Fox News programming not 'Fair and Balanced'

Remy Soni   Opinions blogger and columnist  
June 19th, 2009 - 12:02 AM
Fair and Balanced, Fox News, President Obama
Recommend thisPost a commentDecrease Text SizeIncrease Text Size

Earlier this week, President Obama addressed one significant effect of his presidency thus far— the media has given him a pass on tough criticism. Obama said that, on the contrary, one news network is "entirely devoted to attacking" his administration. Anyone who watches cable news realizes that the network in question is Fox News. I could not be happier with the President for taking an indirect swing at the biased network, considering that it completely goes against its "Fair and Balanced" motto.

How peculiar is it that Fox News consistently trounces the other networks in ratings on almost any given day and night? This is not an indication of which direction the nation's viewers lean politically but rather what they want to see in their news. As Americans, we love excitement in the form of shocking news, gossip, and rumors. Fox News thrives on this type of feeling. Why watch CNN pull out solid facts about a particular news story when Fox News can give viewers an exciting, yet extremely right-winged, stance on it? It is frightening to think about how popular Fox News is becoming, with their viewership increasing by a significant percent each year. Are Americans really that gullible?

Director Robert Greenwald created a documentary a few years ago known as "Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism." Greenwald's film features interviews with former Fox News employees who speak out against the network for constantly trying to slant their coverage in order to benefit the Republican Party. I strongly recommend this film which offers a deeper look into the news network and its prominent manipulators, such as Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity.

These two individuals, more than any others on the network, are everything that is wrong with America. They tell their left-leaning guests to "shut up," verbally assault those who are in opposition to them, and seek any way to humiliate others while claiming that they represent true Americans. That is complete and utter nonsense.

The only reason both O'Reilly and Hannity continue to be so popular is because people are fascinated by their shocking and disturbing way of offering commentary to the nation. Putting opponents down and avoiding a mutually beneficial debate unfortunately draws the best ratings. How pitiful have we become?

By no means am I suggesting that the conservative viewpoint does not have a place in society. However, a news network by definition needs to be unbiased and objective in their reporting. Perhaps, Fox News should take a hint from radio's Rush Limbaugh and publicly declare itself as a network devoted to conservative commentary, discussion, and information.

It scares me to think just how narrow-minded Americans will become if they continue to watch Fox for their news and what the rest of the world thinks of our media, given the fact that Fox News is broadcast internationally. Unfortunately, "The Most Powerful Name in News" is also the most biased and slanted. President Obama has shown that he can brush off Fox News and the obnoxious bluster that is its trademark. Let us hope the rest of the nation can do the same.

Remy is a senior in LAS.

Post a commentRecommend this

Reader's Comments

Tired of being anonymous? Put a name to your comments! Login or register. Registered users can use avatar images and create new forum topics.

Fox News

I agree.

I think that Fox News certainly seems to have some sort of slant toward negativity when it comes to President Obama. This actually started way before he was sworn in. It is no wonder that their ratings are high though. Just because we now have an African American President doesn't mean that we will all play together nicely.

We still have freedom of speech and those of us who support the President (like me) know that we just don't turn on that station. It's no solution, but it certainly helps to keep the conflict down.

So much for Fair and Balanced. Maybe Fox News doesn't know what that meansm>

Nigel    7/11/2009 - 7:27 AM

Remy, You couldn't be more right

Great article, and I couldn't agree with you more. While I agree with Professor8, that yes you need multiple sources, you don't need windbags blasting anyone who disagrees with them, shutting off microphones, and stalking those who disagree with them. Oh yeah, and when you make a mistake, at least have the dignity to admit that you made a mistake. When someone criticizes Keith Olberman or Rachel Maddow about a mistake they made, they will at least address it on air, and either correct it, or state why they believe it wasn't a mistake. But O'Reily or Hannity, they will just yell at you until your segment is over, and then send a stalker producer to track you down like some low-life paparazzi. Don't get me wrong, I see the slant with Keith and Rachel, but at least they don't specifically state they are, "Fair and Balanced." Long live the Chief.

Chief4Life    6/20/2009 - 8:22 AM

Um, Remy, get a clue

The last couple of presidential elections have shown one thing - that this country is fairly evenly divided between liberals and conservatives. Obama got elected thanks primarily to his rock star status, despite little tangible experience to draw upon. Remy, where do you think that rock star status came from? In case you are confused, the answer would be FROM EVERY NATIONAL MEDIA OUTLET IN THE ENTIRE NATION EXCEPT FOR FOX NEWS! You have to be kidding me with this drivel you're spouting. Do you really not understand why Fox News is so popular?? It is because it is the ONLY national media outlet that is not openly demonstrating a solid liberal bias. Where else is nearly 50% of America to turn for some programming that is not going to make them puke?

BigDoggie    6/19/2009 - 2:10 PM

Opinion piece is neither fair nor balanced

So, from this I am to conclude that CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, HLN, CNBC, and the others offer news coverage that is somehow superior? As someone with more than 35 years of experience in news broadcasting, I'll give you an insider's perspective. None of these media outlets offer anything remotely resembling accurate reporting of the day's events. Just as is the case with what goes on inside the Beltway, a bunch of brainless twenty-somethings are mostly running the show.

It is a constant battle to try to get these young reporters and reporterettes to view events with any degree of objectivity. They're blameless; the product our vastly inferior system of public education. The majority of these young morons can't spell Pakistan, let alone find it on the map.

I'll cut you some slack. Having been educated at U of I, just like these idiots, you too are blameless (and, regrettably, probably also clueless). At least the those educated at Medill are able to see how horribly corrupt these newsrooms have become. And, unlike you, they're willing to try to do something about it. Remy, your tuition money was not well-spent.

balogna    6/19/2009 - 8:00 AM

Fox Biased - Look at CNBC.ABC.CBS.NBC???

One would have to be living in a box not to see how "In the tank" the majority of News Media is for Obama-

Now ABC is on its very own going to try to sell the the American public National health care this week from the White House! And that is unbiased reporting???

Nothing the goverment has ever done makes the tax payers money - Postal System - bankrupt is a perfect example -- Amtrack bankrupt -- Without gov't subsidy this a many other gov't run functions would have been out of business years ago -- and why would anyone think they could run health care any better!

Obama wants to shutter anyone and anything that has a different opinioin that his! That is not a democracy but a dictatorship -- It is called Socialism and that is exactly who he is and why Fox reports what they do.

Ctah77's picture
Ctah77    6/19/2009 - 6:45 AM

they're all biased

C'mon! Are you trying to say that Fox is biased but National Socialist Radio and National Socialist Television are neutral and objective!? Or that CNN ever was? Or GE/MSFT/NBC? Or Bloomberg or the WSJ's print, web or radio feeds? Or the DI? Or the Trib or Pantagraph...? Or even C-SPAN? It's difficult to read or listen to or watch any one of them for a protracted time.

Did you catch the bit in "The Negotiator" in which Kevin Spacey's character points out that he doesn't rely on just one source? And the dangers of having one small group of folks with the capability to crack into and alter the info people are fed in "The Net"?

The good thing about having multiple competing sources with different biases is that it makes possible to become aware of those biases, to read between the lines, and end up with a much better idea of what's happening than if we had one "neutral", "objective" source.

For that reason, I like to get the DI head-lines, those from a couple papers in MT and WY, and those of a couple more in what was the wild wild west of PA and VA in the mid-1700s.

Even using only one search engine limits what you get to see. Try different search sites like dogpile and ixquick and brainboost and gigablast and lycos and facesaerch... When you're searching for employment, go beyond the 3-4 most publicized web sites. And then network to the extreme, and dig in the libraries for the wisdom and nonsense recorded on the dead trees.

Professor8    6/19/2009 - 6:44 AM

Post new comment:
All comments are published at the discretion of The Daily Illini. Comments are the opinions of the individuals leaving them and do not reflect the views of The Daily Illini, Illini Media or its affiliated and related entities, or its partners, sponsors, advertisers or content providers. Comments are intended to be a means of reaction to a specific article, podcast, or gallery and will be moderated for obscenity and hateful language. Do not submit commercial, off-topic or other copyrighted material.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.