Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
share
email
font size
options
 
Thursday, June 11, 2009

 

 


Earlier this week, conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer delivered a speech that contained some revealing comments about Fox News. Here's the key passage, with the best stuff highlighted.

"Fox has done a great service to the American polity - single-handedly breaking up the intellectual and ideological monopoly that for decades exerted hegemony (to use a favorite lefty cliché) over the broadcast media....The reason Fox News has thrived and grown is because it offers a vibrant and honest alternative to those who could not abide yet another day of the news delivered to them beneath layer after layer of often undisguised liberalism.

"What Fox did is not just create a venue for alternative opinion. It created an alternate reality."

"An alternate reality"...Krauthammer sure got that right, although probably not in the way that he intended. Here's a classic example of how the crafting of "an alternate reality" works in practice:

On his Fox show one week ago, Sean Hannity told his credulous fans that President Obama had made a deliberate effort during his Cairo speech "to give 9/11 sympathizers a voice on the world stage." Wow, that certainly did sound like major news - the president of the United States taking the time to appease all the crackpots who applaud the murders of 3000 Americans. Hannity even backed up his reporting by airing a video clip from the speech, with Obama saying: "I am aware that there are still some that would question or even justify the events of 9/11."

Great stuff, right? Fox News, by exposing Obama as indulgent of 9/11 sympathizers, was surely giving viewers "a vibrant and honest alternative" to the "undisguised liberalism" of the monopoly media, right?

Bull feces.

I can't imagine how this happened, but for some reason Hannity's video clip of Obama was truncated after that single quoted sentence, omitting everything that followed. Here's what Obama said next, none of which was aired for the Fox viewers:

"But let us be clear. Al Qaeda killed nearly 3000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet al Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with."

In that passage, there isn't a single syllable that could not have been uttered by George W. Bush. But Hannity excised it, in order to provide the "alternate reality" that Fox viewers apparently would prefer. This kind of practice has nothing to do with being an "honest alternative." It has everything to do with dishonestly distorting empirical reality and circulating falsehoods - in this case, the delusion that Obama had actually sought to indulge the 9/11 sympathizers.

Obama's foreign policy positions are obviously grist for debate. But a quality debate hinges on both sides at least agreeing on the same set of empirical facts...such as an accurate record of what Obama actually said. This debate can hardly be substantive if one major broadcast network concocts an "alternate reality" that at its worst seems little more than a license to lie.

  

