bascule Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 I think this is really central to the debate surrounding Fox News. Several people are suggesting that there is no need to distinguish Fox News from other TV news organizations like ABC News, MSNBC, CNN, etc. Members of ABC News, for example, have argued that Fox News should be considered a news organization and given the same access to the White House as any other news organization. Others think Fox News cannot be considered a news organization. What do you think?
Mr Skeptic Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 I thought it supposedly had a news section but was largely commentary/opinion? Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedHm, here's a few links that might be relevant: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel#Programming A large portion of the programming is not described as news. I haven't watched them, so I have no idea. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel_controversies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outfoxed:_Rupert_Murdoch%27s_War_on_Journalism 1
iNow Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel_controversies Wow... That was a particularly robust one. Nice finds, Mr.S.
Mr Skeptic Posted October 27, 2009 Posted October 27, 2009 I think the bit on photo manipulation says it best. Not silly the poodle one, the ones modifying people's faces to look worse. And not just picking an unflattering picture, but actually modifying it. Maybe they accidentally photoshopped his hairline back? Not!
bascule Posted October 27, 2009 Author Posted October 27, 2009 There's also their recurring problem with mislabeling misbehaving Republicans as Democrats
swansont Posted October 27, 2009 Posted October 27, 2009 Fox : News :: Velveeta : Cheese i.e. Fox is a "news-like, processed information" organization 1
SH3RL0CK Posted October 27, 2009 Posted October 27, 2009 I think this is really central to the debate surrounding Fox News. Several people are suggesting that there is no need to distinguish Fox News from other TV news organizations like ABC News, MSNBC, CNN, etc. Members of ABC News, for example, have argued that Fox News should be considered a news organization and given the same access to the White House as any other news organization. Others think Fox News cannot be considered a news organization. What do you think? FOX itself claims to be a news organization and they at least go through the motions that would be expected from a typical News organization. They also have a rather large audience opf viewers most of whom I am sure would say FOX is a news organization. Therefore they have to be called a news organization (and why I voted yes). The fact that they often get the news wrong (whether by mistake or intentionally), provide opinion instead of actual news, and have a clear bias pushing their agenda is besides the point because this is the case for all American (and almost all worldwide) news organizations today. I can find many examples of any American news organization doing exactly the same thing FOX is accused of doing. Frankly, they are all terrible and I really think I could train monkeys to do a better job. This appears to me to be nothing more than an attempt by the whitehouse to control the media (by excluding any opposing views) and Obama is (or should be) better than this. If he can't take criticism (even libel and slander) from a news organization, he should not have run for President. Obama's best move would have been to let FOX slander him, but clearly point out their bias and how they are wrong, and simply carry on with his plans. Instead, Obama 1) gives credence to FOX's biased claims, 2) has to spend time on this issue rather than the important work of governing the country, and 3) makes a bad impression of himself which isn't going to help him or his agenda down the road.
Dudde Posted October 27, 2009 Posted October 27, 2009 I would find it unwise for Obama to ignore fox outright and let them continue, taking into account the ridiculous things they make up and how many people actually believe what they're told... This appears to me to be nothing more than an attempt by the whitehouse to control the media I must disagree sir. this is the case for all American (and almost all worldwide) news organizations today. I thought we had this discussion somewhere else. Didn't fox themselves state they were like reading the opinion section of a newspaper? They're definitely not in any league close to the next worst org., unfortunately they're loud and annoying, so a lot of people like to believe them
bascule Posted October 27, 2009 Author Posted October 27, 2009 I can find many examples of any American news organization doing exactly the same thing FOX is accused of doing. You can find many examples of CNN, ABC News, MSNBC, etc organizing and promoting anti-government protests in Washington?
SH3RL0CK Posted October 27, 2009 Posted October 27, 2009 You can find many examples of CNN, ABC News, MSNBC, etc organizing and promoting anti-government protests in Washington? No, because CNN, ABC, etc. are Pro-government. However, there are many examples of them doing similar things for anti-war protestors and "impeach Bush" rallies for example. I'll look up some examples when I get more time than I have at the moment.
gre Posted October 27, 2009 Posted October 27, 2009 (edited) Post this question on a "redneck" site and you'll have the exact opposite results.. Lol. But the truth is: FOX is bias, and run by crackpots. That should be clear to even the fruit cakes who watch it. Edited October 27, 2009 by gre
A Tripolation Posted October 27, 2009 Posted October 27, 2009 (edited) But Fox News is all...news-y. Just because you disagree with their bias automatically demotes them to a...not-news organization? Edited October 27, 2009 by A Tripolation
bascule Posted October 27, 2009 Author Posted October 27, 2009 However, there are many examples of them doing similar things for anti-war protestors and "impeach Bush" rallies for example. I think you're missing the point here. Do you know about the 9.12 Project? http://www.the912project.com/ Fox News isn't just covering the protests. They aren't just saying good things about them. They're saying "we're organizing a protest. Show up to Washington on 9/12 and protest the government" Did CNN ever orchestrate an "Impeach Bush" rally and tell the protesters when and where to show up?
Mr Skeptic Posted October 28, 2009 Posted October 28, 2009 But Fox News is all...news-y.Just because you disagree with their bias automatically demotes them to a...not-news organization? No, because they don't cover the news. They do cover some news, but they also broadcast a bunch of lies, so you can't tell what is news and what is lies without looking elsewhere. And if you have to look elsewhere to verify everything, then what's the sense to look at Fox in the first place? The Daily Show and Colbert Report are far more reliable as a news source.
bascule Posted October 28, 2009 Author Posted October 28, 2009 But Fox News is all...news-y.Just because you disagree with their bias automatically demotes them to a...not-news organization? When their bias extends to organizing and promoting anti-Democrat protests, making them effectively a political action committee no different from MoveOn.org, they cease to be a news organization. I feel like I keep repeating the fact that Fox News is organizing anti-government protests but the people defending Fox keep ignoring that and complaining people don't treat them like a news organization because they're conservative. If those of you defending Fox can at least acknowledge that they're organizing politically-oriented events like the 9.12 Protests, that'd be swell. It's a lot different covering protests when your employees thought of them, picked the date and created the encompassing "project", then used your mass medium to tell everyone to be there. At that point you're not covering the news, you're creating the news, and at that point you cease to be a news organization.
A Tripolation Posted October 28, 2009 Posted October 28, 2009 Ok, they "organize" political events and take bias to an extreme. I will admit that. But they still do report on news, right? Doesn't that make them a de facto news organization or something? I really don't like Fox, I'm not defending them. What's throwing me for a loop is that they are CALLED Fox NEWS...
bascule Posted October 28, 2009 Author Posted October 28, 2009 Ok, they "organize" political events and take bias to an extreme. I will admit that.But they still do report on news, right? Doesn't that make them a de facto news organization or something? I dunno. What would you make of a courtroom where the court reporter was also the prosecutor? Do you think it really makes sense for one person to fulfill both those roles? I really don't like Fox, I'm not defending them. What's throwing me for a loop is that they are CALLED Fox NEWS... Yes, they also call themselves fair and balanced... Bill O'Reilly calls his program the "No Spin Zone" and "No Ideology Zone"... just because you call yourself something doesn't make it so. 1
Mr Skeptic Posted October 28, 2009 Posted October 28, 2009 But they still do report on news, right? Doesn't that make them a de facto news organization or something? Wouldn't that also make Twitter a news organization?
SH3RL0CK Posted October 28, 2009 Posted October 28, 2009 (edited) I think you're missing the point here. Do you know about the 9.12 Project? http://www.the912project.com/ Fox News isn't just covering the protests. They aren't just saying good things about them. They're saying "we're organizing a protest. Show up to Washington on 9/12 and protest the government" Did CNN ever orchestrate an "Impeach Bush" rally and tell the protesters when and where to show up? I'm not here to defend Fox news. I agree with everyone here that their behavior is inexcusable. They have "pushed the envelope" so to speak regarding the fine line that used to exist between reporting the news and making the news. That said, other organizations have been "making" the news for decades. See for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dateline_NBC#Controversies . Really the difference is that Fox has perhaps gone a bit further along in unethical behavior. But it is a difference without a distinction, the real reason for the additional criticism of FOX is, IMO, that they run counter in their political bias to all other organizations. Clearly (from the poll results) I am in the minority viewpoint. But the way I see it, Fox is clearly a news organization in that they disseminate the news to their viewers. They certainly have a bias, provide only half the story, and are otherwise ...irresponsible at best. But they do provide news to their viewers and as such, they are a news organization. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedWouldn't that also make Twitter a news organization? No, because Twitter has no reporters who investigate the facts and interview people. Not that the Fox reporters, or any American news reporters, do their jobs all that well...but at least they have reporters and analysts. Edited October 28, 2009 by SH3RL0CK to correct typo
Syntho-sis Posted October 28, 2009 Posted October 28, 2009 Well personally I don't consider MSNBC news either, that's if you apply the same criteria to all news organizations. If I want 'news' I watch CNN or BBC.
A Tripolation Posted October 28, 2009 Posted October 28, 2009 You make really good points bascule. But like Syntho-sis said, so long as people keep referring to MSNBC as news, I will do the same for Fox News.
padren Posted October 28, 2009 Posted October 28, 2009 You make really good points bascule.But like Syntho-sis said, so long as people keep referring to MSNBC as news, I will do the same for Fox News. Does that mean the only standard for a News organization is they have the word "News" in their name, and some people call them that? In that case, what does it take for a hunting decoy to actually be a duck?
A Tripolation Posted October 28, 2009 Posted October 28, 2009 (edited) Dam you padren and your sound logic!!! Well, you really got me there. Uhhh...I dunno. Edit* There are two good answers right below me, padren. Edited October 28, 2009 by A Tripolation
Syntho-sis Posted October 28, 2009 Posted October 28, 2009 Does that mean the only standard for a News organization is they have the word "News" in their name, and some people call them that? In that case, what does it take for a hunting decoy to actually be a duck? No, all that is required is a citation under news on Wikipedia. Decoys do not walk, nor do they talk, like a duck.
SH3RL0CK Posted October 28, 2009 Posted October 28, 2009 Does that mean the only standard for a News organization is they have the word "News" in their name, and some people call them that? In that case, what does it take for a hunting decoy to actually be a duck? That is a really good question and I suppose everyone will have a different opinion. However, in case of FOX, where they claim to be a news organization, have paid investigative reporters and analysts on staff, do provide information (albeit not always complete or correct) to millions of people on a regular basis, and have been doing so for years. I think Fox does a terrible job (and intentionally so) but how can they NOT be called a news organization? That would be like saying a mallard is not a duck...
Recommended Posts