Fox News Channel controversies 3721302 225709549 2008-07-15T00:47:01Z SmackBot 433328 Date the maintenance tags or general fixes {{Infobox Network | network_name = [[Fox News Channel]]| country = {{USA}}| network_type = [[Cable television|Cable]] [[television network]]| available = [[United States]] and others; see [[Fox News Channel#International transmission|"International transmission"]] for other availability| slogan = "We Report, You Decide", "[[Fair and Balanced]]", "The Most Powerful Name in News"| owner = [[News Corporation]]| key_people = [[Roger Ailes]], Chairman & [[Chief Executive Officer|CEO]]| launch_date = [[October 7]], [[1996]]| website = [http://foxnews.com foxnews.com]| }} The '''[[Fox News Channel]]''' has been the subject of several controversies. Critics and some observers of the channel accuse it of political bias towards the [[Right-wing politics|political right]]; the network denies such allegations.<ref>[http://www.ft.com/cms/s/5b77af92-548c-11db-901f-0000779e2340.html Interview transcript: Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes], the [[Financial Times]], October 6, 2006</ref> ==Accusations of bias== [[Progressivism in the United States|Progressive]] media [[Watchdog journalism|watch groups]] such as [[Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting]] (FAIR)<ref>[http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1067 The Most Biased Name in News - Fox News Channel's extraordinary right-wing tilt], FAIR, July/August 2001</ref> and [[Media Matters for America]]<ref>[http://mediamatters.org/items/200407140002 33 internal FOX editorial memos reviewed by MMFA reveal FOX News Channel's inner workings], Media Matters, July 14, 2004</ref> have said that Fox News reporting contains conservative editorializing within news stories. Others have referred to the network as "[[Faux]] News",<ref>[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/06/25/faux_news_parody_site_draws/ 'FAUX News' parody site draws FOX News lawyers], ''[[The Register]]'', June 25, 2003</ref> "[[Republican Party (United States)|GOP]]-TV",<ref>[http://bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/dont_quote_me/multi-page/documents/04097843.asp GOP-TV Stuck inside Republican hell with the 'fair and balanced' Fox News Channel] ''[[The Boston Phoenix]]'', September 3 - 9, 2004</ref> "Fox Noise Channel",<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16886276/ 'Worst': Fox News P.R.], [[MSNBC]] Transcript, ''[[Countdown with Keith Olbermann]]'', Jan 30, 2007</ref> and "Fixed News."<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19460007/ 'Countdown with Keith Olbermann' for June 26], MSNBC Transcript, ''Countdown with Keith Olbermann'', June 27, 2007</ref> [[Democratic National Committee]] chairman [[Howard Dean]] has referred to Fox News as a "right-wing propaganda machine,"<ref>[http://www.democrats.org/a/2006/09/dean_on_preside_3.php Dean On President Clinton Standing Up To Right-Wing Propaganda On Fox News Sunday], The Democratic Party, September 25, 2006</ref> and several [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic Party]] politicians have boycotted events hosted or sponsored by the network.<ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/08/politics/main2546570.shtml Fox News Boss Hits Edwards' Boycott], [[CBS]] News, March 9, 2007</ref><ref>[http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/nevada/2007/mar/09/030910435.html Richardson backs out of Fox debate amid online protest], The [[Las Vegas Sun]], March 9, 2007</ref><ref>[http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/04/obama_to_nix_fo.html Obama to Nix Fox Debate], [[ABC News]]'s Political Radar, April 09, 2007</ref>{{Dead link|date=January 2008}} In 2007, several major Democratic Party presidential candidates ([[Hillary Rodham Clinton]], [[John Edwards]], [[Barack Obama]], and [[Bill Richardson]]) boycotted or dropped out of [[Fox News]]-sponsored or hosted debates,<ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/08/politics/main2546570.shtml Fox News Boss Hits Edwards' Boycott], [[CBS]] News, March 9, 2007</ref><ref>[http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/04/clinton_joins_b.html Clinton Joins Boycott of Fox Debate]</ref><ref>[http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/nevada/2007/mar/09/030910435.html Richardson backs out of Fox debate amid online protest], The [[Las Vegas Sun]], March 9, 