Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cable's War Coverage Suggests a New 'Fox Effect' on Television
NY Times ^ | April 16, 2003 | JIM RUTENBERG

Posted on 04/16/2003 5:59:35 PM PDT by Pharmboy

The two commentators were gleeful as they skewered the news media and antiwar protesters in Hollywood.

"They are absolutely committing sedition, or treason," one commentator, Michael Savage, said of the protesters one recent night.

His colleague, Joe Scarborough, responded: "These leftist stooges for anti-American causes are always given a free pass. Isn't it time to make them stand up and be counted for their views?"

The conversation did not take place on A.M. radio, in an Internet chat room or even on the Fox News Channel. Rather, Mr. Savage, a longtime radio talk-show host, and Mr. Scarborough, a former Republican congressman, were speaking during prime time on MSNBC, the cable news network owned by Microsoft and General Electric and overseen by G.E.'s NBC News division.

MSNBC, which is ranked third among cable news channels, hired the two shortly before the war in Iraq, saying it sought better political balance in its programming. But others in the industry say the moves are the most visible sign of a phenomenon they call "the Fox effect."

This was supposed to be CNN's war, a chance for the network, which is owned by AOL Time Warner, to reassert its ratings lead using its international perspective and straightforward approach.

Instead, it has been the Fox News Channel, owned by the News Corporation, that has emerged as the most-watched source of cable news by far, with anchors and commentators who skewer the mainstream media, disparage the French and flay anybody else who questions President Bush's war effort.

Fox's formula had already proved there were huge ratings in opinionated news with an America-first flair. But with 46 of the top 50 cable shows last week alone, Fox has brought prominence to a new sort of TV journalism that casts aside traditional notions of objectivity, holds contempt for dissent and eschews the skepticism of government at mainstream journalism's core.

News executives at other networks are keeping a wary eye on Fox News, trying to figure out what, if anything, its progress will mean to them.

"I certainly think that all news people are watching the success of Fox," said Andrew Heyward, president of CBS News. "There is a long-standing tradition in the mainstream press of middle-of-the-road journalism that is objective and fair. I would hate to see that fall victim to a panic about the Fox effect."

The American news media have been here before. Newspaper headlines in World War II clearly backed the Allies. In 1944, The New York Times used the following headline above a photo essay about an air raid: "We Strike at the Japs."

But until Fox News, television news had rarely taken that sort of tone, though opinion has broken through at times. The major networks were first considered bullish on the Vietnam conflict. Then Walter Cronkite editorialized against it.

Still, for all the claims of disinterest from network anchors and correspondents, conservatives believed that they were masking liberal bias.

Rupert Murdoch played off that suspicion when he started the Fox News Channel in 1996, declaring it would take both sides of the political spectrum into account while overtaking CNN. Fox kept most of its political commentary to its prime-time schedule, which it called the equivalent of a newspaper's opinion page.

After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, though, Fox News Channel covered the fighting in Afghanistan with heavy patriotism, referring to "our troops" who were fighting "terror goons." Fox jumped to first in the cable news ratings in January 2002.

The channel has now taken its brand of pro-American journalism to a new level. One recent night, a correspondent in Iraq referred to war protesters as "the great unwashed."

After the first statue of Saddam Hussein fell in Baghdad, Neal Cavuto, an anchor, delivered a message to those "who opposed the liberation of Iraq": "You were sickening then, you are sickening now." Another Fox anchor, John Gibson, said he hoped Iraq's reconstruction would not be left to "the dopey old U.N."

CNN's ratings also rose during the war, to 2.65 million average daily viewers, from 610,000, but CNN trailed Fox, which had 3.3 million. Though MSNBC remained in third place with 1.4 million, it saw its share of the cable news audience grow, and for the first time in years had a sense of momentum.

Fox News executives would not comment for this article, beyond contending that their channel's success had more to do with its reporting than its editorial approach. They noted, for instance, that Fox showed the first live reports from the push to central Baghdad and from Mr. Hussein's palace there.

Fox's success initially seemed to push CNN to reconsider its editorial direction. In 2001, the network's former chairman, Walter Isaacson, made a public show of meeting with Republican leaders in Washington to discuss CNN's perceived liberal bias. Like Fox News and MSNBC, CNN featured an American flag on its screen after Sept. 11.

Since CNN's new chief, Jim Walton, took over last winter the network has reaffirmed its role as an international news network. It is the only one of the three cable-news networks without a flag on its screen now.

MSNBC, on the other hand, has added several features to capture more conservatives, who, along with moderates, make up a larger share of the cable news audience than do liberals, according to analysts.

MSNBC has patriotic flourishes throughout the day. Along with the regular screen presence of an American flag, Mr. Bush's portrait is featured on MSNBC's main set and an "America's Bravest" studio wall shows snapshots of men and women serving in Iraq.

Neal Shapiro, the NBC News president, said MSNBC hired Mr. Scarborough and Mr. Savage to add political equilibrium to its lineup of hosts. Before the war, Mr. Shapiro said, all of them — Chris Matthews, Phil Donahue, Bill Press and Pat Buchanan — opposed the war. Mr. Donahue's program was canceled in February.

"If you have a range of opinion that leaves out a whole part of the country," Mr. Shapiro said, "you're unintentionally sending a message that `you are not welcome here.' "

Erik Sorenson, MSNBC's president, said it was trying to differentiate its report from what he called a mainstream style of automatic questioning of the government.

"After Sept. 11 the country wants more optimism and benefit of the doubt," Mr. Sorenson said. "It's about being positive as opposed to being negative. If it ends up negative, so be it. But a big criticism of the mainstream press is that the beginning point is negative: `On Day 2, we're in a quagmire.' "

MSNBC's programming moves were welcomed by L. Brent Bozell III, founder of the Media Research Center, a conservative media analysis group. "What Fox is doing, and frankly what MSNBC is also declaring by its product, is that one can be unabashedly patriotic and be a good news journalist at the same time," Mr. Bozell said.

Still, MSNBC's moves have news executives and some liberal critics worried that Fox's success will push TV news too far from a neutral tone.

"I'm a huge believer in the forces of the market and the audience's ability to make choices among various channels," Mr. Heyward of CBS said. "What I would not like to see happen is legitimate debate stifled, or journalists' skepticism, heated journalistic inquiry, somehow dampened by a flock of Fox imitators."


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: foxnews; liberalhypocrisy; mediabias; newnormal
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-112 next last
"There is a long-standing tradition in the mainstream press of middle-of-the-road journalism that is objective and fair. I would hate to see that fall victim to a panic about the Fox effect."

He was being sarcastic, right? He can't be that out of it to actually have spoken these words, right?

1 posted on 04/16/2003 5:59:36 PM PDT by Pharmboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy
Already posted here.
2 posted on 04/16/2003 6:03:59 PM PDT by TomServo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy
The main stream media is beside it self because of the success of Fox News. Obviously the liberals and their cohorts are running scared. If anything, FNC is the most balanced news channel on the air. The Dems realize they were hurt in the last election because of FNC, talk radio, the internet etc. and they are striking back.
3 posted on 04/16/2003 6:06:42 PM PDT by Uncle Hal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy
Fox's formula had already proved there were huge ratings in opinionated news with an America-first flair.

As opposed to the dispassionate reporting in The Times?

ML/NJ

4 posted on 04/16/2003 6:06:58 PM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomServo
Y'know, I searched not ONE but TWO search terms to check whether this story had been posted. According to search, it wasn't.
5 posted on 04/16/2003 6:07:40 PM PDT by Pharmboy (Dems lie 'cause they have to)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TomServo
Still awfully busy, I see.
6 posted on 04/16/2003 6:08:36 PM PDT by ShadowDancer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy
Searching for the word, 'Coverage' (sans quotes) and scrolling down a bit show it. It's tough sometimes...;-)
7 posted on 04/16/2003 6:11:42 PM PDT by TomServo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy

8 posted on 04/16/2003 6:11:50 PM PDT by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowDancer
Still awfully busy, I see.

You bet sweetie. Making flapjacks for Buffy and Jody, dontchaknow... ;-)

9 posted on 04/16/2003 6:12:24 PM PDT by TomServo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy
After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, though, Fox News Channel covered the fighting in Afghanistan with heavy patriotism, referring to "our troops" who were fighting "terror goons." Fox jumped to first in the cable news ratings in January 2002.

Imagine referring to Americans in Uniform as our troops. Whose troops are they if they're not ours? This article show a lot about the menatl/emotional state of the media.
10 posted on 04/16/2003 6:12:48 PM PDT by x1stcav (HooAhh!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy
His colleague, Joe Scarborough, responded: "These leftist stooges for anti-American causes are always given a free pass. Isn't it time to make them stand up and be counted for their views?"

