From Media Matters via Youtube…..
Those month by month clips, just a few of many, clearly demonstrate the bias being spewed by FOX. Before last November's election, FOX's bias for McCain-Palin was apparent. After Obama's victory, FOX's bias against Obama……also apparent.
Those are not the characteristics of a news organization. Those are the characteristics of a Republican Party media entity. Nothing wrong with being the media arm of the Republican Party. Just as long as everyone is aware that that's the situation.
Obama's White House, by stating that FOX is not a news organization but rather an opinion outlet, was doing it's duty to alert the American public about the dangers of confusing FOX with actual news reporting….while warning other media outlets to not get suckered into covering FOX's manufactured anti-Obama stories.
The White House stated that FOX is not a news group but rather, an opinion group. Media Matters provides the evidence to support that statement.
Obama is trying to keep Americans safe……warning them of the dangers of propagandistic misinformation spewed 24/7 by a politically biased opinion outlet masquerading as a news group.
Obama not only did the right thing by calling out FOX,…..something that's been long overdue……but he was also "fair and balanced" about it.
UPDATE: Nothing confirms the truth of FOX's non-news status better than the Villagers siding with FOX.
Here's a perfect example…..
It is now officially 1993 all over again.
Here's more evidence…read it all, here's one piece….
Fox News CEO Roger Ailes has described his station's confrontation with the Obama administration as "the Alamo." Fox News senior vice president Bill Shine said Fox was "the voice of opposition." In other words, the entire operation has an explicit political agenda, not just a few hosts.
..[..]..
Fox News is now coordinating grassroots (or, more accurately, astroturf) political activities, lobbying for or against legislation, and fundraising for conservative causes. The network called April's protests "Fox News Tea Parties." It encouraged people to attend town halls last summer and then broadcast only the statements of those who opposed Democratic health care proposals. The 9/12 rally in Washington was the work of Beck,
{ 37 comments… read them below or add one }
A truly pathetic post. Pick out a few clips you don't like, and then ignore the hours and hours and hours and hours of news that Fox News covers every single day.
Useful idiots.
I'm sorry you are against free speech and a free press, Rev, but you'll just have to deal with it.
One question.
Is MSNBC a news organization ?
Those "few clips" are not even the tip of the iceberg.
MSNBC has a Republican Congressman co-anchoring a THREE hour morning program, every week day. Who is the Democratic equivalent on FOX? Todd, Mitchell, Matthews, Fineman, Barnicle, Brezinski are all part of conservative Village-dom…..working daily framing issues for the powerful monied players.
When King, or others, can string a bunch of biased LIES together from MSNBC that are tilted towards Obama's favor…then we can talk further.
You didn't answer my question. Is MSNBC a news network ?
And I hope you're kidding when challenging me to expose MSNBC's lies. That is a bet you will definitely lose. I can do that all day. I could write my entire blog on that one subject, but I choose to write about more important matters than the endless deceptions of the MSNBC. Let's see, off the top of my head…..I have to go all the way back to……yesterday.
Last night Keith Olbermann made fun of the Tea Party II movement and ridiculed them as a joke because they only had 192 signers on Facebook. What Olbermann didn't bother to tell his audience was that the Tea Party II Facebook account had only existed for a few hours before Olby's' show.
And if you ever actually watched Fox News instead of only complaining about it, like the opinion shows of O'Reilly and Hannity, you'd see that Democrats are ALWAYS represented. Let's see, Dems on Fox – Alan Colmes, Juan Williams, Pat Caddell, Bob Beckel, Kirsten Stewart, several others on a rotating basis. Plus, you "fair and balanced" liberals are always castigating Democrats for going on Fox News, and you give them grief when they do go on.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/10/20/moveon-org-asks-democrats-stay-fox-news
When I watch MSNBC when it counts, during primetime, I don't see anything but lefties. Fox News leans right, obviously, but allows liberals to be heard. I will give you Joe Scarborough, who is on MSNBC when nobody is watching. It's called tokenism.
And having Lawrence O'Donnell complaining about the bias of Fox News is freaking hilarious, in case that went over your head.
Surely you can't be serious about those names you listed as Democrats appearing on FOX.
"Fox News leans right, obviously,.."
Yeah, obviously…..but that's not the issue. The issue is not whether FOX leans right, the issue is whether they are a political arm of the Republican Party, the main espouser in media of anti-Obama propaganda, a sponsor for Obama opposition. And the evidence shows that they are.
If the ontological status of entitiies claiming to be "news organizations", as defined by the Reverand, is a function of whether they are supportive of the President's policies, then it follows that Fox does not meet that rather idiosyncratic definition. Such a conclusion, of course, does not provide evidence to support the title to the Reverand's post. Rather, it opens a revealing window into the Reverand's thought processes and how he twists the meaning of words.
Joe Scarborough does what he is told to do, he is neither Dem nor Rep. He can express his little conservative He was definitely bias toward Obama in last years election.
Bush or Cheney never complained about MSNBC or any of the millions of bloggers or other media outlets no matter how many lies they told or stories they made up or spun or how they tried to undermine the administration. They knew it was just hot air they were spewing.
Fox does lean right thank God. Otherwise we on the right would have no opportunity to hear the truth.
I think Obama has a great character flaw. It comes from being abandoned by his mom and dad when he was young. He tends to associate with a rebelious crowd and suffers from esteem problems. Why would he let the media bother him so much?
Well Quid…let's try this one….
"Feinberg did a pen and pad with reporters to brief them on cutting executive compensation. TV correspondents, as they do with everything, asked to get the comments on camera. Treasury officials agreed and made a list of the networks who asked (Fox was not among them).
But logistically, all of the cameras could not get set up in time or with ease for the Feinberg interview, so they opted for a round robin where the networks use one pool camera. Treasury called the White House pool crew and gave them the list of the networks who’d asked for the interview.
The network pool crew noticed Fox wasn’t on the list, was told that they hadn’t asked and the crew said they needed to be included. Treasury called the White House and asked top Obama adviser Anita Dunn. Dunn said yes and Fox’s Major Garrett was among the correspondents to interview Feinberg last night.
Simple as that, we’re told, and the networks don’t want to be seen as heroes for Fox.
TPMDC spoke with a network bureau chief this afternoon familiar with the situation who was surprised that Fox was portraying the news as networks coming to its rescue."
http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=28678
Did you catch this part?….
"The network pool crew noticed Fox wasn’t on the list, was told that they hadn’t asked and the crew said they needed to be included."
More lies from FOX and their defenders.
And naturally, this is not what I said nor anyone's definition of what a news outlet is…
"….is a function of whether they are supportive of the President's policies."
average says….
"Bush or Cheney never complained about MSNBC or any of the millions of bloggers or other media outlets no matter how many lies they told or stories they made up or spun or how they tried to undermine the administration. They knew it was just hot air they were spewing."
You mean like this…
"on May 19, 2008, NBC aired a piece that morning which "seemed to blame all of the Middle East's problems on the President's policies."
Later that day, White House counsel Ed Gillespie sent a letter to NBC President Steve Capus accusing the network of deceptively editing answers Bush had given during his interview with Richard Engel "to give viewers the impression that he agreed with Engel's characterization of his remarks when he explicitly challenged it."
Or maybe this…
"The White House today accused NBC news of twisting George Bush's remarks on Iran and suggested that the television network had absorbed the bias of two of its star pundits."
Or, perhaps this…
"The reason that we sent the letter yesterday is because we had gotten fed up with the way that the President's policies are being mischaracterized, or the situations on the ground weren't being accurately reflected in the reporting. We had complained before. And it just reached a boiling point when things had boiled over when we believed that NBC News specifically edited out — intentionally edited out — something that the President said in response to a question in an interview regarding Iran, and that it mischaracterized the whole interview because of it.” ~White House press secretary Dana Perino May 20, 2008, press briefing
“And the same goes with the economy. When we got the numbers just two weeks ago on the GDP for the economic growth, it said that we had grown at 0.6 percent. And yet the anchor that night decided to disavow that number. We're just curious what part of the official government data that's been coming out for years do they not agree with. So we haven't had a response on that.” ~ White House press secretary Dana Perino under George Bush May 20, 2008, press briefing."
