![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
~
Monk is still around, though he has been quiet. He's been a little busier at the adult communities, flying with his new ability to post images. Friendlier to a general audience, he did post the following debate.
___ ___ ___
"But Fox isn't exactly pursuing a stealth strategy: anyone who can't figure out that it's in the tank with the Republican party must be brain dead."
-- Frank Rich for The New York Times
Of course, it also may be said that it's no secret that Mr. Rich is rather liberal, and many argue that the Times is biased - paper of record or not. But Rich doesn't pretend to be an objective analyst, and the Times does work on trying to maintain the high road of journalistic excellence (laugh if you must).
There is now a petition before the FTC to have Fox News cease and desist from using their noted/infamous slogan: Fair and Balanced. Yes, this petition is being put forward by MoveOn.org and Common Cause, and the Fox News spokeswoman is probably right that this is more of a "transparent publicity stunt" than anything else, perhaps another attempt at some electioneering.
Yet, Fox News presents itself as objective, non-partisan journalism, and in trying to trademark that "Fair and Balnaced" slogan, the Independent Media Institute countered, ' "fair and balanced" is so prevalent as to be generic, and is "entirely mis-descriptive" when it comes to Fox News.'
For debate: Is it not clear by now that Fox News is not on a journalistic par with CNN and MSNBC, and that Fox News is as much an organ of the Republican Party as it is a journalistic outlet?
I believe that, although it may go a little too far to call Fox the al-Jazeera of the West, it is more politically interested than journalistically objective. I flirt with the theory that Fox was created out of the somewhat mistaken impression that CNN was more like the Clinton News Network rather than objective journalism, and in trying to counter that bogeyman, they became what they were fighting against - a biased, politically interested news organ.
But, more importantly, what say you?
Monk is still around, though he has been quiet. He's been a little busier at the adult communities, flying with his new ability to post images. Friendlier to a general audience, he did post the following debate.
___ ___ ___
"But Fox isn't exactly pursuing a stealth strategy: anyone who can't figure out that it's in the tank with the Republican party must be brain dead."
-- Frank Rich for The New York Times
Of course, it also may be said that it's no secret that Mr. Rich is rather liberal, and many argue that the Times is biased - paper of record or not. But Rich doesn't pretend to be an objective analyst, and the Times does work on trying to maintain the high road of journalistic excellence (laugh if you must).
There is now a petition before the FTC to have Fox News cease and desist from using their noted/infamous slogan: Fair and Balanced. Yes, this petition is being put forward by MoveOn.org and Common Cause, and the Fox News spokeswoman is probably right that this is more of a "transparent publicity stunt" than anything else, perhaps another attempt at some electioneering.
Yet, Fox News presents itself as objective, non-partisan journalism, and in trying to trademark that "Fair and Balnaced" slogan, the Independent Media Institute countered, ' "fair and balanced" is so prevalent as to be generic, and is "entirely mis-descriptive" when it comes to Fox News.'
For debate: Is it not clear by now that Fox News is not on a journalistic par with CNN and MSNBC, and that Fox News is as much an organ of the Republican Party as it is a journalistic outlet?
I believe that, although it may go a little too far to call Fox the al-Jazeera of the West, it is more politically interested than journalistically objective. I flirt with the theory that Fox was created out of the somewhat mistaken impression that CNN was more like the Clinton News Network rather than objective journalism, and in trying to counter that bogeyman, they became what they were fighting against - a biased, politically interested news organ.
But, more importantly, what say you?
