Some / certain reporters on Fox asked some / certain questions about Obama and/or other Democrats, as counter-programming to the rest of the media, but that was driven by the "culture" of some / certain rank-and-file reporters rather than investments or the possible edicts of the owner of parent company. Case in point - WSJ's mostly conservative/libertarian editorial board vs WSJ's generally very liberal news division reporting, owned by the same publication within News Corp.
FNC and Murdoch have a reputation of a "conservative" media outlet, by comparison to an out-and-out "progressive" media. That allows Fox maintain a disproportionate share of the viewers and listeners who don't care for "progressive" point-view fed to them from the numerous other media outlets, whose only differentiation comes down to the "personality" delivering the same "old news" the consumers can hear or have heard everywhere else.
Successful content differentiation is good for business, especially when differentiation is addressing the larger and captive "intellectually hungry" segment of the "market" (population) for political and/or business news.
well the reporters who asked the questions about odumbo’s ties and ideologyare atill employed by Fox
so clearly there was no pressure by Fox or any Saudi investor to STOP asking questions