[Paulie]

You’ve got it Old Sarge.

This is mighty troubling for any news organization to do, much less FOX. Easy for me to say I guess, but if they wanted me to sign something of what I believed to be of such significance (which it is), I think I would have told FOX to...I think you know.

Does this not confirm FOX is part of the problem?

[Leaning Right]

Does this not confirm FOX is part of the problem?

For the sake of argument, I'm going to defend Fox here. It's one thing for Sheriff Joe to go on TV and say here are the facts, and here is the proof (regarding the birth certificate).

But it is another thing for Sheriff Joe to go on TV and just ramble on and on about future investigations. So perhaps Fox simply wants to avoid all that. And I'm sure Fox would just love a world-wide scoop if Sheriff Joe really had something concrete.

[Ohioan]

Fox is obviously conflicted on this sort of issue, because of its owner's dual citizenship, and multi-national business interests. It is not a problem unique to Murdoch, although it has special nuances in his case.

There has always been a high degree of subjectivity in news reporting, however one might wish that it were not so. The most trustworthy jounalist I ever encountered was the late James Jackson Kilpatrick, when he was the Editor of the Richmond News Leader. He certainly had strong opinions--very Conservative;--but he always displayed a balanced approach to the facts. (Of course, as a Conservative, interested in preserving reality, he did not need to embroider or suppress anything. It is very different with those who have duller axes to grind.).