Murdoch rips competitors for bias even as more Fox critics emerge on the right

Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts1514

In an address last night to the National Press Club, News Corp Chairman and CEO Rupert Murdoch ripped into the New York Times as a media outlet with "an agenda" focused on "anything Mr. Obama wants." Murdoch, who owns Fox News and the Times' primary competitor the Wall Street Journal, then fielded a question from the audience about Fox News' own reputation for advancing a conservative agenda — and lately the conservative, grass-roots Tea Party movement — in its coverage, Murdoch waved off the allegation.

"I don't think we should be supporting the Tea Party or any other party," he said. "We have both sides in our news shows, our politics or whatever. We have Democrats and Republicans and whatever."

But while Fox News' head cheerleader was trumpeting his network's objectivity and slinging scorn at liberal bias he sees in the rest of the media, Fox News' coverage and its connection to the activist right has been drawing flak from some prominent national conservatives.

Yesterday, Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn, who is strongly identified with both the fiscal- and social-conservative wings of the GOP, wound up cautioning some conservative constituents at a town hall gathering not to "catch yourself being biased by Fox News that somebody is no good."

Coburn's plea for viewer skepticism came in defense of his courtly aside about Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whom he characterized as "a nice person." When a wave of grumbling followed, Coburn stood his ground, asking the crowd "how many of you all have met her?" before proceeding to chide them for echoing the Fox-branded view of Pelosi as a poor specimen of humanity.

The Coburn episode was especially striking, since he happens to be one of the most stalwart conservatives in the Senate, netting a 96-point rating on the 100-point scale furnished by the American Conservative Union.

Other conservatives who are closer to the traditional GOP mainstream have lately raised similar red flags about Fox's broader political impact. David Frum, the former American Enterprise Institute fellow who was recently let go in the wake of a widely circulated blog post he wrote criticizing GOP legislative tactics on health care reform, has said that "Republicans originally thought that Fox worked for us, and now we're discovering that we're working for Fox." Frum spelled out what he meant by that remark in a weekend appearance on CNN's "Reliable Sources":

"What that means is that Fox, like Limbaugh, has an interest in pushing the Republicans to the margins, making people angry," he said. "When people are angry and alienated, they don't vote. They succumb to feelings of helplessness."

Bruce Bartlett, a Frum sympathizer, argues that the network's elevation as the premier source of conservative information has also closed the right off from healthy debate. "Fox News is a Republican, conservatively biased organization," Bartlett told Yahoo! News. "Now conservatives don't need to get into the New York Times, or on CBS. They've got their own news network, and all they really think is, 'How can I get a positive mention from Beck or Limbaugh?' or 'How can I get my boss onto Fox News?' "

Fox's Glenn Beck, indeed, spearheaded the Sept. 12 rally in Washington, D.C., that served as the national coming out moment for the Tea Party movement. The network was also instrumental in publicizing the first round of Tea Party protests over the stimulus law, which launched last April 15.

Those actions have sent the network's ratings through the roof — Beck, for one, is now the second highest rated host on cable news, behind only fellow conservative and Fox News host Bill O'Reilly. But the popular anger stirred up under the network's auspices may not be an unqualified boon to a GOP facing a tough primary season that pits many Tea Party-style insurgents against candidates aligned with the national party organization. Two of the most prominent such races are the Senate contests in Florida and Arizona, where two more compromise-minded mainstream candidates, Charlie Crist and John McCain, are fending off challenges from candidates backed by the Tea Party — and running strongly to the right of their usual positions as a result.

Beyond the primaries, the GOP is looking to make significant headway against the Democratic majorities in Congress — hoping even to return the House to Republican control. But to do that, Republicans will have to overcome their disadvantage in voter registration in many districts by appealing to independent voters — and those are the very sorts of voters most likely to be repelled by an angry ideological message.

Kevin Madden, a political consultant with the Washington-based firm *** Associates and former communications director for Mitt Romney's 2008 presidential bid, says that GOP leaders aren't yet voicing "widespread" concerns about the Fox message distorting the fall campaign. At the same time, however, Madden — a frequent commentator on the rival cable network CNN — praised Tom Coburn's candor.

"Mr. Coburn's remarks seem to reflect an admirable and rare belief that one can win a political debate by convincing those seated in the jury box of public opinion that an opponent has wrong ideas, without having to demonstrate that same opponent has corrupt intentions," Madden said.

Murdoch apparently does not watch his own network judging by his comments. Just think how biased and far to the right one has to be for Tom Coburn to come off as the voice of reason.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
Frum spelled out what he meant by that remark in a weekend appearance on CNN's "Reliable Sources":

"What that means is that Fox, like Limbaugh, has an interest in pushing the Republicans to the margins, making people angry," he said. "When people are angry and alienated, they don't vote. They succumb to feelings of helplessness."

Wow, I simply cannot agree with that. Frum acts like he's never heard of 'firing up the base'.

And if any group was angry in the last elections, it was the Democrats. Seems to me even though angry they sure managed to vote. Frum's a buffoon.

Who cares if Pelosi is nice in person to other Senior Congressional leaders? It's her policy and governing manner that angers many people.

Anyway, Murdoch's bias doesn't necessarily mean that his claim that the NYT is a media outlet with "an agenda" focused on "anything Mr. Obama wants" is false. Let the NYT produce it's editorial pieces (articles by the editorial board) questioning or refuting some of Obama's policies as proof to the contrary. They're big boys (the biggest in the newpaper world), they can defend themselves.

Fern
 

lothar

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2000
6,674
7
76
Tom Coburn has always recommended Washington Post, New York Times, and Wall Street Journal.
I noticed that several times on C-Span Radio during Healthcare townhall meetings he held last year.
Believe it or not, not all conservatives get their news to FOX news. Only the stupid ones do.
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,153
0
0
Wow, I simply cannot agree with that. Frum acts like he's never heard of 'firing up the base'.

And if any group was angry in the last elections, it was the Democrats. Seems to me even though angry they sure managed to vote. Frum's a buffoon.

Who cares if Pelosi is nice in person to other Senior Congressional leaders? It's her policy and governing manner that angers many people.

Anyway, Murdoch's bias doesn't necessarily mean that his claim that the NYT is a media outlet with "an agenda" focused on "anything Mr. Obama wants" is false. Let the NYT produce it's editorial pieces (articles by the editorial board) questioning or refuting some of Obama's policies as proof to the contrary. They're big boys (the biggest in the newpaper world), they can defend themselves.

Fern

Yeah I think you're right, meaning I would disagree with that particular comment of Frum's. However, Frum has been spot-on with most of his remarks. His main point: that regardless of any political benefit to the republicans in November, the passage of that bill was a huge loss to conservatives, and that in the longrun, they would have been better off trying to help shape the legislation and pick up fewer seats then have no influence on it and gain more seats. Congress and the oval office have changed hands many times over the decades, but Medicare is still around, he points out. Second, that FoxNews and talk radio are running the republican agenda and not the other way around. These points make republicans feel uncomfortable, for sure, but he is so dead right on so many things.

- wolf
 

Noobtastic

Banned
Jul 9, 2005
3,721
0
0
NYT has most certainly become a microphone for Barack Obama - towing his line about HC, the ME, Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc...etc...

The Left cannot stand dissent. Fox News is a threat because it is one of the few networks that does not suck up to Obama.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
What does toeing Obama's line on health care reform entail? Calling it health care reform instead of a government takeover of health care?
 

nonlnear

Platinum Member
Jan 31, 2008
2,497
0
76
What does toeing Obama's line on health care reform entail? Calling it health care reform instead of a government takeover of health care?
In a sense yes. The absence of a definite article when referring to this particular health care reform is a subtle propaganda trick to make people blindly buy into a false dichotomy. Opponents of the bill on the table are branded as "opponents of health care reform" instead of more properly being called "opponents of this health care reform". It's a very subtle but very powerful sleight of hand, and it has been used since day one by the White House and all of the major networks - including Fox.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
There may be a distinction to be made between health care reform and this health care reform, but labeling this reform a government takeover of health care is not subtle and is intentionally disingenuous.
 

