Media Matters Declaring "War On Fox"

[DToTheJ]

We all know how Media Matters has it in for Fox News Channel. Now their founder is quoting as saying they are preparing to wage a war with the network - specifically, one with "guerrilla warfare and sabotage".

Get your popcorn ready.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=2531E25B-654B-4948-BD46-C0C717F5B557

 

[BRNout]

Because Media Matters and George Soros are unbiased centrists, right? :

Interesting that nobody goes after the various other news sources that are clearly lapdogs for the BHO administration (never asking tough questions, never vetting him as a candidate), but Fox News is Satan for playing to a conservative audience. Those of you who beat the anti-Fox drum should probably stop and think about what a 'free press' really means versus how it would be if only one political point of view were permitted to rule the airwaves.

 

[LKellerIII]

This will no doubt be "taken outside" in a minute, but you threw down the gauntlet, BRNout, so I'll comment.

I'm always disturbed when any person or group - liberal or conservative - advocates anything close to censorship. Fox News needs to have the freedom to do what it is doing.

Having said that, the idea that FNC is "Fair and "Balanced" outside of the evening commentary hours is a giant L-I-E. FNC is biased to the right 24/7. And it just isn't the same as the other news sources that do maintain a neutral focus and attempt to give balanced coverage to both liberal and conservative viewpoints. For example, NPR gives considerable air-time to conservative pundits. The conservative claim that NPR is the liberal equivalent to FNC is simply not true. NPR gives coverage to both ends of the political spectrum. So do CBS, CNN, and most other news networks. With the possible exception of MSNBC, Fox News is alone in providing biased news coverage.

FNC is free to do what it wants, but it's also fair for liberals, George Soros -or whoever - to criticize FNC for what it plainly is - a mouthpiece for right-wing causes.

 

[FreddyE1977]

No doubt this is making Fox's day. Nothing like it to stir-up and rally their base audience.

(BTW, as a 501-C3 tax exempt organization, what Media Matters is doing here
is technically illegal)

 

[BRNout]

I didn't intend to throw the gauntlet - just to point out that Media Matters is partisan. That may seem obvious to many of us, but the public persona (e.g. spin) which had been coming from this organization was of a public interest group that looks at things fairly. Their non-profit tax status indicates as such.

As for FNC, a review of some facts for those of you who are seated on the left side of the political aisle:

- Their weekday talk shows (i.e. Hannity, O'Reilly, Beck) are unabashedly conservative;

- Their actual news coverage (shows like Brett Baier and Shepard Smith) are indeed Fair and Balanced; and,

- They actually still give Geraldo Rivera a soapbox and he's a liberal.

This drumbeating of how unfair and horrible Fox News is has gone on for way too long. Fact is, there are examples of liberal bias which take place on ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS and CNN every single day. Seldom (if ever) is there an example of conservative bias coming from any of those outlets.

I will give credit to MSNBC for at least being honest and positioning themselves as a lefty news channel. That's where they stand and they let you know it. Fine - more power to 'em. Then again, that's what separates liberals from conservatives apparently. We on the right don't go around trying to shut MSNBC down in the way that liberals would love to shut down Fox News - which is the only right of center TV outlet for news and commentary.

It's called "being tolerant", something that liberals in this country have forgotten how to do.

Not throwing down the gauntlet Mr. Keller, just stating my point of view.

 

[LKellerIII]

I didn't intend to throw the gauntlet - just to point out that Media Matters is partisan. That may seem obvious to many of us, but the public persona (e.g. spin) which had been coming from this organization was of a public interest group that looks at things fairly. Their non-profit tax status indicates as such.



- Their actual news coverage (shows like Brett Baier and Shepard Smith) are indeed Fair and Balanced; and,

- They actually still give Geraldo Rivera a soapbox and he's a liberal.


It's called "being tolerant", something that liberals in this country have forgotten how to do.

Not throwing down the gauntlet Mr. Keller, just stating my point of view.

OK - pardon the "gauntlet" remark - no offense meant - I respect your views BRNout - you're always fair...though I'm not sure about balanced ;D.

But I disagree with the claim that FNC is "fair and balanced" outside of the evening conservative commentary hours. Fox and Friends certainly skews to the right, and so does Megan Kelly. I rarely see Baier's show, but I did tune in Shep Smith often during the 2008 campaign, and I did notice that his show seemed to be making a concerted effort to be unbaised. So I'll give you Smith and Baier - that's 2 hours per day, or about 8 per cent of their programming day.

And yes - Geraldo is an exception, in terms of politics. But he doesn't get much air time, and really - can you think of another exception?

A comment on MSNBC - I think it's amusing when conservatives conclude that NBC/Universal is liberal based on MSNBC programming. The left-lean on MSNBC is a counter-programming ploy, plain and simple. It has nothing to do with the corporation's politics. These critics should watch CNBC sometime - where probably 80% of the commentators are conservative - not surprising, I guess, given that it's a business channel.

 

[landtuna]

We on the right don't go around trying to shut MSNBC down in the way that liberals would love to shut down Fox News ...

I don't notice liberals trying to shut down Fox News either - just admonishing them for their "fair and balanced" branding which is decidedly just a marketing ploy.

 

[azumanga]

Because Media Matters and George Soros are unbiased centrists, right? :

That and the fact that Glenn Beck blames Soros on everything bad that happens in this world on his Fox News program. No doubt Media Matters has especially made Beck "Public Enemy #1".

 

[nomadcowatbk]

No doubt this is making Fox's day. Nothing like it to stir-up and rally their base audience.

(BTW, as a 501-C3 tax exempt organization, what Media Matters is doing here
is technically illegal)

AFA and Focus are the Family are tax exempt

 

[BRNout]

Because Media Matters and George Soros are unbiased centrists, right? :

That and the fact that Glenn Beck blames Soros on everything bad that happens in this world on his Fox News program. No doubt Media Matters has especially made Beck "Public Enemy #1".

"Spooky dude" Soros (love that name!) is deserving of some scrutiny and you're overstating Beck's position on this.

No doubt this is making Fox's day. Nothing like it to stir-up and rally their base audience.

(BTW, as a 501-C3 tax exempt organization, what Media Matters is doing here
is technically illegal)

AFA and Focus are the Family are tax exempt

I don't know that Focus on the Family is as overtly political as Media Matters has become. Frankly, I am not a fan, but most of what I know about them is that they are more of a ministry than anything else.

As for AFA, they aren't a "political" group at all. Their beef has to do with social issues and their view of morality. They go after programming providers for what they see as indecent programming and not because they espouse a particular point of view. For example, they aren't attacking MSNBC for their political viewpoint. They are after Viacom because of some MTV programming that they feel promotes promiscuity. That's the difference.

Disclaimer: I don't align myself with either of the above groups, nor do I necessarily endorse what they do. But I am pointing out the distinction between their respective missions and that of Media Matters. They are not the same.

 

[mescutia]

I think a more appropriate counterpart to Media Matters would be the Media Research Center.

 

[FreddyE1977]

No doubt this is making Fox's day. Nothing like it to stir-up and rally their base audience.

(BTW, as a 501-C3 tax exempt organization, what Media Matters is doing here
is technically illegal)

AFA and Focus are the Family are tax exempt

...and thus, such an action would be illegal for them as well.
What's your point?

 

[nomadcowatbk]

No doubt this is making Fox's day. Nothing like it to stir-up and rally their base audience.

(BTW, as a 501-C3 tax exempt organization, what Media Matters is doing here
is technically illegal)

AFA and Focus are the Family are tax exempt

many organizations that engage in partisan politics on both sides are tax exempt


...and thus, such an action would be illegal for them as well.
What's your point?

 

[mnradiofan]

A couple thoughts to add:

FNC's news coverage does not represent some corporate conspiracy. NewsCorp owns other assets as well, and they tend to lean more left (FX, Fox Entertainment, Wall Street Journal, etc.) It has been stated several times by several people that FNC was started to fill a gap in programming news that caters specifically to the right, in what many saw as "liberal media" at the time. Murdoch cares about one thing, and that's money. If there is money to be made in starting something similar that is left leaning, he will do it.

With regards to "lefties" wanting to shut down Fox News, as someone who doesn't care for Fox News, that is not what I want. What I would want is for truth in advertising. Don't claim to be "fair and balanced" yet only devote 8% of your programming time to "fair and balanced" news coverage. If you want to be right leaning, just come out and say it. Don't use it as a tool to manipulate the public by claiming to be anything but a right-wing bidding machine.

 

[LKellerIII]

I haven't heard that any lefties want to shut down Fox News, either. Besides, there's such a thing as the First Amendment, so any attempt to do so would be futile, in any case.

What Media Matters - or any other advocacy group is free to do - is criticize Fox News, point out instances in which it is not "fair and balanced," and advocate that consumers or advertisers boycott Fox News. There's nothing illegal about that - both right and left wing advocacy groups have been doing that for decades.

Problem is - in my opinion, any such effort is bound to fail. To draw an analogy - when conservative religious groups ask people to boycott films with objectionable content, it usually just brings more publicity to those films - for every person who boycotts, 5 other people will go see the film because they're curious to see what all the fuss is about.

Same with Fox News - the misguided efforts of Media Matters will just get Fox News higher ratings, and make them look like the brave "freedom loving" Americans standing up to "censorship" from the left-wing "socialist" fringe. Roger Ailes' big fat gut must be jiggling with laughter.

 

[Nate Wesley]

Vivian Schiller, meet Bill Sammon:

"Fox exec: That whole "Obama is a socialist" thing was a wacky joke"
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/03/29/bill_sammon_socialism/index.html

 

[Nate Wesley]

Murdoch cares about one thing, and that's money. If there is money to be made in starting something similar that is left leaning, he will do it.

I think about how there are still 'no urban dictates' or 'no Hispanic dictates' from national and regional media buyers in radio, despite the majority of these stations being owned by some of the biggest, most well-connected/researched media companies in the world. These broadcasters have to know the buying power of these audiences are 1) quite underestimated and 2) ever increasing. (And increasingly more suburban, according to the latest Census.) That they listen to more radio, watch more TV, play with the internet and wireless statistically more than other demos--and that they regularly cross-shop value AND premium brand products/services. So while Hot Blazin' Jamz will never quiite reach billing parity with Lite Soft Rock or Kickin' Bull Wolf, its overall desirability could easily be increased--if they'd simply challenge the stubborn attitudes and stereotypes of some of the mentally slower media planners they coddle. But they don't...they'd rather just reach for the easy short term money without rocking the boat for the long term.

In much of the same vein of what I discussed, I don't believe its Rupert Murdoch's nor FNC's prerogative to even try to achieve or provide notable intellectual balance, nor challenge overwhelming notions that they cater solely to conservative viewers. They know there's a sizeable audience that 'cheers for the other guys', as evidenced by MSNBC's real ratings niche in countering FNC. (Yes, I said 'ratings' and 'MSNBC'--how else would the bigger, more established CNN often place third?)

FNC wouldn't have to disrupt its successful daytime or prime-time at all--it could experiment with weekly shows on the weekends pretty easily. They can start 'The Fox Nation', why not 'Fox Left Flank'? Such a site might attract some hits, now that The Huffington Post has 'sold out' both figuratively and literally to many of its readers. One would be right to posit that News Corp wouldn't 'need' to do either of these suggestions. I'd be just as right in pointing out that in all likelihood, there isn't much of a drive to try.

 

[mnradiofan]

The only way I could see Fox News catering to the left in a major way is if they could make money on it. Whether right or wrong, Left wing stations haven't seen the same success as right wing stations have seen. See Air America, or MSNBC. The best guess I have for why this exists is because those that identify has hardcore "lefties" don't need convincing. They are so sure of what they believe in, that they don't NEED to watch something like Fox News to be reassured that they are making the right decision, and they don't need someone to talk them into how the right is screwing everything up, because they KNOW it.

Either that, or there is just no left wing hosts that are entertaining enough to hold an audience.

 

[FreddyE1977]

On my dish package I can tune a couple of clicks to either side of Fox News and be
watching either LinkTV or Free Speech TV, both of which are incredibly liberal. So there
is choice out there, and I fully support that choice under the First Amendment.

Why is it people to the left only seem to like choice when their side of the argument
is getting the upper hand?

 

[LKellerIII]

On my dish package I can tune a couple of clicks to either side of Fox News and be
watching either LinkTV or Free Speech TV, both of which are incredibly liberal. So there
is choice out there, and I fully support that choice under the First Amendment.

Why is it people to the left only seem to like choice when their side of the argument
is getting the upper hand?

There is plenty of hypocrisy on both ends of the political spectrum.

I went back to college in my 40s (1990s) and was shocked to see left-wing groups trying to keep right wing speakers off campus, denouncing their views as "hate speech." None of said speakers were anything like Nazis or the Klan, just right-wingers, so the hate speech label was a convenient justification for censorship by the left.

On the other hand - you don't have to dig very deep to find hypocrisy in the fundamentalist right-wing, which the conservative movement in this country has been cozying up to for the last 4 decades. In my view, these religious leaders want to limit freedom of religion to their religion, control our lives and have us live by a credo that they don't personally adhere to.

Again -what Media Matters is trying to do is not shut Fox News down - just publicize what it believes are FNC's hypocrisies and lies. They have the First Amendment right to do so, just as Fox News has the First Amendment right to express the views they do.