2007</ref><ref>[http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/04/obama_to_nix_fo.html Obama to Nix Fox Debate], [[ABC News]]'s Political Radar, April 09, 2007</ref> forcing their cancellation. The Nevada State Democratic Party had originally agreed to co-host a Democratic debate with [[Fox News Channel]] in [[Reno, Nevada]]. Despite the opposition of groups like [[MoveOn.org]], the party agreed to bring in Fox News in an effort to find "new ways to talk to new people." However, after Fox News chairman [[Roger Ailes]] was quoted making a joke involving the similarity of Barack Obama's name to that of the terrorist [[Osama bin Laden]]<ref>"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?'" http://mediamatters.org/items/200703100002</ref> a firestorm of opposition arose in Democratic circles against the debate. On [[March 12]], [[2007]], the party announced it had pulled out of the debate, effectively cancelling it.<ref>[http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0307/3069.html Nevada Dems Nix Fox Debate], , Mar. 12, 2007</ref> CNN's [[Larry King]] said in a [[January 17]], [[2007]] interview with the Chicago Sun-Times, "They're a Republican brand. They're an extension of the Republican Party with some exceptions, [like] [[Greta van Susteren]]. But I don't begrudge them that. [Fox CEO] Roger Ailes is an old friend. They've been nice to me. They've said some very nice things about me. Not [Bill] O'Reilly, but I don't watch him."<ref>[http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/fnc/king_says_fox_news_is_a_republican_brand_but_theyve_been_nice_to_me_51252.asp King Says Fox News Is "A Republican Brand" (But "They've Been Nice To Me")]</ref> Writing for the [[Los Angeles Times]], Republican and conservative columnist [[Jonah Goldberg]] indicated his belief that Fox News was rightward-leaning: "Look, I think liberals have reasonable gripes with Fox News. It does lean to the right, primarily in its opinion programming but also in its story selection (which is fine by me) and elsewhere. But it's worth remembering that Fox is less a bastion of ideological conservatism and more a populist, tabloidy network."<ref>[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/03/fox_john_edwards_and_the_two_a.html Fox, John Edwards and the Two Americas]</ref> Fox News host [[Bill O'Reilly (commentator)|Bill O'Reilly]] has stated that "Fox does tilt right," (although he states this in specific reference to the coverage of the Iraq war, not FNC's coverage in general), but that the network does not "actively campaign or try to help Bush-Cheney."<ref>''The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly'', July 19, 2004</ref><ref> [http://mediamatters.org/items/200407210007 O'Reilly: "FOX does tilt right"], [[Media Matters for America]]</ref> [[Accuracy in Media]] has claimed that there was a conflict of interest in Fox News' co-sponsorship of the [[Republican Presidential Debates, 2008|May 15 2007 Republican presidential candidates debate]], pointing out that [[Rudy Giuliani]]'s law firm had tackled copyright protection and legislation on the purchase of cable TV lineups for [[News Corporation]], the parent company of Fox News, and suggesting that Fox might be biased in favor of Giuliani's candidacy for the Republican Party presidential nomination.<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007May15/0,4670,GiulianiapossBusinessABRIDGED,00.html FOXNews.com - Giuliani's Firm Lobbied Government - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> Similar accusations have been levied against Fox News in response to their decision to exclude Texas Representative [[Ron Paul]] and California Representative [[Duncan Hunter]] from the January 5, 2008 Republican candidate debate.<ref>[http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/12/31/arts/TV-Debate-Limits.php, [[International Herald Tribune]], Dec. 31, 2007</ref> In response, many individuals and organizations petitioned Fox News to reconsider its decision. When Fox refused to change its position and continued to exclude candidates Paul and Hunter, the New Hampshire Republican Party officially announced it would withdraw as a Fox partner in the forum.<ref>http://www.nhgop.org/home/2008/1/5/nh-republican-party-withdraws-as-fox-forum-partner.html, Official Press Release from the New Hampshire Republican State Committee, Retrieved Jan. 6, 2008.</ref> However, [[Council on Foreign Relations]] president [[Leslie H. Gelb]] has touted Fox News as being "a more reliable news source for international reporting" than CNN<ref>[http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE0D81038F932A35751C1A9649C8B63 The Nation: Perspective on the Press; Fox News Moves From the Margins to the Mainstream - New York Times<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> and the [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic]] governor of Pennsylvania [[Ed Rendell]] has praised the network for its "objective" and "balanced" coverage of the 2008 Democratic primary.<ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/31/clinton-surrogate-ed-rend_n_94280.html Clinton Surrogate Ed Rendell Praises Fox News For "Most Objective," "Balanced" Coverage - Media on The Huffington Post<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> ==Ownership and management== * Media mogul [[Rupert Murdoch]] is the Chairman and CEO of [[News Corporation]], the owner of Fox News Channel. He has been a subject of controversy and criticism as a result of his substantial influence in both the print and broadcast media. In the [[United States]], he is the publisher of the ''[[New York Post]]'' newspaper and the magazine of opinion, ''[[The Weekly Standard]]''. Accusations against him include the "dumbing down" of news and introducing "mindless vulgarity" in place of genuine [[journalism]], and having his own outlets produce news that serve his own political and financial agendas. According to the [[BBC]] website: "To some he is little less than the devil incarnate, to others, the most progressive mover-and-shaker in the media business".<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2162658.stm Rupert Murdoch: Bigger than Kane] by Andrew Walker, [[BBC News]], July 31, 2002</ref> * [[CEO]] [[Roger Ailes]] was formerly a media/image consultant for Republican Presidents [[Richard Nixon]], [[Ronald Reagan]], and [[George H. W. Bush]]. Controversy was generated in the aftermath of the [[September 11, 2001 attacks|September 11 attacks]] on [[New York City]], when it was revealed that Roger Ailes was sending political advice via "back channel messages" to the Bush administration through its chief political aide, [[Karl Rove]]. According to [[Bob Woodward]], in his book ''[[Bush At War]]'', the messages consisted of warnings that the American public would quickly lose support for the Bush administration unless it employed "the harshest measures possible" in response to the 9/11 attacks. * [[George W. Bush]]'s cousin, [[John Prescott Ellis]], was Fox News' projection team manager during the general election of 2000. After speaking numerous times on election night with his cousins George and [[Jeb Bush|Jeb]],<ref>[http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/12/12/tv.foxexecutive.ap/ Fox executive spoke five times with cousin Bush on Election Night], [[CNN.com]], December 12, 2000</ref> Ellis, at 2:16 AM, reversed Fox News' call for [[Florida]] as a state won by [[Al Gore]]. Critics allege this was a premature decision, given the impossibly razor-thin margin (officially 537 of 5.9 million votes<ref>[http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm 2000 Official Presidential General Election Results]</ref>), which created the "lasting impression that Bush 'won' the White House - and all the legal wrangling down in Florida is just a case of Democratic 'snippiness'."<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/US_election_race/Story/0,2763,399882,00.html Cousin John's calls tipped election tally] by Melinda Wittstock, [[The Guardian]], November 19, 2000</ref> Others note that, by this reasoning, Fox News and the other networks were even more premature in initially calling the state for ''Gore'', a call made while polls were still open, probably depressing voter turnout for Bush. In addition, other networks reversed their decisions and retracted their calls for Gore ''before'' Fox News did so.<ref>[http://johnrlott.tripod.com/op-eds/MooresMyths.html Moore's Myths] by John R. Lott Jr. and Brian Blase, [[New York Post]], July 12, 2004</ref> ==Reports, polls, surveys and studies== {{Details|Media bias}} ===Polls and surveys=== A poll conducted by Rasmussen Reports during September 2004 found that Fox News was second to [[CBS]] as the most politically biased network in the public view. 37% of respondents thought [[CBS]], in the wake of the [[memogate]] scandal, was trying to help elect [[John Kerry]], while 34% of respondents said they believed that Fox's goal was to "help elect Bush".