Posted on 03/17/2010 8:29:57 PM PDT by reprobate
THE FUTURE OF FOX NEWS – AT 10:15 P.M. ET: Those on our side have come to depend on Fox News as one of the few outlets where our views get a fair hearing. But will that always be the case?
There have been some disturbing signs in recent days. Fox, of course, is under the control of Rupert Murdoch, pro-American stalwart and something of a media genius. But Murdoch is aging, and it's widely reported that his son, James, who's becoming increasingly powerful in the parent News Corporation, which owns Fox, has views rather different from those of his father. In particular, James has an affinity for the Arab world, despite the fact that freedom of the press doesn't exactly thrive in that culture.
Fox News has received an infusion of Saudi money, primarily from a Saudi prince who spreads money around the United States to buy influence. Fox announced a few weeks ago that its Mideast headquarters would be in Abu Dhabi.
The obvious question is whether these changes will affect Fox's reporting. Several commentators have already noticed, as have I, a subtle change to a more pro-Arab line in some Fox news reports. A report by Amy Kellogg about the Golan Heights last night was particularly disturbing, coming from a reporter who's been reliable in the past. Left out completely, and shockingly, was the fact that the Golan had been used as an artillery platform by Syria to pound villages in Israel proper before Israel seized the Heights in the 1967 Six-Day War. Some of the reporting from Jerusalem has also been leaving out the context that Fox has normally supplied in the past.
How far will this go? Hard to say. But I'm afraid the signs aren't good. Rupert Murdoch will fade away. Money talks. It is frightening to think of the influences that may come into play in the Murdoch empire in the future, an empire that includes Twentieth Century Fox studios, the Times of London, and the The Wall Street Journal. We may find Fox taking the side of the very people who would deny it the freedom to report freely.
So far I haven't seen any anti-American slant creeping into Fox's reporting, but one can legitimately have concerns. James Murdoch is British, but educated in the United States at Harvard, from which he dropped out. His wife works for a Bill Clinton-sponsored organization, the Clinton Climate Initiative.
March 17, 2010
It could also be that the US Government may try to either buy out FOXnews or force it to become like MSNBC, or face massive fines or shutdowns ala Hugo Chavez.
“As you point out, how much longer will we have FOX?”
I di not trust Murdoch or the Saudis but I think Roger Ailes is probably a good guy. He is making a TON of money for Murdoch. Cavuto did a great job launching Fox Busines News too.
I think Bret Baier is also an honest and decent guy.
Shep Smith, O’Reilly and now Beck? Not so much.
Sean Hannity is a decent guy but he has too many RINOs and Dems on his shows. I trust Dick Morris more than I trust Newt or McCain. Strike that - I Do NOT trust stinking RINOs Newt (I will FU NY-23 for Repubs) Gingrich and Juan McCain.
Agreed. Andrew Brietbart is a good guy. I heard him on Savage the other night. I think he was a guest host fill in. Andrew, James and Hannah helped to just about bring down ACORN.
The quality of writing on his sites is very good like Big Hollywood.
Who needs TV news anymore. Haven’t watched any since the election. Thankfully we have the internet. Free Republic, Weasel Zippers, The Jawa Report, Atlas Shrugs, Twitter, AOSHQ, Drudge, Jim Treacher, Consertives 4 Palin...
Here's the link:
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=899728
Islamophobes' unwelcome at Fox News
FR thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2453165/posts
butterdezillion: Thanks for the ping!
The one thought I'll add is that it is not simply that the Muslims wish to censor anti-Islamic talk in the media -- the larger plan is, by every means available, to engage in a "cultural jihad" to convert as many Westerners as possible, and to insinuate shari'a law within the the Western nations.
They have an End-Time prophecy in the Hadith that "In the Last Days, the sun will rise in the West." They interpret that as meaning that there will be a rising tide of Western conversions and cultural change, even apart from the use of violent jihad.
bttt
Do you really depend of FOX, cause I sure don’t. They have Shep, O’Reilly, and Geraldo.
.
We will see how really important freedom of the press is to maintaining what we have left of our Constitutional rights. The press has already failed by failing, as did our legislature, to vet our natural born alien chief executive, while they have correctly published results of investigations of McCain for twelve years or more. They failed to explain to the public the meaning of our Constitution and now declare it irrelevent.
Perhaps Breitbart will be the inheritor of the mantle “fair and balanced?” The next threat to free speech has already been planned, but not yet executed - a “fairness test” overseen by local boards of community activists. Block captains and civilian disarmament will follow. The Muslims will use the communists and vice versa. Each will think they will prevail when the time of “helter skelter” - complete social disorder - arrives. It will come when Obama’s partners in Venezuela and the Middle East raise the price of oil to a thousand/barrel, unemployment crosses thirty percent and private banks are all nationalized. Then the most numerous and best armed will prevail, and I'm betting on the Muslims, since left wing thieves and academics probably won't be of much use in a real fight.
You cannot protect people from doing stupid things, and changing FOX News would be more than stupid. Why would anyone in his right mind try to fix something that is not broken? I suspect that if FOX becomes another MSNBC, someone will create another cable news network that will target conservatives.
I have the solution:
BREITBART NEWS CHANNEL
I believe he will, can, and should do it...
You are absolutely correct about some of the things Krauthammer has said. Much to my sorrow.
He has also on a fairly consistent basis articulated a conservative message. Your comments remind me of a troubling theory I had years ago.
Fox News could be the answer to the declining confidence in the MSM. The people required a source of news and propaganda that they could believe in again. Gradually Fox has drifted to the left.
I have no idea how to convince myself that Fox is really even handed in their mission. That is getting harder every day. I do know that Free Republic is a blessing as far as receiving news and opinion is concerned.
Go ahead and turn it off. It will be better for you.
The point is that someone will fill the gap, even if they have to move off shore.
“Ballsy interview” is a fitting description.
In a mano-a-mano with the most powerful man in the world, Brett demonstrated he has a pair, while it can be argued his guest “wussed out” on the opportunity to talk straight with America.
Of all the posts, FReeper cbkaty succinctly said it the best: “Brett did his job....with respect for the office...the officer doesn’t respect his office....”
Re your question about O’Reilly…like many others who bemoan the prospective demise of FOX as a source of credible information, I no longer watch O’Reilly and very seldom watch Hannity.
Both have a habit of overtalking or abruptly dismissing professionals whose invitation to appear on the show is based primarily on their qualifications to discuss a specific issue.
Chris Wallace’s program is too often 3-1 on political balance, has an excessive amount of NPR input much of which in Hume’s absence is taken as gospel, and Wallace usually fails to address the obvious shucking and jiving by some of his liberal guests.
Some predict Ailes will break away; perhaps if we are fortunate he will start a format that includes the likes of Hume, Brett, Levin, Limbaugh and other such professionals.
“Why would anyone in his right mind try to fix something that is not broken?”
You certainly would be correct if you were referring to an earlier FOX.
Presently, however, even the controlling interest’s family appears to believe FOX is indeed broken, no doubt for different reasons than most of us.
From another thread -
“Here is a 2009/2010 (?) statement by a member of the Murdoch family:
‘I am by no means alone within the family or the company in being ashamed and sickened by Roger Ailes’s horrendous and sustained disregard of the journalistic standards that News Corporation…(and) its founder (Murdoch) aspires to,’ said Matthew Freud, who is married to [Rupert Murdoch’s daughter Elizabeth]”
Does anyone believe that was a knee-jerk, “unauthorized” public statement?”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.