Most days, I watch “ABC World News Tonight” and/or “CBS Evening News” on Sky News
I ended up landing on Fox News which I detest (evidence here and here). The show was O’Reilly Factor, something I’ve never seen before. I hope I never do again.
I’d heard about O’Reilly, having read about him on blogs or in news stories when he’s gone too far. Having seen his show, I’m surprised it’s not more often.
In a half hour or so, I got the following: Anyone O’Reilly disagrees with is either an “extreme leftist” (MoveOn.org) or “ultra liberal” (Boston Globe, which he repeatedly called the most extremely liberal newspaper in
What I noticed most was that O’Reilly didn’t always tell outright falsehoods. Most of the time, he simply manipulated facts in a way that made them tell the opposite of what they really presented. He made the facts lie so he didn’t have to, I suppose.
But what I found gut-achingly hilarious was a comedy sketch he had with nattering nabob Dick Morris. The two complained loudly about “extreme leftist” organizations threatening to use the Internet to “smear” Democrats they disagree with.
We were warned these people raise a lot of money and influence a lot of other “extreme leftist” people, so they have a lot of power, and will stop at nothing to get what they want. Apparently, they’ll lie, smear, cheat, strong-arm and generally bully into submission all who disagree with them.
You know, like O’Reilly’s buddies in the extreme right. Except that they made it all up. The threats they mentioned? MoveOn.org said it would be watching. Oh! So very scary!
Fox “News” is so cartoonish, so over-the-top that it’s hard to believe that anyone would take it as anything other than a comedy channel. Looking at the various network promos they ran, it occurred to me that Fox is the home of grumpy, washed-up news readers from other American networks, people who are finally freed from normal conventions of accuracy, fairness and balance.
It's official: I hate Fox News.
9 comments:
Every once in a while I watch just for a laugh.
Here are two very funny events both on this nuts show.
San Fransisco passed a resolution recognizing Colt Studios on their 40th Anniversary in the porn busy. O'Riley went nuts.
Well he then has on Cpl. Matt Sanchez who's a reservist who took on the "lefties" at Columbia University.
It turns out that in another life Cpl. Sanchez was in the porn industry and in a very big way (nudge nudge wink wink say no more say no more (with apologies to Monty Python)).
It just makes you laugh. The only problem is the number of people who take his word as gospel.
I saw O'Reilly's apoplexy over the Colt thing mentioned on blogs. The Sanchez thing was covered extensively on Joe.My.God. (where I first heard about it) and Towleroad.
Actually, related to all that, I suppose that Fox and its hosts like O'Reilly must be a a kind of conservative porn. At any rate, they're certainly obscene!
Fox news Channel has offered us a chance to know the real news. We are convinced by the liberal media what our views should be. How about seeing the otherside. In America FNC programs have brought forth corruption in government and in private business. Is this bad or bold? Choose the voices you want to believe.
Joseph of Auckland
It may surprise you, Joseph, but I actually agree with you on one point anyway: Highlighting corruption in government and business is a good thing, and often bold. I'd disagree that Fox is necessarily good at doing so, and it's definitely not the only one.
Has Fox ever looked at the disastrous no-bid contracts awarded to Dick Cheney's Halliburton, for example? Not that I'm aware of.
I also agree that it's important to know what other viewpoints are. But when O'Reilly and some of the other Fox hosts use childishly simplistic language ("extreme leftist", "ultra-liberal", "anti-American", etc.), they come across as no more credible than bloggers who use similar harsh language.
Make no mistake: I'm keenly aware that I often use harsh language when I talk about "extreme rightist" people, but I make no claim to be "fair and balanced". A blog is a space for personal opinion and commentary, a news channel isn't when it presents itself as giving fact and news. Fox, in my opinion, usually blurs the line between fact and opinion, and they do so deliberately in pursuit of an agenda.
The canard about "liberal media" is really quite tired. Numerous studies have looked at American mainstream media reporting and they've failed to detect any "liberal" bias. For example, in the case of the beginning of the Iraq war, the MSM were unanimously pro-Bush and his war. The media only started asking questions and offering criticism when Bush's policies failed. That's not "liberal" or "conservative" that's the media doing its job--holding governments accountable.
And don't think for a moment that right wing media don't tell people "what our views should be". All MSM do that, regardless of ideology.
My problem with Fox News is that it's pretty consistently unfair and unbalanced. When other MSM outlets veer off course, I'm happy to criticise them, too. But I've never seen any purported MSM news organisation be as consistently unfair and unbalanced as Fox is.
But let me also say that I appreciate the civility of your comment, Joseph. When Fox News is criticised, there's always the risk that responses will be more sound and fury than discussion. I believe that the best hope for Democracy is for people to discuss issues calmly and rationally, even when they disagree strongly. Thank you for contributing your viewpoint to the discussion.
Anyone I talk to thinks Fox is a joke. They certainly don't watch for true news items or for anything fair and balanced. It's so biased.
Fox News is not really available in the UK, and the sister channel here, Sky News, is actaully rather respectable. They have to compete with the BBC which keeps them on the straight and narrow.
In the UK there are also laws against the bias which exists in Fox News (I am surprised they have not been sued for lying, its not as if there is not plenty of evidence).
I have heard alot about Fox News through the US blogging world, even managed to get a get hold of Outfoxed.
Here are some amusing screen shots of Fox News 'Fair and Balanced' coverage.
http://welcome-to-pottersville.blogspot.com/2007/03/fox-news-at-its-finest.html
Archerr - I'm the same--I don't personally know anybody who watches Fox for any real news. For 24-hour services, the choices here would be CNN or BBC, then Sky News Australia and then, well, turn the TV off and try the radio.
EE - Thanks for the link. Some of those screen shots are hilarious (I've only noticed misspellings when I've watched).
Our Sky News from Australia isn't too bad, either, though it is a bit like Monty Python's news for penguins (one of my typical posts on that subject is here). BBC is excellent, CNN, well, okay.
Under American law, there's nothing that can be done about Faux News when it lies or distorts unless by doing so they libel someone. They're careful not to do that so obviously that they'd face a lawsuit. In America, as you realise, the First Amendment trumps almost everything. Of course, Bush has put a big asterisk on it so that he doesn't release anything he doesn't want to, but you won't see the far right media complaining about that.
Oh my goodness -- Fox News! It figured in my first blog post ever as my father used to always have it on as background noise. How I hated that!
Yes, LiF, Fox News hangs around like a bad smell...
Post a Comment