Fox, why are you doing this to me?
Monday, January 11, 2010
I have been a lukewarm defender of Fox News in the past. Most of their op-ed stuff is pretty biased, but the "news" portion of their broadcast wasn't all that bad and they usually get some fairly bright commentators and panels. They certainly weren't any worse than most of the rest of the MSM. Maybe I have just been getting more crotchety, but I have less tolerance for pundits in general and the commentators on Fox have been getting on my nerves.
O'Reilly is the least annoying, but he still shouts far too much. At least he brings on people that disagree with him. Hannity is a lost cause. His show made some attempt at balance when Colmes was paired with him, but it is completely unwatchable now. Beck never was watchable, nor will he ever be.
As for the contributors, some are good. Judge Andrew Napolitano is sharp and has a good understanding of the Constitution. I don't like Karl Rove, but at least he has the background to discuss politics, campaigning, and DC. Now I find out that they are bringing on Sarah Palin as a contributor. I know I have defended her in the past. I still don't think the media treated her fairly, but I also don't think she has done enough to educate herself on national matters and is content to produce sound bites and populist BS. I think this is a bad move on the part of Fox.
19 comments:
FOX and Palin? They're a match made in my personal hell.
On the plus side I think this throws yet another shovelful of dirt on her political future.
She will never win another election in her life. And I honestly think she'll probably never run for anything.
Of course the suspense/possibility that she might is the only thing that makes it worth paying any $$$ for FOX and the only reason any wingers listen to her, so she has to maintain the illusion that she'll consider it.
I don't think she can win, either. Generally, I don't have much faith in the average voter, as they tend to pick superficial features and slogans and don't really know much about the candidates. Palin appeals to a fair number of people, but is so polarizing that she will doubtfully appeal to moderates and independents. I also think that some intelligent conservatives will become less enamored with her as time goes on and she is seen as not being that knowledgable.
I suppose some of this depends on who else is runnig, but she seems to be content to be a speaker/rabble rouser.
I think there is a good chance she will not "produce" like Fox wants. I suspect she will want the position without doing the work to support it, and will quickly tire of it, and want to move on.
She appears to me to not be a person willing to stick it out and do the hard work of about any position.
My Alaske friends, despite her resigning, tell me she did a decent job as Governor. That being said, she doesn't seem to be willing to work very hard on the national stage. If she did, then more people would (may) take her seriously.
Maybe I have just been getting more crotchety, but I have less tolerance for pundits in general and the commentators on Fox have been getting on my nerves.
We are both getting crotchety. Pundits - on all networks and of all political opions - have been bugging me lately too.
She appears to me to not be a person willing to stick it out and do the hard work of about any position.
I think you are right, but for Fox programming, she doesn't need the facts, just needs to be fed funny little quips to entertain her followers.
It's an obvious, bullshit attempt to give her some national exposure and make it sound like she has become more sophisticated on issues. A Presidential candidate given airtime and free publicity (plus she's certainly getting paid for this) for years before actually running??
What bugs me even more is that the rest of the MSM isn't calling FOX out on this or any of their other bullshit. For competitive reasons alone, shouldn't they be calling FOX out??
I will need more evidence to believe this is anything other than Fox putting a person on the air that will attract viewers. Whether she deserves it or not, she is a popular figure and will get some people to watch. Like any network, they care more about bringing in revenue than advancing any agenda.
Steve:
If you need "more proof" of FOX's plainly obvious bias, beyond the political bent and statements of every one of their op-ed contributors, then I will spend the time to sift through the hundreds of good examples and make a blog post about it. I am also happy to send you along to sites that bitch about FOX's bias, and even make an effort to pick posts that aren't just bitching, but instead show a clear bias.
But if you can't see plainly what FOX is doing and how they do it, I may not be able to find anything that will satisfy your need for "more proof."
Yes, Palin is mind-bogglingly popular. Yes, Palin will draw more viewers, potentially, who somehow aren't already watching FOX. I am willing to bet though that most people who would scramble to watch a Palin show are one of two types: 1) already watching FOX because they agree with FOX's bent on news anaysis; or 2) watch FOX out of morbid curiosity or because it's important to know what your opposition says.
I would fall into camp 2. I would watch Palin because for the 5 minutes I could stand before murderous rage set in, I would be morbidly curious to see what she said if for no other reason than to drive myself fucking crazy.
I think FOX does drive an agenda. Their octogenerian Australian owner is an unabashed conservative, and owns other media outlets whose op-eds are of a starkly right-leaning bent.
Rupert has an agenda beyond making money. Part I think is business competition; by obtaining right-leaning news networks and periodicals, he is simply capitalizing on what he sees as the sellers. He ain't buying Mother Jones, because Mother Jones ain't making money. He isn't buying blogs like HuffPo because there's no money in it. He isn't buying NPR because he kinda can't.
But come on Steve...FOX's strict adherence to a conservative line is so tight that they don't even try to hide it any more.
Thus: my theory. Give Palin 2 years worth of daily time to say whatever the fuck she wants. FOX draws viewers and makes money...and helps an ally.
You give her 2 year of talk time, she may talk herself OUT of being a presidential contender.
I agree that this will attract viewers. People will watch because they are curious about her. They will want to know if she knows anything, or is she is simply an Alaskan bumpkin. But that will get old fast, and she will actually have to show she can cut it.
I won't disagree that they are biased, and you should know that I am open to arguments and have changed my mind on many things. To suggest otherwise is just not true and I am irked that you would suggest this.
I guess time will tell if this isn't part of Fox just trying to get Palin elected rather then make money. I know there are hundreds of Fox watch sites that show the bias, as I am familiar with other sites that pick apart other stuff being generated by other lazy "journalists". It just took me 20 minutes to pick apart this piece from the Huffinton Post. I agree with Andy. They are taking a big chance, as she is polarizing and tends to annoy people. This will likely backfire, as the only people that will support her after this are the people that supported her in the first place.
To suggest otherwise is just not true and I am irked that you would suggest this.
I'll bring a hankey the next time we go to Greg's.
I said I may not be able to find enough data that you would find suitable enough to make a strong "bias" argument specific to FOX helping Palin campaign. I didn't say you never change your mind and no matter what I find you still won't.
You said I will need more evidence to believe this is anything other than Fox putting a person on the air that will attract viewers.
So I said what I said, because I might not be able to spend the time it takes to make a convincing argument that FOX is stumping for a Palin Presidency. My strongest case is that FOX is a right-biased, right-favoring "news" organization fronting for a giant 24-hour conservative op-ed. It's plain to me, it may not be to you, and I am doubting my ability to comb Balloon Juice to push you into my camp.
Feel better? Do we need to hug this out?
My strongest case is that FOX is a right-biased, right-favoring "news" organization fronting for a giant 24-hour conservative op-ed.
While I may not agree 100%, I think that one could make a plausible argument to support this claim. As with most bias, it is a matter of perspective.
I apologize for misinterpreting your comments. Sometimes I skim through these too fast.
I am doubting my ability to comb Balloon Juice to push you into my camp.
I am pretty content being a contrarian independent. I think the Dems have some good ideas and I have no problem pulling the lever (or punching the chad) for some of them.
I think Andy might have an interesting point here :
You give her 2 year of talk time, she may talk herself OUT of being a presidential contender.
Pat Buchanan did pretty much the same thing here, didn't he? After a few embarrassing clips on air, his electoral fate was sealed, and I am pretty sure hers will be as well.
I think former Gov. Palin is just as "out for the money" as any of the Fox news corporate leaders are.
Personally, and I may be mistaken, but I think the woman knows she will never have major elective office, but is going to milk this phase of her life for every dime she can, while she can. She might think she can go higher, but the milking will continue inspite of whatever else goes on.
Just look at the fundamentalist televangelists and mega church preachers where I live, no matter what else goes on, their private bank accounts are stuffed with cash FIRST above all else.
ps, that above statement only goes for some of them, there are many who are devoted to the cause of Christ and live pretty simple lives. It is fairly easy with some observation to see the money grubbers, and I think Gov. Palin is one.
One supposes that she could do *slightly* less damage spewing uninformed patriotic hate on Fox News than in the White House, but this is still pretty lousy news.
She probably feels like legitimate public service is for suckers and that she can reach a lot more people this way via the private sector. This move seems to be half laziness, half greed and %100 ugly.
I recorded her appearance from last night, so I will see what she was like. I don't expect much.
Palin and her family are no different than any of the other hacks who use their 15 minutes to enrich themselves.
I group her with the so called "octomom", reality TV stars, the balloon-boy family, etc.
Personally, and I may be mistaken, but I think the woman knows she will never have major elective office, but is going to milk this phase of her life for every dime she can, while she can. She might think she can go higher, but the milking will continue inspite of whatever else goes on.
This. Absolutely, this.
She is doing everything she can to rake it while she can—and for that, I suppose, I can't blame her. If Rupert Murdoch was going to back up a Brinks truck to the Casa de Furious, I'd read a script for as long as he paid me.
But she, in my opinion, has no genuine interest in the hard work, or less money, of campaigning for POTUS or holding the office. If she could've ascended to the office via the VP spot, she'd make the best of it, but her engagement with the office would make George Bush look like Thomas Jefferson.
No, she has to keep the option of running alive as long as possible to keep the gravy train rolling. If she actually ends up running it will be because her own ego and her sycophants are telling her too and only if it's a means of extending the payday.
Post a Comment