Schadenfroh

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2003
38,416
4
0
We need tighter state regulation / control of the media / news to keep bias organizations like Fox News from spreading lies and inflaming the right-wing nut jobs into committing acts of violence.
 

nonlnear

Platinum Member
Jan 31, 2008
2,497
0
76
There may be a distinction to be made between health care reform and this health care reform, but labeling this reform a government takeover of health care is not subtle and is intentionally disingenuous.
Agreed, but it actually plays into Obama's hands quite nicely by convincing his opponents that it is something other than further entrenching welfare capitalism. Then when the corporate lobbyists behind Fox and the RNC start firing up the presses as GOP momentum builds, they will be poised to "save" the GOP base from the alleged government takeover by rolling out... more corporate welfare in the form of "deregulation".

The RNC and DNC are the truest frenemies there ever were. The word choices in this fake war are a drama unto themselves.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
We need tighter state regulation / control of the media / news to keep bias organizations like Fox News from spreading lies and inflaming the right-wing nut jobs into committing acts of violence.

Not really, mockery of them should suffice.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
I think too many people are still brainwashed by the left wing media, that they are unable to think for themselves.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
I think too many people are still brainwashed by the left wing media, that they are unable to think for themselves.
I dunno,Faux Noise dominates the ratings for Cable News, if anything I'd think it was their wingnut viewers who are being told what to think.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Rupert Murdock, as the sponsor of a totally politically biased network has no room to call anyone else biased. But even then, there is some validity to call the NYT more liberal than average, but without much room to call the NYT as a distorter of the truth.

But I have to really wonder what will happen to the Fox network after Murdock dies? He is a pretty old guy as it is, and death by natural causes cannot be all that far into the future. As far as I can see, his heirs are not all that likely to continue the Fox tradition of being entirely right wing biased.

Time will tell.

Time heals all wounds and time wounds all heels.
 

DanDaManJC

Senior member
Oct 31, 2004
776
0
76
We need tighter state regulation / control of the media / news to keep bias organizations like Fox News from spreading lies and inflaming the right-wing nut jobs into committing acts of violence.

that's pretty tough though... who will end up setting the rules? the same politicians who get millions of dollars in donations from big media and other corporations, especially since a corporation is now a person too

the only real solution is for people to study the issues more :-/
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
11,112
1,587
126
NYT has most certainly become a microphone for Barack Obama - towing his line about HC, the ME, Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc...etc...

The Left cannot stand dissent. Fox News is a threat because it is one of the few networks that does not suck up to Obama.

Did you seriously say that with a straight face? The left is all about dissent. The entire premise of the left and the concept of progressivism is about dissent from the current and progress into the better. If the left didn't do dissent then the healthcare bill would have been written, passed, and signed into law within a month of Obama taking office. If you wanna talk about no dissent, then realize that every Republican made it their #1 priority to work against healthcare reform before anyone considered what to put in it. Note that during the Bush years that everytime Bush pushed a personal agenda EVERY single Republican voted for it. Note that just a few months ago the RNC tired to push a concept of kicking out anyone who dissented from more than 2 of 10 listed concepts!

I don't even know how to contain the stupidity of your statement in words! It was retarded enough to make Sarah Palin try to use it for sympathy and votes!
 

Linflas

Lifer
Jan 30, 2001
15,395
78
91
We need tighter state regulation / control of the media / news to keep bias organizations like Fox News from spreading lies and inflaming the right-wing nut jobs into committing acts of violence.

Just curious which part of this is not clear to you? Just in case I have bolded the relevant parts.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
 
Last edited:

Rangoric

Senior member
Apr 5, 2006
530
0
71
Just curious which part of this is not clear to you? Just in case I have bolded the relevant parts.

Whoa there, Fox has already said they are entertainment. And also, libel and slander are "illegal".
 

Linflas

Lifer
Jan 30, 2001
15,395
78
91
Whoa there, Fox has already said they are entertainment. And also, libel and slander are "illegal".

When has Fox News claimed to be entertainment? As for libel and slander there are legal remedies if those can be proven. Once again show me where Fox News has been successfully held liable for libel or slander. Once again the 1st amendment is very clear about Congress and their ability to control the press: Congress shall make no law
 

UberNeuman

Lifer
Nov 4, 1999
16,937
3,087
126
"I don't think we should be supporting the Tea Party or any other party," he said. "We have both sides in our news shows, our politics or whatever. We have Democrats and Republicans and whatever."

fox-20090408-opposition2.jpg


\okay, Murdoch....:rolleyes: