(Fox screenshot: HuffPo)

News? or Mutual admiration society?
(screenshot: HuffPo)

I didn’t see this article at the time, but Dan Froomkin makes a good case.

I dislike the hypocrisy of this ‘channel’ — the apparent willingness to distort, their naked manipulation of the ‘issues’ (far beyond a ‘slant’, Fox misleads … in short, like some people I know: a total lack of self-awareness

Sure, Fox ‘News’ has a right to express its (Master’s) opinions, but NOT — in my view — the right to brazenly mislead as it does … and still expect to be taken seriously as a journalistic organ. Oh no you don’t.

“You’re entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts!”– Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Why Journalists Shouldn’t Be Defending Fox News

Dan Froomkin | 23-October-09

The Obama administration’s recent characterization of Fox News is a long overdue acknowledgment of the obvious: Fox News is not a legitimate news organization — indeed, after many years of serving as the research and messaging wing of the Republican Party, it has now gone beyond even that, to become the electronic evangelist of an ultra-partisan and non-reality-based world view.

Historically speaking, White House criticism of the media has often been unseemly and defensive, with the president’s ire generally provoked by journalists who excel at their work — by asking cheeky questions, exposing important things that the president would prefer be kept secret, holding the powerful accountable and playing host to a vibrant and informed exchange of a wide range of political opinions.

But in this case, the critique is something else entirely. The litmus test is that the Obama White House is not upset at news gatherers for doing their job. What Obama and his aides are correctly pointing out is that the people working at Fox News are doing another job altogether.

…continues Huffington Post.)

It irritates me when scoundrels pretend to be honest and appeal for ‘fair treatment’ and their ‘rights’ while callously denying others such treatment, or worse, profiteer by duping the gullible.

That is a sleazy confidence trick, fraud even, and I despise it.

It seems the word ‘News’ has been diluted and devalued, like the word ‘friend’.
They’re just tags now, marketing labels, bereft of their original meaning.

A couple of months ago, I discussed (via comments on Dan Lyons’ excellent Secret Diary of Fake Steve Jobs with “FSJ Conscience”) what I see as the problem with the likes of Fox News ‘personality’ Glenn Beck and their impact on political discussion:

It seems to me people like Glenn Beck are doing the country [USA] a disservice using all their ‘alarm’ language and hysterical claims, and giving credence to hateful ignorant ravings. Their behaviour is ratings-driven, yes, of course, but this stuff feeds the HATE-FEST — and that, if I read you right FSJC, is what nauseated you to the point where you snapped here.

Like you, I see the US as riven by partisanship. I don’t know when that pronounced division started, but it seems to have accelerated. Beck’s “the gloves are off” comment, speaks to that. Fox, it seems, respects ‘The Office of President of the United States’ — but only while it’s held by a Republican. They’re not alone in their partisanship, naturally. Other media mercilessly attacked GWB, and had quite a lot of genuine material to work with: e.g. the “weapons of mass destruction” claim, a neocon-driven war, wire-tapping, denigration of the Joint Chiefs by Rumsfield, rendition and torture — these eviscerated Bush’s (and Tony Blair’s) credibility too.

You say: “I feel like right now, at this point and time, everyone is a hater and everyone with the anonymity of the web check just say what every the hell they want with no facts and no basis and for what?”

Yes, I can see that too. I don’t do anonymous, and I try not to hate, but I completely get what you’re saying about destructive negative fantasy. [I’ve just scrolled back through your own comments as “FSJ Conscience” and (as you say) you’ve played that game a bit at times, too… but it sounds to me like you’re now calling for an improved tone of debate. If that’s the case, I support you in that.]