MoveOn pushes Dems to join White House in icing Fox News

By Stephen C. Webster
Wednesday, October 21st, 2009 -- 2:05 am
Share on Facebook Stumble This!

foxnewslogo MoveOn pushes Dems to join White House in icing Fox NewsJoining recent condemnations by the Obama White House, Democratic political action group MoveOn.org is urging its network to petition Democrats in congress against appearing on Fox News at all until the start of next year.

"Democrats often appear on FOX in hopes of reaching out to conservative viewers. But FOX cuts off their mic, distorts what they say, or runs biased headlines at the bottom of the screen," the group said in a recent mass e-mail. "In the end, Democrats always lose on FOX."

The e-mail references a New York Times article in claiming that President Obama will not be appearing on Fox News until 2010.

"The one weapon all administrations can wield is access, and the White House, making it clear that it will use that leverage going forward, informed Fox News not to expect to bump knees with the president until 2010," the Times reported. "But Fox News, as many have pointed out, is not in the access business. They are in the agitation business."

To this effect, Huffington Post's Cenk Uygur explained: "The Daily Show did a great segment just last week showing how Fox News acted as cheerleaders for the 9/12 Tea Party protests and gave it wall to wall coverage, yet for a protest of almost the same exact size -- the Gay Rights protest last weekend -- they didn't send a single camera crew. And The Daily Show didn't even mention a Fox News producer who was caught on camera riling up the crowds in the 9/12 protest and literally encouraging them to cheer louder. I don't think they sent a similar 'news producer' to the gay rights march. To argue that they covered these protests straight without any leaning toward one side or another is comically disingenuous."

Story continues below...

MoveOn also cited a report by watchdog group Media Matters which called out an instance of Fox News re-purposing media highlights from a Senate GOP press release.

On Sunday, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel came out swinging. "It’s not a news organization so much as it has a perspective. And that’s a different take. And more importantly, is not have the CNNs and the others in the world basically be led in following Fox, as if what they’re trying to do is a legitimate news organization."

Asked recently how Fox News is different than other major news networks, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs alluded to hosts Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity.

"You and I should watch sometime around 9 tonight or 5 this afternoon," Politico quoted Gibbs as saying.

Of course, the move is not without its detractors.

"It is unwise for Obama to single out Fox, and generally unwise for Obama to go after the media," Alan Lichtman, a professor of history at Washington, D.C.-based American University, told The Montreal Gazette. "Clashes between presidents and the media are not usually happy for the president. It kind of brings the president down, and makes the president look a bit petty, a bit of a whiner, and it usually just helps the media outlet."

Even veteran Washington writer Helen Thomas warned the Obama administration against going after the media.

Speaking on MSNBC's Morning Joe, the Hearst Newspapers columnist, who as White House correspondent has covered every president since John F. Kennedy, told Obama: "They can only take you down. You can't kill the messenger."

David Carr, writing in The New York Times, similarly panned the move.

"The American presidency was conceived as a corrective to the royals, but trading punches with cable shouters seems a bit too common," he wrote. "Perhaps it’s time to restore a little imperiousness to the relationship."

In spite of the rhetoric being exchanged by both camps, the White House has not entirely disengaged from Fox News. Senior Obama adviser David Axelrod told ABC News host George Stephanopoulos on Sunday, "We're going to appear on their shows. We're going to participate, but understanding that they represent a point of view."

While both sides certainly stand to benefit from the publicity Obama's reclassification of Fox News will attract, The New York Daily News was quick to point out that anything could happen.

"The administration could look like a bully trying to intimidate critics and a free press," writer David Hinckley noted. "It may also look as if it’s descending to a level beneath the dignity of the Oval Office."

Then again, Hinckley concludes, "convincing Americans that their choice is the Obama administration or Fox News could give the administration a sweet push, at a time when it could use one."

Share this article:
  • Print
  • email
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Story comments are below...

  • rexozone
    Let's truly kick it up a notch and with a rush to judgment answer the beck and cawl, stop the Ins(h)annity. Boycott the WSJ, the Post, and any pubication (yellow titillating history rewriting, issue muddying outback journalism) owned by Mr. Fox whatever ailes him.
    Boycott the fox sports sponsored games and anything that bears the Murdoch seal of approval.
    Send him back to Wupp-Wupp.
  • Savantster
    "Clashes between presidents and the media are not usually happy for the president. It kind of brings the president down, and makes the president look a bit petty, a bit of a whiner, and it usually just helps the media outlet."

    Except, this is the first time we've had something like FOX out there. They are not a news channel, they are a propaganda channel, an arm of a political party. In the "past", if a President criticized a media outlet, it was likely because they didn't like the truth being told since it painted them in a negative light.. today, pointing out that FOX isn't "news" is completely different. They [the WH] aren't saying they don't like the news painting them in a negative light, they are saying "nice political propaganda machine".
  • starvapor
    Any Democrats who "appear on FOX in hopes of reaching out to conservative viewers" are not too bright to begin with.
    Their efforts to do so, remind me of Thomas Paine when he noted that "To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead."
  • Name
    These people telling Obama not to get into a fight with the press need to realize that Fox "news" is not the press nor is it news.
  • dennycrane
    Remember, FAUX NEWS won a lawsuit against a FAUX NEWS husband and wife team in Florida. The couple did some inside journalism on a story and FAUX told them "not" to tell the truth. They refused to tell the story because it was a lie. FAUX fired them The couple won the suit at first, then it was appealed. The judge said, "FAUX doesn't have to "tell" the truth." Gee, a "news" station that doesn't have to tell the truth.
  • moi2cents
    I have always believed in both freedom of speech, and freedom of the press.
    But.........Murdoch being able to call the farcical Fox News "news" seems a bit much. There should be some sort of truth in labeling regulation applied, or promulgated and then applied.
    Apparently there are both cynical people willing to dupe fools with fake news stories, and fools willing to suspend disbelief on some fairly obviously false "news" reports.
    This brings about a situation where people who may, in fact, have valid doubts about the incumbent administration are co-opted by a GOP freight train of idiocy. This allows rational people to altogether disregard Republicans in general.
    No populace is safe when the incumbent administration is without a rational opposition. We all know that the current admin. is, all things considered, center to center-right, as compared to the entire Democratic party. So it's quite easy for them to ignore the left wing of the party. There is no credible opposition; none that looks close to legitimate or viable.
    I think Fox News is damaging our political dialog, cheapening our level of discourse. They've truly weakened the very people whose ideals they profess to espouse. And having been taken for a ride by Fox, they're now seemingly a little too angry to think straight. They follow the stories and regurgitate the pablum, looking and sounding more foolish, more unstable every day.
    The rest of the media has been co-opted in the process. Now instead of simply reporting news, or following developing stories, the media is almost obliged to report on this curiously fact-challenged media source. The media becomes the story.

    It is certainly ethically wrong to mislead people to make money. To call it news should be criminal. People are, in fact, dying because of this. Whip up enough otherwise well-intentioned people with misinformation, and we will probably be in Iran before we really know why, and who really wants us there, and who is behind it, and which corporations are lobbying hardest to go 'cause they stand to gain the most.
    Haven't we been manipulated into working against our own interests long enough?
    I think it's a special kind of treason to fool people into fighting against their own health care, never mind fighting illegal wars.

    We have a pretty good chance to re-gain some international respect. But without seriousness of purpose and good intel (news, facts, reason, context), we're just not going to make it.
    We need a rational voice of opposition, and Fox News isn't it. Time for them to stop undermining this country with lies.
  • Anais
    MoveOn has a great idea. The fact that Fixed News is fixed and NOT news seems to be gaining momentum. It started with Obama's refusal to go on the network and extended to the recent and very well-argued story in Newsweek that Fixed is unAmerican because it does not ascribe to the American concept of the press as independent. Once Fixed is further marginalized, perhaps the American people as a whole will see it for what it is: an emperor with no clothes and start making fun of it, as Fixed deserves.
  • commonwealth
    Is it a wise move for Fox to criticize the president, to now attack the president because the president has stated the obvious?