Is that what you mean when you say that Bush and Cheney never complained about MSNBC?
But average, my friend….you entered the psycho-babble arena here….
"I think Obama has a great character flaw. It comes from being abandoned by his mom and dad when he was young. He tends to associate with a rebelious crowd and suffers from esteem problems. Why would he let the media bother him so much?"
Been watching Oprah?
FOX is lying about the Obama administration, and has been since January….now other media outlets are getting punked by FOX into covering their outrageous lies and propaganda….the same vast right wing conspiracy that damaged Clinton is now back, on steroids….and is beling led by FOX.
All that is not "bothering" Obama….he simply felt it was time to state the very obvious….FOX is not a news outfit, but rather, an anti-Obama outlet. Nothing wrong with being an anti-Obama media outlet. That's a perfectly acceptable effort on FOX's part. Likewise, nothing wrong with Obama saying that FOX is an anti-Obama opinion media outlet.
FOX viewers may not like what Obama said…but really, turnabout is still fair play, isn't it?
Gee whiz, Reverend. Parroting the powers that be? You used to at least try to think for yourself.
It`s like Jon Stewart said, to paraphrase……"you lost, it`s supposed to taste like $hit"! Now it`s the GOP`s turn to cry. One observation though, under Bush it was Comedy Central with the man. Under the tsar Obama, the crticism has been mean spirited, vicious, and intense. The amount of scare tactics has been mind-boggling. No civility at all from many right wingers.
Rev,
Still waiting for an answer to my question. Is MSNBC a news organization ?
Yes, MSNBC is more a news organization than a partisan advocate. MSNBC is more "fair and balanced" in their lineup and coverage than FOX.
That would be funny if I weren't so sad about your sorry demise, Reverend. Wake up, man.
"Is the Reverand an independent thinker", is a batter question.
When…what am I saying?….IF, FOX hires a former Democratic liberal congressperson to co-host a daily three hour morning "news" program…..if that should ever happen, then I may take conservative complaints seriously.
But FOX won't do that,…..yet this fact remains….MSNBC employs a former Republican conservative congressperson, and he co-hosts a daily three hour "news" program.
Ipso-freaking-facto……MSNBC is more fair and balanced than FOX. FOX's only fair and balanced person, and I've given him credit in the past, is Shep Smith. His hourlong program has redeeming value. The rest…..is anti-Obama crap. FOX has the right to be an anti-Obama network, sponsoring wingnut parties and all, but as I've said many times already……in doing, FOX has chosen to not be a news organization. That's all Obama and White House officials are getting at.
Fred….exactly.
Quid…..how could I be an independent thinker with the many devils all up inside my head? I only write what the demons tell me to. I thought everyone knew that.
I will accept your premise that Fox has evolved from a news organization into a network which intent is to oppose Obama and the liberal agenda. I believe most of the hosts may be sincere in their efforts but I have no idea if the ownership is motivated by beliefs or ratings.
However to promote MSNBC as something different than Fox is sheer lunacy. I watch a little of MSNBC on a nightly basis to understand what "news" the left is promoting and what talking points to expect from the White House and the mainstream media in the coming days.
The difference I see is twofold. Fox spends more time presenting facts and figures in the macro while MSNBC spends more time reporting on the plight of indivudals and their suffering as rational for their viewpoint. Fox invites liberals to the shows with the intent of destroying their position and by association the individuals. MSNBC is less interested in presenting the opposing view and spends more time ridiculing,demeaning and destroying individuals. The most troubling part of this approach is that MSNBC is increasingly advancing the idea that these opposing views should not be allowed to be voiced.
It's also quite troubling that MSNBC is operating as an organ of those who are in power. Like the Reverend.
That's funny, larry.
In a well thought-out comment angry says..
"Fox spends more time presenting facts and figures in the macro while MSNBC spends more time reporting on the plight of indivudals and their suffering as rational for their viewpoint."
I might partially agree with that, except for the FOX promotions of Tea Parties and the 9-12 event. MSNBC does nothing similar to what FOX does in promoting anti-Obama activity. I would also point out that FOX, is selective on those "facts and figures", choosing to repeatedly air stories that seem to denigrate or diminish Obama and Democrats. The ACORN faux-sting thing is a prime example.
Furthermore, Maddow is the only true liberal on MSNBC…and often I've heard her explain how FOX….and even corporate propagandists, have every right to do what they do. That doesn't sound like MSNBC is actively seeking to stifle opposing voices.
Once again angry, thanks for the comment.
Rev, I painstakingly watched both for the past few days, their basic news seems to be done very well. It seems like the talk shows are the problem not the news reporting itself. The Morning Show is no different that Morning Joe was 2 years ago when Bush was in office, not one bit different. As far as the programs…Maddow and Olberman et al= Beck et al. The govt needs to quit crying about these people, ignor them and get over it. All of those shows are definitley biased with the FOX talk shows defintely trying to undermine the left, and MSNBC's people still bitching and blaming the Bush administration for the woes of the world. My question, how can anyone stand to watch either. On the basic news show where they have guests they both ask the hard questions to the opposing party favorites. MSNBC throws softballs to Libs. FOX throws hard balls to the Lib and vice versa. I see nothing wrong with making the politicians squirm by being asked the tough quetions. To me there are 2 answers shut both down and go with govt sponsored news only, or just recognize those shows as entertainment. The sad thing is people won't investigate to actually find the truth. Especially since all of the characters like Maddow and Beck add a great deal of truth and emotion to their stories.
Also, why are there going to be 16 to 25 million Americans still uncovered with both the house and senate versions of the healthcare bills? These are the questions we need answered. I have seen FOX asking both DEM and REP guests these questions. I have not seen MSNBC ask these questions. I have seen Jon Stewart ask this question to his guests.
Now there is a great solution—-let the government be in charge of the news—welcome to the world of Big Brother
You are kidding, correct? CNN has been a left-wing commentary haus, for years. Hence the moniker "Communist News Network". MSNBC? Not even REMOTELY credible. Hell, I would rather get my news from John Stewart(and yes, I know he is a Lib). This White House doesn't like criticism, so it will do what it needs to do to pull press credentials, stifling their critics. They must be taking cues from Chavez.
Not a problem, this White House is TOTALL irrelevant to me, and has no influence in my life.
That's an excellent point about the projected coverage number. And you're right, MSNBC, as far as I know, hasn't addressed that issue.
If the mandate is stronger, including more Americans, then it's going to cost more. I don't care about the cost in this situation….but Presidents Baucus and Snowe….well…they do care.
Here's what's happening: Corporate whore Democrats are doing their best to pass the worst bill…so it will eventually fail, giving opportunity to corporatists to make yet another faux-case that government effs stuff up. Shampoo. Rinse. Repeat. That's why the public option is so essential…and I would think conservatives would be for lower prices, but I guess that's only if, like, Wal-Mart is being talked about.
Also angry….we've let media turn into nothing but profit-centers. It's corrupt, rotted and worthy of the dumpster. And I know you know that. Until PBS an NPR became partially corrupted by corporate connections, they did excellent work. C-SPAN is an excellent project.
I mean, honestly, it's kind of embarassing, how our media behaves. Is America nothing but a bunch of carnival barkers?
Rev,
Let us assume that the Reps. control both houses and your buddy D. Chaney is
the Pres. You would have no problem allowing them to silence the evil corporate bastards and have the gov. in control of our information?
The answer– Chaney is part of the evil corp. cabal isnt acceptable.
angry…I don't want the evil corporate bastards silenced. Really, I don't. This is America.
However, "news" shouldn't be subject to capitalism. For-profit news-gathering and reporting is undemocratic. People may disagree about that, but I'm convinced of it.
Balkan….seriously, if you think CNN leans left, you really haven't been paying attention. Two words: Lou Dobbs.
This…
"This White House doesn't like criticism, so it will do what it needs to do to pull press credentials, stifling their critics. They must be taking cues from Chavez."
…may be what conservatives are hoping for, but Obama is much too smart to do something only authoritarian conservatives would do.
The White House said that FOX is not a news organization…..it's not. That's all there is to this story.
Keep repeating it, Reverend. Goebbels would be proud.
Not just a few clips it is what those at Fox are told to do by those in charge.
Orders comes from the top Rudolf Murdoch's and his empire he publishes 175 newspapers, including the New York Post and The Times of London, weekly standard and controls FOX News. Murdock controls what he owns with a tight fist. There is no partisan news when you work under Murdock. MURDOCH THE NEOCONSERVATIVE . And you are kidding yourself if you believe anything else. I know first hand since I have relatives who have worked in the newspaper business and have worked for the NY Post and have also worked for more "liberal" news medias as well.
this from the American Chronicale…….
"What shocked the researchers was the extent to which FOX NEWS viewers were mistaken. Those who relied on the FOX network for news were, "three times more likely than the next nearest network to hold misperceptions". In the audience for NPR/PBS, there was an overwhelming majority who did not have any misperceptions."
Back in 2003, while looking at the three misperceptions one at a time, people were asked, for example, if the U.S. had discovered the alleged stockpiles of WMD in Iraq since the war began. Just 11% of those who relied on daily newspapers as their "primary news source" incorrectly believed that U.S. forces had made such a discovery. Only slightly more, 17% of those who relied on NPR and PBS networks were wrong. Yet 33% of FOX NEWS viewers were wrong, far ahead of those who relied on any other outlet.
Likewise, when people were asked if the U.S. had "clear evidence that Saddam Hussein was working closely with al Qaeda," similar results were found. Only 16% of NPR and PBS listeners/viewers believed that the U.S. has such evidence, while 67% of FOX NEWS viewers were under that mistaken impression.
Overall, 80% of those who relied on FOX NEWS as their primary news source believed in at least one of the three misperceptions. The viewers/listeners/readers of other news outlets didn´t even come close to this total."
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/122813
Yes but 70 percent of NPR listeners don't know that Obama is a nefarious liar, walt. Each outlet has its pluses and minuses.
larry….that 70% figure….you get that from Fox News?
Thanks Andrea and walter…..for fleshing out even more proof of FOX's bias. Set aside FOX for a moment and simply read Murdoch's Wall Street Journal. What a conservative wingnut rag.
Like I've said…..I don't even think it's controversial to state that FOX is not a news organization.
Rev,
So MSNBC IS a news organization and Fox News ISN'T, according to you.
I have always marveled at how you think you can get away with these absurd pronouncements of yours. MSNBC and Fox News are two sides of the same political news coin, yet that doesn't keep you from attempting to convince us they are somehow different, that one is credible and the other is lying. You're hopeless, my friend. You've allowed your agenda to take priority over your brain. Sad.
It's not sad….at least I'm not sad.
FOX sponsors arch-conservative TeaParties. FOX promoted the Beck 9-12 event. FOX news is captained by Roger Ailes, a former Republican Party leader. FOX proudly calls itself the Obama opposition.
And MSBNC sponsors and promotes what partisan events? What is MSNBC doing with ultra-conservative Pat Buchanan bloviating daily? Why does MSNBC give 3 hours daily over to a former Republican congressman?
FOX stands alone as a non-news outlet. They admit they are an arm of the GOP which opposes Obama. What more proof do you need?
Give it up, Rev. If you can watch Olbermann, Maddow, Schultz, Matthews, and company throughout primetime, and then come up with the inane idea that MSNBC is NOT biased, then sad is exactly the right word for you.