<ref>[http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Broadcast%20Bias.htm Broadcast Bias]</ref> A survey by the [[Pew Research Center|Pew Research Center for the People & the Press]] showed "a striking rise in the politicization of cable TV news audiences . . . This pattern is most apparent with the fast-growing Fox News Channel."<ref>[http://pewresearch.org/assets/files/trends2005-media.pdf Trends 2005, Media] Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, 2005. (PDF file)</ref> Another Pew survey of news consumption found that Fox News has not suffered a decline in credibility with its audience, with one in four (25%) saying they believe all or most of what they see on Fox News Channel, virtually unchanged since Fox was first tested in 2000.<ref>[http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=1069 Online Papers Modestly Boost Newspaper Readership] The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, 2006.</ref> According to the results of a 2006 study by the [[Project for Excellence in Journalism]] a survey of 547 journalis, found that FOX was most frequently cited by surveyed journalists as an outlet taking an ideological stance in its coverage, and most identified as advocating [[American conservatism|conservative]] political positions,<ref>Project for Excellence in Journalism, [http://www.stateofthenewsmedia.org/2006/index.asp State of the News Media 2006: An Annual Report on American Journalism]</ref> with 56% of national journalists citing Fox News as being especially conservative in its coverage of news. Additionally FOX was viewed as having the highest profile as a conservative news organization; it was cited unprompted by 69% of national journalists.<ref>Project for Excellence in Journalism, [http://www.stateofthenewsmedia.org/2006/journalist_survey_prc.asp Press Going Too Easy on Bush].</ref> ===Studies and reports=== In an academic content analysis of election news, Rasmussen Reports showed that coverage at ABC, CBS, and NBC was more favorable toward Kerry than Bush, while coverage at Fox News Channel were more favorable toward Bush.<ref name=Farnsworth>Stephen Farnsworth and S. Robert Lichter, The Nightly News Nightmare: How Television Portrays Presidential Elections, Second Edition, Rowman & Littlefield, 2006</ref> The Project on Excellence in Journalism report in 2006<ref>Project for Excellence in Journalism, [http://www.stateofthenewsmedia.org/2006/index.asp State of the News Media 2006: An Annual Report on American Journalism]</ref> showed that 68 percent of Fox cable stories contained personal opinions, as compared to MSNBC at 27 percent and CNN at 4 percent. The "content analysis" portion of their 2005 report also concluded that "Fox was measurably more one-sided than the other networks, and Fox journalists were more opinionated on the air."<ref>[http://stateofthemedia.com/2005/narrative_cabletv_contentanalysis.asp?cat=2&media=5 State of the News Media 2005: An Annual Report on American Journalism - Cable TV: Content Analysis]</ref> A 2007 Pew Research Center poll of viewer political knowledge indicated that Fox News Channel viewers scored 35% in the high-knowledge area, the same as the national average. This was not significantly different than local news, network news and morning new, and was slightly lower than CNN (41%). Viewers of The O'Reilly Factor (51%) scored in the high category along with ''[[Rush Limbaugh]]'' (50%), [[NPR]] (51%), major newspapers (54%), ''[[Newshour with Jim Lehr]]'' (53%) ''[[The Daily Show]]'' (54%) and ''[[The Colbert Report]]'' (54%).<ref>[http://people-press.org/report/319/public-knowledge-of-current-affairs-little-changed-by-news-and-information-revolutions]</ref> Research has shown that there is a correlation between the presence of the Fox News Channel in cable markets and increases in Republican votes in those markets.<ref>{{cite paper | author = DellaVigna, Stefano & Ethan Kaplan | title = The Fox News Effect: Media Bias and Voting | version = March 30, 2006 | publisher = University of California, Berkeley |date=2006-03-30 | url = http://elsa.berkeley.edu/~sdellavi/wp/foxvote06-03-30.pdf#search=%22fox%20news%20studies%22 | format = [[PDF]] | accessdate = 2006-10-09 }}</ref> The "signature political news show" of the Fox News Channel, ''[[Special Report with Brit Hume]],'' was alleged to have a strong bias in their choice of guests, overwhelmingly choosing "conservatives" over "non-conservatives" for interviews. The progressive media watchdog group [[Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting]] (FAIR) claimed that in a study of a 19 week period from January 2001 to May 2001 the ratio of conservative guests to liberals was 50:6.<ref>[http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1072 Fox's Slanted Sources; Conservatives, Republicans far outnumber others] by Steve Rendall, [[Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting]] (FAIR), July/August 2001</ref> The documentary ''[[Outfoxed]]'' claims that FOX reporters and anchors use the traditional journalistic phrase "some people say" in a very clever way; instead of citing an [[Anonymity|anonymous]] source in order to advance a storyline, FOX personalities allegedly use the phrase to inject conservative opinion and commentary even in reports in which it probably shouldn't be. In the film, Media Matters for America president [[David Brock]] noted that some shows, like FOX's evening news program, ''[[Special Report with Brit Hume]]'', tend to exhibit editorializing attitudes and behavior when on the air. A study by the [[Program on International Policy Attitudes]],<ref>[http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Iraq/Media_10_02_03_Report.pdf PIPA / Knowledge Networks Poll] Misperceptions, the Media, and the Iraq War. [[Program on International Policy Attitudes]] October 2003</ref> in the Winter 03-04 issue of [[Political Science Quarterly]], reported that viewers of the Fox Network local affiliates or Fox News were more likely than viewers of other news networks to hold three misperceptions:<ref>[http://www.psqonline.org/cgi-bin/99_article.cgi?byear=2003&bmonth=winter&a=02free&format=view Political Science Quarterly] ([[Portable Document Format|PDF]]), ''The Academy of Political Science'', Winter 2003-2004 </ref> : * 67% of Fox viewers believed that the "U.S. has found clear evidence in Iraq that Saddam Hussein [[Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda|was working closely with the al Qaeda terrorist organization]]" (Compared with 56% for CBS, 49% for NBC, 48% for CNN, 45% for ABC, 16% for NPR/PBS). * The belief that "Iraq was directly involved in September 11" was held by 33% of CBS viewers and only 24% of Fox viewers, 23% for ABC, 22% for NBC, 21% for CNN and 10% for NPR/PBS * 35% of Fox viewers believed that "the majority of people [in the world] favor the U.S. having gone to war" with Iraq. (Compared with 28% for CBS, 27% for ABC, 24% for CNN, 20% for NBC, 5% for NPR/PBS) In response, Fox News contributor [[Ann Coulter]] characterized the PIPA findings as "misperceptions of pointless liberal factoids" and called it a "hoax poll".<ref>[http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/anncoulter/2004/05/13/11680.html Crazy-Like-A-Fox News Viewer] by [[Ann Coulter]], ''Townhall.com'', [[May 13]], [[2004]]</ref> [[Bill O'Reilly (commentator)|Bill O'Reilly]] called the study "absolute crap".<ref>[[The O'Reilly Factor]], [[February 22]], [[2006]])</ref> Roger Ailes referred to the study as "an old [[push poll]]."<ref>[http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005157 Elite, Arrogant, Condescending] by [[Roger Ailes]], ''OpinionJournal.com'', [[June 2]], [[2004]]</ref> [[James Taranto]], editor of OpinionJournal.com, the [[Wall Street Journal]]'s online editorial page, called the poll "pure propaganda."<ref>[http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110004127#fox Best of the Web Today] [[James Taranto]]. OpinionJournal, [[The Wall Street Journal]]. [[October 7]], [[2003]].</ref> PIPA issued a clarification on [[October 17]], [[2003]] stating that "The findings were not meant to and cannot be used as a basis for making broad judgments about the general accuracy of the reporting of various networks or the general accuracy of the beliefs of those who get their news from those networks. Only a substantially more comprehensive study could undertake such broad research questions," and that the results of the poll show correlation, but do not prove causation.<ref>[http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110005065 Best of the Web Today] [[James Taranto]]. OpinionJournal, [[The Wall Street Journal]]. [[May 11]], [[2004]].</ref><ref>[http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/artsentertainment/2001757992_kay06.html Study shows TV news viewers have misperceptions about Iraq war] Kay McFadden. The Seattle Times, [[October 20]], [[2003]].</ref> A study published in November 2005 by Tim Groseclose, a professor of [[political science]] at [[UCLA]], comparing political bias from such news outlets as the New York Times, USA Today, the [[Drudge Report]], the Los Angeles Times, and Fox News’ Special Report, concluded that "all of the news outlets we examine, except Fox News’ Special Report and the Washington Times, received scores to the left of the average member of Congress." In particular, Fox News' ''[[Special Report with Brit Hume]]'' had an [[Americans for Democratic Action]] rating that was right of the political center. Groseclose used the number of times a host cited a particular [[think tank]] on his or her program and compared it with the number of times a member of the [[U.S. Congress]] cited a think tank, correlating that with the politician's Americans for Democratic Action rating.<ref>[http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=6664 Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist] [[December 14]], [[2005]]</ref><ref>[http://www.polisci.ucla.edu/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.pdf A Measure of Media Bias] by Time Groseclose and Jeffery Milyo, [[UCLA]]</ref> Geoff Nunberg, a professor of linguistics at UC Berkeley and a [[National Public Radio]] commentator, criticized the methodology of the study on his personal blog, and contends that its conclusions are invalid.<ref>[[Geoff Nunberg]], [http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001169.html "'Liberal Bias', Noch Einmal"]. ''[[Language Log]]'', [[July 05]], [[2004]]</ref> He points to what he saw as a Groseclose's reliance on interpretations of facts and data that were taken from sources that were not, in his view, credible. Groseclose and Professor Jeff Milyo rebutted, saying Nunberg "shows a gross misunderstanding [of] our statistical method and the actual assumptions upon which it relies".<ref>[[Mark Liberman]], [http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001301.html "Groseclose and Milyo respond"]. ''[[Language Log]]'', [[2 August]] [[2004]]</ref> Mark Liberman, who helped to post Groseclose and Professor Jeff Milyo's rebuttal, later posted how the statistical methods used to calculate this bias poses faults.<ref name="Language Log">{{cite web| last = Liberman| first = Mark| title = Multiplying ideologies considered harmful| publisher = Language Log|date=2005-12-23| url = http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002724.html| accessdate = 2006-11-06}}</ref><ref name="Language Log.">{{cite web| last = Liberman| first = Mark| title = Linguistics, politics, mathematics| publisher = Language Log|date=2005-12-22| url = http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002723.html| accessdate = 2006-11-06}}</ref> Mark Liberman is a professor of Computer Science and the Director of Linguistic Data Consortium at the University of Pennsylvania. Mark concludes his post saying he thinks "that many if not most of the complaints directed against G&M are motivated in part by ideological disagreement -- just as much of the praise for their work is motivated by ideological agreement. It would be nice if there were a less politically fraught body of data on which such modeling exercises could be explored."<ref name="Language Log">{{cite web| last = Lieberman| first = Mark| title = Multiplying ideologies considered harmful| publisher = Language Log|date=2005-12-23| url = http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002724.html| accessdate = 2006-11-06}}</ref> A December 2007 study/examination by [[Robert Lichter]] of the [[nonpartisan]] media watchdog group, the [[Center for Media and Public Affairs]] found that Fox News's evaluations of all of the 2008 [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic]] presidential candidates combined was 51% positive and 49% negative, while the network's evaluations of the [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican]] presidential candidates 51% negative and 49% positive. The study, however, did find that Fox's coverage was less negative toward Republican candidates than the coverage of broadcast networks.<ref>http://www.cmpa.com/releases/07_12_21_Election_Study.pdf</ref> In addition, FAIR has note that Lichter himself is a Fox News contributor. Also, on the [[January 10]], [[2008]] edition of ''The O'Reilly Factor'', Lichter stated that he only examined the first half of the ''[[Special Report with Brit Hume]]''.