Fox News...not so biased?

Lord Blackadder

macrumors G5
Original poster
May 7, 2004
13,521
2,557
Sod off
I just stumbled across this little tidbit (I'll post in full for the benefit of the lazy ;)):

By Mary Kate Cary, Thomas Jefferson Street blog [From US News & World Report]

(Of significance is the note on her page that she is a "former White House speechwriter for President George H.W. Bush")

My colleague Doug Heye wrote yesterday about White House Communications Director Anita Dunn's recent attack on Fox News. I agree with Doug—the White House should not be going after a specific news outlet as biased. Especially when it's not true. Take a look at a Fox News account that includes this fact:

As for Dunn's complaint about Fox News' coverage of the Obama campaign, a study by the Pew Research Center showed that 40 percent of Fox News stories on Obama in the last six weeks of the campaign were negative. Similarly, 40 percent of Fox News' stories on Obama's Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain, were negative.

On CNN, by contrast, there was a 22-point disparity in the percentage of negative stories on Obama (39 percent) and McCain (61 percent). The disparity was even greater at MSNBC, according to Pew, where just 14 percent of Obama stories were negative, compared to a whopping 73 percent of McCain stories—a spread of 59 points.

I'd add this: If you were a reporter at another network, wouldn't the logical "next step" be to make sure your coverage of the president is positive all the time, so that you are not singled out and cut off from further access to the president, as Fox has been? This is what happens when the administration tries to manipulate press coverage. And I think it's safe to say it backfires every time.
One comment and several criticisms:

Comment: She has a point, to a certain extent. I do not want to see news networks become so focused on attacking their media/political opponents that they become partisan propaganda machines. MSNBC and Fox are both in serious danger of going down that road.

Criticisms: To start with, Comparing Obama to Mcain is no longer as relevant as it was during the election. A better measure of bias would be to compare reactions to Obama with reactions to Congressional (GOP) minority leaders who are spearheading conservative political moves. McCain is really not in that category as much as other people like John Boehner.

Secondly, my criticisms of Fox news fall most heavily on their rabble-rousing prime time shows involving Bill O' Reilly, Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity. The above article does not factor these guys in.

She's really not giving the whole picture.
 

remmy

macrumors 6502a
Jul 1, 2007
649
0
I don't know, maybe the difference in negative stories is because one candidate was more clumsy in there campaign than the other. Although I agree there is bias, how can you acurately measure the difference unless you had identitcal candidates with identitcal campaigns?
 

Zombie Acorn

macrumors 65816
Feb 2, 2009
1,301
9,062
Toronto, Ontario
Fox news isn't too bad until glen beck comes on, after that its pretty much a ******** until o'reilly get done. During the morning/afternoon they have quite a few senators on etc.
 

freeny

macrumors 68020
Sep 27, 2005
2,065
5
Location: Location:
Fox news isn't too bad until glen beck comes on, after that its pretty much a ******** until o'reilly get done. During the morning/afternoon they have quite a few senators on etc.
I had a roomate while in the hospital that watched FOX news 29 hours straight. In that time id say that 90% of the stories concentrated on Obama and 100% of those stories were negative. Durring those stories the "news" anchors repeatedly made numerous jokes about Obama like frat boys at a keg party.

Fox news is a joke 100% of the time.
 

Thomas Veil

macrumors 68020
Feb 14, 2004
2,435
5,498
OBJECTIVE reality
I've a problem with people who simplistically measure negative news coverage and determine that a 50-50 split means the network is fair.

Yes, networks can err in their fairness to a candidate. Anyone remember the pasting Al Gore took because the Bushies, Limbaugh and Fox painted him as a congenital liar and the media kept repeating the false accusation until it stuck?

But there are going to be times when negative coverage won't be 50-50. Let's face it, everyone agrees Obama's people ran a generally well-focused campaign, while McCain's featured a new disaster almost every day. The networks would have to do some considerable bending of facts to allot the same amount of negative coverage to both men.
 

Zombie Acorn

macrumors 65816
Feb 2, 2009
1,301
9,062
Toronto, Ontario
I had a roomate while in the hospital that watched FOX news 29 hours straight. In that time id say that 90% of the stories concentrated on Obama and 100% of those stories were negative. Durring those stories the "news" anchors repeatedly made numerous jokes about Obama like frat boys at a keg party.

Fox news is a joke 100% of the time.
This isn't even close to being accurate.
 

Zombie Acorn

macrumors 65816
Feb 2, 2009
1,301
9,062
Toronto, Ontario
I've a problem with people who simplistically measure negative news coverage and determine that a 50-50 split means the network is fair.

Yes, networks can err in their fairness to a candidate. Anyone remember the pasting Al Gore took because the Bushies, Limbaugh and Fox painted him as a congenital liar and the media kept repeating the false accusation until it stuck?

But there are going to be times when negative coverage won't be 50-50. Let's face it, everyone agrees Obama's people ran a generally well-focused campaign, while McCain's featured a new disaster almost every day. The networks would have to do some considerable bending of facts to allot the same amount of negative coverage to both men.
The media leaning to the left brushed over quite a few negative issues they could have covered about Obama, there's no disputing this. The liberal media and Obama were on a honeymoon together.
 

Eraserhead

macrumors G4
Nov 3, 2005
10,300
10,366
UK
When can I start the thread:

Chinese official media... not so biased?

?

Because it makes far more sense than this one.
 

Eraserhead

macrumors G4
Nov 3, 2005
10,300
10,366
UK
Anything to cover for the lunatics at MSNBC
Agreed:
MSNBC said:
When President Barack Obama signs credit card reform legislation -- which should happen any day now -- that will be a great day for consumers.

...

Too bad the president is backing the wrong horse.
(source)

MSNBC said:
WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama defended himself Thursday against critics in New Orleans and across the Katrina-ravaged Gulf Coast who feel recovery help has not come soon enough from his administration.

Making his first stop as president in the region devastated by Hurricane Katrina over four years ago, Obama appeared at a town hall gathering to hear residents' concerns in person. One man asked why federal damage reimbursements are coming to locals so slowly and in amounts far less than needed.
(source)

All positive on MSNBC on Obama.
 

thegoldenmackid

macrumors 604
Dec 29, 2006
7,777
5
dallas, texas
Yeah, this is just not true. Every network is biased, the unique problem with Fox News is the extremes that their anchors go to and the lack of restrain they exhibit.
 

P-Worm

macrumors 68020
Jul 16, 2002
2,045
0
Salt Lake City, UT
These are dumb statistics in my opinion. Does being balanced mean hating on both candidates for equal amounts of time? What if a candidate does more to deserve ridicule?

P-Worm
 

Lord Blackadder

macrumors G5
Original poster
May 7, 2004
13,521
2,557
Sod off
These are dumb statistics in my opinion. Does being balanced mean hating on both candidates for equal amounts of time? What if a candidate does more to deserve ridicule?

P-Worm
Exactly my point. Her defined conditions representing bias and objectivity are flawed.
 

Beric

macrumors 68020
Jan 22, 2008
2,148
0
Bay Area
These are dumb statistics in my opinion. Does being balanced mean hating on both candidates for equal amounts of time? What if a candidate does more to deserve ridicule?

P-Worm
Obama did an awful lot to deserve ridicule. Liberals couldn't take it, though. :rolleyes:

Everyone knows that Fox talk shows are conservative. That's because Fox has pretty much the only conservative talk shows. But if you look at just the news channels, they actually are quite balanced, presenting both sides of the story.
 

Jack Flash

macrumors 65816
May 8, 2007
1,160
7
Obama did an awful lot to deserve ridicule. Liberals couldn't take it, though. :rolleyes:

Everyone knows that Fox talk shows are conservative. That's because Fox has pretty much the only conservative talk shows. But if you look at just the news channels, they actually are quite balanced, presenting both sides of the story.
They're movement conservative. There really is a huge difference.
 

Thomas Veil

macrumors 68020
Feb 14, 2004
2,435
5,498
OBJECTIVE reality
The media leaning to the left brushed over quite a few negative issues they could have covered about Obama, there's no disputing this. The liberal media and Obama were on a honeymoon together.
What kind of issues? I'm trying to think of anything the Obama camp did that was as bad as Palin's almost daily gaffes, or Joe the Plumber, or David Letterman catching McCain in a lie about the latter racing back to Washington.

Obama had things like Ayers and Wright, but those were guilt-by-association issues trumped up by other people, not self-inflicted wounds like McCain's.
 

Wotan31

macrumors 6502
Jun 5, 2008
491
0
Secondly, my criticisms of Fox news fall most heavily on their rabble-rousing prime time shows involving Bill O' Reilly, Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity. The above article does not factor these guys in.
Those are *opinion* shows. Why do you want to prevent people from expressing their opinions? They are no more "rabble rousing" than those left-wing wackos like ACLU, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, etc. You're absolutely right though - put aside the opinion shows, and the news reporting is remarkably similar to what you get on other channels.

And for the fox haters: The whole "freedom of the press" thing is just completely lost on most you folks. I bet most of you "anti-fox" people would shut down that channel and prevent them from broadcasting, if you had the power to do so. Just like a dictator running a fascist regime, determined to stamp out all dissidents. It's embarrassing really, this unnatural hatred you harbor. For a tv station.
 

obeygiant

macrumors 601
Jan 14, 2002
4,003
3,774
totally cool
I had a roomate while in the hospital that watched FOX news 29 hours straight. In that time id say that 90% of the stories concentrated on Obama and 100% of those stories were negative. Durring those stories the "news" anchors repeatedly made numerous jokes about Obama like frat boys at a keg party.

Fox news is a joke 100% of the time.
What would you call this? Second hand anecdotal evidence?

It might help if you added "neighbor's dog's cousin" somewhere in there. lol