Posted on 11/05/2009 3:56:23 AM PST by Kaslin
I spoke at a recent town hall forum. The many issues discussed included the Obama administration's attack on Fox News. Later, one of the audience members came up to me and sneered, "Well, even you must admit that Fox News is biased in favor of Republicans."
Separate the opinion guys from the news deliverers. Does Fox focus on stuff that the others -- MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS -- do not? Yes. Is that stuff more critical of liberals and less critical of conservatives? Yes.
The best gauge is who watches these stations. Fox News Channel, as a percentage of viewers, includes more self-described libs and indies than CNN or MSNBC includes self-described conservatives and indies. Pew Research Center recently studied the cable channels' viewers' politics. CNN? Fifty-one percent liberal, 23 percent independent and 18 percent conservative. MSNBC? Forty-five percent liberal, 27 percent independent and 18 percent conservative. Don't know about the "fair" part, but Fox's audience was the most "balanced," with 39 percent conservatives, 33 percent liberals and 22 percent independents.
I know from my appearances that the audiences differ -- at least as to the e-mail I receive.
When I appear on Fox, as I did to promote my latest book, "What's Race Got to Do with It," I get mostly approving e-mail. When I get one that disagrees, the writer points out -- using facts, information or analogies -- what, in his or her opinion, undermines my position. But when I appear on Wolf Blitzer's CNN show -- oh, man! Hundreds of hostile e-mails accuse me of everything but the Lincoln assassination. Only rarely, such as when someone took exception to the book's premise -- that white racism no longer poses a potent or even significant factor in America -- does anyone argue intelligently, with facts or information. It's snarl, attack, name-call.
On a recent appearance on Ed Schultz's MSNBC show, I opposed Obamacare -- or tried to, given the host's interruptions. The e-mails I received were unprintable.
The White House loathes Fox News. President Obama pointedly excluded Fox while appearing on ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN. Obama's communications director, on CNN, complained about Fox's year-old coverage of Obama's campaign. But a Pew Research Center study found that during the last six weeks of the campaign, 61 percent of CNN's stories on John McCain were negative, compared with 39 percent on Obama. On MSNBC, 73 percent of McCain stories were negative, while only 14 percent of stories on Obama were negative. But 40 percent of Fox News' stories on Obama and 40 percent of those on McCain aired during the final six weeks of the race were negative. So, of the three major cable news networks, who can legitimately claim to be more "fair and balanced"?
But let's assume, for the sake of argument, Fox News slants toward conservatives. On one side stand conservative talk radio, Investor's Business Daily and some conservative/libertarian publications, writers, bloggers and, yes, Fox News. On the other stand The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, the San Francisco Chronicle, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution and even the news section of The Wall Street Journal, as well as the editorial pages of virtually every big-city newspaper. It includes PBS, NPR, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN and MSNBC. In the 1992 presidential election, for example, almost 90 percent of Washington-based journalists admitted to voting for Bill Clinton for president.
But because Fox News is allegedly biased in favor of conservatives, critics whine like children whose lunch money got snatched. Conservatives have been pummeled for decades. Now that Fox News and conservative talk radio give people alternatives, critics squeal as if being sodomized.
Is Fox skeptical about the "bailout" and Cash for Clunkers or more likely to blame government rather than "greed" for the housing meltdown? Yes. Does Fox appear to focus more on Obama's dithering over his top Afghanistan commander's request for the troops the general thinks necessary to succeed? Yes. The better question is, why aren't the others doing the same thing? The double standards and pro-liberal negligence are mind-boggling. If media malpractice were a crime, many "reporters" would be on death row.
When the Obama administration claimed 640,000 jobs were "saved or created" with $159 billion of the "stimulus," many "news" outlets blithely "reported" this. Do you know that comes to $250,000 per job?!!! And the administration claimed half the jobs were teachers. How many teachers make $250,000 per year? Very little skepticism. Why didn't "journalists" immediately challenge this as a matter of who, what, where, when and why? If George W. Bush had done this (God forbid he'd have supported an $800 billion stimulus package), the mainstream media would have -- and should have -- said, "Why, that comes to $250K per job!!!!!"
