Philosophical Conversations Public Opinion Junk for code
parliament house.gif
Think Tanks
Oz Blogs
Economic Blogs
Foreign Policy Blogs
International Blogs
Media Blogs
South Australian Weblogs
Economic Resources
Environment Links
Political Resources
South Australian Links
"...public opinion deserves to be respected as well as despised" G.W.F. Hegel, 'Philosophy of Right'

Fox News: "fair + balanced" « Previous | |Next »
October 23, 2009

I used to watch Fox News when I worked in Canberra, and we had Foxtel so I could watch parliament. After a while I go sick of what I interpreted as the Republican noise machine and Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity that masqueraded as media. I presume that Glenn Beck came on board latter.

Looking at this video, it is clear that Fox News has become more extreme and hysterical in its attempt to destroy the Obama presidency and it has dropped its barest pretense of objectivity

The objective for Roger Ailes, as for Murdoch, is not fairness or balance; the objective is always to win by whatever means necessary. That includes marketing himself and his employees as high-minded truth-seekers and innocent victims of snotty liberalism -- much in the mode of old Nixon.

Fox News has given up being a media organization (a conservative media ) as it is now a political operation inside the shell of a media institution that aims to inflame the right-wing base (Fox Nation). It has gained audience share whilst turning itself into a big fat political target. As Glenn Greenward observes:

Fox has taken on a political role that is very rare, at least in modern times, for a large American news organization. Its news coverage is not merely biased or opinionated; there'd be nothing unusual about that. Instead, it is a major participant -- the leading participant -- in organizing, promoting and fueling protests, including street protests, against the government.... Fox has every right to do that, but the pretense that it is a news organization is ludicrous -- transparently so -- and there isn't anything remotely wrong with the Obama White House saying so.

He adds that even those with high tolerance levels for blatant double standards should have a very hard time watching Bush officials of all people -- along with their media-star allies -- whine about criticisms of Fox coming from the White House, when the prior eight years were marked by an administration that attempted to dominate and control media coverage more than any in modern history, along with a media that seemed perfectly content, even happy, to be controlled.

| Posted by Gary Sauer-Thompson at 5:45 PM | | Comments (7)


Bloody frightening stuff!

But... I'm hoping (really, really hoping) that most of the people who watch Fox these days are ALREADY right-wing loons. I can't imagine anyone else being taken in by that bullshit-fest.

Up until recently at least, it was not just right-wing loons who fed on the Fox.

A couple of years ago he late Frank Devine wrote a column in praise of the Fox, because it was an antidote to presumed political correctness of the liberal media and the liberal establishment too.

Plus at about the same time someone wrote a similar column
in City Journal, admiring the fact that the Fox was beginning to erode this supposed dominance too---and this was in the middle of the Bush regime!

and Murdoch is saying that we should have to pay---if people wanted to read his newspapers and watch his TV they could bloody well pay for them.

He's asking us to pay for this rubbish at Fox? Obviously he doesn't understand the internet culture.

good article by Michael Wolff in Vanity Fair on Murdoch + Internet---Rupert to Internet: It’s War! Wolff says that:

Murdoch can almost single-handedly take apart and re-assemble a complex printing press, but his digital-technology acumen and interest is practically zero. Murdoch’s abiding love of newspapers has turned into a personal antipathy to the Internet: for him it’s a place for porn, thievery, and hackers.

Wolff says that you get a dreadful harrumph when you talk to Murdoch about user-created content, or even simple linking to other sites.
He doesn’t get it. He doesn’t buy it. He doesn’t want it.Every conversation I’ve had with him about the new news, about the fundamental change in how people get their news—that users go through Google to find their news rather than to a specific paper—earned me a walleyed stare.

Murdoch is fighting a rear guard action----the more he can choke off the Internet as a free news medium, the more publishers he can get to join him, the more people he can bring back to his papers.

the assumption of Frank Devine and others that Fox was an antidote to presumed political correctness of the liberal media and the liberal establishment is that Fox is a news organization. That assumption is what is being challenged. Fox sounds, and functions, like a conservative political organization that is part of the Republican Party's machinery.

But Fox is growing its audience and making money --that's all that Murdoch cares. He has his back to the wall with his newspapers.

"....Fox has every right to do that ...."

That is an interesting little assumption just chucked in almost at random.
It caught my eye and I just wondered if it is an uncontested unanimously agree 'right'.
Cos I'm not sure I'd go along with it without considerable thought and discussion about the principles involved.
After all 'it' [Fox, I mean] is not a citizen or a person or a citizen, is it?

It's an easy fix....

The opinions and views expressed by the hosts/presenters are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of the network.