Fox News is proud of its slogan, “fair and balanced.” But is it?
The White House didn’t think so, which is why President Obama took his promotion of health care reform last fall to all the Sunday morning news shows except the Chris Wallace-hosted “Fox News Sunday.”
Afterward, Wallace went on Bill O’Reilly’s top-rated Fox show, “The Factor,” and described the President’s snub as “childishness.”
But in an interview with the Hoover Institution’s Peter Robinson that was posted on National Review, Fox News Chairman and CEO Roger Ailes said Obama may have had reason to avoid the home of O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Shep Smith, and Brit Hume. He “wasn’t whining over nothing,” said Ailes.
The exchange went like this:
ROBINSON: Do you subscribe to the statement of your news host Chris Wallace that the Obama administration is “the biggest bunch,” he said, “the biggest bunch of crybabies” that he’s dealt with in his 30 years in Washington?
AILES: That was his…
ROBINSON: They’re whining over nothing!
AILES: Well, I don’t think they’re whining over nothing and I think they have — look, there’s legitimate complaints that they could have. And I’ve had this dialogue with David Axelrod, who I like very much and, there are legitimate areas. I mean, Chris said that, that’s his words, that’s what he believes, and he had reason to believe that. But I don’t think its helpful to say that.
As has been pointed out, most recently by Thinkprogress.org, Fox News’ Senior Vice President for Programming Bill Shine told NPR that the network was “the voice of opposition on some issues.” For his own part, Ailes has reportedly declared that the network is “the Alamo” in terms of challenging the Obama administration “until the last shot is fired.”
It sounds like Ailes admitted that Fox has an anti-administration agenda.
Do you think this sounds “fair and balanced”? Should TV news be fair and balanced? Or is that just a myth?