»» Columnists

What’s Right With The White House’s Posture on Fox News (And What’s Wrong)

by Tommy Christopher | 9:33 am, October 22nd, 2009

» 11 comments

Fox_NAMBLA Jake Tapper took a lot of heat from the left yesterday for daring to ask whether the White House has the right to adjudicate the legitimacy of a news organization. The exchange was the latest in a growing feud between the White House and Fox News Channel. The White House has also begun to take flak over this, and not just from the right. I think both sides need to simmer down, now, and take a look at the whole picture.

Where is the Outrage?

Shortly before Tapper’s volley, Mediaite asked why other mainstream media outlets had not rallied to defend Fox News from the White House’s onslaught. There are several possible explanations for this that I’ll explore in greater detail, but I wanted to point out that this is not the first time something like this has happened. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs routinely takes shots at news outlets, Fox and otherwise, and he always has. His indictment of the entire British press got him a huge laugh in the briefing room, and nobody complained when he admonished Major Garrett for using blogs as a source when he asked about “Dealer-gate.”

Those situations are not the same as this one, but I don’t recall any attempt to get Gibbs to narrow his criticisms then. As someone who writes for several blogs, I would have appreciated that.

Tapper’s Principled Question

Much of the criticism of Tapper is the result of a misunderstanding of his question, and the fact that Gibbs didn’t answer it very well. He wasn’t defending Fox News, and he wasn’t suggesting that the White House shouldn’t push back against Fox. Here’s what he asked:

It’s escaped none of our notice that the White House has decided in the last few weeks to declare one of our sister organizations “not a news organization” and to tell the rest of us not to treat them like a news organization. Can you explain why it’s appropriate for the White House to decide that a news organization is not one…

There’s a world of difference between some verbal jousting over an editorial point of view and what could be seen as an effort to chill a free press. Questioning Fox News’ “legitimacy,” arguably a point about the honesty of some of the network’s reporting, dances on that line. Advising other news organizations to shun Fox News crosses it. As a friend said to me, President Palin will also have thoughts on which news organizations are legitimate.

What Axelrod’s heavy-handed remark also does is to allow Fox News to play the victim, and allows the media to ignore Fox News’ provocation of the White House.

As for Gibbs’ handling of the question, he gives Fox an out by referencing Fox’s opinion programming, rather than elaborating on the accuracy and fairness of its reporting, which he began to do when I asked him about it last week.

Next: The Wall Between Opinion and News, And The White House’s War on Fox

Pages: 1 2

Anita Dunn, Fox Kevin Jennings, Glenn Beck, Jake Tapper, Robert Gibbs, Sean Hannity, Tommy Christopher, White House, White House Posture on Fox News, White House Press Corps

m

>A linchpin of Fox News’ defense has been the notion that there’s a separation between their news and opinion programming. This is true, to some degree

True in its presentation, but not true in its implementation.

On their supposed “news programming” they reprint RNC talking points as news without remorse http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/10/fox-passed-of-gop-talking_n_165720.html and have partisan-hack, faux reporters such as Griff Jenkins do segments to them: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDGhs_LN7Fk

Next time someone in the media says “well, Fox News has a divide between their opinion, prime-time programming and their day-time, news programming” they deserve to be slapped silly. It’s not true.
SFPhoto

Hi Tommy, this is a very well thought out and well written piece. Thank you. Although I have grown to dislike and mistrust Obama, I do think the “White House” does need to regain the high ground. Being a bully has done nothing but drag down Nancy Pelosi and it will do the same for Obama.
ImNotBlue

Media Matters has posted extensive examples of Fox News programming that is untrue or unfair…

I agree. MOST of what Media Matters posts IS untrue and unfair. I don’t know why people keep referencing them.
realitycheck

Why would Gibbs have a problem with Garrets Blogs as sources. I seem to recall a certain Huffington Post being ushered into a news conference, and being called upon in prime Time? Does that count as opinionated broadcasting if the White house does a PM Presser? Seems to me someone is cherry picking.
straitshooter

Mr. Christopher,

Media Matters fact-checks Fox. Do you fact-check Media Matters? Isn’t it worth mentioning Media Matters’ founders and funders? I would like you, as an employee of the this blog, to do a little heavy-lifting. Go find a Fox News story (news, not commentary) and show us a distortion, or better yet, an out-and-out lie or factual mistake. It’s useless to challenge Fox as an honest news organization without specific proof it has been dishonest.

Of course if Fox does make mistakes, I expect them to issue corrections and retractions like any other responsible news outfit.
CaptainAmerica

Why doesn’t Tommy quit writing for Mediaite and go to work for MEDIA MATTERS. He can then tout their b.s. all day and push his gay agenda. Maybe even Kevin Jennings for President!
Tommy Christopher

The Media Matters material was extremely tertiary to the point I was making, but I did review their examples, which are very well-documented. If you have a problem with one of them, I’ll gladly take a look at it.
Tommy Christopher

CaptainAmerica,

anti-gay bias doesn’t just kill gay kids.

http://www.edgeboston.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=&sc2=news&sc3=&id=90214
matt111

I get so irritated when people misunderstand the constitution and freedom of speech and press. I see people do it from the left and right, all the time. There is no chilling effect on the freedom of the press. Fox is free to print what they will and the White House is free to attack them in the press or through PR as they will; they have a freedom of speech, as well.

Now, if the government starts passing laws to outlaw Fox News- that would be different.

TOMMY CHRISTOPHER, PLEASE BE MORE INTELLIGENT!!!!
MoonDog

I echo matt111 – you completely missed the one and only point that needed to be made. It’s obvious you are oblivious to that point and frankly, you wasted a lot of time trying to defend and indefensible position.
StewartIII

NewsBusters: ‘Safe Schools Czar’ Funded Anti-Christian Gay Porn Art Exhibit
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-philbin/2009/10/22/safe-schools-czar-funded-anti-christian-gay-porn-art-exhibit