Conservatives are shocked (shocked!) to learn that Democrats don't care for Fox News.
Democrats actually were shocked that the Nevada Party thought it was a good idea to broadcast on the extraordinarily conservative Fox, but were not at all surprised that Fox wouldn't let Air America carry the event on the radio.
Fox News is, and has always been, a conservative media outlet. I find it difficult to believe that anyone didn't know that. J.D. seems to be blaming Democrats for this bifurcation of news sources, but that's difficult to credit. Fox News is the Conservapedia of news sources; and seems motivated by the same malleable sense of truth. Fox treats editorial as reporting, tossing out a vague liberal (Colmes, aka "Liberal to be determined") to balance their strident and persistently conservative commentary (O'Reilly, Hannity, Cavuto, Snow, Hume, etc.).
An admittedly inebriated j.d. asks the candidates "What better way to expose 'conservative bias' than to show up and make yourself a target of it?"
Because these candidates are running for President, not for the chance to prove that Fox News is biased. It's already been amply demonstrated. Heck, the incident that led to the Nevada Party pulling Fox News was ample evidence. Roger Ailes, head of Fox News, gave a speech that he thought was funny, funny, funny:
And it is true that Barack Obama is on the move. I don't know if it's true that President Bush called Musharraf and said, "Why can't we catch this guy?"
Which he followed by explaining:
I feel compelled, however -- on a serious note -- to say a few words. We're headed into covering a tough political season and all of us will be called upon to do our best and be fair.
And balanced, too, no doubt.
Somehow his act managed to comment on both Democratic frontrunners (he joked that Obama was a terrorist and Hillary's marriage was failing), without joking about the many wives of Rudy Giuliani, the many positions Romney takes on every issue, or how John McCain is the Manchurian candidate.
Like j.d., I don't watch Fox News. I also don't read the National Review or American Spectator, and I certainly don't listen to Rush Limbaugh or his many clones. I certainly don't consider those to be news sources. I don't think of the blogs I read as news sources either. I read news from the Lawrence Journal World, the Washington Post, the Wichita Eagle, and the New York Times. I don't read the opinion pages from the Times any more (stupid Times Select), and I rarely care about the opinion pages of the other papers. For commentary on the news, I've got the Daily Show and daily doses of what Brad Delong has called "The Invisible College," an entire blogosphere full of smart people saying smart things. I don't agree with all of them, but I get smart, interesting perspectives, which is more than could be said for Fox News.
Fox News may well be the highest rated cable news channel, but that is irrelevant to the question of whether they should broadcast a Democratic debate. Fox News and its leadership attack Democrats consistently and persistently, and Democrats shouldn't be forced to defend that network or its actions. Allowing Fox to host the debates would have perpetuated the stereotype that Fox News is actually a news channel, and distracted from the candidates themselves.
- Log in to post comments