Cynthia Meyer, Staff Writer
Ideology: Conservative | Writing From: George Washington University
Liberals scoff at any person who points out the obvious fact that the mainstream media is overwhelmingly biased to the left. And Fox News Channel, through the eyes of a liberal, is nothing but conservative propaganda. Cable news personalities on CNN and MSNBC discredit Fox, pretending that they haven’t been overshadowed by FNC’s success for years on end.
The simple reality is that, especially recently, Fox News has been the only source of quality journalism and reporting in the cable news realm. The
numbers speak for themselves; Fox is consistently on top. On the evening of Tuesday, September 15, Bill O’Reilly’s viewership was 4,039,000, followed by Hannity, Beck, Greta, Baier, and Shep Smith—all above 2 and 3 million. The closest a rival station came to Fox was MSNBC’s Keith Olberman, at a modest 1.3 million.
So if Fox News is merely a “tool of the right” to feed the fire of the angry conservative conspiracy, then why exactly is it the most watched, most trusted and most successful cable news station?
Because it is genuine alternative media. Other cable news stations like MSNBC and CNN have apparently rejected the notion of the watch-dog media (lap-dog is more their forte these days). Why ask Obama about his plans for Iran when everyone clearly would rather know how his dog Bo enjoys living in the White House? Why bother him with tough questions about the economy or healthcare when the public is much more concerned about how Obama is feeling today? They blatantly and shamelessly express favoritism to the left, and have consequently lost the trust of their viewers. Contrary to what rival stations would like to think, the Fox viewership is by no means limited to a conservative audience—it specifically reaches out to those to are dissatisfied with all other media – conservatives, liberals and independents alike. That is the key to FNC’s success, and that is what guides their reporting.
The role of our media should be to act as a check on the government. But the only cable news outlet to dare challenge the President seems to be Fox.
Where were Fox News Channel’s rival stations during the Van Jones controversy? One of President Obama’s controversial appointed czars came under fire for his radical Marxist views—oh, and this classy remark—while the mainstream media was virtually silent.
Where were its rival stations during the 9/12 March on Washington—the largest protest of Obama’s policies since his election? Or any of the previous Tea Party protests this year, for that matter? They avoid it at all costs, and the little coverage that is given to the Tea Party movement belittles, insults and dismisses its legitimacy.
Where were its rival stations when the ACORN tapes were exposed? This massive left-wing organization had been receiving federal funds to guide clients on how to cheat their taxes and run illegal underage prostitution rings from their own homes. Was this not newsworthy?
Where exactly were Fox News Channel’s rival stations? Why were these stories ignored? Because each one of these stories would have hurt President Obama. His approval ratings are already slipping; any unnecessary negative coverage is avoided at all costs. Would the media have expressed such restraint had one of George W. Bush’s appointees been mixed up in a similar scandal? Would they have ignored such massive grassroots protests under a Republican? If a conservative organization had been exposed for similar crimes as ACORN, would the media have so conveniently overlooked it? Not a chance.
Liberals can unsuccessfully boycott Fox News, claim it has no credibility and dismiss its reporting as too “conservative”, but that certainly will not improve the faults of the mainstream media. The liberal media needs to first master the simple concepts of objectivity and quality reporting before attacking the most trusted cable news station on air.

The reason for the ratings dominance of Fox “News” seems obvious to me. Since Fox is the only extreme right-wing station they get 100% of the far-right news audience while the rest have to split up the non-right-wing news audience. The latter is MUCH larger but is divided among many outlets.
Mark,
During the same time slot as O’Rielly, CNN and MSNBC (Olbermann and Blitzer, respectively) don’t even get as many viewers as Fox News – combined.
Even when divided amongst CNN and MSNBC, “main stream” viewers, they are still less then FNC.
This is not to defend Fox News, or claim that it’s not conservative – I’m just pointing out that what you said above simply is not true.
You’re confusing ratings with quality. I tune into Fox too, but not to receive truth and good journalism. I tune in for the comedy and to see just how low and wrong they can go.
Who was educated in a madrassa today? Who’s exchanging terrorist fist jabs today? Will Glenn Beck cry today? Will Hannity admit that the water pumps have actually been turned on? Can Hannity make it through 10 minutes without mentioning William Ayers or Reverend Wright? If Fox is truly riled by corruption, when will they take on Blackwater with the same vigor they did Acorn?
And the list goes on.
FOX covers what is news…. CNN and the others cover what they think only you should know. They then point the finger at FOX for digging up what is then not important for you to know. Just like OBAMA and his government will soon be making all the little decisions in life that greatly control you. See the future?
I watch FOX because FOX tells me both sides of an issue. And, I hear news on FOX that the other networks (and newspapers) decline to report. I’m a fairly typical American.
The New York TImes just released an apology for not covering the ACORN stories soon enough, and for missing the Van Jones story. Apology? Sheesh. Just get with it NY Times before you slide off to oblivion. The rest of you too ABCCBSNBCMSNBCCNN.
FOX questions things the others worship and are propaganda machines. It is very very obvious. 100% of those against the this administrations ideas do not watch FOX.
I watch FOX News to be informed. The most ignorant people watch Mainstream media, CNN and MSNBC…ignorance guaranteed.
Out of curiosity, I would like to hear more about how Blackwater is part of the issue. Please. Go on.
in my opinion, FOX news is the only news. the others are merely worshipers of “the one” and will never actually report on anything that is remotely negative, no matter how true, of “the one”. there are no journalists anymore unless you watch FOX.
I would say that if you ignore the primetime lineup on each channel, which is really political commentary more than news, it’s clear the Sheppard Smith and Brett Baier and Neil Cavuto are much better at being objective than people like MSNBC’s Norah O’Donnell (she is absolutely ridiculous) or CNN’s choice of things to cover.
None of the primetime lineups are very fair and balanced, Fox included. The primetime lineup is more for entertainment purposes. I think Fox is the most objective in terms of daytime news coverage.
This website – http://www.mediamatters.org — chronicles the misinformation broadcast every day on the Fox network. These are straight transcripts – which are then shown to be false with actual facts.
Cynthia, can you point me to the website that chronicles misinformation on CNN and MSNBC?
Beth
Frankly all of the news on CNN MSNBC and FOX is not really new anymore. It is all entertainment(surprise surprise because all of them are owned by large entertainment companies). IF you want real news watch BBC America, The News Hour on PBS, or read the Economist. Fox blatantly peddles to the right just as MSNBC peddles to the left. To try and portray FOX as fair and balanced is not only pathetic, its ignorant. I watch Fox and I watch MSNBC when I want entertainment based on the tiniest grain of news.
BTW Cyntia, you say CNN neglected to cover the 9/12 rallies? Then why did they have live coverage from the rallies with reporters on the ground. Also why did CBS make it the lead story in their nightly news hours if they didn’t cover it. Just sayin
http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/binladen_dead_alive_opt.jpg
Its cable tv. Of course it has errors. Every day, every station says something dumb. The only difference is FOX has a plethora of enemies with no time on their hands that think its a good use of their time to write them down.
@ RMichael. Im not going to sit here and defend CNN or MSNBC as the best news source but FOX is just as bad as they are at misrepresenting the news. Your link shows CNN with the bin laden thing. how bout this one from fox http://www.bradblog.com/Images/MarkSanford_PressConf_062409_FoxNewsDemocrat.jpg identifiying Mark Sanford a “family values” conservative as a democrat. Bottom line is all of the mainstream news is 95% bullshit
Clark, that was an obvious typo. I would hardly call that a misrepresentation of the news. Are you implying that they labeled him a Democrat as part of a right-wing hidden agenda to make people think a Democrat had cheated on his wife?
No, of course not. Besides, they don’t need any help showing Democrats with sex scandals.
The issue here is with hard news coverage. Ignore Glenn Beck, Hannity, O’Reilly, Olbermann, Matthews, Maddow, Dobbs, Campbell, etc. etc.
Look at daytime coverage. Look at what ISN’T covered. CNN and MSNBC fail in this regard.
@ Alec
First off its not a typo, FOX has done it in the past with other disgraced republicans http://www.joeydevilla.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/mark_foley_fox_news.jpg. You remember Foley
CNN and MSNBC have crappy day time coverage but when Bush was in office Valerie Plame and Abu Garib abuses got menial if hardly any coverage. When they did get cover, Fox News was halfassed in its condemnation and its “investigative” reporting was all lacking . CNN MSNBC and FOX all suck equally. Of course if your liberal Fox is a mouth piece for the RNC and if your Conservative MSNBC and CNN are in the bed with liberals. IF your going to watch any of those shows you might as well grab a bowl of pop corn and make a night of it. Sometimes they’re even funnier then John Stewert or Colbert.
*…but when Bush was in office Valerie Plame and Abu Garib abuses got menial if hardly any coverage ON FOX.
It was definitely a typo. There’s no agenda there. And from what I remember, I think you’re wrong about Valerie Plame, but whatever.
if only it was a typo…
Hey Alec!
The only problems I find myself facing with FNC is a couple of their personalities (Sean just refuses to let people speak sometimes), and that they dis-regarded Ron Paul.
Truth be told, we can’t find fair and balanced news anyway, when we turn on the tube were forced to listen to right or left regardless. If you want news, you have to go to other sources. And when you read both sides you can come to an informed decision.
Point being, listen to CNN and FNC to see both sides, then see what’s really going on. You’ll hear the part thats demoralizing to the Dem’s on FNC, and you’ll hear constant bashing from the left on other news outlets.
As with everything political, listen to both sides, then make your own decision, don’t become sheep (well too late, look in the big office).
I agree Rick. I watch MSNBC and read Michael Moore and Paul Krugman sometimes just to make sure I am confident in my opinions. I encourage all liberals to watch Fox and conservatives MSNBC. In the words of Marcus Aurelius, “If any man is able to convince me and show me that I do not think or act right, I will gladly change; for I seek the truth by which no man was ever injured. But he is injured who abides in his ignorance”.
Well, I see the freepers are out in force here, and some are in dire need to reconnect to reality. While, undoubtedly, MSNBC isn’t the most unbiased source of news, to claim that FOX news is any better (in fact, I would argue that it’s worse) is quite simply ignoring the facts.
Please, folks, remember that there’s a difference between “this station tells me things which confirm my beliefs” and “this station presents unbiased news”. How do you find that out? By watching more than just one channel — and by getting your news from more than just FOX and freerepublic.
I was raised conservative and I used to (and still do to some degree) watch FOX when my parents put it on. I don’t generally watch the pundits because they all have inflated egos are are just generally tools. When I want news, I watch the BBC and CSPAN.
Holy christ this is one of the worst articles that I have ever read. You make the argument that the high numbers in viewership is evidence for Fox News’ quality in journalism. A few earlier comments, thankfully, point to this too. This is mind-numbingly puerile and I’m surprised by your lack of shame. Maybe you should work for Fox News. I’m sure they’d hire you.
You know, there was once a time when most people thought that the planet was flat. You could successfully argue with your logic that those people were onto something through their sheer numbers.
I should explain that poorer and rural “folks” (<- did you catch that Mr. David Edwards) that have satellite TV don't even have access to MSNBC and cannot afford any extended packages which which would include it. Unusually, in all basic cable and satellite packages Fox News is always included, but MSNBC is not. This renders any objective viewer calculation as stymied. Case closed.
What we all know is this: Fox News leans right, CNN leans center, and MSNBC leans left.
Considering that we have probably the most liberal administration in office, of course the media that is sways tendentiously right will offer the most hard-lined questions. The Bush administration was thrown consecutive softballs from Fox News – how obscenely ridiculous was the Hannity interview with Palin? I don't know how further a 'independent' news source could have been more accommodating. They were practically sucking each other's d*cks. Here, get your vitamins and watch it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vU90Z6VBEk0
I agree with what Beth said about watching Fox News. It's comic gold. There's nothing quite like sitting back, cold beer in hand, watching escapees from Bellevue (like Glenn Beck who can't spell "oligarchy") present the most mentally deranged 'news' that gives the Onion a run for its money.
