Fox News producer admits to high-level bias

Charlie Reina, a television producer who worked for Fox News Channel for six years, admits that the network gets not-very-subtle hints about which way to slant the news from the head office:

So far, it seems like Salon is the only news outlet to pick up on this story. They have an interview with Reina, who goes into a bit more detail:

Personally, I never trusted Fox News further than I could heft a Buick, and this memo merely confirms what I’d already suspected. But for folks who aren’t as cynical as me, what do you think of this? Is it a mountain being made out of a molehill? Or is Fox now definitely an unreliable source of information?

[fixed code --Gaudere]

Ack, sorry about the code errors. The links are here and here.

Can a passing mod fix the coding for me? Thanks. :slight_smile:


Well, I can’t say it’s surprising to hear about the right-wing pressure in the Fox newsroom, but it is nice to have it confirmed for all to see.

Well, all who read Salon anyway.

There’s also supposedly direct communication between FOXnews and the Bushites. How is this any different from the good 'ol Soviet news service TASS/Pravda?

You took the words right out of my mouth.

Tass/Pravda are examples of state-controlled media, reflecting the slants and opinions of a political elite. Fox News is an example of a vigorous and free American press, unafraid to speak truth to power and eager to present the unvarnished truth to the American people.

And I, as Queen of Romania, issue the following decrees…


these horror stories have been circulating as far as I can remember. I had actually seen interviews on tv where reporters, and even anchors for CNN where Turner and company made it very plain to them to change a story (due to political slant) or it would not be on the air.

So your picking on Fox is a bit disingenuous. I enjoy FOX news, and I have always thought they have some tilt to many of their stories. But so does every News organization that writes their own commentaries. CSPAN is no exception, but you will notice their commentaries are far and few between.

I have heard liberals get pissed at Fox for their slogan “fair and balanced” but never heard a yelp about CNN’s “'The Most Trusted Name In News”, or ,“You can depend on CNN.” or NPR’s “free speech radio”.

I understand if you have a gripe against Fox if you have a dislike for a non-liberal, right leaning, accredited news organization. But no more of a gripe than all non liberals have against all other left leaning media. This is getting old, and you guys get more shrill every time you bring it up.

pssst. Don’t tell O’Reilly.

SAen, did you actually read any of the links? Do you know the difference between editorial commentary and news?

No one is really talking about FOX’s slogan, but rather about the fact that a major news service has an open political agenda and is essentially a wing of the Republican party.

“But NPR is a footstool of the Demoncrats…” Yes, but Terri McAuliffe isn’t their news director, for Crissake.

If only more Americans could see BBC…

Cite? CITE?

I-Know-you-are-but-what-am-I is not a good debate tactic possum. The exact same crap can be said about every news organisation that is seen with a bisae. And that means all of them, like I said.

Did you pay attention to how LA Times treated Arnold during the recall election?

Turner gave a billion dollars to the UN to pay off “America’s ineptitude”. You dont get any more political than that.

Deep breaths. Calm down and I will try to dig it up, I told you I saw it on an interview on TV, but I reckon there will be records of such on the net but it may take a bit of searching so dont panic just yet.

Fox has a conservative bias?

Faints dead away

When CBS, CNN (HAPPY B-DAY, SADDAM!!!), ABC, NBC, NYT, LAT, etcetera, admit their bias, that will be a real news story.

An example of the type of memo:

"Among the examples that Reina cites is the following Mar. 20th memo: “There is something utterly incomprehensible about Kofi Annan’s remarks in which he allows that his thoughts are ‘with the Iraqi people.’ [sub]cough[/sub]**One could ask **[sub]cough [/sub]where those thoughts were during the 23 years Saddam Hussein was brutalizing those same Iraqis. Food for thought.”

  • my bolding and coughing. Just a view, but journalistic integrity and independence is fundamental to the very concept of democracy itself and, as such, should be beyond party political point-scoring. It’s scary, folks. Really.

It should not be acceptable from any quarter on any subject. Period. Let alone defended . . .

No, Saen, you can’t say “the exact same crap”- that a former partisan media coordinator is head of the news division- about CNN, or the LA Times.

While your looking around, why don’t you find out who Roger Ailes is?

I think the most damning proof that the slant does NOT operate the same way on both sides was the recent study showing the relative ignorance of the Fox viewer vs. the NPR listener. (For those who missed it, Fox viewers were the most likely to be grossly misinformed and mistaken about Saddam Hussein & Al Queda, and NPR listeners were the most likely to have the most accurate understanding of the facts. )

The moral is: point of view is one thing, propaganda another.

“Let a hundred flowers bloom, let a thousand schools of thought contend.”

  • Mao Tze-tung

Contention is good. Debate is good. Even raw propaganda is good if you already know. The people who watch Fox News know what they’re getting. Fine and dandy. Too many watchdogs for them to get away with putting forth outright lies, as compared to spin. Also, Fox has a lock on the wing-nut population, no one is going to risk the money to attempt direct competition on thier turf.

Half an hour of “Daily Show” is probably a pretty good balance for 24/7 of Fox news, the relative weight of truth being what it is.

That’s a damn good question.

Actually, watching Fox on occasion and listening to NPR will not make your head explode. PBS had an interesting special on Afghan warlords and a stone quarry last night. O’Reilly was polite to a Satanist, for the 20 seconds I watched. I was shocked.