Of course Fox News is a right-biased organization. And of course most of the rest of them are left-biased organizations. Who cares? What I object to is the pretense (from any of them) that they’re objective, fair, balanced, etc. while others are biased.

I certainly don’t mind agenda-oriented commentary…so long as there’s no pretense about where it’s coming from. And I don’t think the idea of a “structured” (ie, statutory) balance is a good one. In fact, it’s probably unconstitutional.

But why doesn’t everybody in media just take off their masks? They can disparage the Glenn Becks or Keith Olbermanns all they want: at least those guys are honest about who they are and what they think.

Because FOX VETTED Obama. Because they reported on the negatives surrounding Obama. Because they didn’t paint Obama as the second coming. Because they pointed out Obama’s dismal voting records, and lack of experience, and habit of voting present.

Perhaps if more gay people watched FOX they wouldn’t be feeling so neglected, and lied to now, by Obama.

Yes, diverse enough for 90% of them to vote McCain/Palin:
http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/08/07/fox_news/index.html

Even the BBC had a story (the left leaning BBC) about how the earth has COOLED the last 11 years.

There are suckers born every minute and sadly they are the 20% in this country who are LIBERALS.

But we can see why there are people who hate FNC. They are the ones who want/love the Obama handouts.

No seriously… whenever there’s a special where Rupert Murdock wants to convince Americans that Saddam Hussein has WMD, or that Iran/North Korea is going to attack America tomorrow, or a Hannity or Beck segment where they want to scare their right-wing audience (even more) there’s always that ominous music to go along with the story.

It’s like a scary GOP music video.

While Fox News has the highest ratings, it’s also the same group of people that make up just 20% of America’s electorate… the far right-wing of the GOP.

There will always be an audience for the far right and that’s Rupert Murdock’s Fox News demographic.

Rupert keeps them frothing at the mouth with manufactured fear and GOP talking-points, phony outrage.

Fox is also a right-wing echo chamber.. notice that when “The Wall Street Journal”, “The Weekly Standard” people are on Fox News there’s never disclosure that these people are all Rupert Murdock employees.

Imagine if MSNBC or CNN did this… I don’t know how Fox News gets way with constantly recycling Rupert Murdock’s employees (sockpuppets) from his various media properties.

There’s harldy a word on the “MSM” about Murdock’s world wide (far right-wing) media empire.

Murdock has a lot of influence, example: all of his various sockpuppets, Hannity, Beck, etc, and all of Murdock’s worldwide media holdings trash global warming, Presidnet Obama and anything else right-wing Rupert Murdock dislikes.

I think that press and especially individual journalists are deathly afraid of Rupert Murdock and what he can do to them professionally.

Rupert Murdock is the new William Randolph Hearst.

Another thing, Sarah Palin, who is a favorite among the Faux News/ Right-wing crowd is getting Rupert Murdock’s wingnut welfare.

Palin’s (Rupert Murdock’s ghostwriter) book publisher is HarperCollins… a wholly owned Rupert Murdock subsidiary, you ‘betcha.

This war is going to backfire. It should be lesson to every other network out there. Anita Dunn told the public that Team Obama owns all other networks. Is that the reputation they really want to have? It’s one thing for folks like me, a news consumer, to bash the networks, but when the WH publicly states that they OWN nbcabccbsnbcmsnbcnytimesetal isn’t that cause for alarm for the other “news” organs? (Of course, I should have eliminated NBC/MSNBC from that list, because indeed the WH does own them…bowing Brian, tingles Matthews, et al).

Great point and should have been part of the story!
Obama’s quote “Most of you covered me, all of you voted for me” is not that far from the trooth.

“Most of you covered me, all of you voted for me”, Obama said at a media gala. Most administrations despise the media……what does it tell you when they like all media outlets but Fox? It’s sad when a party wants to bring back the fairness doctrine so they can stifle any opposition. This debate should be held in Venezuela rather than the US. This admonistration is too thin skinned.

Keep bringing it Anita! We’re sick of laying down for these liars.

This is dangerous. I’m glad to read that most of the punditry is telling Obama to back off. Not only does it make them look like big babies, but it reveals that the WH senses they they can and do control all other media outlets.

I guess Team Obama is so spoiled because of the open campaigning the networks did for Obama during the run up to the election, but it’s high time that the rest of the media start asking questions other than: can I get you another pillow.

FOX forced the MSM to cover stories like Van Jones and ACORN, and the tea parties. People can hate FOX all they want, but they should be extremely glad that we have more than one voice in the media.

Waging a war with FOX makes them look small, naive, paranoid, inexperienced, and thin skinned. Obama needs to get to work, and ignore the chatter.

“…he says that Dunn’s Reliable Sources interview was refreshing because she was telling the truth, and that the bias of Fox’s reporting is so strong that it needs an official response. ”

What about the bias of all the liberal stations? Doesn’t that need addressing? Or is it ok because they are liberal and supportive of Obama?

Is it really bias or is it just a difference in ideologies? The Obama administration accuses FOX and their viewers of bias because they won’t buy what Obama is selling…. but, if they don’t believe it, why should they?

As for the WH.gov fact checking – did anyone in the MSM fact check their fact checking? They were not very honest in their *facts* http://tinyurl.com/ydy2jaz

It doesn’t need to be tit for tat, but the occasional backhand against blatant propagandists will be productive in the long run.