Outfoxed: Why continue to watch when they're clearly partisan and dishonest?

[Ms2001]

@BrainGlutton

Either way, I wonder what they would say, afterwards, to defend themselves?

Here’s what Fox News has to say about Outfoxed:

If any news organizations decide to make this an anti-FOX News story, then all of their material becomes fodder immediately for possible out of context and biased documentaries.

The former low-level FOX employees are hardly worth addressing. Some of the “sources” for this documentary never worked for FOX News Channel. Some left because of incompetence, and none expressed concern about editorial policy while employees. They represent fewer than 10 employees out of 2,000 over 8 years. Any news organization that believes this story is big and FOX News Channel is a problem will be challenged by FOX News Channel in the following manner:

If they will put out 100 percent of their editorial directions and internal memos, FOX News Channel will publish 100 percent of our editorial directions and internal memos, and let the public decide who is fair.

[BrainGlutton]

From that link:

The illegal copyright infringement actions of Moveon.org in cooperation with the New York Times, including “cutting a deal” not to give FOX News Channel adequate time to react, is unprecedented. The New York Times corrupts the journalistic process by taking orders from a George Soros-funded web site – Soros is a left-wing billionaire currency speculator who funds many liberal efforts. This is the real story.

I missed that part of the story – what on earth are they talking about?

Some of the “sources” for this documentary never worked for FOX News Channel.

If they are referring to sources that were identified in the film as former Fox employees, and Fox can prove they never were – then Fox has grounds to sue Robert Greenwald for defamation. But I don’t see them threatening to do that.

Any news organization that thinks this story is legitimate is opening itself to having its copyrighted material taken out of context for partisan reasons. . . . If any news organizations decide to make this an anti-FOX News story, then all of their material becomes fodder immediately for possible out of context and biased documentaries.

If I were running CBS or CNN, somehow I don’t think I’d worry about this much.

Besides, any news network’s material is already fodder for possible out of context and biased documentaries. No way to stop them. So what difference does it make? If Murdoch has a beef, let him hire a director and make his own documentary exposing badness on the part of CNN or whatever network he hates worst. Or better still, Air America . . . they could use the publicity!

If they will put out 100 percent of their editorial directions and internal memos, FOX News Channel will publish 100 percent of our editorial directions and internal memos, and let the public decide who is fair. This includes any legitimate cable news network, broadcast network, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, and The Washington Post.

I hope at least one of these rises to the challenge. But I see, that apart from the three newspapers actually named, they seem to be reserving for themselves the right to decide who’s “legitimate”. If CNN publishes its internal communications, will Fox respond in kind or deny they’re “legitimate”? How about Pacifica Network News?