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

Neil Cavuto: "All the Blogs" Will be "Furious" to Learn That, Per a Fox News "Study," The Media Really IS Biased

Reported by Melanie - December 15, 2006 -

Fox killed two birds with one stone today during a segment claiming that the "liberal media" intentionally hid good economic news prior to the midterm election because they "don't want to see Bush succeed." Not only was the notion of the "liberal media" reinforced but so was the idea that the middle class is better off than ever, they just don't know it.

It all began with a promo Cavuto aired prior to the segment:

The market's record run splashing across the headlines these days, but did the media hide some good news before the midterm elections? We studied this pretty closely. I think you're going to be a little alarmed. After this.

Check out the "evidence" that came out of Fox's alleged "study," below.

After the break Cavuto introduced the roundtable panel with:

Alright. A FOX NEWS ALERT for you. Inflation tame, the markets not. The economy's very strong and all of a sudden the media's noticing. Glowing headlines in all of the major papers. Flashback before the election when you were more likely to read headlines like 'Nerves Shot,' or 'Economic Fears Mount,' or 'The Markets Rise Despite...' A lot of 'despite.' So, did the media bury the good news before the election intentionally?

Rebecca Gomez, a Fox News business correspondent went first:

Well, I don't think that there's this big, vast, liberal media conspiracy...it's too complicated...you have too many egos, they couldn't agree on, you know, which way to go.

Moving up the Fox food chain from correspondent to anchor, Cavuto turned to David Asman who hosts the Saturday morning "business news" program, Forbes on Fox:

There is a big conspiracy! You're dead wrong Rebecca! Of course there is! We had a much stronger economy going into the election than we do right now. It was soaring -- four to five percent etcetera. Here's a typical New York Times headline: 'Pockets of Concern Slow a Strong U.S. Economy.' You know, I mean, that's so typical...

(Asman's emphasis.)

Next came Price Headley of Bigtrends.com. Headley isn't on the Fox News payroll yet but he is a frequent Fox guest.

I think David's right on. If you look at any stat, any stat you look at, I mean, you look at like Bush before the 2004 elections. He had 13% positive headlines. Clinton, in the same type of economic numbers, got 85% positive. ...The economy was anemic for Bush and that's not the case.

I guess the "stats" Headley quoted came out of Fox's "study."

Fox employee Gary B. Smith of Exemplar Capital was next with more "proof:"

I think he's right... There is definitely a bias. The media has not gotten over the Bush election in 2000. They are still angry.

Smith contended that if you tell someone that the "median household net worth is at an all-time high," people go, "your kidding? The middle class is suffering." He said a lot of the "good news with respect to the current administration is buried because the media does not want to see Bush succeed."

Smith said people who write the business columns "care about winning the Pulitzer prizes, getting the awards and the reason you get the awards is by finding the dirt out there and shoveling it as high as you can. That's how you get noticed, not by saying that, you know, 95.5% of Americans have jobs."

In closing, Cavuto, the propagandist whose "study" has absolutely no credibility whatsoever, gave himself a big ol' compliment that showed just how out of touch he is: "This will get all the blogs going." Then he said something about them being "furious," presumably because his "study" produced irrefutable evidence that the media really is biased.

Comment: In your dreams Neil. TGIF.