Posted on 05/20/2008 8:05:21 AM PDT by GPSkins
Presidential historian Sean Wilentz—who’s also a New Republic contributing editor, Bob Dylan enthusiast, and prominent Clinton backer—talked to MarketWatch about campaign coverage.
And like many Clinton supporters these days, he didn't shower praise on CNN or MSNBC.
[Wilentz] said the best coverage by far came from the Fox News Channel. Wilentz observed that Karl Rove, contributor to Fox News and architect of Bush's two successful presidential campaigns, among others, had sounded "very, very knowledgeable."
"What it showed is that the reporting of politics doesn't have to be bad," Wilentz said. "If you respect your audience without a partisan imperative, then you can have some sophisticated reporting."
Wilentz now joins Fox-loving Clintonites like Ed Rendell, Terry McAuliffe, and Lanny Davis.
If the political reporting were as accurate as the sports reporting..it would be big progress. Facts and figures..undoctored pictures..objective analysis..wow..just think how many people would watch.
Carl Rove is getting good reviews because he is accurate and factual. Sort of stands out among all the ho’s.
Lots of Clinton cheerleaders on Fox.
And lots of McCain cheerleaders...that’s why it’s FAIR AND BALANCED.
I’ve never understood their phrase...’We report, you decide’. It seems that if they reported the facts, then what’s to decide?
I am disappointed in FOX. They continually keep swinging farther and farther to the left.
They were trying to harpoon NBC this morning but that began only to appear to be sibling rivalry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.