About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Fox's news programs echo its "opinion" shows: Smears, doctored videos, GOP talking points

October 13, 2009 4:58 pm ET — 46 Comments

Fox News has responded to White House criticisms of its network by claiming that while its "editorial" programs are filled with "vibrant opinion," its news hours are straight and objective. However, Fox News' purportedly straight news programs echo its "editorial" programs: Media Matters for America has compiled a non-exhaustive list -- from this year alone -- documenting how Fox's news programming features smears, falsehoods, doctored and deceptive editing, and GOP talking points.

Fox News: Our news hours are objective

In response to criticism, Fox News claims its news hours are objective. The New York Times reported on October 11 that in response to White House criticism, Fox News claimed that its news hours -- which it reportedly defined as "9 a.m. to 4 p.m. and 6 to 8 p.m. on weekdays" are objective:

In an interview, Mr. [senior vice president for news Michael] Clemente suggested that there was an element of "shoot the messenger" in the back and forth. "Sometimes it's actually helpful to have an organization or a person that you can go up against for whatever reason," he said.

Fox argues that its news hours -- 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. and 6 to 8 p.m. on weekdays -- are objective. The channel has taken pains recently to highlight its news programs, including the two hours led by Shepard Smith, its chief news anchor. And its daytime newscasts draw more viewers than CNN or MSNBC's prime-time programs.

"The average consumer certainly knows the difference between the A section of the newspaper and the editorial page," Mr. Clemente said.

In a written statement provided to media outlets, Clemente compared Fox News' purportedly separate "news" and "opinion" programming to "the A-section of the newspaper and the editorial page":

An increasing number of viewers are relying on FOX News for both news and opinion. And the average news consumer can certainly distinguish between the A-section of the newspaper and the editorial page, which is what our programming represents. So, with all due respect to anyone who might still be confused about the difference between news reporting and vibrant opinion, my suggestion would be to talk about the stories and the facts, rather than attack the messenger...which over time, has never worked.

America's Newsroom (9-11 a.m. ET): Obama official never reported "statutory rape"; Dems "protect pedophiles"; tea parties recruitment

Hemmer advances smear that Jennings knew of "statutory rape" and "never reported it." During the October 1 edition of America's Newsroom, co-host Bill Hemmer joined his network's smears against Department of Education official Kevin Jennings by claiming that Jennings knew of a "statutory rape" case involving a student but "never reported it." In fact, as Media Matters has confirmed, the student in question was of legal age of consent at the time he was counseled by Jennings.

Kelly on Sotomayor comment: "sounds to a lot of people like reverse racism." On May 26, co-host Megyn Kelly joined conservative commentators such as Rush Limbaugh by stating that then-Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor's "wise Latina" remark "sounds to a lot of people like reverse racism, basically. Like she's saying that Latina judges are obviously better than white male judges, and that that's her assumption, and people get worried about putting a person like that on the U.S. Supreme Court." Kelly later added, "I've looked at the entire speech that she was offering to see if that was taken out of context, and I have to tell you ... it wasn't." In fact, Sotomayor was specifically discussing the importance of diversity in adjudicating race and sex discrimination cases; several conservative legal figures have made similar comments.

America's Newsroom falsehood: "House Dems vote to protect pedophiles, but not veterans." On May 6, America's Newsroom pushed the falsehood that Democrats attempted to "protect" pedophiles in voting in favor of the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Hemmer teased a segment by stating that Democrats had reportedly "voted to give special protection to pedophiles." During the segment, America's Newsroom ran on-screen text that read, "House Dems vote to protect pedophiles, but not veterans":

peds

Henneberg repeats right-wing myth that hate crimes bill could gag ministers. During the April 29 edition of America's Newsroom, correspondent Molly Henneberg repeated the right-wing myth that under the proposed Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, religious groups "may be prosecuted for their religious beliefs if they believe that homosexuality is a sin," and the disputed claim that the legislation "could gag ministers who preach that [homosexuality is a sin], or even if a church may not want to marry a gay couple."

Fox News' Hemmer "keeping track of the stimulus money" -- by lifting research from GOP website. On April 23, Hemmer repeatedly suggested information about four "interesting" projects reportedly funded by the recovery act was obtained through Fox News' own research, even though nearly all of the information Hemmer mentioned, as well as that included in on-screen text and graphics, first appeared on Rep. Eric Cantor's Republican Whip website.

America's Newsroom promotes tea party organizing info on-air and online. America's Newsroom encouraged viewers to get involved with April 15 "tea party" protests across the country, which Fox News had described as primarily a response to President Obama's fiscal policies. The program frequently hosted tea party organizers, and posted on-screen organizing information, such as protest dates and locations. America's Newsroom also repeatedly directed viewers to its website, which featured a list of tea party protests.

America's Newsroom directs viewers to "virtual tea party." America's Newsroom repeatedly directed viewers to participate in a "virtual tea party" at Fox News' purportedly non-biased website, Fox Nation. Hemmer told viewers, "Can't get to a tea party? Fox Nation hosts a virtual tea party," while Kelly said, "You can join the tea party action from your home if you go to the FoxNation.com ... a virtual tax day tea party."

America's Newsroom pushes discredited GOP calculation of Obama's cap-and-trade proposal. On April 2, guest host Alisyn Camerota asserted that the cost of Obama's cap-and-trade proposal "would be $3,100 per U.S. household." The claim was advanced by the House Republican Conference in a March 23 "Talking Points" press release, and the Republicans reportedly purported to back up the claim by pointing to a 2007 study by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). But MIT professor John Reilly, one of the authors of the study, has disputed the GOP's calculation, stating that his study "has been misrepresented" and that the Republicans' claim of an average household cost of $3,128 is "nearly 10 times the correct estimate" based on his study's cap-and-trade model. PolitiFact.com rated the $3,100 figure a "pants on fire" falsehood.

America's Newsroom falsely claimed Obama budget "4x bigger than Bush's costliest plan." On the April 3 edition of America's Newsroom, on-screen text falsely claimed that Obama's $3.6 trillion FY 2010 budget is "4x bigger than Bush's costliest plan." In fact, President Bush submitted a $3.1 trillion budget for FY 2009 and a $2.9 trillion budget for FY 2008.

America's Newsroom promotes McCaughey falsehood that stimulus would "hav[e] the government essentially dictate treatments." On February 10, Hemmer and Kelly promoted the falsehood -- which first appeared in a Bloomberg "commentary" by serial misinformer Betsy McCaughey and was subsequently promoted by Limbaugh and Matt Drudge -- that the economic recovery bill included a provision that would, in the words of guest Stephen Moore, a Wall Street Journal economics writer, "hav[e] the government essentially dictate treatments."

Happening Now (11 a.m.-1 p.m. ET): Home of repeated attempts to pass off GOP research as its own

Happening Now passes off GOP press release as its own research -- typo and all. During the February 10 edition of Happening Now, co-host Jon Scott purported to "take a look back" at how the economic recovery plan "grew, and grew, and grew." In doing so, Scott referenced seven dates, as on-screen graphics cited various news sources from those time periods -- all of which came directly from a Senate Republican Communications Center press release. A Fox News on-screen graphic even reproduced a typo contained in the Republican press release. The following day, Scott apologized -- for running the typo. Scott's apology was criticized by Washington Post media critic and CNN host Howard Kurtz, who said: "We sometimes jab at the pundits for using talking points, but in the case of Fox News anchor Jon Scott, it was literally true this week. ... You should be apologizing for using partisan propaganda from the GOP without telling your viewers where it came from. Talk about missing the point."

Happening Now posts "FOXfact[s]" about GOP budget nearly identical to GOP Rep. Ryan's op-ed. During two segments on the April 1, Happening Now aired "FOXfact[s]" purporting to describe facts about the House Republican budget. However, all of the seven "FOXfact[s]" displayed onscreen were nearly identical to portions of an op-ed by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) published in that day's Wall Street Journal.

Happening Now crops clips of Obama to promote "another apology tour." On June 2, Scott asked if "the president's upcoming trip [to Europe and the Middle East will] be what conservatives might call another apology tour," and both Scott and co-host Jane Skinner aired cropped clips of Obama's remarks from an April 3 speech in France to falsely suggest that Obama only criticized the United States. In doing so, Happening Now joined conservative commentators and Fox News hosts who have cropped or misrepresented Obama's overseas remarks to falsely suggest, in the words of host Sean Hannity, that Obama was "blam[ing] America first" and, more broadly, that Obama's earlier overseas trip constituted an "apology tour."

Live Desk (1-3 p.m. ET): Falsehoods, deceptive editing

Fox News presents deceptively cropped six-month-old Biden clip as new. On March 16, Live Desk co-host Martha MacCallum claimed that "after weeks of economic doom and gloom, the Obama administration is now singing a slightly different tune. Take a look at what was said in recent interviews this weekend." Live Desk then aired clips of administration officials purportedly giving an optimistic view of the economy, which included video of Vice President Joe Biden stating, "The fundamentals of the economy are strong." However, Biden did not make those remarks during an "interview" that weekend; he made them at a September 2008 campaign event in which he criticized statements by Sen. John McCain. MacCallum apologized the next day.

Fox's Camerota pushes bogus stat that cap-and-trade would cost "every American family $1,761 annually." On September 30, guest co-host Alisyn Camerota pushed the bogus stat that cap-and-trade would cost "every American family $1,761 annually." PolitiFact.com has labeled the statistic false and noted that the talking point has been pushed by Republicans.

Jarrett suggests DOJ "thinks it's OK to intimidate white people, not OK to intimidate black people at the polls." On July 30, guest co-host Gregg Jarrett suggested that the Obama Department of Justice "thinks it's OK to intimidate white people, not OK to intimidate black people at the polls."

Live Desk: "Dems and Unions Push to Kill Workers' Right to Secret Ballot." During a report on the Employee Free Choice Act on the March 11 edition of The Live Desk, Fox aired a chyron stating, "Dems and Unions Push to Kill Workers' Right to Secret Ballot." In fact, the legislation would not eliminate employees' right to a secret ballot; as The New York Times reported, "Business groups have attacked the legislation because it would take away employers' right to insist on holding a secret-ballot election to determine whether workers favored unionization" [emphasis added]. Indeed, as The Christian Science Monitor has noted, "[t]he proposed law gives workers a choice of forming a union through majority sign-up ('card check') or an election by secret ballot."

fox3

MacCallum agrees with Bachmann's claim that Obama's proposals are a "lurch toward socialism." On March 24, MacCallum responded to Rep. Michele Bachmann's (R-MN) claim that Obama proposals are a "lurch toward socialism" by stating: "I think you're absolutely right about that."

"Democrat" Mark Sanford. While airing live footage of a press conference by South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, Live Desk incorrectly identified the Republican as a Democrat. Gallagher later apologized for the error.

Special Report (6-7 p.m. ET): Video doctoring, cropped quotes, smears of Obama officials, falsehoods

Baier smears Jennings as failing to report "sexual abuse." On October 1, host Bret Baier joined Fox News' witch hunt against Jennings, claiming that "Education Secretary Arne Duncan is standing behind his so-called safe schools czar after revelations that Kevin Jennings did not report a case of sexual abuse he encountered as a schoolteacher."

Wilson: Jennings "admitted" that "he failed to alert authorities when a 15-year-old boy told him he was involved in a sexual relationship with an older man." On October 6, correspondent Brian Wilson stated: "School safety czar Kevin Jennings is currently under fire because he admitted that in 1988, when he was a high school teacher, he failed to alert authorities when a 15-year-old boy told him he was involved in a sexual relationship with an older man. One member of the House believes Jennings would not have his current job if czars were required to face Senate confirmation hearings." Wilson repeated the 15-year old age claim even though FoxNews.com previously acknowledged that the student was of legal age -- 16 years old -- at the time.

Video doctoring: Goler reverses meaning of Obama quote to falsely suggest he supports European-style health care. On April 24, White House correspondent Wendell Goler cropped a comment by Obama and took it out of context -- effectively reversing the statement's meaning -- to falsely suggest that Obama supports creating a health care system "like the European countries." Goler claimed that Obama "doesn't want to do it halfway" on health care, and then aired a clip from a March 26 online town hall event of Obama saying, "If you're going to fix it, why not do a universal health-care system like the European countries?" Following the clip, Goler reported: "His critics worry universal health care would mean government-run health care." In fact, Obama actually said, "Now, the question is, if you're going to fix it, why not do a universal health-care system like the European countries?" [emphasis added] In doing so, Obama was paraphrasing the town hall question he had been asked -- "Why can we not have a universal health-care system, like many European countries, where people are treated based on needs rather than financial resources?" -- before explaining why he opposed such a system.

Fox's Garrett deceptively cropped Obama remark on judicial role. On May 1, saying it was a "description of how the president hopes his nominee will interpret the law," congressional correspondent Major Garrett aired a clip in which Obama stated: "I view that quality of empathy, of understanding and identifying with people's hopes and struggles, as an essential ingredient for arriving at just decisions and outcomes." Garrett then said: "That aggravates those who believe justices should follow the Constitution and legislative intent." But Garrett omitted Obama's very next sentence, in which he stated: "I will seek somebody who is dedicated to the rule of law, who honors our constitutional traditions, who respects the integrity of the judicial process and the appropriate limits of the judicial role."

Rosen: "Rats could attack us in the sewers and court systems if all of Cass Sunstein's writings became law." On September 9, reporter James Rosen joined Glenn Beck's "czars" witch hunt by distorting Obama administration official Cass Sunstein's writings about organ donation and animal rights.

Special Report packs in health care falsehoods. In an August 24 report on how, in the words of Baier, "Republicans are trying to position themselves as the party looking out for seniors' well-being," Rosen advanced the conservative talking point that Democrats plan to cut Medicare benefits for seniors and presented the widely debunked "death panel" falsehood as a he said/she said. Rosen also advanced the smear that Veterans Health Administration officials are referring veterans to a booklet that encourages them to end their lives prematurely.

Baier falsely suggests Obama has cited Canada as possible health reform model. On June 29, Baier falsely suggested that Obama has cited Canada's medical system as a "possible model" for his health care reform plan. In fact, Obama has explicitly rejected a Canadian-style health care system.

Special Report falsely suggests activism question deleted from questionnaire for Sotomayor. A June 4 report by legal correspondent Shannon Bream falsely suggested that Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) eliminated a question on judicial activism from the questionnaire for Sonia Sotomayor's Supreme Court nomination. In fact, Leahy reportedly removed the question in 2007 pursuant to a bipartisan agreement. The following day, Baier corrected Bream's report by acknowledging that the question was deleted "long before Sotomayor was picked for the high court."

Fox News Sunday: "Death book," health care misinformation

"Death book" distortions abound on Fox News Sunday. On the August 23 edition of Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace hosted former Bush administration aide Jim Towey to discuss his Wall Street Journal op-ed, "The Death Book for Veterans," and in doing so promoted numerous distortions about an end-of-life educational booklet used by the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). In addition to forwarding the smear that the booklet is a "death book," Wallace promoted Towey's distortion that the booklet encourages veterans to "pull the plug" -- it doesn't; Wallace and Towey both suggested that the Bush administration suspended use of the booklet -- it didn't; and Wallace claimed that a VHA document requires doctors to direct veterans to the booklet -- it doesn't.

Wallace revives rationing bogeyman. On August 16, Wallace repeatedly advanced the conservative talking point that Democrats' health care reform proposals would create a system of rationing care, omitting the fact that rationing already happens under the current system. Indeed, Wallace did not acknowledge that rationing already occurs, even after his guest, American Medical Association president J. James Rohack, said, "[T]here's a myth that rationing doesn't occur right now. ... That's why this bill's important. It gets rid of some of the rationing that's occurring right now."

Wallace claimed Holder, confirmed 75-21, "got into office by the skin of his teeth." On February 22, Wallace claimed that Attorney General Eric Holder "got into office by the skin of his teeth." However, Holder was confirmed by the Senate in a 75-21 vote, and the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 17-2 in favor of reporting his nomination to the full Senate.

Wallace on Obama: "pettiness," "childishness"; Obama admin. "biggest bunch of crybabies." Wallace has claimed Obama did not appear on his show because of "pettiness" and "childishness," and has called the Obama administration the "biggest bunch of crybabies I have dealt with in my 30 years in Washington."

Fox News opinion programs don't just have "vibrant opinion" -- they frequently smear Obama administration

Fox News "opinion" programs frequently smear Obama administration with falsehoods. In defending its programming, Fox News has repeatedly pushed the argument that critics are targeting the network for the "vibrant opinion" expressed on shows such as Glenn Beck and Hannity. However, Fox News' "opinion" programs don't simply have a "vibrant opinion" about the Obama administration -- they frequently smear the Obama administration with falsehoods. Fox News' pattern of smearing the Obama administration follows the network's prevalent pattern of smears and misinformation -- on both the network's purported straight news hours and its "opinion" shows -- during the 2008 political campaign.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by Bad News (October 13, 2009 5:09 pm ET)
      6 3
      News Corp. "A Racist Enterprise"
      They compared Obama to a Chimpanzee, but they did Apologize.
      They accused Obama of belonging to a Madrassa while chanting "This is Huge"
      Leaving me with no choice but to compare Fox & Friends to that of a 1st, 2nd & 3rd Stooge.

      Speak truth to power.


      Mr. News
      Report Abuse
      • Author by quantpro (October 14, 2009 1:30 pm ET)
        2 8
        You can say that but I never heard the smears you are accusing Fox of making. You should just stick to the facts yourself.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by WildcatProgressive (October 15, 2009 8:46 am ET)
          5  
          The poster referred specifically to News Corp, which includes the fine newspaper, The New York Post. (That's the paper you don't even line bird cages with for fear of offending bird dung.) The Post ran a cartoon that did, in fact, compare President Obama to a chimp. A dead chimp, having been shot by police officers. So I guess you could say News Corp also smears cops. Why do you hate cops, Rupert?
          Report Abuse
      • Author by stevensm (October 14, 2009 1:43 pm ET)
        6  
        Speaking of F&F, I noticed it was not included in MM's list of daytime Fox shows that smear the Obama White House. They smear, lie and, as Bush would say, catapult the propaganda as the 3 hosts and most guests are pro-GOP in the way they frame nearly everything.

        Is that because F&F is not considered a news program but an opinion program instead? Lord knows they have more opinion than news but I always thought that FOX classified F&F as news programming.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by rkcomments (October 14, 2009 2:50 pm ET)
        6  
        Fox News will be around as long as we have hypocritical 'family values' conservatives in our country.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by pros2pros2940 (October 13, 2009 5:47 pm ET)
      15 1
      Regardless of how Fox wants to spin it, Murdoch/Ailes have no intention of changing their ideology or anything else for that matter. I don't trust a single person on their network.

      They've decided that being corporate whores is better than being an actual news organization.

      It is basically a network for the uninformed & gullible.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by ScienceBuff (October 13, 2009 7:45 pm ET)
        6 1
        I'd go a step further. I think they absolutely delight in the lies and smears they create. Their biggest thrill is hearing them echoed around the media and by their blind followers. One would hope that they'll cross a line that will destroy their credibility among the average people, but right now they haven't found that line. For now we'll have to be satisfied that they have no credibility with honest, informed people.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by E_Joyce (October 14, 2009 6:37 pm ET)
        1  
        Until the FCC does its job and requires ALL news networks, including cable,radio and ALL news programs to broadcast facts only, unless they clearly define themselves or the show as a commentator show therefore not required to use facts or tell the truth, Fox News, Rush, et al, will continue to be unethical arbiters of lies and lies by omission.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by NoSpinner (October 13, 2009 5:57 pm ET)
      6  
      This one by Megyn Kelly is classic:
      Latest Stimulus Lie: Harry Reid ‘Is Committed To’ A ‘Red Light Express’ To Nevada Brothel

      See also "Watch How Fox News Does It (How They Lie)" from Daily Kos regarding the same story.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Conchobhar (October 14, 2009 12:26 am ET)
        1  
        Great get from Kos, NoSpinner. Thanks.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by NoSpinner (October 14, 2009 10:34 am ET)
          3  
          Fox News has "disappeared" the Think Progress video from YouTube, but I discovered it from Media Matters website.
          Here it is:
          Fox News will find any excuse to run photos of scantily-clad women.

          It is sickening to seek Megyn Kelly push THIS ABSOLUTE LIE that Reid wanted to build a railroad from Disneyland to a brothel in Nevada. The Moonlight Bunny Ranch is nowhere near Las Vegas, it's hundreds of miles north near Carson City.

          Watch the video. It's beyond shocking...
          Report Abuse
          • Author by NoSpinner (October 14, 2009 11:02 am ET)
            2  
            The railroad that Reid wanted a few million dollars for (not billions of dollars) was a small tourist railroad: The Virginia and Truckee Railroad.
            This would be a family-friendly excursion between Virginia City and Carson City.
            Of course the congressman in the video knew that Megyn was confusing two railroads (high-speed rail between Disneyland and Las Vegas, and this small tourist railroad in Northern Nevada), he didn't do anything to clear it up.
            It is also interesting to see how Fox News has scrubbed this video off YouTube.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by jflash97 (October 13, 2009 6:06 pm ET)
      3 2
      I don't recall exactly what circumstances prompted the WWE (then the WWF) to re-brand themselves as "Sports Entertainment" so as not to be confused with a real sport, but it seems Fox is coming closer and closer to a WWE moment. If legitimate news organizations and watchdog groups keep applying pressure, it seems that Fox is going to be forced to re-brand themselves as "News Entertainment."
      Report Abuse
      • Author by wzwriter (October 14, 2009 12:56 pm ET)
        3  
        I don't recall exactly what circumstances prompted the WWE (then the WWF) to re-brand themselves as "Sports Entertainment" so as not to be confused with a real sport...

        They had to re-brand themselves because their original name was an infringment on the copyright held by the World Wildlife Federation (WWF).

        [http://images2.layoutsparks.com/1/244955/wwf-panda-bear-animal.jpg]
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Conchobhar (October 13, 2009 10:24 pm ET)
      7 1
      Even if I liked Fux News I wouldn't watch a program styling itself, "America's Newsroom." I'm also, offended, while I'm at it, by any team calling itself "America's Team," unless they're representing us in international competition.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by joseph_b26 (October 14, 2009 8:32 am ET)
      3 5
      Fox News Is One Among Few On My List

      MSNBC, with Chris Mathews, has got to be on the same list as Fox News. Although they may be a little more into journalistic correctness, on a daily basis they, MSNBC news shows, attack Barack Obama all day long.

      The worse of them all has got to be Mathews. He starts his show with a legitimate topic concerning Obama, but will turn his topic into a negative analysis. His style of hosting his show often does not allow for anyone to give a complete opinion or counter to his negative analysis of Obama.

      MSNBC's most damaging practice is to frame everything Obama does in a negative light. This was done when Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. On the surface, this looks harmless, but if this goes on throughout his Obama's presidency, it will damage his chances for a second term.

      Joseph
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Ruby (October 14, 2009 12:04 pm ET)
        3 1
        It is not MSNBC's job to be Obama cheerleaders.

        Anyone on any news network should be free to provide any kind of analysis of Obama's policies, whether positive or negative. As long as they rely on facts to inform that analysis, and do not engage in spreading lies, rumors, and smears, then that's perfectly fine by me, and surely by MMfA.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by latichever (October 14, 2009 9:14 am ET)
      7 1
      They also regularly point to Greta's show as one anchored by a liberal who supports Obama.

      But the show does not support this. She regularly has Karl Rove and Stephen Moore to trash Obama, and nods in agreement. Anyone watching her show will get the same message as Hannity, Beck, and O'Reilly.

      What do you expect from the daughter of Joe McCarthy's campaign manager?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Sks1 (October 14, 2009 9:42 am ET)
      5 1
      i dont know why fox continues to try and hide behind this obvious blantanty biased programing and tries to call it news... they're so transparent its not even funny anymore.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by quantpro (October 14, 2009 1:29 pm ET)
        1 4
        That's not what their viewers think. That's why they have the highest ratings.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by political_left-religious_right (October 14, 2009 2:04 pm ET)
          2 1
          their viewers think

          Whoops. Your first big mistake.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by WildcatProgressive (October 15, 2009 12:15 pm ET)
          3  
          American Idol has the most viewers; I guess it must be the best show on television. McDonald's sells the most food; it must be the best restaurant. Milli Vanilli sold millions of records; they must be sensational singers. Al Gore got more votes than George Bush; he must have been ... oh, wait a minute ...
          Report Abuse
    • Author by Samurai Cowboy (October 14, 2009 10:13 am ET)
      4 1
      Fox News Channel need to be shut down I am in the process of drafting a letter to Rupert Murdoch. I want to tell him about how his lies and propaganda have brainwashed an 85 year old woman who suffers from Dementia. This woman absolutely hates President Obama, and wishes him dead, even though President Obama has done nothing to her personally. She believes the Glenn Beck is the most truthful man on earth, with the exception of God. I have tried to prove to her that every thing that Fox broadcasts is a proven lie. She brought up the Birthers and the “sing praises to Obama” crap. She talked about the kindergarten student who was suspended for carrying a cub scout knife to school, and said the the school never had that policy until Obama came into office. Of course she heard the last part on Fox, wish was an outright lie. Fox News needs to be stopped before someone gets killed. Oh, wait. That all ready happened. An Abortion Doctor was killed on O'Reilly's orders.


      Report Abuse
    • Author by Welfare-Warfare State (October 14, 2009 11:06 am ET)
      2 9
      FoxNews' programs are slanted to the right, but you don't think CBS,MSNBC,CNN,ABC, AND NBC'S "hard" news programs somehow aren't. Give me a break. Roger Ailes took up the banner of 'Fair and Balanced' to tweek the lefties at the other major news outlets in retaliation for their claims of objectivity. The collectivist news networks at CNN, ABC, NBC, and CBS have claimed ludicrously for decades that their news programs don't have a socialistic tinge. Anyone with eyes, ears and two active brain cells knows this to be absurd. Why don't you guys stop whining about the one network that advocates something close to a free market and watchand read your socialist pablum spoon-fed to you by the other news outlets?
      We classical liberals-not to be confused with the knuckle-dragging collectivists who mistakenly call themselves modern liberals, don't have even one major news network or large newspaper to call our own, but, yet, we don't whine incessantly about it. We get our message out anyway. You guys have a near monopoly, but you still have this myopic hatred towards any news source that dairs deviate from collectivist orthodoxy. I can only imagine the state of your minds if someday the majority of the networks were classically liberal(libertarian) or conservative. Your socialist brains would explode, no doubt. You guys should relax and enjoy your near monopoly in the dissemination of news.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by IowaDem (October 14, 2009 12:24 pm ET)
        8 1
        Anyone with eyes, ears and two active brain cells knows that you do not have any brain cells if you belive anything you just said. "Advocates a free market"? What does that even mean? Are you saying that Fox "news" is a product of a free market (if there's a market for lies, then I guess they have the "monopoloy" on that too) or that they advocate FOR a free market econommic paradigm? Or both?
        "Classical liberls"? Don't try to co opt the word Liberal and create try to create some kind of equivalency because Libertarians and liberals have now and always have had major differences in beliefs, while having the same Latin root for their names.
        And what do you mean "call you own" Again, do you need a tv channel to feed you proven lies and misleading stories in order to feed your misguided ideas of fair? Why would anyone want to be fed lies? Why do you want to be told things that are not true? I just don't get that. Facts are facts and reality is reality, just because it doesn't fit your libertarian world-view doesn't mean it isn't true. And just because Fox "news" says something from your point of view using lies to justify what you WANT to believe, doesn't make it true?!
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Welfare-Warfare State (October 14, 2009 1:00 pm ET)
          2 3
          I didn't say they were a product of a free market, though they are. I said they were, for the most part, an advocate of a free market system. Earth to lemming: the other networks are selling collectivism. Does this compute? By the way, a free market is nothing more than a matrix of individual transactions made by consenting individuals. Whether the individual is acting in the role of the buyer or seller; employer or employee is irrelevant. A free market requires consent and volitional choice in comparison collectivism's coercion and force. It is the absence of force. It is naturally occurring and is not the product of central planning. It's the only, to use an overused word of the left, organic system. All branches of economic collectivism (communism, socialism, fascism, our mixed economy) are a reaction to the hatred for free markets. They are artificial and inherently anti-individual at their core.
          You don't even know what a free market is because you are just another product of our glorious government schools. You lack the inate intelligence to even question the mindless civics book platitudes spoon-fed to you as a child that you, doubtlessly, parrot back to others like some brain-dead, slogan chanting moonie. I've spoken with enough collectivist drones to spot one a mile away. If you are going to reject classical liberalism and free markets you should, at least, read some of the great advocates for liberty and free markets of the last 300 years.
          Start with Adam Smith, J.S. Mill, Bastiat,and Say. Then you can read some of the great 20th century classical liberals like Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, Friedman, Rand, and Sowell. Perhaps, after have read some of these intellectuals, we'll be able to have a conversation as equals.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by IowaDem (October 14, 2009 1:25 pm ET)
            5 1
            Besides having a BA in Economics and an MBA, I have a passing understanding with free market capitalism in my line of work, but in any case, You say that other networks sell "collectivism", do you have any examples or proof of this assertion or is this simply an opinion based on your superficial, dictionarial understanding of economics?
            I never said I "reject" classical liberalism. I said that you were trying to say you were somehow a better, cleaner, or more rational "liberal" simply because you co-opt the term liberal by calling libratarianism, "classical liberalism". You are trying to conflate two separate and distinct meanings for the base Latin root of the term. Much like some folks like to claim that the Nazi's were "socialist" because the party was named "National Socialists" when they clearly were facist. You are no liberal in the common use of the term
            Calling Rand a liberal is laughable and your trotting out of a long list of writers, philosophers, and self-described economists impresses no one.
            Look, Fox "news" is right-wing, you admit as much by calling a network of "your own". A hard right libratarian. Whether or not other networks are "socialistic" is irrelevant to the discussion here. No one here is discussing CNN, MSNBC or any of the other wetworks. This is a discussion of Fox "news". Your adolescent whining and name-calling have shown all who read these posts who and what you are. I don't even need to spell it out for them because most of the regular readers here (rather than the trolls) have above average intelligence and the ability to reason without resorting to finger-pointing and name-calling.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by congero6189599 (October 14, 2009 1:52 pm ET)
              1  
              Thank You ! :-)
              Report Abuse
            • Author by Welfare-Warfare State (October 14, 2009 5:35 pm ET)
                2
              I didn't call Rand a liberal. i properly identified her as a classiscal liberal. Are you so uneducated as to assert that they are the same? Classical liberalism starts with the concept of the autonomous individual. The classical liberals were greatly concerned with the private property rights of the individual.
              In sharp contrast, we have the modern liberal. The statists at the turn of the century hijacked the term liberal as their own and turned its original meaning on its head in regard to the proper role of governmnent. They favored(and still favor) making law based on the concept of the collective. Modern liberalism is a statist ideology hostile to the concept of the individual. These people called themselves progressives for a time. I hope they abandon the term liberal again. They don't deserve the word.
              Fascism was a collectivist ideology, too. By the way.
              Report Abuse
            • Author by sleepy joe (October 14, 2009 5:53 pm ET)
                 
              Beautuful. Well put.
              Report Abuse
          • Author by Old_Benjamin (October 14, 2009 3:24 pm ET)
            3  
            Start with Adam Smith...
            -WWS

            Yes - start with that great Scotsman. He had much to say about such matters. Like...

            "Our merchants and master-manufacturers complain much of the bad effects of high wages in raising the price of their goods both at home and abroad. They say nothing concerning the bad effects of high profits. They are silent and regard to the pernicious effects of their own gains. They complain only of those of other people.

            "The interest of the dealers in any particular branch and trade or manufactures, is always in some respects different from and even opposite to, that of the public."

            http://www.heraldscotland.com/adam-smith-the-father-of-capitalism-and-one-of-its-fiercest-critics-1.834114
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Welfare-Warfare State (October 14, 2009 6:33 pm ET)
                 
              I suspect you haven't read Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations or his Moral Sentiments, either. You just grabbed a quote from the internet or some book you read. That's my guess. The quote was actually accurate and not taken out of context amazingly. I don't disagree with a word of it. Businessmen do act in their own self-interest as do employees and consumers. They are disciplined by a market though. They can't charge whatever they want or pay whatever they wish to their employees. That there is fraud and corruption among businessmen isn't a justification to do away with markets. The proper way to handle fraud(which is a type of force) is with fraud laws. When a businessman attepts to offer wages below market levels he is punished with less skilled workers. When he puts a shoddy product on the market he gets a bad reputation eventually and loses market share.
              Contrast that with what happens when government fails to deliver good services. They are rewarded with even more money and power with which to use inefficiently. There is no means for the individual to go anywhere else because government is monopoly. The only real monopolies that have lasted for any lenght of time were made monopolies by government decree or as a result of government grant, favor, or subsidy. The closest thing that capitalism has produced to a monopoly was ALCOA Aluminum. Even then people had recourse to other metals and that's what many chose to do.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Old_Benjamin (October 14, 2009 6:44 pm ET)
                1  
                And you believe that nonsense? And who said anything about "doing away with markets"? I sure didn't. But you free market fanatics forget that there needs to be oversight of them and that's what Adam Smith was referring to.

                And I love when you folks throw out the term "government schools". It just shows what you think - there is no such thing as the commons and it's every person for themselves.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by Tbone Slickens (October 14, 2009 9:50 pm ET)
                  1  
                  Smith saw an important role for a strong national government only as was necessary to provide a strong national defense, a system of justice for individual rights (especially property rights), and to help spread the costs of of public works and infrastructure.

                  After that he saw ANY other form of government interference as having consequences. History has provided a long list of governments and rulers adjusting their nations economic enterprises with disastrous results. To Smith this was more than a theory, it was a history lesson. Smith:

                  All systems either of preference or of restraint, therefore being thus completely taken away, the obvious and simple system of natural liberty establishes itself of its own accord. Every man, as long as he does not violate the laws of justice, is left perfectly free to pursue his own interest his own way...The sovereign is completely discharged from a duty, in the attempting to perform which he must always be exposed to innumerable delusions, and for the proper performance of which no human wisdom or knowledge could ever be sufficient; the duty of superintending the industry of private people, and of directing it towards the employments most suitable to the interests of society
                  Report Abuse
            • Author by Tbone Slickens (October 14, 2009 9:34 pm ET)
              1  
              A paradox my kinsman Smith. He also said:

              "The answer is division of labor, "so great a quantity of everything is produced, that there is enough both to gratify the slothful and oppressive profusion of the great, and at the same time abundantly to supply the wants of the artisan and the peasant". Better to be a poor man in a rich country than a rich man in a poor one.

              Smith saw this lesson come to fruition in the Highlands and later in America by the waves of immigrants so ready to give up homes and family in their countries to work menial jobs in the new world.
              Report Abuse
    • Author by YngDodger (October 14, 2009 12:22 pm ET)
      4 3
      After I found out, the attorneys for Fox, owned by media baron Rupert Murdoch, successfully argued the First Amendment gives broadcasters the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on the public airwaves, I almost blocked the entire channel. I think it's disgustingly unethical and NOT in the "public interest" as regulated by FCC policy.

      Look it up. Fox won in court on February 14, 2003 in a Florida Appeals court, that there is absolutely nothing illegal about lying, concealing or distorting information by a major press organization.

      I know all news organizations do it now, but Fox definitely leads the pack up there with MSNBC - which I don't watch either - far too liberal a slant. I pretty much stick to CNN/BBC/and more responsible NEWS (not propaganda and lies). Just my opinion.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by quantpro (October 14, 2009 1:19 pm ET)
      1 3
      This is just another way to attack the messenger. If you disagree with the facts state your disagreement and then prove it. Fox News proves their news to me but then I'm listening with an open mind.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by congero6189599 (October 14, 2009 1:57 pm ET)
        1  
        Look it up. Fox won in court on February 14, 2003 in a Florida Appeals court, that there is absolutely nothing illegal about lying, concealing or distorting information by a major press organization.----yng Dodger


        After reading that Fox fought and won for the right to lie you could post your statement. All I have to say to that is some people like to be fools. No mind is more apt to you quan.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by nofox (October 14, 2009 10:49 pm ET)
         
      Let's not kid ourselves, the barking fox monkeys are not interested in "fair and balanced". These pseudo-patriotic hypocrites want a one party, authoritarian, totalitarian America where disent is prohibited. The Barackophobics at faux spin out fear, hate and lies in their attempt to win over the weak and gullible. God help us if they win.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by captainhendry4927 (October 15, 2009 4:00 am ET)
      1  
      Sotomayor was specifically discussing the importance of diversity in adjudicating race and sex discrimination cases


      This claim has been repeated ad infinitum, but it's still not true. I've gone through this speech line by line. That's not what she was saying. She was discussing the definition of wisdom itself. The speech was about how appointing more minorities to the courts would change the law and "society" at large in unpredictable ways. She suggested the practice of law itself might change. Hers was not a narrow statement about race or sexual discrimination cases. She used a few such cases as examples, but she also used examples that were not race or sex based cases and which demonstrate her comments were to be taken broadly.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by quantpro (October 15, 2009 9:04 am ET)
        2
      Why object to Fox news bias and accept the bias of the other networks? That seems rather partisan and slanted to me. We''ll have to watch the ratings and see which bias is currently more popular. I seem to recall Fox news attacking the previous administration om many key issues. So they have a more balanced bias then then CNN and NBC in my view. I can see why Fox news is watched more even by my more radical friends.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by diogenie27611 (October 15, 2009 10:14 am ET)
        1  
        "Why object to Fox news bias and accept the bias of the other networks?"
        It's not the bias its the lies.

        "That seems rather partisan and slanted to me."
        MMfA makes no claim to be unbiased onyl claims of truthfulness unlike Fox News which claims a lack of bias and routinely lies.

        "We'll have to watch the ratings and see which bias is currently more popular."
        Band Wagon fallacy... otherwise known as 'ad populum'.

        "I seem to recall Fox news attacking the previous administration om many key issues."
        Yet you do not provide any examples of when Fox News questioned Bush's judgment particularly prior to 2004 when it might have mattered.

        "So they have a more balanced bias then then CNN and NBC in my view."
        Clinton was attacked mercilessly by CNN and NBC who covered affairs and manufactured scandals more than they covered actual policy decisions.

        "I can see why Fox news is watched more even by my more radical friends."
        I assume you mean right wing radicval friends otherwise this is a highly dubious claim.


        Wow! 6 sentences, 0 truth, 0 logic.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by freeman888 (October 15, 2009 8:31 pm ET)
      1  
      After watching only 10 mins of fox, it's possible to hear several lies, smears and downright partisan comments. How anyone with even half-a-brain could think fox is anything other than a reich-wing propaganda site makes me wonder for that person's sanity.

      I remember when NEWS programs actually reported real NEWS. However, THAT kinda programing is a thing of the distant past. What we get today is propaganda, no matter the channel you watch.
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.