Posted by Dick Polman @ 2:18 PM  Permalink | 126 comments
Comments   
Posted 02:31 PM, 06/11/2009
Phrossty
Half truths and semi-quotes like the one used by Hannity allow one to quote from the Holy Bible thusly, "There is no God." [Psalm 14:1] Yet there is no shortage among extremists on both sides of the aisle who think the tactic is fine for debate and context doesn't matter. That's ridiculous. I could not agree more with the author's assertion "a quality debate hinges on both sides at least agreeing on the same set of empirical facts." It's why there's so little quality debate on the internet....
Posted 02:35 PM, 06/11/2009
Phrossty
Of course, I expect the usual suspects to come a-posting about the unfairness of lambasting one of their unofficial spokespersons and "butwhaddabouting" the talking points and/or recriminate the author's tendency to inculpate the "out of power" party. Counting down. 3... 2.... 1...
Posted 02:36 PM, 06/11/2009
jwad (D)
Before you wingnuts start commenting please be advised no liberal new organization has ever taken anything out of context.
Posted 02:41 PM, 06/11/2009
CD75
This is news? With all the big stuff going on in politics and the world this is all Dick can write about? Lame. Dick is sounding more and more like a mini-Olberman or an Olberman wannabe every day. Can Dick say " I am a silly left-wing partisan quasi-journalist". He could also now say his name is "Dick the Democratic Guard Dog who needs a job at MSNBC really badly".
Posted 02:43 PM, 06/11/2009
t_dmanns
That Fox News has an agenda, and is willing to throw accurate reporting out the window isn't really a revelation. We have a free press. This is the unfortunate bi-product. But I can live with it for the sake of the good stuff we get from other outlets.
Posted 02:47 PM, 06/11/2009
CD75
Dick, if you watched (which I know you do) Hardball or Olberman for just 5 minutes you could also find out-of-context facts and even lies. Would Dick ever write about that? Of course not. Because he will not, today's entry from Disingenuous Dick shows how leftist he is and nothing he says should be trusted.
Posted 02:49 PM, 06/11/2009
SteveMG
In the past, I have suggested that when people expect words to be taken out of context, they use a comma in the text instead of a period. It seems to make the cherry picking more obvious no matter what direction the cherry picker is coming from, when the nugget isn't even a full sentence.
Posted 02:51 PM, 06/11/2009
NEPhilly
Quoting Hannity, who is an opinion personality, and saying that is what Fox News is all about is disingenuous at best! It's like quoting Lou Dobbs and saying that is what CNN is all about! They have quality shows w/Brett Baier and Shepard Smith, that are not opinion programs like Hannity's and O'Reilly's are. The reason they do so well in the ratings is because there is a whole country between New York, Wash DC and Los Angeles and San Fran that the main stream media underserves and underreports on, that is the secret to Fox's success! And I have a thing for Julie Banderas :)
Comment removed.
Posted 03:01 PM, 06/11/2009
Greg S
The shame of it is, he is right, that Fox News provides an alternative to the typically liberal other television news outlets. If they did this with some more intellegence and level headedness it would be a good thing. But Fox News and its personalities feel the need to go the extra mile, and not appeal to the average conservative/republican, but to those on the far right who just want to tear down every liberal idea out there. It is as if to counterbalance the fact that Fox News is outnumbered by liberal outlets, they lean waaayyyy far right. In response almost, many of the liberal pundits on the other outlets now seem to be taking it to the extreme on the left. I think its as much of a reflection on modern society than actual political ideaology. Your cant be on TV or in print unless you are loud and bash the other side. Rational debate is a thing of the past.
Posted 03:01 PM, 06/11/2009
Greg S
The shame of it is, he is right, that Fox News provides an alternative to the typically liberal other television news outlets. If they did this with some more intellegence and level headedness it would be a good thing. But Fox News and its personalities feel the need to go the extra mile, and not appeal to the average conservative/republican, but to those on the far right who just want to tear down every liberal idea out there. It is as if to counterbalance the fact that Fox News is outnumbered by liberal outlets, they lean waaayyyy far right. In response almost, many of the liberal pundits on the other outlets now seem to be taking it to the extreme on the left. I think its as much of a reflection on modern society than actual political ideaology. Your cant be on TV or in print unless you are loud and bash the other side. Rational debate is a thing of the past.
Posted 03:06 PM, 06/11/2009
schnail
CD75 said: "I am a silly ... Dick ... job." Whoa, he totally said that! That's a blockbuster admission from the usually very self-confident CD75. Stay tuned for more shocking revelations!
Posted 03:09 PM, 06/11/2009
yoda
NEPhilly, you and I may realize that Hannity, O'Reilly, and their ilk are opinion bloviators, but there are millions of people who take everything they say as gospel truth (like "There is no God..." - good one, Phrossty!). Therefore, Polman is absolutely right in saying Fox can be held responsible for the intellectual and moral felonies, misdemeanors, and lies that they allow to be propagated on their network.
Posted 03:12 PM, 06/11/2009
woogie
I highly recommend that you all watch "Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism" to see what Fox News is all about.
Comment removed.
About Dick Polman

Cited by the Columbia Journalism Review as one of the nation's top political reporters, and lauded by the ABC News political website as "one of the finest political journalists of his generation," Dick Polman is a national political columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer. He is on the full-time faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, as "writer in residence." Dick has been a frequent guest on C-Span, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and the BBC. He covered the 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 presidential campaigns.

ARCHIVES

All commentaries posted before April 18, 2008, can be accessed at www.dickpolman.blogspot.com.