The conversation did not take place on A.M. radio, in an Internet chat room or even on the Fox News Channel. Rather, Mr. Savage, a longtime radio talk-show host, and Mr. Scarborough, a former Republican congressman, were speaking during prime time on MSNBC, the cable news network owned by Microsoft and General Electric and overseen by G.E.'s NBC News division.

The NY Times can't even bother to ask the salient question:

ARE THEY RIGHT?

Look into International A.N.S.W.E.R. Look into the Black Bloc.

But that doesn't matter to the Times. What matters to them is that someone is pointing it out.

11 posted on 04/16/2003 6:12:59 PM PDT by William McKinley (You're so vain, you probably think this tagline's about you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy
And btw:

Fox has brought prominence to a new sort of TV journalism that casts aside traditional notions of objectivity,
True. Because the 'traditional' notions of objectivity have nothing to do with objectivity.
holds contempt for dissent
Fox does not. It does hold contempt, however, for the anarchists and communists. Dissent like Elanor Clift and Alan Colmes and Susan Estrich get plenty of airtime and a fair hearing.
and eschews the skepticism of government at mainstream journalism's core.
Is mainstream journalism at the right place? Skeptism is good-- and people would agree with that. Is 'skeptism' what the mainstream media has and Fox lacks?

People are voting and saying "no".

12 posted on 04/16/2003 6:16:43 PM PDT by William McKinley (You're so vain, you probably think this tagline's about you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomServo

"I am so proud of you."
13 posted on 04/16/2003 6:17:04 PM PDT by ShadowDancer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy
Fox's formula had already proved there were huge ratings in opinionated news with an America-first flair.

Flip side of the coin: CNN's formula had already proved there were low ratings in opinionated news with an anti-America flair.

14 posted on 04/16/2003 6:18:13 PM PDT by KansasCanadian (My sources are telling me to avoid Rita Cosby)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy
eschews the skepticism of government at mainstream journalism's core.

Did CNN express skepticism of Saddam's government? Did Dan Rather express skepticism of Castro? Did any of these bozos express skepticism of Clinton?

Fox is certainly pro America but I don't think they would cover up for Dubya if it turned out he was taking campagin contributions from Chicoms/Haiti/Indonesia etc or violating sexual harassment laws he had campaign upon and signed into existence.

15 posted on 04/16/2003 6:19:00 PM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy
What BS! How about this quote too:

Fox has brought prominence to a new sort of TV journalism that casts aside traditional notions of objectivity, holds contempt for dissent and eschews the skepticism of government at mainstream journalism's core.

Did he say objectivity?! BWAHAHAHA, and this coming from the Iraqi mouthpiece the NYT! What would they know about objectivity?

The conservatives have ONE channel and the liberals are in total meltdown over it. They have NBC/CBS/ABC/CNN/MSNBC/PBS + the largest radio network (NPR with 800 stations) + NYT + Washington Post and they still think they're losing. I love it!

16 posted on 04/16/2003 6:19:30 PM PDT by Reagan is King
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy
Cable's War Coverage Suggests a New 'Fox Effect' on Television..................................................

So much for the 19th. Century FOX snipe.
17 posted on 04/16/2003 6:19:56 PM PDT by YOMO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy
"I'm a huge believer in the forces of the market and the audience's ability to make choices among various channels," Mr. Heyward of CBS said.

And those market forces are exactly what caused Fox News Channel to beat the pants off CBS. First time in history a little ol' cable channel beat a "major" network. Keep doing what you're doing, Mr. Heyward. Forget what business you're in, keep paying your leftist anti-American anchors enormous salaries, continue serving up spin for dinner and pretty soon we'll all be saying "C'ya, CBS!"

18 posted on 04/16/2003 6:29:12 PM PDT by arasina ("Thank you Mister Bush!" [direct quote from liberated Iraqi man])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowDancer
LOL!!! Always the charmer!!!
19 posted on 04/16/2003 6:33:35 PM PDT by TomServo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7
You are quite correct FNC would not cover up any wrong doing by W. For example right before the election of 2000 the person who broke the story concerning W's twenty year old DUI was FNC's Carl Cameron.
20 posted on 04/16/2003 6:34:17 PM PDT by In mourning for six years
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-112 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson