Archive

Archive for the ‘Washington Times’ Category

Unfair & Imbalanced; The New Fox News

April 11, 2011 Leave a comment

Many of us are familiar with the Whitney Houston classic “The Greatest Love of All” (also sung by George Benson).  Though it is new agey in a way, there is a lesson to be grasped.  Consider these lines:

Everybody’s searching for a hero
People need someone to look up to
I never found anyone to fulfill my needs
A lonely place to be
And so I learned to depend on me

For years, America’s conservatives, patriots and for that matter, anyone who wanted an impartial view of the news and wanted a media heavyweight behind it could depend on FoxNews.com and the Fox News Channel.  When we couldn’t get it from ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, we could rely on America’s “hero”. If we couldn’t get the story at all (other than on lesser known websites and blogs), we knew we could find it on Fox.

Some folks have been saying for quite some time now that Fox has discarded its moniker “we report, you decide”. Yes, it could be seen in some respects. Perhaps no one was more biased on some issues (albeit not all) than the true pinhead, Bill O’Reilly.

But there still existed a consensus from Fox reporters and hosts like Britt Hume and Sean Hannity that we could get both sides of a story and the public would figure out what was truth and what was not.

Those days at Fox are pretty much over.  Fox has been one of the last media venues to address the issue no one there dared touch, that being Barack Obama’s birth certificate (BC) and presidential eligibility.  The issue percolated when Hawaii’s Gov. Neil Abercrombie earlier this year publicly announced that he wanted to put an end to it all by ordering the release of the alleged BC.

But when he ran into circumstances that forced him to backtrack, the media was forced to sit up and take notice. The burst of entrepreneur and tycoon Donald Trump onto the 2012 presidential scene and his outspokenness on the absence of any proof of natural born citizenship of America’s putative prez quickly kicked the issue into high gear.  Suddenly he was getting interviews on media outlets across the spectra. With Fox sticking out like a sore thumb on its then non-participation, it was forced to cover what it cringed doing.

These became Maalox moments for O’Reilly, Hannity, Greta Van Susteren, Neal Cavuto, Megyn Kelly and others at Fox shunning to discuss what the public is increasingly concerned about (besides jobs and high gas and food prices).

But instead of running with the issue and giving both sides of the story, the talking heads at Fox were acting like politer versions of PMSNBC’s Chris Matthews and Joe Scarborough, CNN’s Suzaane Malveaux, the New York Times Gail Collins and others, treating Trump and his supporters with skepticism as to why this should be a national issue.

And then Fox comes out with this hit piece yesterday, the “coup de gras” to its previous history of impartiality.  And boy, as you will see, it is loaded with disdain at those of us who not only question but seriously doubt the presidential credentials of Barack Obama.

A quick summary of the Fox blatant bias comes in four parts:

  1. Polls show that the billionaire reality star’s popularity has been on the rise as he’s taken up the so-called “birther” cause”.  As Trump points out, the term “birther” has been, in his words (and mine), a “pejorative” (AKA slur).  Anyone using this term in an article, other than in a quote, is likely using it as a point of mockery and disdain.  Fox repeats the term in the third to last paragraph, not as a quote from someone but inserting its own two cents.
  2. appealing to a fringe movement”.  So people like me who question Obama’s lack of natural born citizenship appear to be “fringe” folks (AKA extremists).  Funny but that doesn’t seem to jive with some recent polling. Perhaps Fox is the one on the fringe.
  3. Most mainstream politicians have rejected this conspiracy theory as hokum, but Trump has embraced it”.  So questioning whether Obama lines up with being a natural born citizen, according to Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 5 of the Constitution is now viewed by Fox as conspiratorial and “hokum”, another word for nonsense.
  4. Though the president has produced a certificate of live birth”.  This is disingenuous reporting on the part of Fox. There are countless articles from experts debunking the so-called birth certificate, too many to list here, but if you have lived in a hut over the last 2-3 years and haven’t seen an example of a truly bogus document compared to a bonafide one, compare Obama’s phony BC to Trump’s legitimate one.

 

barack-obama-birth-certificate.jpg (500×488)6a00d8341c4df253ef014e870c2b5b970d-500wi (413×310)

 
(Is Fox so far removed that they want its readers to believe that the one Obama originally posted on his Fight the Smears website is authentic? Puhleez!)

In the top left corner of the Fox page (as well as all its news pages) you see below its logo “Fair and Balanced”.  Frankly, there’s zilch that’s fair on this piece and if this is balanced, then I have a bridge for sale in New York I can offer you for next to nothing.

If those questioning Obama’s constitutional eligibility to be president is viewed as fringe, then maybe Fox staff should view the 10,500+ comments (and counting) in just over a 24 hour period (at the time of this writing).  Granted, there are opposition posts to those of us who believe Obama is ineligible but by far, the vast majority of posters here see a big problem.  And Fox thinks the 9-10,000 who do are fringe?  How many other articles of theirs at any time get posted comments into the five figures?  Look at the “Most Commented” list to the right and try to find ones there (or any other recently past article) with anything remotely close.

Perhaps someone could ask Fox why no one individual wants to put his or her name as the author of this hit piece since none is listed.

And maybe someone could ask Hannity (if you can get thru to him) how prior to the 2008 election he could dig up so much dirt on Obama and his shady character pals like Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, and Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his arguably racist church but then make a boneheaded statement on this past Thursday’s show, saying to his so-called great American panel (web link cannot be found but the show was seen by this writer), “I assume the president was born in the United States”.

Memo to Sean (if he’s listening):  Hey, buddy, why don’t you do the same research on Obama’s questionable natural born status in the same way you did his connections three years ago instead of just assuming?  And if you come up with the same things so many of us have come up with, why not use both your radio and TV shows to report your findings?  If Ruppert Murdoch or Roger Ailes fires you for doing so, consider it as a badge of honor to God, country and your audience.  You will have done a heroic service to America and you will be highly valued and respected for standing on principle instead of with the hush hushers at the Fox hierarchy who appear to prefer to bow to Obama and his FCC instead.

You’re financially set with the nice six figure salary you get at Fox. Because of this and other reasons, isn’t the possible loss of your job at Fox worth it as a sacrifice to get the truth out on Obama and his ineligibility?  Wouldn’t you want to be a hero to your audience, constitutionalists, conservatives and other patriots? Or is the Rodney King mentality, “can’t we all just get along” more important to you?

If you wish to e-mail the last paragraph to Hannity, his address is hannity@foxnews.com. However, do not expect a reply or comment unless it’s in the multiples of thousands. He doesn’t advertise his e-mail address any more.  At least O’Reilly still does, though don’t expect him to respond to this matter if you write him on it.  But if you wish to do so, oreilly@foxnews.com.

Unfortunately, it appears Fox is not alone among the prestigious so-called conservative news sites when it comes to Barack’s ineligibility.  The Washington Times also came up with this slightly slanted piece, albeit not as heavily so, this past Friday.  The term “birther” was injected twice and “talk show conspiracists” once.   But at least the writers’ names were provided and there was a little more objectivity here than the Fox story.

Memo to WT writers David Eldridge and Ben Wolfgang:  Why does this issue not command your investigation?  Are you unaware that constitutional lawyer Mario Apuzzo, one of those suing the Obama Administration, has advertised several times in your paper, including as recently as last month? Have you read his ad.  Is it not compelling? Or is Mario a kook in your opinion?  Don’t you think you could take a little time to talk to him (his contact info is readily observable on his home page. I assure you, he does interviews.

E-mail info for Mr. Eldridge and Mr. Wolfgang are noticeably absent here but if you’re interested in contacting them thru the paper or by fax or submitting a letter to the editor, details can be located here.

I won’t yet lump the WT into the category Fox now officially belongs to, the “Unfair and Imbalanced” one, since there is a general fairness in their writings – the ones on repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, or DADT, in the military (like this one) are very sound.  And it is good on most other matters.  But it is one we need to keep our eyes on.

That said, our hero sources are dwindling, those that have significant name recognition.  It’s becoming more fashionable to read the lesser known sites and blogs for they have readers to gain.  Sources like Fox, the WT, NewsMax and others have large reader bases.  With biased reporting like seen in the above news story, Fox’s audience will likely drop some of its support, at least from those who watch its shows.  The online site will likely maintain a high volume because unlike with the TV, you can pick what you want to read and view anytime.  You don’t have that luxury on the boob tube, unless you switch the channel.

But it must be said that the Fox News Channel is not one of us any more. It doesn’t fulfill our needs that much any more.  And so we will learn to depend on others for fair and balanced.  Because Fox has abandoned it.  And it must now pay the price in its ratings until such time it decides to cater to its audience and not Obama and the Saudis who are helping Mr. Murdoch in veering away from its previously refreshing coverage.

So now that I’ve reported the facts, it’s up to you to decide whether to believe them.

Advertisements