# Obama vs. Fox **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 20, 2009, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497 "2009-10-20T16:57:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/81 "2009-10-20T22:03:05Z")
How reporters vote means nothing (exceopt that it should maybe tell you something that the most informed people vote against Republicans). That does not mean that their work is biased. Objective reporting does not mean you don’t have personal opinions. It means you don’t let it affect what you report. Moreover, it’s a _coroporate_ media. Editorial decisions are made at a _corporate_ level. It’s about bottom line, not political agenda. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tooth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c67d28/32.png) [@The\_Tooth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tooth)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/82 "2009-10-20T22:14:11Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > Well, there would seem to be rather a few people who do not believe that Fox is garbage. Well, they’re wrong. But assuming they were right, why would national unity hang on what cable news channel some people watch? I don’t see the connection here. > [@](#): > > Your country would not appear to be united on that front. Fox News is not a factor here. Some may like it, some may not. Canada’s national unity, however strong or weak it may be, does not hinge on who likes Fox News. > [@](#): > > There are people who, based upon things like your last line there, would be happy to dismiss your comments on the situation entirely. That’s fine. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/83 "2009-10-20T22:19:25Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > Seems to me like it’ll be divisive to no good purpose. It’ll give reason for people to trot out the “Well, duh, of course Fox are partisan/Bah, and this is supposed to be the spirit of bipartisanship” ideas which they already hold and will only find bolstered or supported by this. If nothing else, and I imagine it will do little else, it will simply be another excuse for more petty bickering. Which seems harmful to me. Except, of course Fox is partisan. That’s the whole point of Fox News, that they are an explicitly conservative media outlet. There’s nothing wrong with being a partisan media organization, and for most of the history of our country most newspapers were explicitly partisan. It’s only in the 50s and 60s that a non-partisan impartial media became the ideal. But that coincided with a time when partisanship was at an all-time low, when party affiliation meant almost nothing. Not that there weren’t sharp disagreements about policy, even nasty ones, but those disagreements weren’t along party lines. You’d find both segregationist Democrats and Republicans, anticommunist Democrats and Republicans, isolationist Democrats and Republicans, conservative Democrats and Republicans, liberal Democrats and Republicans, and on and on. The parties have achieved a sort of ideological coherence today, but the fabled golden age of bipartisanship was due to the lack of party ideological coherence at the time. ---
**Author:** ![Lochdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/edb3f5/32.png) [@Lochdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lochdale)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/84 "2009-10-20T22:28:47Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > How reporters vote means nothing (exceopt that it should maybe tell you something that the most informed people vote against Republicans). That does not mean that their work is biased. Objective reporting does not mean you don’t have personal opinions. It means you don’t let it affect what you report. > . You managed to be both naive and arrogant all at once. Well done. Biased individuals results in biased reporting. It’s not always a bad thing but it’s something that we should be aware of. Reporters bias routinely leaks into stories that have nothing to do with senior editorial boards. You other comment isn’t worth responding to. > [@](#): > > Moreover, it’s a _coroporate_ media. Editorial decisions are made at a _corporate_ level. It’s about bottom line, not political agenda Other than at senior op-ed level it’s not. It’s down to mid-level editors so bias routinely sinks in. And as for bottom line, what does it tell you that the NY Times is suffering whereas the WSJ seems to be holding its own? ---
**Author:** ![duality72](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duality72/32/3910_2.png) [@duality72](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/duality72)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/85 "2009-10-20T22:31:29Z")
> [@flonks](#): > > Did the pope ever give a positive statement on abortion? Does the pope pretend to be fair and balanced? ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/86 "2009-10-20T22:37:58Z")
> [@The\_Tooth](#): > > Well, they’re wrong. But assuming they were right, why would national unity hang on what cable news channel some people watch? I don’t see the connection here. I’m not claiming that national unity hangs upon it; civil war isn’t on the horizon over this issue. Saying it’ll likely cause some harm is as far as I see it going. > [@](#): > > Fox News is not a factor here. Some may like it, some may not. Canada’s national unity, however strong or weak it may be, does not hinge on who likes Fox News. Apologies, I thought you were American. > [@](#): > > That’s fine. Is it? Wouldn’t you prefer they agree with you? ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/87 "2009-10-20T22:39:55Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > Except, of course Fox is partisan. That’s the whole point of Fox News, that they are an explicitly conservative media outlet. The point really isn’t whether they are or not, so far as people go. It’s what people think they are that matters. And, indeed, there are lots of people with rather divergent views on Fox’s partisanship. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/88 "2009-10-20T22:47:47Z")
> [@The\_Tooth](#): > > Or like someone who’s not afraid to tell it like it is and spit in the face of Fox News. The White House is being far more polite to Fox and Republicans in general than they deserve. Whatever. We can be sure of one thing though. This will send Fox News ratings even higher. Rupert Murdoch must be a happy man today. He’s an old, old hand at this game and knows what happens to circulation and viewing figures when politicians attack the media. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tooth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c67d28/32.png) [@The\_Tooth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tooth)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/89 "2009-10-20T22:49:51Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > Wouldn’t you prefer they agree with you? Well, yes. But having seen the data (I hesitate to use the word ‘facts’ here) they base their opinions on, there’s no point debating. Reason has no home there. Wanna talk about climate change? Thousands and thousands of hours worth of peer reviewed research apparently have the same weight as a two-page essay by a ‘fellow’ of the AEI or a list of creationist TV weathermen compiled by James Inhofe under the auspices of “International Scientists”. Wanna talk about torture? Too bad, because if you don’t support it you either hate freedom or want to coddle terrorists. These are some things I’ve learned about the American Right during the Bush Administration. I’m learning new things about them during Obama’s every day. Fox News fans may not like hearing their source of data being labelled a propaganda machine, but that’s exactly what it is so hard cheese for them. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tooth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c67d28/32.png) [@The\_Tooth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tooth)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/90 "2009-10-20T22:52:06Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > Whatever. We can be sure of one thing though. This will send Fox News ratings even higher. Rupert Murdoch must be a happy man today. He’s an old, old hand at this game and knows what happens to circulation and viewing figures when politicians attack the media. That’s fine too. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/91 "2009-10-20T23:01:55Z")
Fox news dominates all the other news outlets in viewership. The President has effectively declared a media war against those who watch it. It’s disturbing enough that the White House Communications [del]Director[/del] Sheep Herder thinks she can control the flow of information with other media outlets. Finding out one of her [favorite political philosophers](http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=113347)is Mao Tse-tung doesn’t endear anyone to the idea of a President who respects a free press. Openly attacking Fox will reinforce the long held notion that the other networks have a liberal bias and will further erode viewership for these networks. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/92 "2009-10-20T23:12:17Z")
What’s interesting here is that Obama has essentially been working with Fox News to brand it as the authentic voice of conservatism. Now by attacking Fox News he can attack conservatism as a whole by attacking Fox News while acting like he is friendly to individual conservatives. It’s actually brilliant. Conservatives by allowing a narrow number of outlets to dominate the conservative narrative have painted themselves into a corner. [http://www.newmajority.com/why-is-the-white-house-attacking-fox](http://www.newmajority.com/why-is-the-white-house-attacking-fox) ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/93 "2009-10-20T23:12:18Z")
> [@](#): > > …Finding out one of her favorite political philosophers is Mao Tse-tung… You didn’t. You didn’t offer _World Net Daily_ as a cite. You couldn’t have. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/94 "2009-10-20T23:26:27Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > You didn’t. You didn’t offer _World Net Daily_ as a cite. You couldn’t have. You mean the one with the video clip of her actually saying it? Yes. Were you expecting to hear it from CBS or CNN? I think not. ---
**Author:** ![Fuzzy\_Dunlop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/848f3c/32.png) [@Fuzzy\_Dunlop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuzzy_Dunlop)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/95 "2009-10-20T23:38:50Z")
> [@MeanOldLady](#): > > Fox News is the only network that treated that birther nonsense as if it were an actual news story worthy of discussion. The story didn’t pick up any speed for a while (because it’s so obviously ludicrous) until the right-wing commentators decided to make a huge fuss about it. Once it got any publicity at all, it was immediately debunked as Republican lunacy, and this Gretchen Carlson whore sat there with a straight face and asked why the “mainstream media” isn’t weighing both sides of the argument equally. Because they don’t carry equal weight, bitch. One side is completely made up. I’d snark at them too. What on earth does that have to do with the fact that it’s an organized effort from the White house to marginalize and delegitimize Fox news? Somebody said 1 guy at the White house made a comment so I pointed out that it was actually the president’s chief of staff, senior adviser and communications director all presenting the same argument with obviously synchronized language. I don’t care if you want to call it an attack or a deliberate effort to marginalize Fox, it’s obviously one of those depending on what weird definition of attack you use. ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/96 "2009-10-20T23:42:37Z")
> [@](#): > > > [@Magiver](#): > > > > Finding out one of her [favorite political philosophers](http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=113347)is Mao Tse-tung doesn’t endear anyone to the idea of a President who respects a free press. > > > [@elucidator](#): > > > > You didn’t. You didn’t offer _World Net Daily_ as a cite. You couldn’t have. > > > [@Magiver](#): > > > > You mean the one with the video clip of her actually saying it? Yes. Were you expecting to hear it from CBS or CNN? I think not. I’m confused – did you mean that ironically? If I say something like “Starship Troopers is my favorite example of how Hollywood can ruin a great piece of fiction,” do you interpret that as me saying that ST is one of my favorite movies? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/97 "2009-10-20T23:44:33Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > _Come on._ I don’t think the White House should do this kind of thing at all, and it’s a stupid strategy to boot, but if you stood on top of this statement and looked down, you would not even be able to see where “over the top” is. > > The Obama administration has adopted this kind of style from day one. Nobody benefits when the White House starts fighting with the press. It’s not good for the press, it hurts the level of discourse nationwide, and it does not help the White House. You cannot outtalk people who get paid to talk for a living. Nobody’s going to vote out Fox News next November. But Obama did appear on Fox, with Bill O. I thought he was treated very fairly and I also though he acquitted himself quite well. My opinion of him went up upon seeing that. I agree with you that this does not make the White House look good at all. It makes them appear both afraid and heavy-handed. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/98 "2009-10-20T23:46:28Z")
> [@NDP](#): > > Agreed. I don’t like Fox News either (even not considering its politics, I’ve always found it too tabloidy) but the White House calling it out like this brings to mind a well-used but applicable simile about why you shouldn’t wrestle pigs. Have you watched Fox News with Chris Wallace? You find that too tabloidy? ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/99 "2009-10-20T23:51:57Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > You mean the one with the video clip of her actually saying it? Yes. Were you expecting to hear it from CBS or CNN? I think not. My hearing must be failing me, because I watched that whole clip, and didn’t hear her so much as mention Mao Tse Tung. Can you give me the time stamp from that clip where she says this? ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2009, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/100 "2009-10-20T23:56:50Z")
> [@Rhythmdvl](#): > > I’m confused – did you mean that ironically? If I say something like “Starship Troopers is my favorite example of how Hollywood can ruin a great piece of fiction,” do you interpret that as me saying that ST is one of my favorite movies? 😕 It is kind of amusing how people think that the idea of the White House controlling its message is sinister as opposed to being a basic level of professionalism. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497.md?page=6)