bush – Plame, Gannon, censored photos, etc…
Obama – FNC boycott, censored photos
Human Rights:
Bush – too many abuses to think about.
Obama – Won’t close Gitmo, increasing rendition and indefinite detention (but no torture supposedly)
War:
Bush – 2 wars
Obama – escalating both (”off the books” by using private contractors).
Health Care:
Bush – sold out Medicare to drug companies.
Obama – sold out health reform before it even started to drug companies. (Yes, he backed away from it supposedly, but how do you trust someone who began the process that way? If the “reform” began with backroom deals, I’m willing to bet it will end that way too).
Links for referral if needed:
http://washingtonindependent.com/27199/torture-case-poses-early-state-secret-test
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/13/internal-memo-confirms-bi_n_258285.html
http://rawstory.com/blog/2009/09/us-replacing-iraq-troops-with-private-contractors/
And so on…
My only question is: Why does Fox News hate him so much when he’s barely different than Bush?
27 October 2009, on 3:19 pm
“Freedom of the press:
Bush – Plame, Gannon, censored photos, etc…
Obama – FNC boycott, censored photos”
I would also add to attacks on the press the practice of embedding reporters with military units so that access is restricted as well as the practice of not showing coffins on television to sanitize the war.
27 October 2009, on 3:21 pm
“I am hearing now that Dubya never pulled a stunt like this. Am trying to find some sources about his media tactics that had everyone pissed off.”
Shrub rarely gave press conferences or dealt with unfriendly reporters.
27 October 2009, on 6:54 pm
All this arguing comparing the Bush and Obama administrations RE the Press, reminds me of just how few, TRULY honest & gutsy journalists there are covering the various “shenanigans” involving the endless ‘dodging’ and word games that go on RE the US government.
Here’s a sort of classic glimpse of one of the all-time best journalists…
“Helen Thomas asks George Bush about Iraq”:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8ZuQndRLTU
[Hmmm...why does "You Lie!" pop into my head, as an appropriate outburst, watching that clip?]
More recently…
“Helen Thomas Lays Into Gibbs”:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ga8WSWusXLw&feature=related
AND, from an interview with Wolf Blitzer…
“Veteran Journalist Helen Thomas on the Worst President Ever”:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7lqBTImH50&feature=related
27 October 2009, on 7:43 pm
As someone highly critical of Obama for years now, I find myself in support of his decision to ignore Fox Media. I would agree with media network statements that to block one outlet is wrong if it was a true media outlet and not the propaganda machine that we all seem to agree that it is.
27 October 2009, on 9:52 pm
If FOX News is a legitimate news media source, then so is the National Enquirer. Shall they start boo-hooing too that Obama and others wont’ take them seriously? Oooops…forgot the boo hoo category tag! I better fix that!
27 October 2009, on 11:00 pm
Fox is going to make up the news anyway so the Obama administration is only placing themselves in a bad light by restricting access. It plays right into the Fox mentality of persecution. Big mistake by Obama’s staff.
Look at how successful films become when bishops/cardinals manage to get films banned. Just saw on Bravo, during the “Monty Python: Almost The Truth” documentary, how the bad publicity and censorship of “The Life of Brian” made the film far more successful than if everyone had just kept their insane criticisms to themselves. Watch how Michael Palin and John Cleese handle the bishops during a debate. Obama ought to be able to handle Fox reporters just as cleverly.
Fox sNooze manages to do more damage to its own reputation when it is allowed to report on events than by making it into an underdog in the news world.
28 October 2009, on 11:15 am
Rupert Murdoch specifically built it to be exactly that – pro-republican, pro-xtian, pro-Regan. The mental dwarfs @ Faux Noise don’t know their own history, or what?
FN is a reichwingnut sock puppet.
2 November 2009, on 7:06 pm
Fox “News” is not a news organization. When they do things like promote those “tea parties”, they cross the line from reporting to advocacy, to the point of one of their producers being caught trying to get the crowd to cheer for the cameras at one of the rallies.
I have the misfortune of working in the Fox News building here in NYC. I get a real laugh when I see giant signs on the wall showing Beck or Hannity with the slogan “Fair and Balanced.” Yeah, right.
2 November 2009, on 9:39 pm
I have the misfortune of working in the Fox News building here in NYC. I get a real laugh when I see giant signs on the wall showing Beck or Hannity with the slogan “Fair and Balanced.” Yeah, right.
Gawd, Tommy how do you stand it day after day? I would go insane.
2 November 2009, on 11:40 pm
Tommykey?…
“Holy Shit!” RE your “Fucks News” comment.
OT…
And speaking of language; I checked your Site; and noticed the “Deadwood” shtick. One ‘helluva’ Series, IMO. I suggest checking your local library’s DVD collections (D’uh?) for the whole Series; which only lasted three seasons. The third season was actually ’somewhat’ truncated(?), after HBO decided to cancel…about which I was very disappointed in 2006.
Great cast; and Ian McShane is ‘perfectly’ hilarious as “Al Swearengen”…an appropriate name, if there ever was one…?
There was also, at numerous times, quite a bit of poking at some definitely fundie-style religion; which, aside from any actual known historical facts of the period, I’m guessing, probably reflected more, series writer David Milch’s own personal views.
The series sure made me rather glad that I’m living in THESE times in the USA; with all our, taken for granted, ‘luxuries’…like running water (as opposed to walking?) and flushing toilets. (private water closets?)
For more on the series, of course…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadwood_%28TV_series%29
4 November 2009, on 12:53 pm
why was CNN known as the Clinton News Network?
No one likes to hear opposition form what they believe. Why be afraid of FOX? Just don’t watch it. LOL
4 November 2009, on 4:21 pm
why was CNN known as the Clinton News Network?
Because some retard rethuglican thought it was cute.
No one likes to hear opposition form what they believe. Why be afraid of FOX? Just don’t watch it. LOL
My goodness, you are a jolly troll. LOLOLOL (snark)
I and most of us here don’t watch Faux News, just like I don’t read the National Enquirer. Both are in the same category. And fear has nothing to do with it. It’s just being intelligent enough to recognize that Fox News is just a propaganda machine for the conservatives. And they “embellish”. And before you say anything else…yes, there are liberal news sources too. Doesn’t excuse Fox…they are the worst.