Was this really news? Fox News attacks Mr. Rogers

dwmckim

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2002
Messages
2,874
Reaction score
848
The idea of presenting both sides of a view without editorial slant and letting the facts speak for themselves is a time-honored tradition in journalism and is one of the most valued code of ethics in that field. In the US, not only has it been a long tradition, but also a mandated law via the Fairness Doctrine which required that news sources present fair and equal time to opposing views. This was later done away with (despite a lot of Americans thinking it's still in effect) which gave rise to things like conservative talk radio and Fox News whose purpose is to report on events with conservative spin.

There's certainly room for commentary outlets that are dedicated to analizing current events via a particular side. In itself, there is absolutely nothing wrong with this...as long as such outlets present itself as such identifying what they are and presenting themselves as commentators as opposed to reporters (for the most part talk radio does this well).

Fox News is a perfect example of abusing the process - being in existance to provide slanted coverage while simultaneously being blatently dishonest about their purpose - wrapping their presentation up as and identifying themselves as a neutral news reporting outlet. Their slogan of "Fair and Balanced" is particularly reprehensible because it's used to confuse people into believing that they're receiving "real journalism" (which strives to present neutral reporting) when everyone behind the scenes is dedicated to showcasing a rightward spin.

Proponants of Fox News may argue that the "fair and balanced" slogan is meant to indicate that it's meant to balance out the liberal spin the general media carries. But this is just an empty arguement that's another talking point of the propoganda Fox spins - the myth of the liberal media. This was a strategic attack on news media by conservative think tanks dating back decades to scare/pressure news outlets to skew more rightward. Indeed given that most news outlets are owned by major corporations (which usually have right-leaning interests) and especially in today's atmosphere where practically ALL major media is owned by one of only five media conglomerates the notion is all the more simply absurd.

Most American news outlets have sadly lost much of its credibility to the point where one literally has to seek out news reports from not only a variety of sources but especially including those outside the country - something most people don't have time to do. We're essentially left with newspapers (a dying breed), radio, television, and web news outlets that slant rightward if for no other reason due to editorial control (even if most of the reporters/staff are doing their best to keep things equal and fair) and things like Fox News whose whole business model is based on deceiving an ignorant public into thinking it's a legitmate news outlet when its purpose is to be a part of the right's spin cycle. If Fox was honest about its purpose, that would be a whole other story, but they spend just as much time trying to sell the lie about their "fairness and balance" and that what they're broadcasting is news in the ideal sense instead of commentary as they do their talking points.

Anyone wanting to check out some extraordinary exposes of Fox News in particular should watch Robert Greenwald's documentary "Outfoxed" and those wanting a more general account of the history of the "liberal media" myth and its genesis from conservative think tanks to its infiltrating the general media and rise of Fox News and rightwing radio should read David Brock's "The Republican Noise Machine". I highly reccomend the latter to anyone interested in media/journalism studies in general as Brock not only traces the history of the myth but also does so with actual insider knowledge as he had spent the early part of his career as part of the machine he writes about.
 

Drtooth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
31,718
Reaction score
6,707
Personally, I don't see why anyone would trust a "news" organization that employs someone instrumental in selling weapons to Iran in the 1980's... we ALL know who I'm talking about.
 

frogboy4

Inactive Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2002
Messages
10,080
Reaction score
358
Fox News has a far superior production staff in terms of style. I wish they had the appropriate substance along with the shiny packaging. Fox has the best lighting, graphics, constant live updates, they're always closed captioned 24/7 and always display the correct time. Everything is easy to read and the screen is seldom cluttered.

None of this is true for the other networks. CNN is never captioned Pacific Time evenings. That makes following coverage on the gym monitors impossible. They just don't have their acts together. MSNBC has no excuse for shoddy packaging when backed by Microsoft and NBC/Universal. I don't see why the other networks don't take a look at some of the tactics they use (aside from the smarm*) and develop a counter-punch in a spoonful of sugar. That's what Americans prefer. :attitude: :embarrassed:

*One example of classic Fox News Smarm is the day Shepard Smith corrected the control room for playing "The Katrina Theme Music" instead of "The Martha Stewart Theme Music" in their tabloid coverage of her court case some years ago. Why the frog do news events have their own theme music? :mad:
 

Drtooth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
31,718
Reaction score
6,707
MSNBC has no excuse for shoddy packaging when backed by Microsoft and NBC/Universal.
Maybe their shoddiness is because they use Microsoft product... Wocka Wocka Wocka! :embarrassed:

Why the frog do news events have their own theme music? :mad:
That's what bugs me about news coverage on the whole... liberal, conservative, it doesn't matter. Everything has to have a cute little title card and musical piece for it like it was the beginning of a cartoon. The most annoying news coverage I've seen (and no, it isn't the channel we're talking about) is Boston's channel 7 news cast. Recently, they pushed off a bunch of experienced seasoned news professionals for pretty looking things... they aren't idiotic bimbos sure, but are a notch under Kelly Rippa for perkiness no matter how bad the story is... think Miss Information from Histeria! But the worst part is EVERY single news headline has to have either a cute pun, a cute alliteration, or some cutesy wootsy rhyme in it. Honestly, it insults my intelligence a LOT more than anyone else, even whom we're talking about. They give terrorist bombings and gang activities cute little names and theme songs like they were Animaniacs cartoons. It never fails to sicken me.
 

Yorick

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
745
Reaction score
81
Add Boston's channel 7 news cast to the list of things that I can't believe happen in the year 2009 (going on 2010). Pretty freaky stuff!:concern:
 
Top