Does Fox News play fair in its Obama coverage?
Now that the latest approval polls are showing President Obama’s numbers slipping and media outlets have officially declared their honeymoon with Obama over, the president has once again lashed out on Fox News for their unfavorable coverage.
In a CNBC interview on Tuesday, Obama seemed to use Fox News as an excuse for his slipping approval numbers. He said:
“First of all, I’ve got one television station entirely devoted to attacking my administration.”
Here is a link to a video of the interview on You Tube.
Though he didn’t directly refer to Fox, it’s pretty clear who he’s talking about. And this isn’t the first time Obama has complained about Fox. In a New York Times magazine article published around election time as reported by the Huffington Post, President Obama said:
I’m convinced that if there were no Fox News, I might be two or three points higher in the polls. If I were watching Fox News, I wouldn’t vote for me, right?
Because the way I’m portrayed 24/7 is as a freak. I’m the latte-sipping, ‘New York Times’ reading, Volvo driving, no-gun-owning, effete, politically correct, arrogant liberal. Who wants something like that?
Everyone knows that Obama receives more favorable coverage in other more moderate or liberal media outlets, such as MSNBC. Is it fair for him to be complaining about unfavorable coverage from just one news network? After all, Fox is a conservative news network so it shouldn’t be surprising that they would have some opposition to a Democratic president.
In America we see balance in the news not always because of objective reporting but from the differing types of bias from conservative and liberal networks. But does Fox News go too far? As long as they don’t skew information and keep to the truth, is harsh criticism OK?
Should the president be criticizing the media in the first place? Do you think his complaints will impact Fox News’ coverage?
Yes, harsh criticism is OK, under the guidlines you specified: `As long as they don’t skew information and keep to the truth….” With Fox News, though, that’s always the $10 million question.
I don’t see anything wrong with the president criticizing the media. Nixon had issues with the New York Times and Washington Post. Other presidents would surely have had issues with newspapers undercovering various administration scandals (i.e., Teapot Dome). It’s fair game.
Unless someone has some other facts or studies I am unaware of, Fox News was found to be the only network that had a balance of coverage on Obama. Pos and Neg almost dead even. It always makes me question someones bias when such a fact is ignored to only condem that network as being in the can for Conservatism.
Surely you jest!! FOX News has no interest in factual reporting or what might be called truth. They seem to be only interested in attacking Obama because: 1. He is black; 2. He is a Democrat; 3. His policies might not be optimal for the corporations that FOX News is really just one big lobbying organization for; 4. The staff at FOX News has extremely low IQ’s. Many more reasons could be listed but you get the idea.
“Everyone knows that Obama receives more favorable coverage in other more moderate or liberal media outlets, such as MSNBC.”
So why is one ok and the other isn’t? Suck it up, Mr President, you knew the job was dangerous when you took it. Sorry this 1st Amendment stuff is causing you pain.
Bill Clinton was notorious for throwing temper tantrums at bad press, but as far as I know he never called out reporters or specific networks by name. I can’t recall a president as thin-skinned and defensive as this one. This is the sort of response you would expect from prima donnas unaccustomed to not getting things their way. It’s also typical of people thrust into positions they are woefully unqualified for but are too egotistical to admit. We saw several examples of this during the campaigns when he whined about not being able to eat his waffles and then again when he threw reporters off his plane simply because their paper’s didn’t endorse him.
Obama’s a rank amateur and it shows. He simply doesn’t know how to respond to non-scripted questions and gets pissy when put on the spot. He better man up quick because the press is going to get a whole lot worse.
You do believe in fair-play right?
How about that piece on the mainstream media and it’s demonization of all things Bush?
What a joke. Here it is folks, for all to see. THE case study for leftist hypocrisy. If they weren’t so blinded by theor ideology, they too would see.
“Other presidents would surely have had issues with newspapers undercovering various administration scandals (i.e., Teapot Dome). It’s fair game.”
The difference E.J., is that the NEWSPAPERS, MAGAZINES, AND T.V. NEWSCASTS have issues with uncovering administration scandals today, now that they’ve gotten their man in.
Why was I edited for asking when we were going to get an expose on MSNBC for the whole “tea-bagging” fiasco?
The question I have is what are the repercusions of Obama’s pointed criticism of unfriendly press coverage? Nothing happens in a vacuum. Does this mean we can expect repackaged “fairness doctrine” schemes designed to keep the press in line with Obama’s agenda? That scares me. We like to think government interference with the press can only happen in totalitarian countries. But the underpinnings of our freedom have been so eroded (No, Obama hasn’t done that in six months, it’s been going on for years) that I’m not sure we are sentient enough as citizens to stop it.
While I am no big fan of FOX, and President Obama can criticize whoever he wants I guess, it would seem to me that the fawning view of MSNBC more than outweights the negatives views of FOX. At this point, everyone knows where each station will come down. And we know how to adjust our minds accordingly.
(On a side note, I really don’t think that FOX has much to do with the recent drop in Obama’s poll numbers. Nor do I think the drop is something the administration ought to worry about to much. He still polls very well. Why create controversey needlessly?)