If there is one thing about today's media and the media our parents or especially our grandparents grew up with, things are over hyped and not down the middle enough. We have MSNBC who cater to mostly liberals and those on the left and we have Fox News who cater to mostly conservatives and those on the right. CNN has a good balance, but they too are guilty of some of the problems in today's media. Talk radio to me is also joke and is more of outlet for fear, paranoia, and "bitching". Both brands of talk radio are pointless to furthering educational talk and discussion and only regress things. I always preach arguments based on facts and truths. Also looking at things down the middle in order to be "fair and balanced". That last quotation sounds kind of familiar? Of course, it is one of the big slogans that Fox News says they are. However, some like Howell Raines see them as "skewed and hypocritical".
Mr. Raines is a former editor of the New York Times and has reached his boiling point with Fox News. He targets his attack at the chief of Fox News, Roger Ailes. Ailes is obviously a staunch conservative, anti-Obama, and against everything on the president's agenda. As someone who prefers CNN over the other two, I can clearly see where Raines is coming from. As much as MSNBC can be accused of supporting the White House, Fox News is definitely on a mission to rip apart the President's administration and all around it including the Democratic Congress. The difference between the two "bias" channels is at least MSNBC tries to deviate at times while Fox News sticks to reigning in conservative propaganda points.
I doubt this mission against Obama is strictly based on his race, but based on the fact that the President goes against everything that a conservative embraces. He wants to help the less fortunate and spend money. But spend money on programs that help the majority and not the minority. The biggest thing in Raines' argument against Ailes and Fox News is the fact that the network has spent much money and energy on fighting against the health care legislation. They continue to enforce their belief that no one wants this and the money isn't there. Traditional talking points. Raines is angry over the fact that everyone has sat idly by while Fox News has "turned reality on its head with, among other tactics, its endless repetition of its uber-lie: 'The American people do not want health-care reform." As someone who regularly follows the daily political news and news in general, I can echo that sentiment as the network does some like a church preaching its gospel. Almost fitting since many who watch the channel are probably fairly religious.
Since Harry Truman, almost every president has brought up working on health care reform. It has been part of presidential campaigns before Obama's. And to dispute that this legislation is Democratic, Richard Nixon would favor the current legislation as he was a major fighter for reform. However, his party has changed greatly in the last 40 years. Raines brings up the fact that the network highlights increased disapproval for reform since the debate began. At the same time, he accuses the network of setting back newsrooms and professional standards back a half century. Journalism since World War II had gradually increased its account of honest story telling of daily events as it watched the world change. For Raines, Fox News has a Foxian reality of the world where the actors on their network lower their morals and respect for news journalism in an all out assault against the White House and Democrats.
Raines lays things out as such:
"I'm confident that many old-schoolers are too principled to appear on the network, choosing silence over being used; when Fox does trot out a house liberal as a punching bag, the result is a parody of reasoned news formats."
In the same breath as that, Raines fears and is worried that many of those "old-schoolers" who would normally blow the lid off lies are hesitate to combat someone and a network with much financial power and a large audience. Ridicule is almost a deterrent that Raines brings up referencing Paula Zahn's departure from Fox News to CNN and Ailes' use of ripping apart Zahn's credibility. The silence is what Raines sees as a spark to the fire that Ailes has created with Fox News. It only intensifies what is said and done on the network. Recently, Arianna Huffington called out Ailes and the bias coverage he produces on Obama. In response, Ailes mentioned caring most about ratings and getting an audience is all that he is concerned about. Essentially throwing telling things like they actually are out the door in favor of making sure his regular viewers stay loyal. It is his outlook that dictates how things are told on Fox News.
Raines sees what Fox News produces as reverting to yellow journalism of the early 1900s as one political party is promoted. Fox believes that the rest of the news media is slanted left and they are essential to balancing the "mainstream media" bias. Fox News is far right and those center left or center right refrain from calling out the network. What makes it so tricky for many to fully attack Fox News is the power of money. NewsCorp owns Fox News and Ailes makes Rupert Murdoch, the head of NewsCorp a lot of money and thus why would he argue against Ailes' style of journalism and news.
In closing, Raines states:
"As for Fox News, lots of people who know better are keeping quiet about what to call it. Its news operation can, in fact, be called many things, but reporters of my generation, with memories and keyboards, dare not call it journalism."
As I stated in the beginning, I think all news networks have flaws, but that is part of human nature. There is a difference though in knowing that what you are saying isn't completely "fair and balanced" and Raines brings up a lot of great points. He unlike many had the balls to write his beliefs out and who knows how he will be perceived. I for one support his argument and say to Fox News, this is your reality check. I never view you as a true and honest news network and thus chose not to watch you. I only occasionally watch it to see what its commentators are saying. I am someone who reads and studies things and often enough they portray things as they aren't or tell stories as they see fit. They use statistics that favor their arguments and points of views and then look foolish when they are caught. Jon Stewart is someone who equally rips both sides of the aisle and both parties, but he probably exposes 5 times more garbage on Fox News then the other networks. I don't find that ironic as the truth hurts sometimes. How about Fox News tell it more like it is then how they want it to be.
I implore everyone to check it out and gather your own opinion: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/11/AR2010031102523.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment