Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

Why Rather, Not Fox?

Reported by Ellen - September 23, 2004 -

With all the self-righteous finger-pointing at Dan Rather and CBS over "memogate" why are the media ignoring the more pervasive, better-documented and more obvious bias of FOX News?

In a wonderful post from our reader, limbo, on Who Says?, this excellent point was made. It bears repeating here. Many thanks again to limbo.

If the point they're trying to make is CBS is biased and can no longer be trusted, and we discuss this endlessly everywhere on a daily basis, WHY WAS THERE NEVER A DAILY DISCUSSION FOR DAYS AND WEEKS WHEN THE OUTFOXED MOVIE CAME OUT ABOUT FOX BIAS? Why Dan Rather now, but not Fox then?

The only proof we have regarding Rather supports a conclusion that Rather made a mistake. There is no evidence of bias. Yet we discuss this for hours and hours on media programs EVERYWHERE.

With Outfoxed we have STRONG EVIDENCE of actual bias for Bush(The Moody memos), yet that never became a story to discuss everywhere for hour upon hour. Why?

Is it because it is a given that FoxNews is biased, so the Moody memos aren't important because they prove something everyone already knows? Is the standard lower for Fox? Maybe, but this is bullshit, because Fox is King in a way, and it is hard to say it is not an integral and influential cog in the right-wing noise machine.

It's as if bias wasn't important really for discussion until Rather became accused of it. But I don't see evidence (just speculation) of Rather bias. Yet the media holds on to this story, it seems, until they find some.

If the subject is bias, why was it not a story to be drumbeated EVERYWHERE when Outfoxed came out? Why didn't Paula Tooth on CNN have a show to talk about whether Fox can ever be trusted again, when Outfoxed came out? That movie contains strong, direct evidence that proves that management purposefully influences with a bias for Bush. Memo from Moody to EEs: Shape the news this way!

There is none of the same regarding Rather. I'm not saying there are no arguments that can be made to show Rather bias. You want to argue that there is a trend or what have you, bring it on! But there aren't memos from top management to Dan to do this or to do that that show democrats in a good light, is there?

In this case what they have begs for the conclusion that Rather made a mistake after being duped. That's it! And he has already apologized for it. Yet it's a big, long story about bias.

Now that's biased!