I wonder what this numb-nuts thought of the “non-partisan” reporting of the New York Times or the Washington Post during the past 40 or so years?
As Bugs Bunny so aptly says it; What a maroon!
Posted on 04/16/2003 5:21:04 PM PDT by RJCogburn
Besides the Bush Administration, the big winner of Operation Iraqi Freedom is the Fox News Network. Fox News' ratings jumped to 3.3 million average daily viewers, while CNN had 2.65 million and MSNBC trailed in third place with 1.4 million daily viewers. Fox News' success is causing considerable handwringing among the would-be gatekeepers in the "mainstream media." Today, The New York Times worries about the baleful "Fox News Effect" on journalism.
"I certainly think that all news people are watching the success of Fox," groused Andrew Heyward, president of CBS News in the Times. "There is a long-standing tradition in the mainstream press of middle-of-the-road journalism that is objective and fair."
Setting aside the ongoing argument of whether or not the "mainstream press" is objective and fair, perhaps the United States is returning to a time when media were frankly partisan. After all, how do you think the Tallahassee Democrat, the Waterbury Republican-American, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, the Preston Republican-Leader, the Albany Democrat-Herald, and the Garrett County Republican got their names in the first place?
Another model of a partisan, but nevertheless free and vibrant press, is Britain, where readers know the political leanings of all the major papers and make their purchases accordingly. Leftists peruse the Guardian while right-of-center people scan the Daily Telegraph. Both groups go home happy.
I suspect that as news sources continue to proliferate, those 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.
Secondly, what is Shep Smith's position on abortion? What does Linda Vester think about human cloning? How does John Gibson feel about welfare reform? Is Rita Cosby pro- or anti-gun control? I don't know any of these things. Perhaps I just wasn't paying enough attention before the war, but it seems to me that accusations of "partisan bias" depend wholly on the fact that Fox's news anchors and reporters are definitely pro-American. They want America to prosper, and they have all along wanted America to win this war, and the wider war against terrorism. They also don't like Saddam Hussein.
The fact that simple patriotism is grounds for an accusation of "partisanship" in this country demonstrates conclusively why the left can not at the present time be permitted any share of power in the federal government.
Neutrality betwen the US and Saddam Hussein is not "objective." It's sick. Electing these people to office would be a national suicide attempt.
Amen. Case in point: NPR. It tries to bill itself as objective when it is nothing of the sort.
FOX is Fair and balanced
CBS is middle of the road
All are being intellectually dishonest. Fox obviously has a center right tilt why the rest of the media outlets have a center left tilt. The only result of the Fox effect is that more networks may move to a center-right tilt with their newscasts. This type of change will be easier for MSNBC than for the tree major networks since they carry a full day of liberal programming (sitcoms, dramas, etc).
CNN has so many internal problems it will take a long time for them to make any headway against Fox. This war was suppsed to be the thing that brought CNN to the forefont but they were beaten handily by Fox. Now, with the disclosure from Mr. Jordan their troubles are only compounded.
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."
Leaning far left gives a biased perspective that those in the center appear as though they're on the right and that those on the right are over the edge. The same goes for people on the right as they look through the center toward the left.
The rarest of the rare are the the few that stand above -- neither left, right or center -- and see the "stage" below for what it is, the lesser of evils always begets evil. Aside from a few hard-copy financial newsletters, the few exist almost exclusively on the Internet. Though bits and pieces of their work is occasionally republished off line.
Those precious few are part of Cassandra's Copernican Revolution.
I wonder what this numb-nuts thought of the “non-partisan” reporting of the New York Times or the Washington Post during the past 40 or so years?
As Bugs Bunny so aptly says it; What a maroon!
The blatant arrogance of that CBS exec's statement is mind boggling.
The real Fox News Effect is this--
The first major TV news organization to not be a shill for the liberals has had a great impact.
Neutrality betwen the US and Saddam Hussein is not "objective." It's sick. Electing these people to office would be a national suicide attempt.
Worth repeating. In boldface.
That IS the issue. Get a clue! If CNN had been honest and fair, FOX News would have had no market.
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.