If You Don’t Watch FOX (redux)

Editorial
by Phil Erwin

If you rely on networks other than FOX for your daily dose of news, you might consider carefully the true value of your news sources.

Not that FOX is above reproach, nor other networks useless; rather, it’s a question of intent: Does your news outlet intend to present you with facts, and help you understand the truth that those facts illuminate? Or do they believe they own the “truth”, and work to present “facts” to you in such a way as to make their “truth” inescapable?

The New York Times slogan is: All the news that’s fit to print. A more representative slogan for the “mainstream” media is: Only the stories we want you to believe.

Despite what you hear, it is FOX that strives to meet the fundamental mandate of journalism: Present all the facts in an unbiased (or a bias-balanced) way.

Journalism insider Bernard Goldberg, author of Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News, says the “mainstream” media are so biased, they don’t even know that they’re biased. They actually believe that their approach to news is even-handed.

Think he’s wrong? Consider this:

On CNN’s TV/Magazine show, State of the Union with Candy Crowley (June 29), Crowley had her news-analysis panel consider the IRS claiming inability to irs.1provide Congressional watchdog committees with relevant e-mail which the law requires they provide. Ms. Crowley opened thusly: “We have the President… talking about ‘phony’ scandals. Let’s just pretend this is a phony scandal… Is it an effective political scandal? Does it have resonance?”

Huh?

What kind of “journalism” is that?

Since when does the phrase, Let’s pretend… have anything to do with responsible journalism? “Let’s just pretend what I want you to believe is true, and then have a nationally-televised discussion on that pretend-reality.”

Is that what they call “journalism” now?

The only reason journalists began using the terms “phony” and “scandal” in the same sentence is because the President did so repeatedly on camera, making the completely unfounded and inane assertion that Republicans gin up “phony scandals” to distract from–what? From his mishandling of every aspect of government? Seems to me like Republicans would want to shine a light on his mishandling, which they believe actually reaches the level of, well… scandalous.

When the President says “phony scandals,” what he means is, “I’m a magician, and I don’t want you looking at this hand, I want you looking over here.”

And over here is precisely where all non-FOX news organizations obediently focus.

So Ms. Crowley reminds you that The President Himself has called the IRS scandal PHONY, and then proceeds with a “news analysis” panel discussion predicated on that blatantly invalid proposition.

One panelist repeatedly objected to the suggestion that missing e-mails might have been deliberately “disappeared”: “But there’s no proof!”

Gee, Golly… You suppose that’s why those e-mails went missing? To hide the proof?

In case you’re unaware: The IRS “scandal” involves the deliberate use of IRS power to squelch opposing political speech – a violation of First Amendments rights, and a repeat of one of Nixon’s political sins, for which he was impeached. If it happened again, and there are extremely powerful indications that it did, it is a scandal, of the highest order. To have a news organization parrot that the scandal, and subsequent efforts to cover it up, is “phony” because the President pronounced it so is to revoke that organization’s right to call itself a “news” organization. That is National Inquirer, “The-Alien-Dog-Ate-My-Homework” stuff.

You may recall that Ms. Crowley, as the moderator for the 2012 foreign-policy Presidential debate, interrupted Republican candidate Romney to correct his facts – a major no-no for a moderator – by insisting that the President had called Benghazi a “terrorist attack” the very next day. That assertion was absolutely wrong, and Ms. Crowley later walked it back. (Obama had artfully implied it was a terrorist attack without stating it outright.) But Crowley’s invasive “correction” had already changed the course of the debate, and perhaps the course of the election, by making it appear that Mr. Romney was out-of-touch, when in fact it was the other two on the stage who were the foreign-policy incompetents.

As subsequent events have proven.

Perhaps we should pretend that CNN actually knows what true journalism is.

Naaahh.

As for Ms. Crowley, let’s pretend that she actually loves her country, and would like to do something helpful. I’d suggest she resign from the airwaves, abandon her career in yellow journalism (a phrase describing pseudo-journalists peddling propaganda in place of truth) and try her hand at writing heartthrob novels – a pursuit where the phrase Let’s pretend… actually belongs.

To repeat a previous assertion of mine: If you don’t watch FOX, you don’t know sh*t.

Phil Erwin is an author and IT administrator living in Newbury Park.

______________________________________________________

Get free Citizensjournal.us BULLETINS. Please patronize our advertisers to keep us publishing and/or DONATE

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *