Yes, more FOX "News"-bashing, and this time two posts in a row! The timing is sheer coincidence, however, as I've been watching the Sunday political shows this morning, and FOX "News" Sunday is the one that puts the "ick" in ridiculous.
As Media Matters has reported, these shows all tend to skew right, particularly over the last six years. But no Sunday show tries so hard to steer the ship rightward with so much effort.
Let's start with Chris Wallace. Admittedly, he does throw in a tough-to-answer question to Republican guests once in a while (one could argue not as often, and not as hard as those lobbed to Democrats). On a merely superficial personal level, he just creeps me out, I can't put my finger on why. But in the show's wrap-up segment (ludicrously called The Power Panel), Wallace often becomes an obvious and serious Democrat-basher, as he did today, out-and-out calling Democratic nominees for President "panderers."
All of the Sunday show hosts tend to treat guests with kid gloves, offering the occasional sharp jab, only to let the guest wander away from the question, or reframe it by saying, "let's talk about this," or simply go off on a totally unrelated topic. Wallace, on the other hand, sets up (in my view) Republican talking points, or nearly holds up a target of a Democrat and let's his guest shoot metaphorical arrows at it.
And finally, the afore-mentioned Power Panel. Where to start? Wallace and his obvious partisanship is number one. Second, Brit Hume, the host of FOX's alleged "hard news" show, who is such a foaming-at-the-mouth partisan, he seems like a rabid basset hound. There's William Kristol--neocon cheerleader of the Iraq War--with his perpetual inappropriate smirk and condescension. Not to mention he's a man who has been wrong about everything and is still treated like his analysis and predictions have any relevance.
Shoring up the "left" side, and presenting the illusion of "balance," are usually two people from NPR, Mara Liasson and Juan Williams. NPR is pilloried for being as liberal as Air America by wingnuts, which I'm not sure is a foregone conclusion. My theory is that right-wingers see any media that doesn't have an obvious right-wing cant as automatically left-wing biased. They seem to have a left-right, black-white, on-off approach to everything, don't they?
Anyway, Williams is pretty good at summing something up, and also can swat down some of Kristol's, Hume's and Wallace's more obvious omissions or falsehoods. But he's an Alan Colmes-style "liberal," more a moderate who only looks liberal by comparison to his colleagues.
Neeson seems centrist, with a slight rightward tilt, and is in the same boat with Williams by default.
What I find by watching the Sunday shows is that if you are well-versed in a political topic, you can punch holes in any of the interviews and discussions. The whole political process starts to feel phony and slimy. It makes you lose respect for many politicians, as well as the TV personalities. But FOX "News" Sunday lost my respect a very long time ago. Only Juan Williams has any right now, as he seems the only one willing--on a regular basis--to point out uncomfortable facts for both Republicans and Democrats.
As Media Matters has reported, these shows all tend to skew right, particularly over the last six years. But no Sunday show tries so hard to steer the ship rightward with so much effort.
Let's start with Chris Wallace. Admittedly, he does throw in a tough-to-answer question to Republican guests once in a while (one could argue not as often, and not as hard as those lobbed to Democrats). On a merely superficial personal level, he just creeps me out, I can't put my finger on why. But in the show's wrap-up segment (ludicrously called The Power Panel), Wallace often becomes an obvious and serious Democrat-basher, as he did today, out-and-out calling Democratic nominees for President "panderers."
All of the Sunday show hosts tend to treat guests with kid gloves, offering the occasional sharp jab, only to let the guest wander away from the question, or reframe it by saying, "let's talk about this," or simply go off on a totally unrelated topic. Wallace, on the other hand, sets up (in my view) Republican talking points, or nearly holds up a target of a Democrat and let's his guest shoot metaphorical arrows at it.
And finally, the afore-mentioned Power Panel. Where to start? Wallace and his obvious partisanship is number one. Second, Brit Hume, the host of FOX's alleged "hard news" show, who is such a foaming-at-the-mouth partisan, he seems like a rabid basset hound. There's William Kristol--neocon cheerleader of the Iraq War--with his perpetual inappropriate smirk and condescension. Not to mention he's a man who has been wrong about everything and is still treated like his analysis and predictions have any relevance.
Shoring up the "left" side, and presenting the illusion of "balance," are usually two people from NPR, Mara Liasson and Juan Williams. NPR is pilloried for being as liberal as Air America by wingnuts, which I'm not sure is a foregone conclusion. My theory is that right-wingers see any media that doesn't have an obvious right-wing cant as automatically left-wing biased. They seem to have a left-right, black-white, on-off approach to everything, don't they?
Anyway, Williams is pretty good at summing something up, and also can swat down some of Kristol's, Hume's and Wallace's more obvious omissions or falsehoods. But he's an Alan Colmes-style "liberal," more a moderate who only looks liberal by comparison to his colleagues.
Neeson seems centrist, with a slight rightward tilt, and is in the same boat with Williams by default.
What I find by watching the Sunday shows is that if you are well-versed in a political topic, you can punch holes in any of the interviews and discussions. The whole political process starts to feel phony and slimy. It makes you lose respect for many politicians, as well as the TV personalities. But FOX "News" Sunday lost my respect a very long time ago. Only Juan Williams has any right now, as he seems the only one willing--on a regular basis--to point out uncomfortable facts for both Republicans and Democrats.
So let's sum up. You have a Wallace who's clearly conservative, Hume who's aggressively so, and Kristol, who makes both of them seem moderate. Then you have Liasson who's merely less right-wing (and she's occasionally replaced by a lady from that far-left loony FORBES Magazine) and Juan Williams who dips his toe off the fence onto the left side on occasion. Sound's "fair and balanced to me," doesn't it to you? Ha!
And I really want to smack that Cheshire Cat grin off of Kristol's face, but here I am being petty again. . .
And I really want to smack that Cheshire Cat grin off of Kristol's face, but here I am being petty again. . .
No comments:
Post a Comment
Have something to say to us? Post it here!