Obama Administration At War With FoxNews

This, I find interesting on so many levels.

First, it's not like the Obama administration had to wait for a good reason, let's face it, FoxNews is conservative, but to start the fight over a Sunday morning program fact checking an Obama official, is. . . well, it's just stupid. It looks immature, and what's worse, is the Obama official (Tammy Duckworth) was actually wrong. It's like saying that news organizations shouldn't ever try to show how an official is wrong, or hold them accountable.

I keep thinking, why pick the fight over this? There were, like, a million other good reasons (i.e. Hannity's and Beck's rhetoric come to mind).

~String

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well, they aren't real news. Of course, there is nothing that helps Fox more than a percieved enemy, even if Obama is just relating a fact.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well, that's an opinion. And it's valid, but not necessarily true.

The news reporting segment of Fox is no more or less inaccurate than any of the other news bureaus. It's the "talk" shows that are overtly conservative and spiteful against the Obama administration (Hannity, Beck, etc.)

~String

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

But the issue they are drumming on about is that FoxNews fact checked Tammy Duckworth. . . and she ended up being WRONG! Hell, pick this fight over a real issue. Not that an Obama admin official actually ended up being wrong.

~String

 

Their "news" is hopelessly biased. I'm afraid that is a proven fact, not just an opinion. They do sometimes report news that isn't biased, but that's just a cover. It's a media outlet for the Republican party, plain and simple.

 

There's no doubt that it's conservative. But you're going to have to do a little better in proving that it's a media outlet for the Republican party.

~String

 

I doubt that is true but I can't say for sure that you are wrong.

At minimum Fox News's choices of what to cover is different and if they can't find enough bad to say about the Democrats or Liberals or Muslims or groups like ACCORN then Fox will cover stories that have no political or policy implications at all.

I think it was well past time for Fox News to be called what they are. I have no problem with Fox existing but I wish there was a network as far left as Fox is right to create a balance.

All the networks are suck ups to status quo corporatism. Fox tries to put out a sort of pro ordinary person populist feel but I don't buy it and just see Fox as a right side corporatist Network as opposed to the other culturally center-left corporatist Networks.

 

Obama-san must tread carefully on his chosen path.
A good martyr makes, fox news does.
Win the middle classes he must, by targeting the right people.

 

The bias in the news reporting shows up not as inaccuracy, but as selectivity. Stories are chosen (or ignored) in line with specific, coordinated political agendas. Even the weather reporting is biased: any unseasonably cold weather, anywhere, is siezed upon and highlighted vigorously, with the implication that global warming is a hoax. Unseasonably warm weather does not receive the same attention.

About the only news on Fox that isn't directly politicized are stories that they are more-or-less forced to follow by virtue of their prominence in the rest of the media. This is done to keep viewership up and retain what credibility they can. Which is to say that it still serves a secondary political purpose by boosting its effectiveness as a propaganda vehicle.

 

For a time, I thought MSNBC was that leftist network. But not really. They've actually become more centrist.

 

Hang on. I'm interested to see what other news services say.. got any other links?
I think Fox is spinning this to their own advantage. Already I see a heavy republican bias in their quotes, designed to put people like Karl Rove, as supporters of press freedom. Hah!.

 

I agree with this. And it's interesting, since I usually find myself on the other side of this debate. I'm no fan of FoxNews. I have a standing feud with branches of my family over the claims that they regurgitate after watching Beck and Hannity. But, my point is, when FoxNews reports on--say--that kid in the Helium balloon, I'm not worried about the accuracy. I do agree that their choice of stories in politics tends towards the conservative.

I also believe we would see similar slants at other news outlets like the BBC, CNN, MSNBC and the "big three".

~String

 

No. And it's driving me nuts. My usual news sources (Economist, Wall Street Journal, CNN and Breitbart) don't have much to say on it.

~String

 

The Huffington Post has an article. But I consider the Huffington Post to be as left-leaning as FoxNews is right-leaning.

I didn't read the article yet:

Snubbed By Obama, Fox News's Chris Wallace Calls White House "Biggest Bunch Of Crybabies I've Ever Seen"

~String

 

I agree string, it's a stupid move and will backfire.

 

But it's labelled as political commentary. That's the difference.

 

I think they should have been more sly. Just cut Fox off. No public statement. Just cut the damned station off. But they picked this fight over a bad issue. That looks poorly planned.

~String

 

Sure, that story is under the "gotta cover it, everyone else is" heading.

But people don't go to Fox for news. They could get that exact same news on any other station. They go to have their identity reinforced. The incidental news stuff like that is just included so they don't change the channel between indoctrination sessions. Take Hannity and Beck out, and instead show only real news, and Fox would disappear in a matter of days.

Well, I stopped watching tv news years ago, due to its abysmal quality (apart from any questions of bias). But I've long seen this equivocation drawn when Fox comes up, and I've never bought it. To the extent CNN is biased, it's towards such a centrist, apolitical common denominator that it pretty much comes out in the wash.

 

CNN would be the only "centrist" example I can think of. It's why, when I chose a McNews source, I usually go with them. But the news bureaus of CBS, for example, was a veritable who's who amongst the Democratic party (until the whole Dan Rather affair). The same was true of MSNBC. Does it excuse Fox's rightwing slant or their selectivism in news reporting? No. But I'm not fooling myself into believing that I'd be doing any better with MSNBC or CBS.

Thus, I stick with places like the Wall Street Journal, Breitbart and the Economist. It's not like quality global reporting can't be found, it just takes a little work.

~String

 

Maddow and Olberman are definitely far to the left but MSNBC as a whole does not seem to want the niche as the Left version of Fox.

Something about Olbermann's style seems pompous and irritates me. If the left only gets two full blown lefties on TV why does one of them half to be Olbermann? Maddow also comes across a bit to smug also but so do the guys at Fox and when i think about it so have all anchors in general for as long as I can remember.