The American public has recently received a series of news flashes from the White House warning them that Fox News -- ostensibly just another cable news network, albeit one proudly carrying a slogan of being "fair and balanced" -- is in fact biased (it has a "perspective" according to Rahm Emanuel...scary!) and should not be considered to be a legitimate news organization but rather as a mouthpiece for the Republican Party. The Obama team evidently considers informing the public as to Fox News' true identity to be a matter of prime national importance: thus, we've heard administration figures such as Anita Dunn, Rahm Emanuel, and David Axelrod weigh in on the subject. Even the president himself has spoken out on the matter. The problem here is that all this isn't news to anyone: I'd think that everyone who has ever watched Fox News for an appreciable amount of time knows it has a perspective and a bias and does not quite live up to its slogan...they don't even have a single non-neocon opinion show host anymore since Alan Colmes stopped co-hosting with Sean Hannity. However, most sensible newshounds realize that virtually every news organization has a "perspective." Fox News tends to reflect a neoconservative point of view, MSNBC tends to reflect a progressive point of view, the Economist tends to advocate for free markets...is there anything really wrong with that as long as the facts presented are generally correct? I do think there is a lack of truly nonbiased reporting in the media, which is a shame (however, it's definitely not just a Fox problem), but I also appreciate being able to get my news from a variety of different viewpoints so I can see the issues from different sides. What the Obama administration seems to be saying is that some perspectives are legitimate and some are not -- in a democratic republic, I don't believe the government should be deciding that.
To be fair, it is very easy to make the administration's war of words against Fox into something it isn't. We're talking about public censure here, not censorship; there's been no discussion of the administration shutting Fox down thus far. Freedom of the press endures. In fact, the diatribes against Fox rather seem to lack teeth -- administration officials still want to appear on Fox News so the White House isn't even boycotting the network. Historically, presidents have often butted heads with the press. Obama is probably not thrilled to be lumped in with President Nixon and his notorious enemies' lists, but he might not mind sharing company with John Adams...Obama has actually been by far the least villainous towards the press of the trio so far, though he still has time to change that. To tell you the truth, this whole scenario has even reminded me of something our last president (you know, the one who butted heads with NBC) would pull off. Isn't President Obama essentially telling the press, "You're either with us or against us!"? While historically normal, it is still disturbing to me that this administration would go out of its way to try to discredit a particular news organization that has broken several stories that reflected negatively on the White House recently. The ACORN, Van Jones, and Anita Dunn controversies weren't all that big a deal in my view, but they certainly did deserve to be covered...Fox News is actually doing a good job of playing the role of presidential watchdog. They're keeping him honest and checking his power; that's one of the things the press is supposed to do. Does Fox always give president a fair shake? Heck no. They also sure didn't do an effective job of checking President Bush's power. At the end of the day, they ARE a bunch of neocons who'd like America to think just like they do. Nonetheless, they're the most important news organization in the country for the moment.
Obama apologists would argue that Fox News isn't being targeted because of its views but rather instead for its tactics. I definitely think it's a good idea for the administration to call out Fox News on actual factual errors. Certainly the network has been linked to unethical practices in the past such as displaying incorrect party affiliations on screen for scandal ridden Republican politicians. It's exceedingly hard to say what is the result of human error or newsroom shenanigans and what is a deliberate attempt to mislead and propagandize, however. Bias is to a large extent in the eye of the beholder -- for instance, conservatives often see the "mainstream media" as liberal and liberals often see it as conservative. When assessing bias, news watchers naturally consider intangibles like what isn't covered and to what extent something is covered. Some think Fox News showed a great deal of bias by giving so much coverage to the tea parties; others think it's other news sources that were biased for NOT covering the tea parties more. What I tend to think is that there's bias swirling all around the media world (and it's not necessarily organizational in nature -- individual reporters can be biased), but it's pretty hard to prove subtle bias conclusively. That's likely why the Obama attacks on Fox have been so lacking in substance so far.
Even if Fox News were worse than it is, I'm not sure I'd ever want the White House to enter the fray publicly in such a way as it has. Even a well-watched media outfit is nowhere near as powerful as the president. This is simply not a battle between equals -- it has made the president seem like a bully. Considering press censorship remains a huge problem in many areas of the world, I think it would be wise for all arms of government to refrain from attacking the press directly. Just speaking personally, this controversy has made me want to watch Fox News more. Watching Fox has become a REBELLIOUS thing to do! It's fighting the power! I can't believe I'm even saying that...it's amazing what a change in administration can do. I suppose there were political reasons for why the full court press was unleashed on Fox. For one thing, Obama's base of supporters seems to love it -- they've been bashing Fox News for being biased for years so this is official confirmation of something that was painfully obvious to them. Another bonus is that it has been a distraction from other issues. I don't believe there is any serious intent on the part of the administration to squelch freedom of the press. Instead, this has been a dog-and-pony show to take some time off the clock and allow the White House some breathing space. It's not easy to be in power in a free republic -- there are political forces that will resist everything you try to do and other political forces that will never be satisfied that you are doing enough. None of them will ever shut up...President Obama should just accept that and get back to work.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment