This is in response to this article in the New York Times about Fox News and its relationship with the Obama administration.
Being a journalism student who was taught the 6 elements of journalism - fairness, accuracy, attribution, newness, relevance - I have always questioned whether Fox News is a legitimate news organization, especially in the fairness column.
When I watch Fox News, it amazes me to hear some of the things commentators such as Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck say, as well as how they say it. It's fine to have commentary shows, but to pass off opinion as fact is a questionable practice in my opinion. To advertise their shows as "fair and balanced" and the "no spin zone" is a joke.
These shows wouldn't be dangerous if reasonable viewers knew that the commentators' comments were opinion rather than fact, but this is not the case. I know many intelligent people who watch Fox News and believe everything they say is true. For example, I have friends that believe that President Obama "hates white people."
I find it irresponsible for a station or show that represents itself as news to perpetuate lies like Fox News.
People like Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity have a responsibilty to their viewers. They have a responsibility to accurately represent the things they put in their show, and to live up to their "fair and balanced" news coverage claims.
There is a difference between a "talk radio" type of broadcast as brought up in the article and actual news. The line needs to be clear and defined, and this is not the case when a commentary show portrays itself as a "no spin zone."
While I believe Fox News has irresponsible practices, I don't agree with some of the things the White House has done. I agree that it is good that Fox's coverage is being discussed, but trying to exclude Fox from a round of official interviews seems petty and unprofessional. It also just gives Fox more fodder to put on its shows.
The White House needs to question whether being aggressive against Fox News will hurt or help itself and U.S. Citizens. It needs to think about what the ramifications will be if they try to cut Fox's access to the White House.
I thinks some things need to change at Fox News, but I don't think the White House's current moves will do anything to spur anything positive.
Good post, and I'm glad you incorporated some links.
ReplyDeleteI do have a few observations: You cite six elements of journalism but list five (and I think you're referring to the list from class, of which there are five. And you might want to provide a source). Be careful with your editing.
Your thoughts are well-articulated concerning the commentary function of the network, but I wondered if you had thoughts about their defense that the commentary and news functions of the organization are segregated? You say almost nothing about the news programs on Fox and I was wondering what you thought of them.
And as always, examples help. Be specific.
On the potential effects, I think you're right, but you might want to specify what you're considering as "not positive." What are the ramifications? What do we stand to lose? What's at stake.
Again, more specificity, more examples, more clarity.
Keep at it.