A Cold Wind Is Blowin In...The White House Steps Up Smear Campaign Against Fox News.

[LibocalypseNow]

Most independent studies including this most recent study by the CMPA (Center for Media and Public Affairs) have shown that Fox News is the most balanced News Network on TV. This was especially true during the last Election where the Liberal Mainstream Media seemed to be thoroughly fixated on viciously attacking & smearing Sarah Palin and her children. Fox News was clearly more fair & balanced in their treatment of Palin. The independent studies confirm this. So no matter how often the Hopey Changeys screech about Fox News being "An Arm of the Republican Party",most of the independent studies have proven them wrong time & time again. There is a clear Bias in the MSM but it's all coming from the Liberal dominated Mainstream Media at this point.

 

[Jay Canuck]

"What Obama needs is a Fuck You czar. Any time Glenn Beck or Hannity has a problem with someone in his administration Obama could say, 'Hey, talk to my Fuck You czar.' "
-- Marc Perkel

 

[Vast LWC]

And, it must be said ~snip~

In fact, it could be said

Just because it can be, could be, must be, would be or is said by idiot partisan sycophants, does not make it true by any stretch.

I'm complaining about the problem presented by MSNBC and Fox basically supporting candidates and I'm "Partisan" for doing so?

Perhaps you missed the part where I said MSNBC was as bad as Fox multiple times?

I certainly do have Liberal views on a variety of issues, but when it comes to the media, I hate equally.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

And, it must be said ~snip~

In fact, it could be said

Just because it can be, could be, must be, would be or is said by idiot partisan sycophants, does not make it true by any stretch.

I'm complaining about the problem presented by MSNBC and Fox basically supporting candidates and I'm "Partisan" for doing so?

As soon as we hear a Fox anchor say a candidate gives him/her "chills up the leg" and as soon as we see Fox openly cheerleading a candidate, then there might be a case.

Oh and, don't wear shoes unless they actually fit.

 

[Vast LWC]

Most independent studies including this most recent study by the CMPA (Center for Media and Public Affairs) have shown that Fox News is the most balanced News Network on TV. This was especially true during the last Election where the Liberal Mainstream Media seemed to be thoroughly fixated on viciously attacking & smearing Sarah Palin and her children. Fox News was clearly more fair & balanced in their treatment of Palin. The independent studies confirm this. So no matter how often the Hopey Changeys screech about Fox News being "An Arm of the Republican Party",most of the independent studies have proven them wrong time & time again. There is a clear Bias in the MSM but it's all coming from the Liberal dominated Mainstream Media at this point.

Where do you even get this? Do you have a link, because here's what I find on the CMPA website:

CMPA:STUDY: OBAMA’S MEDIA COVERAGE SOURS

Mr. Obama’s coverage throughout his term has been mainly favorable in the New York Times (61% positive evaluations), evenly balanced (50% positive) at the broadcast networks, and slightly negative (48% positive) in the news magazines.

Worst Press on FOX: President Obama fared far worse on Fox News Channel’s “Special Report” than on the broadcast networks or the prestige press – only 23% positive v. 77% negative evaluations. [We analyzed the first half-hour of “Special Report,” which most resembles the broadcast network newscasts in format.]

Unlike the other outlets we analyzed, FOX has been consistent in the tone of its coverage, with 21% positive evaluations during the administration’s first 100 days and 25% positive evaluations since then. Like the other outlets, FOX was most critical of Mr. Obama’s policies. They received only 15% positive evaluations, compared to 41% positive evaluations on all other aspects of his presidency.

Example: “President Obama introduced his nominee to be Secretary of the Army without the mention of an attack on Army soldiers inside the U.S., no condemnation, and no condolences…” -- Bret Baier, FOX, June 3

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Well most independent studies don't show Fox News as being so biased. They do however show many other MSM outlets as being biased though. Check out the CMPA study on the last Election. There was clearly a morbid fixation by most in the MSM on viciously attacking & smearing Sarah Palin and her children. Fox News was one of the very few MSM outlets who didn't engage in that awful stuff. Anyway,check out the CMPA study on the last Election. It really is interesting.

 

[Annie]

Whassamatta? Can't the folks at FOX take it like they can dish it out?

I think they can, they've been responding. Still, those on the 'left' understand the problem implicit with the tactics:

Whiner-in-Chief

Whiner-in-Chief

posted by JOHN NICHOLS on 10/12/2009 @ 8:08pm

The Obama administration really needs to get over itself.

First, the president and his aides go to war with Fox News because the network maintains a generally anti-Obama slant.

Then, an anonymous administration aide attacks bloggers for failing to maintain a sufficiently pro-Obama slant.

These are not disconnected developments.

An administration that won the White House with an almost always on-message campaign and generally friendly coverage from old and new media is now frustrated by its inability to control the debate and get the coverage it wants.

But before the president and his inner circle go all Spiro Agnew on us, they might want to consider three fundamental facts regarding relations between the executive branch and the fourth estate:

1. Since the founding of the republic, media outlets (the founders dismissed them as "damnable periodicals") have been partisan.

White House communications director Anita Dunn was not exactly breaking news when she told CNN's "Reliable Sources" that Fox was neither fair nor balanced. "What I think is fair to say about Fox -- and certainly it's the way we view it -- is that it really is more a wing of the Republican Party," grumbled Dunn. "They take their talking points, put them on the air; take their opposition research, put them on the air. And that's fine. But let's not pretend they're a news network the way CNN is."

Fox hosts do go overboard in their savaging of Obama and the Democrats -- sometimes ridiculously so. But their assaults on the president are gentle when compared with the battering that Benjamin Franklin Bache's Philadelphia Aurora administered to John Adams (appropriately) or the trashing that Colonel McCormick's Chicago Tribune gave Franklin Roosevelt (inappropriately).

To suggest that Fox is not a news network simply because Sean Hannity echoes RNC talking points would be like suggesting that the Aurora was not a newspaper because it took cues from Tom Jefferson or that the Tribune was not a legitimate member of the fourth estate because it was sweet on Alf Landon.

2. Presidents are supposed to rise above their own partisanship and engage with a wide range of media -- even outlets that are hard on their administrations.

In fact, presidents should go out of their way to accept invites from media that can be expected to poke, prod and pester them. The willingness to take the hits suggests that a commander-in-chief is not afraid to engage with his critics. It also reminds presidents, who tend to be cloistered, that there are a lot of Americans who get their information from sources that do not buy what the White House press office is selling.

When Dick Cheney kept giving "exclusive" interviews to Fox "personalities," there were those of us who ridiculed both the personalities and the former vice president for going through the ridiculous exercise of lobbing softballs and swinging at them.

Obama should be better than Cheney. But aides are not helping the president prevail in what ought to be an easy competition.

Cheney saw newspapers such as The New York Times and news channels such as CNN as little more than branches of his Democratic opposition.

When Dunn was asked whether the president refused to accept interview requests from Fox because the White House sees the network as "a wing of the Republican party," the communications director responded: "Is this why he did not appear? The answer is yes."

That is such a radically wrong response that it calls into question the whole communications strategy of an administration that has somehow managed to take a man who was elected with a mandate and lodge him in a corner where there are now serious questions about whether a Democratic president and an overwhelmingly Democratic Congress can enact basic elements of the Democratic agenda.

Obama should sit down with Fox reporters and anchors and do interviews. That does not mean that the president has to put up with the emotional wreckage that is Glenn Beck. But there is no reason why he shouldn't go another round with Bill O'Reilly (as Obama did during the 2008 campaign) or sit down with Chris Wallace (as Bill Clinton did)....

 

[Annie]

Point still missed by so many. This isn't just a Left vs. Right thing. This issue is far more serious than that. Government intimidation of the Free Press should alarm all Americans. This is just plain bad for America. Too bad so many are just too petty & small-minded to see this.

No, if government were trying to pass laws against a media outlet, or apply executive measures to curtail the actions of a media outlet, then THAT would be worrying.

But none of those things are happening.

The White House publicly criticizing a media outlet that continuously freely criticizes the President is not "intimidation".

"Intimidation" would be if the President sent the FBI into NewsCorp headquarters and threatened them with arrest.

Hells bells, the administration is giving notice to all media that if they leave the swoon, they too will be out of the loop, not for days or weeks, but permanently.

 

[Vast LWC]

Just because it can be, could be, must be, would be or is said by idiot partisan sycophants, does not make it true by any stretch.

I'm complaining about the problem presented by MSNBC and Fox basically supporting candidates and I'm "Partisan" for doing so?

As soon as we hear a Fox anchor say a candidate gives him/her "chills up the leg" and as soon as we see Fox openly cheerleading a candidate, then there might be a case.

Oh and, don't wear shoes unless they actually fit.

I'm sorry was I the only person who listened to what FoxNews hosts actually said after Sarah Palin's appearance at the RNC?

 

[LibocalypseNow]

In the end it really is all about this White House trying to silence anyone in the Media who dare to criticize them. My God,this guy has just about all of the MSM kneeling to lick his boots yet he can't handle just a couple of Media Outlets criticizing him? Yikes! In fact i would even say that the Liberal dominated MSM should be ashamed of themselves for the way they have rolled over for this guy. The man has a thoroughly compliant and submissive Mainstream Media yet he's still whining & smearing. What a sad scam.

 

[Vast LWC]

Well most independent studies don't show Fox News as being so biased. They do however show many other MSM outlets as being biased though. Check out the CMPA study on the last Election. There was clearly a morbid fixation by most in the MSM on viciously attacking & smearing Sarah Palin and her children. Fox News was one of the very few MSM outlets who didn't engage in that awful stuff. Anyway,check out the CMPA study on the last Election. It really is interesting.

Hey, I just used your example. I can find lots and lots of studies proving a FoxNews bias.

I can also find lots of studies proving an MSNBC bias.

The only difference between the two in my mind is that MSNBC doesn't actually try and claim it's "Fair and Balanced".

At least they're honest about the fact that they're biased as hell.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

I'm complaining about the problem presented by MSNBC and Fox basically supporting candidates and I'm "Partisan" for doing so?

As soon as we hear a Fox anchor say a candidate gives him/her "chills up the leg" and as soon as we see Fox openly cheerleading a candidate, then there might be a case.

Oh and, don't wear shoes unless they actually fit.

I'm sorry was I the only person who listened to what FoxNews hosts actually said after Sarah Palin's appearance at the RNC?

You're saying the news anchors or the op-ed show hosts such as Hannity? There IS a difference, you understand?

I bet not.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

I can find lots and lots of studies proving a FoxNews bias.

Post them then. Instead of anecdotal bullshit.

 

[Vast LWC]

Hells bells, the administration is giving notice to all media that if they leave the swoon, they too will be out of the loop, not for days or weeks, but permanently.

Once Fox started calling the president a "Nazi", a "Stalinist", and a "Racist", they lost all credibility as a "News" Organization when it comes to political coverage.

Hell, I'm surprised the President still lets them into the press room.

It is the president's choice as to which media organization he chooses to talk to. Fox has decided to hate on Mr Obama all the time, no matter what, so he's chosen not to give them face time.

Seems like a rational response to me.

 

[Annie]

As soon as we hear a Fox anchor say a candidate gives him/her "chills up the leg" and as soon as we see Fox openly cheerleading a candidate, then there might be a case.

Oh and, don't wear shoes unless they actually fit.

I'm sorry was I the only person who listened to what FoxNews hosts actually said after Sarah Palin's appearance at the RNC?

You're saying the news anchors or the op-ed show hosts such as Hannity? there IS a difference, you understand?

I bet not.

FOX has been hitting back with clips from O'Reilly and Van Sustern, with pro-Obama commentary. Of course the attacks have been on the News department, which time and again have been shown to be 'un-biased'. Hannity? Beck? Indeed, biased, but editorial type of bias.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Based on independent analysis of the last Election,Fox News did provide the most balanced coverage overall. They may have been the only MSM Outlet who didn't engage in that awful smearing of Sarah Palin and her children. Hey it is what it is in the end.

 

[Vast LWC]

As soon as we hear a Fox anchor say a candidate gives him/her "chills up the leg" and as soon as we see Fox openly cheerleading a candidate, then there might be a case.

Oh and, don't wear shoes unless they actually fit.

I'm sorry was I the only person who listened to what FoxNews hosts actually said after Sarah Palin's appearance at the RNC?

You're saying the news anchors or the op-ed show hosts such as Hannity? There IS a difference, you understand?

I bet not.

Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews server the exact same function on MSNBC as Hannity does on Fox.

Hannity was hosting election coverage at the time he made the comments I'm talkling about.

It's the EXACT same thing.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Once Fox started calling the president a "Nazi", a "Stalinist", and a "Racist", they lost all credibility as a "News" Organization when it comes to political coverage.

Where did that happen? When? Post proof!

FOX as an entity never did any such thing. PUNDITS who have OPINION shows might have.

These are ON Fox but do not represent the VIEWS of Fox. It's the OPINION of the show HOST.

 

[Annie]

I'm sorry was I the only person who listened to what FoxNews hosts actually said after Sarah Palin's appearance at the RNC?

You're saying the news anchors or the op-ed show hosts such as Hannity? There IS a difference, you understand?

I bet not.

Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews server the exact same function on MSNBC as Hannity does on Fox.

Hannity was hosting election coverage at the time he made the comments I'm talkling about.

It's the EXACT same thing.

Well ratings...FAIL!

 

[Midnight Marauder]

I'm sorry was I the only person who listened to what FoxNews hosts actually said after Sarah Palin's appearance at the RNC?

You're saying the news anchors or the op-ed show hosts such as Hannity? There IS a difference, you understand?

I bet not.

Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews server the exact same function on MSNBC as Hannity does on Fox.

Hannity was hosting election coverage at the time he made the comments I'm talkling about.

It's the EXACT same thing.

It's not. It was his show, on location in his regular slot. HIS take on the issues.

Please begin to post your polls that prove FNC bias. I'll wait.