And yes, Van Jones was right – Republicans ARE assholes. Not to mention (and yes, the evidence backs me up) ignorant, racist, and prone to religiosity and other such conspiracy theories. These are the same financially and/or mentally piss poor Republicans that would actually benefit under Obama's plan. Almost all of the Republicans in Congress are genuine radicals – their utopia vision for America is one where there is a full repeal of the New Deal, where we take away unemployment insurance, social security, civil rights (remember the 60's southern switch from Democrat to Republican after Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of '64), lower the tax rates at the top – or more laughably implement a 'flat tax,' provide private school vouchers so that the children of racists can attend racist schools, and force drug addicts to "hear and accept the word of our 'lord jesus christ' when looking for treatment which will undoubtedly be faith-based. Conservatives want life to be made most easy for those on top because, of course, they are the most productive members of society, who also, of course, earned it through hard work and ingenuity, not, y'know, fixing prices or inheriting anything.
Wow, sorry for the rant, but…
… Fox News one of the ways to bring this 'amazing' utopia from firmament to fruition.
See "Outfoxed: Rupert Murdochs War on Journalism"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXNvDD13hoY
Alex,
That last paragraph is absurd.
@Alec
I’m impressed you made it past the first paragraph in. You know the counterargument is going to be intelligent when they have to open up with “Holy Christ” to illustrated a point.
@Alex C
That was one of the most crude and uneducated responses I have ever read in my life. “Sucking each others d*cks” had no place in this discussion. Well done. Your personal attacks bring more credibility to your argument. Yes. I know understand exactly what you were trying to say. I’ve seen the light. This entire article was wrong because you have pointed out that Republicans are “assholes.”
Dear Alec,
You’re absurd – unless, of course, you can tell me why my last paragraph, or, as I stated, rant is absurd.
Dear RMichael,
I’d like to challenge you on your claim. In my last paragraph I did apologize for and did acknowledge that it was a rant although it was not an ‘uneducated’ one as you say. In these discussions I don’t have to be nice and formal, and neither does anyone here. I will not be conscripted into saying anything less than what is necessary. And, as I stated, if you watch the Palin-Hannity interview, they were “practically sucking each other’s d*cks.” My effusion that Republicans are assholes has a basis in reality; it’s not some ethereal concept that was vaguely assembled and packaged as fact a la Glenn Beck.
“This entire article was wrong because you have pointed out that Republicans are “assholes.””
Rightttt………..
@ Alex C
If you had the time to look back and “apologize” then you had the time to censor yourself. If you hate Glen Beck and FOX News so much then why do you behave like them? Your immature hypocrisies are what anger me about your post. You sit and claim that Republicans are ignorant, but you argue with broad generalizations that only makes you seem ignorant. Prove that all Republicans are racist. Where is the evidence you claim to have?
Your response encompassed everything that you hate about FOX News. The difference being it came from you, so you do not see the issue with it. The fallacies, ad hominum attacks, straw man arguments, vulgarity were all rehashed in your comment. Thank you for the “Comic Gold” in this thread.
CNN leans center? This is the kinda crap that prevents any useful debate. CNN is far from centrist.
Dear RMichael,
I already told you that I will not be conscripted into obsequious formality just because you see something vaguely offensive. I apologized for my last paragraph for being a rant, not for its content – and if you didn’t know that simple fact then you’re clearly an idiot.
“If you hate Glen[n] Beck and FOX News so much then why do you behave like them? ”
Well, at least you admit that they have a problem. I would hardly argue that I behave like them in certain, and more salient, respects. Admittedly, in other respects my behavior can be explicitly far worse – I can say what I want to say (ex. – my vulgarity) whereas all on Fox News cannot. But that is beside the point. The reason that I can behave (if I wanted to) like Fox News is BECAUSE I’M NOT A F*CKING NATIONAL NEWS OUTLET YOU F*CKING MOMO. The good lady, Ms. Mayer, pointed out that millions of people watch Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC to get their news. I hardly think that my comments (on a 3rd party political website run by students no less) even gets a glance. Fox News has to be objective in their coverage. I only should be. Evidently Fox News cannot live up to that expectation especially in daytime news coverage.
And yes, clearly I was arguing with generalizations. Arguing with generalizations is convenient, not necessarily ignorant (although you really can’t have one without the other). We can get as recursive and unpractical as we want tallying every single Republican’s racial preference, but I have other things to do, as I’m sure you do too. Let me be plain and say, because you apparently do not have the necessary I.Q. to see the obvious, that many Republicans are tacitly and tendentiously racist (although, for your brain’s sake, not all). I know many Republicans and a great majority of them are unabashedly racist and tout this as a good element of the party. I can’t tell you how many times I heard the consensus of my Republican acquaintances, especially Conservative Republicans, express clamored disgust at the thought of a bi-racial couple. You look at any of the Tea Party protests and an overwhelming majority of them the attendees are white; crudely judging 95% to 5%. But this is only circumstantial evidence.
I should start with the disclaimer that the Republicans of today are not the Republicans of 20-30 years ago. The latter were much more moderate. They never tried undue the ‘safety net’ policies of the New Deal. The former, however, radicalized as they are, are making any and all attempts to roll back most of the policies of the New Deal bringing us back to their glory days when income inequality was at an all time high. Unapologetic, bold, and full of equanimity these new Republicans exploited the fears of whites across the nation gaining seats in the Senate and, in 1980, the apogee of control of our democracy, the White House. Starting in the mid-late 70′s this radical group enacted policies that hurt labor and the poor directly, which were overwhelmingly black. Reagan’s policies were an arcane dog-whistle to racists everywhere.
http://www.issues2000.org/Celeb/Ronald_Reagan_Welfare_+_Poverty.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/19/opinion/19krugman.html
“The G.O.P.’s own leaders admit that the great Southern white shift [of the 60's] was the result of a deliberate political strategy. “Some Republicans gave up on winning the African-American vote, looking the other way or trying to benefit politically from racial polarization.” So declared Ken Mehlman, the former chairman of the Republican National Committee, speaking in 2005.
And Ronald Reagan was among the “some” who tried to benefit from racial polarization.
True, he never used explicit racial rhetoric. Neither did Richard Nixon. As Thomas and Mary Edsall put it in their classic 1991 book, “Chain Reaction: The impact of race, rights and taxes on American politics,” “Reagan paralleled Nixon’s success in constructing a politics and a strategy of governing that attacked policies targeted toward blacks and other minorities without reference to race — a conservative politics that had the effect of polarizing the electorate along racial lines.”
Thus, Reagan repeatedly told the bogus story of the Cadillac-driving welfare queen — a gross exaggeration of a minor case of welfare fraud. He never mentioned the woman’s race, but he didn’t have to.”
————————————————-
Dear Tim,
That’s up to debate. I will admit that CNN is much less liberal than MSNBC. CNN has Lou Dobbs who is a closet Republican. But yes, this is totally useless knowledge.
Alex C.,
If you’re implying that Nixon was a racist or manipulated race to win elections, then you actually are ignorant.
Read the first ten or so chapters of Aitken’s “Nixon: A Life” and maybe you’ll come away sounding a bit smarter.
I am disappointed that ratings are being used as a sign of fairness. We’ve talked before, you know better than this. Let’s just hope this was a lapse in knowledge.
What we all must remember is that every media source bases their content on ratings. It does not have to be based on fact, or be accurate, if a program makes the executives lots of money, they’ll put it on the air.
Media is not peer reviewed until after the fact. Unlike scientific papers, no one is there to catch any of the things that reviewed journals do.
I check both Fox and CNN daily (mainly because they have the best mobile websites.. msnbc mobile is terrible), but because they both report different things. I then do research on my own when there is a statement made about certain facts. The news can give facts, but rarely does it interpret them properly.