But as to Fox News, it's BMW -- bitch, moan and whine. Oh, the humanity!
FoxNews seems to have made a subtle change — they don’t seem to do so much of the ‘sensationalism’ celebrity news.
With Anna Nicole Smith, I kept a count of the daily ‘news alerts’ FoxNews ran. After 28 continuous days of ‘Anna news alerts’, I developed a new habit: I turned the TV off FoxNews at the first mention of Smith.
It would be that less celeb-sensationalism news increases viewership from those who want less celeb-sensationalism news.
the liberals define fair by them being bias towards left 90% of the time and 10% to the right
when its 50-50. Its totally unfair
I wish that some very wealthy conservative would start buying up all the failing news organizations and make all of them “fair and balanced.”
The difference is this: Fox News allows differing opinions to be presented and heard. CNN and PMSNBC make no effort to present anything other than the liberal koolaid.
Good article with good stats to drop on my lib acquaintances (not that facts matter to them).
Without Fox news, Drudge, and a few other Conservative news media, FR as well, 0bamacare would already be made law, we wouldn’t know about the radical background of 0’s Czars, none of the dirt.
The former white house has all of the former mainstream media in it’s back pocket, and is really pissed that Fox isn’t there also.
I had FOX on in the store yesterday when I was changing a watch battery for an older lady. She frumpily commented that “I can’t believe you have that FOX news channel on” because they lie and they are so hateful. She clearly thought that I would run over and change the channel and apologize. I didn’t. I told her that I want to hear the real news, fair and balanced, and if she wants to just listen to MSM pandering she can get right back to it when I’m finished. It surprised her that I didn’t back down. She became nicer to me. It seems that all opposition respects power and resolve.
Good for you
My daughter, last night, told me they did a poll in her senior government class on the media in general and a huge majority of the students thought the media was too liberal.
Yes, there IS hope!
You can’t get any more middle of the road than BOR and Shelp Smith.
With the drumbeat of all the shades of control deriving from the "Fairness Doctrine", this is unlikely. While I have minimal fear of duplication of this here, consider what Hugo Chavez has done to the media spectrum in Venezuela. From a thriving multiple viewpoint spectrum it has been reduced to a state controlled media.
With the current talk of government subsidies of newspapers (Ben Franklin must be around 10k rpm right now), just imagine the control that will come with it. A government that so easily abrogates contracts (Chrysler Bailout) will have no qualms in making new rules about editorial content.
LOL!
And the idea that BOTH sides of an issue should be aired is beyond their comprehension. Mainly because their policies & ideas have no basis in reality or logic. Socialism does not work. Nanny-ism is tyranny. AGW is a lie. Racial harmony is achieved by ignoring race, not promoting it. There IS a right & a wrong.
Leftists are clearly the source of the vast majority of tyranny & oppression in this world, currently & historically. Silencing the Press & all opposing views is standard practice for them.
“I wish that some very wealthy conservative would start buying up all the failing news organizations and make all of them “fair and balanced.””
I made that same case a few years back. People really DO want accurate reporting and good investigative journalism. There IS a good market for this.
Obviously, when it comes to Fox, it is not fair to be balanced.
Nice article, and thanks for posting it! (Thanks for the ping, Molly!) Larry Elder is always such a voice of reason, and he says things in a way that resonates.
Note to self: get Larry’s excellent new book, and sit down to enjoy it as much as his previous ones!
Defenders of the Big Media like to point out that they (for instance the alphabet news networks) do not offer opinion like FOX does. They do, but they do it in an insidious way. The most insidious is not by offering snide comments, but simply by not reporting half the news. That has always been Big Lib Media’s biggest sin: not reporting news that depicts liberalism or leftism in less than a favorable light.
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.