(Thumbnail image from FOX News)
“FOX news often operates almost as either the research arm or communications arm of the Republican Party. Its fair to say about Fox and certainly the way we view it is it is more of a wing of the Republican Party. Obviously he will go on Fox because he engages with ideological opponents. But what I will say is that when he understands that he is not going on it as a news network at this point, he is going on it to debate the opposition.” (CNN)
That was White House Communications Director Anita Dunn speaking about FOX News on CNN’s Reliable Sources. Some members of the media say this is part of a new White House strategy to fight inaccurate or unflattering news stories.
Our research shows this new stance has raised the level of controversy between those who believe attacking one member of the press is inappropriate, and those who support the White House’s new strategy.
We are bringing you perspectives from across the spectrum -- CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, and FOX News.
First off, we’ll hear from FOX News’s Glenn Beck, who says that the White House is infringing upon freedom of the press by attacking the news organization.
“Free speech, under attack, sure. In the coming days I’m going to show you exactly how this administration is consolidating power and how your right to speak out, and your right to hear simply opposing voices, people who are asking legitimate questions all under assault.”
CNBC’s John Kernen believes President Obama should be content with the amount of positive press he receives and says he thinks FOX is being singled out for not following the status quo.
“If I were in the Obama administration, I would just, in general, look at my treatment by the media. I would not look a gift horse in the mouth. Given the, if you take ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC and CNN and if you are not satisfied with the glowing positive chill down your leg coverage that you got with every other media station, that you have to call out one station because you're not happy with them. You don’t think they have benefited from pretty positive media coverage?
MSNBC talks with Eric Burns, President of Media Matters for America, who is a supporter of the White House’s decision.
“I’d take it a step further. I think what we’ve all thought of as a conservative news organization has really morphed itself this year into a 24/7 political operation with a very specific goal, and that is to destroy this Presidency, to destroy any progressive policy agenda that the American people voted for in November."
FOX’s Senior Vice President of News Michael Clemente defends the network by saying the administration is confusing opinion-oriented shows with news reports.
“An increasing number of viewers are relying on Fox News for both news and opinion. And the average news consumer can certainly distinguish between the A-section of the newspaper and the editorial page which is what our programming represents.”
A commentator on CBS says that the feud is good for both Fox News and the White House.
“This is kind of good for both sides. Fox News sees its viewership increase. The white house has an enemy; it can galvanize its liberal supporters by attacking Fox News, that’s something that gets cheers in those quarters. The problem for the White House, is that it can look petty and a little small as it punches down on a cable network.”
So what do you think? Should the White House speak out against news organizations? Is Fox News an arm of the GOP, or is the White House unjustly attacking a critical news organization?
