The Fox News Effect

Reason ^ | 4/16/03 | Ronald Bailey

[SunStar]

Leftists peruse the Guardian while right-of-center people scan the Daily Telegraph.

Hmm... Isn't that how it is here?

Washington Post (liberal) vs. Washington Times (conservative)
New York Times (liberal) vs. New York Post (conservative), etc.?

[LS]

You live and learn. Journalists decided in the Civil War era to try to aim for "objective" journalism and set up codes of conduct; new publishing objectives; strategies to downplay political bias in reporting. "Objectivity," "fairness," and fact-based reporting soon triumphed over the moralistic Progressive press and held sway for the next 50 or so years, until the 1960s. For a number of reasons, the media gradually abandoned this "objectivity" in the 1960s, then RAN away from it in the 1980s, to the point that the national media was simply not trustworthy on major news issues.

We have now come full circle, to a "partisan press" not unlike the Jacksonian era, and that is not bad. The reporters were NEVER unbiased, but the "holier-than-thou" approach they took insulated them for 20 years, from Cronkite to Jennings.

Far better to have networks and papers say up front their politics, and let US decide which news is valid, than to trick the public into thinking that it is getting "objective" news.

[MEG33]

I think MSNBC had one of the best embeds..Dr. Bob Arnott.I like Fox and simply don't watch the big three for national news.

[narby]

This is why my tag line is:

[backhoe]

What really galls me is the pretense most reporters, journalists, and writers make of being "objective."

This is utter hogwash- everyone, right, left, or center, has biases, viewpoints, and a body of life experiences that color their perceptions- it is far better to acknowledge "where you come from" and try to compensate, than pretend to be "fair."

[ECM]

Considering my brother considers all of your liberal examples "moderate," no, I don't think so.

[FreedomPoster]

It's amazing how hard the Left tries to continue to propogate the lie of "objective" reporting from the lamestream sources. I've been engaging some lefties on a neutral board, and that concept comes up again and again. FNC is slanted, but ABCNNBCBS are "objective". They really seem to believe their own horse apples.

[savedbygrace]

CNN's new tagline - We report when we damn well want to, or not.

[sd-joe]

"The New York Times worries about the baleful "Fox News Effect" on journalism."

The NYT worries about Fair and Balanced, and well they should with their biased agenda.

[Uncle Miltie]

Not mentioned in the ratings was the Antiamerican Broadcasting Corporation, and their disdainful moral equivalence machine from Canada.

[narby]

Hmm... Isn't that how it is here? Washington Post (liberal) vs. Washington Times (conservative) New York Times (liberal) vs. New York Post (conservative), etc.?

Newspapers Yes. But TV claims to be unbiased. Even Fox claims to be unbiased (which I think they can prove, IF you make the assumption that the definition of "unbiased" is what the majority of the people think)

[BillF]

"There is a long-standing tradition in the mainstream press of middle-of-the-road journalism that is objective and fair." says SeeBS.

It's laughable that the network that employs Dan Rather ( click on http://www.ratherbiased.com) would say this.

[News sources] that provide their readers, viewers and listeners with the best information and superior analysis will tend to win out over those who offer chiefly partisan screeds. CBS News and other mainstream media have nothing to fear from the "Fox effect" if they keep that simple standard in mind.[emphasis added]

SeeBS has everything to fear precisely because it has NOT been providing accurate and fair reporting in recent memory.

[RAT Patrol]

"There is a long-standing tradition in the mainstream press of middle-of-the-road journalism that is objective and fair." Liar, liar!

[rwfromkansas]

I don't know. I think being fair is important.

But, I would not say "objective," as nobody can be perfectly objective. But, a journalist should try hard to be fair and give both sides a good amount of press in the same article.

[urbanrights]

to opine that the mainstream media is non-biased could not be more biased

[bolthead]

There is a long-standing tradition in the mainstream press of middle-of-the-road journalism that is objective and fair.

Talk about drinking your own bathwater...he's sitting in that tub with a big ole slurpee straw.

[Libloather]

"There is a long-standing tradition in the mainstream press of middle-of-the-road journalism that is objective and fair."

I think I heard the very same thing mentioned by the Iraqi Minister of Information...

[MEG33]

LOL

[Michael121]

It would seem that once again the libs think that their way is the fair way. And if you don't like their way then you are a Nazi.

The sad thing is Hitler, since I being a conservative have to constantly be compared to being a nazi, is that the libs in the media have actually done more damage to reporting the truth then all the Hitlers and Goebels could have dreamed of doing. They are just as anti-Jew and anti free thinking. They do not believe in burning books that is unless they are written or given a thumbs up by, Rush, or Hannity, or G. Gordon, or any other perceived conservative.

The leftists version of "freedom of speech" is they stand on their little soapbox and spout their beliefs, then as you stand on your soapbox they stuff a sock into your mouth. "Freedom of speech" means as long as they get their words out then that is free. Yet they whine when we won't buy their book, or CD, or Movie, etc..... Libs whine whine whine... I think they learned it from the French. Hey the French have the cheese to go with.