In addition to the other picture rule, one can't mention FOX NEWS without an obligatory picture of a FOX INFO BABE so that those who do not get FOX NEWS can call their cable company and complain.
Laurie Dhue (Me)
Posted on 01/31/2003 7:40:42 PM PST by webber
By Doug Schmitz
January 30, 2003
The overwhelming success of the Fox News Channel has finally snapped the establishment media's Achilles' heel. As the number one-rated cable news network, Fox News has broken Big Media's monopoly over the dissemination of news. By doing so, Fox News threw a monkey wrench into the liberals' political agendas. And that has them worried.
For decades, the establishment media have dominated the airwaves and newsprint. Now, with the advent of the Internet and the emergence of Fox News, they can no longer decide which major stories get covered - and which get ignored.
Many Americans have finally acknowledged "the elephant in the room" whenever they watch CNN or Dan Rather, and have been handed the power to switch. This makes Fox News a breath of fresh air - as well as a threat to an extremely dominating media culture.
As Bernie Goldberg pointed out in his bestseller, "Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News," the way to fix one-sided reporting is not to hire more conservative writers. The only way to remedy the slant is to do the job right the first time by reporting both sides of the news. Fox News' Roger Ailes saw the problem and fixed it. What Fox News did was truly unprecedented. They sought to restore the tenets of fairness and balance; basic rules of journalism that have all but been forgotten.
Although Fox News occupies fewer markets than CNN and MSNBC, they draw a much larger audience. That speaks volumes about the hunger for objective news coverage.
But while the Big Media often place politics over principle, the independent news organizations have suffered attacks by liberals who don't like what Fox News and other independent news organizations, such as the Washington Times, WorldNetDaily.com, Newsmax.com and CNSNews.com, report.
When Democratic scandals do get coverage from independent news sources, the liberals likely perceive them as politically motivated attacks.
By the same token, if the mainstream media had exposed Bill Clinton, it's quite possible that he would have been held accountable for his crimes and respectfully left office, like Richard Nixon.
Despite Mr. Clinton lying under oath to a federal grand jury, suborning witnesses and tampering with evidence, he went through his presidency virtually unscathed. Nixon, however, wasn't so fortunate. When two investigative reporters from the Washington Post exposed him in the Watergate scandal, his political career was over.
So why didn't the press go after Clinton like they went after Nixon? The fact that Clinton was a Democrat probably made all the difference. Hence, the reason Democrats never complain about a liberal media bias: they possibly think they can seek refuge with the establishment media. But when Democrats like Al Gore and Tom Daschle decry the independent media, it's a sure sign Americans are getting a side of the news they haven't heard.
The mainstream press seemingly goes out of their way to appease Democrats. After all, nearly 90 percent of them are registered Democrats, according to a 1996 Freedom Forum survey. So it comes as no surprise that Democrats - who pride themselves on the power of the press - bemoan the independent media.
But whenever the independent media uncover Democratic scandals, it's immediately declared "right-wing." Yet with the mainstream media, the Democratic viewpoint usually goes unchallenged. Now, the mainstream media are trying to copy Fox News' success with little, if any, results. In fact, when Fox News was the first to create the ticker that runs text across the bottom of the screen, the others immediately followed suit.
For example, CNN's attempt at revamping its news programs probably shows its paranoia. And MSNBC, calling itself "America's News Channel," might be exposing its own uncertainties.
After all, if Fox News was the conservative and pro-Republican vehicle that liberals claim, they wouldn't have hired Alan Colmes, Greta Van Susteren, John Gibson or Geraldo Rivera. If the mainstream media ever hope to succeed, they should follow Fox News' lead and report the news the way it was meant to be reported - fair and balanced.
Besides, if changes were already evident, CBS News and the others wouldn't be going down in flames in the ratings war. If the media elite insists on ignoring the warning signs, they will only have themselves to blame.
Major DUH!
Try to imagine, for the sake of argument of course, the firestorm that would have resulted had it been George Bush, Ronald Reagan or Richard Nixon who was receiving oral sex from an intern in the White House.
It would have been "Lights Out" from Day One. Presidency over. The NOW gang would be camped out in Lafayette Park with candles until the sexual predator president resigned his office and boarded Marine One in disgrace.
There is no way in hell that any Republican president would survive a scandal like that. And everybody knows it. But because the sexual predator was a beloved "Democrat", not only did the NOW gang not make a peep about it, but they sung his praises and attacked those who dared to suggest that there was a problem with a president of the United States soliciting and receiving sexual favors from his underlings. An act, by the way, that would get any run-of-the-mill office manager immediately fired from his job.
The Monica Lewinksy affair settled the issue once and for all regarding whether or not there is liberal bias in the media.
If the media elite insists on ignoring the warning signs, they will only have themselves to blame.
What you say is true. However, you also have to remember who the constituencies of the parties are. The Rats are composed of dozens of small groups who want their piece of the pie. They don't care what the other constituencies want, so long as they get their piece. These are the people that continue to vote Barney Frank into office even after he was caught with an underage male prostitution ring running out of his office. Does anyone really believe he didn't know what was going on? His constituents didn't care, because he brought home the bacon.
Even if the scandals had been covered by the press properly, Clinton would have kept much of his base because the core constituencies of the Rats simply don't have a problem with perjury and extramarital affairs. A clear example is the recent issue with Trent Lott. There were a lot of Pubbies calling for his resignation. Robert Byrd made far more inflammatory comments, and these were reported, but he Rats didn't have a problem with Byrd, because they knew that at the end of the day, he'd bring home the bacon.
Post is too long already, but the simple fact is that a scandal will never hurt a Rat like it hurts a Pubbie, because most Rat voters don't care whether their candidate had an extramarital affair with a subordinate, committed perjury or left a 29 year old girl underwater in a car for nine hours so he could sober up and come up with a story, as long as he brings home the bacon.
In addition to the other picture rule, one can't mention FOX NEWS without an obligatory picture of a FOX INFO BABE so that those who do not get FOX NEWS can call their cable company and complain.
Laurie Dhue (Me)
SAVE THE TREES!
Don't buy newspapers.
How many trees are cut down to print the NYT a year?
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.