    And when will Roger Ailes stop beating his wife?
  • mel
    48th and Sixth, Manhattan, the location of Fox, the "news station" with a license to lie. I suppose we can't make citizen's arrests for Fox personel impersonating journalists but we can make our presence felt. The windows aren't completely opaque. Let's force them to put up steel shutters.
  • primero
    Anyone who criticizes the white house for opting out of Fox "News" is a hypocrite. No thinking person can watch that cable outfit for more than 5 min. and not see the bias.

    Do they have a right to say anything they want to on Fox; absolutely! but the white house is NOT obliged to go onto a network that clearly and deliberately distorts the words of progressives, IDs disgraced Republicans as Democrats in their cyrons and pumps hysterical stories like "The Madrassa" "birthers" etc. and creates its own protest (tea baggers) then covers it. Its a joke. And people who turn a blind eye to all the antics at Fox and say that its 'beneath' the white house to avid such an organization is 100% disingenuous at best.
  • crackbaby
    In WWII, when the Allies reached an island in the Pacific theater that was too heavily fortified to invade without incurring huge losses they simply went around it and let it "whither on the vine" so to speak. They cut them off from supplies and proceeded towards the Japanese mainland. Engagement was saved for fewer major battles rather than taking on every holdout.

    The same strategy can work for Fahk's Nuze.
  • zelduh
    I say GOOD FOR THE WHITE HOUSE! Fox "News" is not a real news organization; it is simply a propaganda outlet for the GOP.

    I say, ignore Fox!
  • lorn
    You are right about Fox. But seriously, you should have said the same thing about the Obama White House. It is no more of a real Presidency than the nightmare reign of W Bush was.

    Both are corrupt masters of war and deceit. As long as our vile media continue to prop up the big lie that Democrats and Republicans differ, the people will stay at the bottom being abused by both.
    I remember not so long ago when the vast majority of commenters here knew that.

    Now it is overrun with clowns arguing over Glen Beck, Fox and other trivial matters.
    Meahwhile Obama bombs, lies and tortures as his devotees look away and pretend it is all OK.......just as the Bush lovers used to do.
  • Savantster
    You're as bad as FOX..

    No one here is looking away or ignoring anything. We just happen to be able to do more than one thing at a time.
  • PunchDrunkLove
    moveon is every bit as hypocritical as fox news is, for example, a few weeks back they were lambasting Pat Buchanan because he said something about hitler's leadership, yet last week they were defending a democrat after she revealed Mao was one of her favorite philosophers .

    Moveon is just as stuck in the left-right paradigm as is fox, both just different sides of the same coin .
  • dan
    FOX = Mainstream Cable News Network
    MOVE ON = Political Action Committee
    Hypocrisy?
    You need a Thesaurus or something.
    Have a nice day
  • dennycrane
    The Mao "quote" was a "joke", if you would have been in the audience from "start" to "finish." In other words, she found their words handy to make a universal and fairly banal point about being true to one's self. Nothing more. Don't "break" your neck looking the other way. Shill.
  • kiboshki
    MoveOn is a political organization and doesn't brand itself as a news outlet.

    FOX News clearly does claim to be a news organization while acting largely as a political one. This ought to make it guilty of false advertising, at the very least.

    Change the name to "FOX PsyOps", and the debate would end.
  • jamzz94549
    Hmmm...you're a douche bag on either side of the same coin...
  • Savantster
    .
    I don't know if what you say is true, I don't know what Buchanan said.. But I know FOX twisted the intent of the Mao quote for their own slant.

    And even if MoveOn was "wrong" by being hypocritical, it doesn't follow that they are wrong about this, or anything else. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

    The problem with the left-right paradigm is that we have two completely unrelated groups sitting in that paradigm.. the "leadership" and the "populous". Leadership doesn't care about their "party" in terms of ideology (plenty of "Dems" voting for corporate interests instead of the philosophy of "left").. but the "populous" generally falls into their ideologies.

    I think you're conflating the left-right paradigm with the "two party fallacy". Left is pro-people, the right is pro-gimmeallicangetandfuckyou (exercised through "business")
blog comments powered by Disqus