So the Obama administration has declared war on FOX news. Oh wait, Fox isn’t a news organization, it’s an arm of the Republican party (my memos from the WH take some time reaching Korea).
Seriously, whatever your politics, isn’t this just a little bit scary? And you know, I don’t particularly care much for Glen Beck, but without FOX who would have reported on the Van Jones, ACORN, and Anita Dunn scandals? Perhaps this is why the Obama regime is down on FOX, it is the only network left that is not afraid to report stories unfavorable to The One. Racists!
Well, I’m not the only to notice the latest idiocy from the White House:
Where the White House has gone way overboard is in its decision to treat Fox as an outright enemy and to go public with the assault. Imagine the outcry if the Bush administration had pulled a similar hissy fit with MSNBC. “Opinion journalism masquerading as news,” White House communications director Anita Dunn declared of Fox. Certainly Fox tends to report its news with a conservative slant — but has anyone at the White House clicked over to MSNBC recently? Or is the only problem opinion journalism that doesn’t match its opinion? On “Fox News Sunday,” host Chris Wallace replayed a quote from an Obama interview: “I don’t always get my most favorable coverage on Fox, but I think that’s part of how democracy is supposed to work. You know, we’re not supposed to all be in lock step here.”
Maybe he should tell the rest of the team.
And I really liked what Claudia Rossett has to say:
This would be a very good moment for all those other news organizations — CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, the newspapers and the news web sites – to offer President Obama the perspective that it is utterly inappropriate for White House personnel to be opining publicly on the overall fitness of specific news outlets. The president has sworn to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” That includes protecting free speech, not dispatching White House staff and advisers to hold forth publicly as media critics denouncing news outlets they don’t like.
If errors of fact turn up in reporting, the White House is entitled to dispute them. But Axelrod and Emanuel were not disputing a particular piece of reporting. They were slamming wholesale a widely followed and highly informative news outlet, and denouncing it as not “legitimate.”
Government personnel getting into this act is altogether different. These are people paid out of the public purse, and speaking under the imprimatur of public institutions — in this case the White House. Here they are, urging White House-favored news outfits to follow the White House lead, and ostracize a specific news outlet the White House doesn’t like. This is Banana Republic stuff, a stock tactic of pressure and intimidation. The effect of such stuff, as a rule, is not to promote accurate news coverage, but to cover up stories the government doesn’t want aired, and shut up critics.
Other news outlets — the CNNs, ABCs, NBCs, CBS’s, or for that matter the New York Times and the Globe-Post-Mercury-Etceteras, may not agree with opinions expressed on Fox. But they would be wise to remember that what goes around comes around. And if they don’t rally now around the idea that the White House has no business vetting, according to its own “perspective,” which news outlets are “legitimate” and which are not, then the legitimacy of all news outlets becomes a function of “point of view” held by the White House. Welcome to the road to China’s Xinhua News Agency and Russia’s Channel One TV.
On a more hopeful note, at least some in the media are pushing back. I really like this exchange between the WH press secretary and ABC’s Jake Tapper:
Tapper: It’s escaped none of our notice that the White House has decided in the last few weeks to declare one of our sister organizations “not a news organization” and to tell the rest of us not to treat them like a news organization. Can you explain why it’s appropriate for the White House to decide that a news organization is not one –
(Crosstalk)
Gibbs: Jake, we render, we render an opinion based on some of their coverage and the fairness that, the fairness of that coverage.
Tapper: But that’s a pretty sweeping declaration that they are “not a news organization.” How are they any different from, say –
Gibbs: ABC –
Tapper: ABC. MSNBC. Univision. I mean how are they any different?
Gibbs: You and I should watch sometime around 9 o’clock tonight. Or 5 o’clock this afternoon.
Tapper: I’m not talking about their opinion programming or issues you have with certain reports. I’m talking about saying thousands of individuals who work for a media organization, do not work for a “news organization” — why is that appropriate for the White House to say?
Gibbs: That’s our opinion.
And one more thing. If FOX is not a news organization, what the hell does that make MSNBC?
MSNBC is left leaning for sure. No doubt. But Fox claims to be Fair and Blanced and that just isn’t true. Not sure Obama’s people should start this battle but it isn’t like they are off base. And George W.’s people treated MSNBC the same way when he was in office. They wisely didn’t make it such a public issue though.
So, it was right leaning to report on Van Jones and ACORN when no one else would? Do we define right leaning as anything the Obama administration doesn’t approve of?
Does it bother you that most of the press is in the tank for Obama?
Do you really think Fox News is down the middle? You don’t think that they lean right?
Again, I want to make it clear that I agree with you in that I think it was another of many mistakes by the Obama admin to pick a fight with FNC. But anyone can see that Fox News is not a straight down the middle group. Just like anyone can see MSNBC is not.
If you are going to complain about bias in the media then you have to look at both sides.
An w reallyhat bothers me is that our cable news channels are so stupid they spend a day of coverage chasing an run away ball0on that any sane person could see did not have a kid inside it. This is american cable news now. Ballon boy, The king of pop, Anna Nicole Smith and Brad and Angellina. It is ALL a joke. Fox, MSNBC, CNN…
We were better off with 30 minutes of bias a day…now we get 24/7 on four channels.
We have dumbed down our media and it is sad.
Well, even conceding a slant to the right at FNC, it is nothing compared to the over-the-top left bias at CNN. MSNBC is a joke and I don’t think they even make a pretext at straight news reporting, so let’s leave them out of this.
So, taking the hypothesis of FNC on the right and CNN on the left, here’s the issue: Fox reports stories that CNN won’t. Let’s take the ACORN thing for example and argue that FNC had a right wing bias on the story. CNN could have reported from the left, but instead ignored the story altogether (they did however take the time to “fact check” a skit on SNL mocking Obama). And that’s really the problem. You need the media to play the watchdog role in a democracy–the whole 4th estate thing. And only one network is even attempting to do so.
Which makes Obama’s attempt to isolate and demonize FNC a real scary thing. He’s sending a clear message to the other networks–when FNC uncovers dirt, don’t you dare report it.
So, in that context I would say FNC is more fair and balanced than any of the alternatives…
I agree. I’m with you on the media stepping up its game. They should have raised more questions on the bailouts and the war in Iraq.
I think we pretty much agree here other than I question why Fox didn’t seem to be this skeptical when Bush was in office. There has been a clear change in their approach since Obama took office.
For the record I watch Fox a lot. I also watch MSNBC or MS”DNC” as I like to call it. Honestly CNN seems to try to keep it close to the middle (Lou Dobbs) but they do lean left for sure.
Good stuff. I always enjoy media discussion.
I hope you read the link in the quagmire post. It is hilarious and they have some great faux quotes from Olbermann, Matthews, et al.
All good points on both sides here. However, the main point is why the President and his staff are attacking any news outlet. If they can refute certain articles then refute them. This is Chavez at his best. This president has spoken more lies than any elected official in US history. He and his wife are racist. Any contrary arguement is a sham. 2010 will show how the American public feels. After those elections we will know. To continue to attack Bush (Kevin) just shows how far the brainwash has gone. Bush said what he was going to do and he did it (right/wrong). He has not said anything to defend himself from all the liberal attacks. All Obama does is attack anyone and anything that disagrees. This is by far the most corrupt, under the table, secrative administration ever elected. Not even Nixon came close. Campaign, campaign is all they do. Not on one item can they actually defend the decisions made. Unemployment and the economy are both still in shambles. Yet this group says they have saved the world. BS. I have never seen anyone spend their way out of debt. 450 billion deficit to a 10 trillion deficit is going to fix what? Unless George Soros or Michele tells him what to do this President can’t make a decision. “EMPTY SUIT” is a very kind description. Liberals in the US should take note. Conservatives, when the power shifts, will not back-up next time. Liberals have shown that they fully intend on taking over this country. They will fail. When conservatives again take control liberals will be decades from regaining power.