Thus, on the heels of White House Communication Director Anita Dunn's charge that Fox News operates like the "research" or "communications" arm of the Republican Party, the network's zealously devoted, yet demonstratively clueless viewer base has managed to again reveal -- via their wholly unsustainable defense of Fox as an upfront, "fair and balanced" news organization -- the perils that foreshadow cult-like allegiance to a single source of information.
Consider their conundrum. Certainly, the Fox slogan, "We Report, You Decide" provides its viewers the opportunity to pass judgment on what it reports; it's just that the network fails so miserably as a place to turn for accurate, objective and unfiltered content that truly is "fair and balanced." After all, how many other news organizations are known for generating mass protests against the President of the United States as has Fox's Glenn Beck-inspired "9-12" protest? Moreover, what news organization broadcasts a morning eye-opener that offers a level of mind-numbingly vacuous and transparently partisan chatter of the kind found on Fox and Friends?
Launched in 1996, the network's history of distorting news to influence public opinion is so well-documented that it's now become shop-worn. Fox News' journalistic follies run the gamut from statistical distortions and altering images, to delivering news analysis designed to convey Republican Party talking points.
Ask the avid Fox News supporter why the U.S. invaded Iraq and the likely answer will be "because of September 11!" Ask what's most to fear about "Obama-care" and you'll probably hear "death panels!" By and large, they are people who simply cannot fathom how something as "refreshing" as a good water-boarding can be construed as torture.
Still number one
Indeed the expression of deluded, tortured logic by many Fox News viewers is hardly surprising considering from where their primary source of "facts" originate. Bill Maher once stated that Christianity used to be a cult until it gained enough followers to become respectable. As such, in the case of Fox, if respectability is measured by high ratings, then the network can legitimately argue that it deserves a bit more respect than it receives from the journalistic community at-large. For some time now, the Fox News Channel has been the number one cable news network. As for overall ratings, currently only the USA Network, the Disney Channel and ESPN pull in more cable television viewers than Fox.
From the onset, the network's adamant pro-America bluster has been specifically targeted to those politically-susceptible devotees of a narrow-minded "my country, right or wrong" type of thinking. And, in terms of market share and ratings, it's an approach that continues to serve the network well. According to Reed Business Information, during this year's third quarter, Fox ranked fourth in total viewers among basic cable networks.
By and large, the network's viewer core of older white males -- the average age of a Fox viewer is 65 -- has no interest in accepting the notion that other than liberalism, there's anything wrong with America that would warrant the time it would take to have a debate about it. Perhaps this is why someone who can manage to come off both vapid and outlandish like Beck has thrived on Fox, or why someone like CNN's churlish in-house xenophobe, Lou Dobbs belongs on Fox.
Once a formidable and knowledgeable presence, Dobb's credibility has been overwhelmed by his increasingly strident immigration stance. As most of us know, former Fox sports reporter Keith Olbermann, of MSNBC's overtly anti-Fox news program Countdown, can rant like a 21st Century Howard Beale, but at least he gets his facts straight. The pretentious Dobbs on the other hand, simply rants; channeling a spirit that leans more toward Ted Baxter than Howard Beale. What Dobbs offers is tailor made for the typical Fox News viewer.
A note on MSNBC. Largely due to Olbermann, MSNBC now appears on Fox News supporters' "du jour" list of the "Mother of all Great Satans" of the liberal media. Perhaps for good reason. In recent years, MSNBC has become more persistent in its Fox-bashing as well as more strident -- perhaps in some ways, more Fox-like -- in the clarity with which it expresses the progressive viewpoint. Without a doubt this has occurred, in part, to address the need for a filter through which the partisan extremes of Fox's news coverage can be sifted. After all, CNN -- perhaps out of professional courtesy -- certainly doesn't allot very much air-time challenging Fox distortions.
Still, I find it doubtful that in this case, MSNBC's constant Fox bashing is the symbol of a network that is indifferent about professional courtesy among peers. It's clear that MSNBC has decided that it can no longer recognize as a peer, a network so lacking in journalistic integrity as the Fox News Channel.
"Firing Line" or the "700 Club?"
This is certainly the belief within the Obama Administration which in late October followed up on Dunn's initial charges by flatly stating that if Fox insists on being recognized as a news organization, then it also needs to be acknowledged that Fox is a news organization with a "perspective" thus setting it apart from the mainstream media.
That is a valid point. In terms of style, Fox's political opinion shows like Beck's, along with The O'Reilly Factor and Hannity, too often engage in the kind of low-brow, noisy theatrics reminiscent of the old Morton Downey, Jr. shows (I'm sure that Jeremy Glick can attest to that). Very rarely do Fox's opinion shows exhibit any elements of the learned, smoothly intellectual political repartee heard, for example, during the days of conservative William F. Buckley's Firing Line broadcasts.
As for its hard news -- in terms of flavor -- Fox News' content seems to have more in common with news segments broadcast on Pat Robertson's 700 Club than with Walter Cronkite or Eric Sevareid. Similar to its opinion shows, the network utilizes a vivid, tabloid approach in the presentation of its hard news content -- which is basically a mash-up of pop culture sensationalism, anti-terror hysteria, religious rabble-rousing and hyper-patriotic nationalism. It's a format that brings to mind the kind of "reporting" found in tabloid publications available along supermarket check out isles.
Purists may find this approach appalling, but it's the type of presentation that Fox News' viewers obviously enjoy. The fact that the network also carries the burden of a well-documented history of distortion and flat-out lying isn't a simple reality that Fox News viewers find unacceptable; it's a reality most refuse to admit even exists.