{{Fact|date=April 2007}} ==Internal memos== As with many news sources, Fox News executives exert a degree of editorial control over the content of their daily reporting. In the case of Fox News, some of this control comes in the form of daily memos issued by Fox News' Vice President of News, [[John Moody (journalist)|John Moody]]. In the documentary [[Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism]], former Fox News employees are interviewed to better understand the inner workings of Fox News. In memos from the documentary, Moody instructs employees on the approach to be taken on particular stories. Critics of Fox News claim that the instructions on many of the memos indicate a conservative bias. The Washington Post quoted Larry Johnson, a former part-time Fox News commentator, describing the Moody memos as "talking points instructing us what the themes are supposed to be, and God help you if you stray."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mediamatters.org/items/200407140002|title=33 internal FOX editorial memos reviewed by MMFA reveal FOX News Channel's inner workings|accessdate=2007-01-25}}</ref> Former Fox News producer [[Charlie Reina]] explained, "The roots of Fox News Channel's day-to-day on-air bias are actual and direct. They come in the form of an executive memo distributed electronically each morning, addressing what stories will be covered and, often, suggesting how they should be covered. To the newsroom personnel responsible for the channel's daytime programming, The Memo is the Bible. If, on any given day, you notice that the Fox anchors seem to be trying to drive a particular point home, you can bet The Memo is behind it."<ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCommentary.asp?Page=\Commentary\archive\200311\COM20031107b.html Journalism 101] by Rich Tucker, [[CNSNews.com]], November 07, 2003</ref><ref>[http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Fox_News Fox News], ''Source Watch''</ref> Photocopied memos from Fox News executive [[John Moody (journalist)|John Moody]] instructed the network's on-air anchors and reporters to use positive language when discussing [[pro-life]] viewpoints, the Iraq war, and [[tax cuts]], as well as requesting that the [[Abu Ghraib]] prisoner abuse scandal be put in context with the other violence in the area.<ref>[http://mediamatters.org/items/200407140002 33 internal FOX editorial memos reviewed by MMFA reveal FOX News Channel's inner workings], [[Media Matters for America]], July 14, 2004</ref> Such memos were reproduced for the film ''[[Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism]]'', which included Moody quotes such as, "[T]he soldiers [seen on FOX in [[Iraq]]] in the foreground should be identified as '[[sharpshooters]],' not '[[snipers]],' which carries a negative [[connotation]]." Two days after the 2006 election, [[The Huffington Post]] reported they had acquired a copy of a leaked internal memo from Mr. Moody that recommended: "... let's be on the lookout for any statements from the Iraqi insurgents, who must be thrilled at the prospect of a Dem-controlled congress." Within hours of the memo's publication, Fox News anchor, Martha McCallum, went on-air with reports of Iraqi insurgents cheering the firing of Donald Rumsfeld and the results of the 2006 Congressional election.<ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/11/14/fox-news-internal-memo-_n_34128.html FOX News Internal Memo: : "Be On The Lookout For Any Statements From The Iraqi Insurgents...Thrilled At The Prospect Of A Dem Controlled Congress"...]</ref><ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15750535/ Has Fox News gone too far?], MSNBC interview about the leaked internal Fox memo</ref> ==Wikipedia edits== In August 2007 a new utility, [[Wikipedia Scanner]], revealed that Wikipedia articles relating to Fox News had been edited from [[IP address]]es owned by Fox News, though it was not possible to determine exactly who the editors were. The tool showed that self-referential edits from IP ranges owned by corporations and news agencies were not uncommon.<ref>''[[The Guardian]]'', Technology News, Bobbie Johnson (August 15, 2007) [http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/aug/15/wikipedia.corporateaccountability "Companies and party aides cast censorious eye over Wikipedia"]</ref> Fox edits received attention in the [[blogosphere]] and on some online news sites. Wikipedia articles edited from Fox computers from 2005 through 2007 included [[Al Franken]], [[Keith Olbermann]], [[Chris Wallace (journalist)|Chris Wallace]] and [[Brit Hume]].<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=201800211 | title = Wikipedia Spin Doctors Revealed | author = Thomas Claburn | publisher = InformationWeek |date=2007-08-14 | accessdate = 2007-08-15 }}</ref><ref>[http://www.theseminal.com/2007/08/14/fox-news-busted/ Fox News — Busted - The Seminal :: Independent Media and Politics<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> ==Criticisms of pundits== ===Notable pundits=== * Business anchor [[Neil Cavuto]], who is also Fox News' vice president of business news and a current member of the network's executive committee, has been described as a "Bush apologist" by critics<ref>[http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0613-23.htm Waking to Reality; Bush Numbers Drop as Americans Reject Spin] (editorial), ''Daily Camera'', June 13, 2005</ref> after conducting an allegedly deferential interview with President George W. Bush. Democratic strategists and politicians boycotted Cavuto's show in 2004 after he claimed, on air, that Bin Laden was rooting for [[John Kerry]] in the presidential election, critics contend, in an attempt to create a backlash among voters casting ballots for Bush, against Bin Laden's alleged pick.<ref>[http://mediamatters.org/items/200411040008 Cavuto defended suggestion that bin Laden was wearing Kerry campaign button in videotaped message], Media Matters for America, November 4, 2004</ref> Cavuto has also received criticism for gratuitous footage and photos of scantily clad [[supermodel]]s and [[porn]] stars on his show, ''[[Your World with Neil Cavuto]]''.<ref> [http://mediamatters.org/items/200512190010 Cavuto's World populated by Victoria's Secret, Playboy models and a pole-dancing Pamela Anderson]</ref><ref>[http://mediamatters.org/items/200605150012 Porn World with Neil Cavuto: Fox business show featured more scantily clad women]</ref> * [[Alan Colmes]] is touted by Fox as "a hard-hitting liberal",<ref>[http://www.Foxnews.com/story/0,2933,1536,00.html Alan Colmes' Bio], [[FoxNews.com]], October 10, 2002</ref> but he admitted to ''[[USA Today]]'' that "I'm quite moderate". He has been characterized by several newspapers as being Sean Hannity's "sidekick".<ref name="fair_aggressive_conservative">[http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1158 An Aggressive Conservative vs. a "Liberal to be Determined"] by Steve Rendall, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, November/December 2003</ref> Liberal commentator [[Al Franken]] lambasted Colmes in his book, ''[[Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them]]''. In the book, Colmes' name is printed in smaller type than all other words. Franken accuses him of refusing to ask tough questions during debates and neglecting to challenge erroneous claims made by Hannity or his guests.<ref name="fair_aggressive_conservative"/> * [[John Gibson (media host)|John Gibson]] the former host of an afternoon hour of news coverage called "[[The Big Story]]", and is frequently cited as an example of Fox News blurring the lines between objective reporting and opinion/editorial programming. Gibson angered some people immediately after the [[U.S. presidential election, 2000#Florida election results|2000 presidential election controversy]] when, during the opinion segment of his show, Gibson said: "Is this a case where knowing the facts actually would be worse than not knowing? I mean, should we burn these ballots, preserve them in amber, or shred them?" and "George Bush is going to be president. And who needs to know that he's not a legitimate president?"<ref>[http://www.fair.org/activism/fox-ballots.html Fox Reporter on Florida Ballots: Burn Them or Shred Them?], Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, December 20th, 2000</ref> In an opinion piece on the [[Hutton Inquiry]] decision, Gibson said the [[BBC]] had "a frothing-at-the-mouth anti-Americanism that was obsessive, irrational and dishonest" and that the BBC reporter, [[Andrew Gilligan]], "insisted on air that the Iraqi Army was heroically repulsing an incompetent American Military".<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,109821,00.html Liar Liar] by John Gibson, [[FoxNews.com]], January 29, 2004</ref> In reviewing viewer complaints, [[Ofcom]] (the [[United Kingdom]]'s [[statutory]] broadcasting regulator) ruled that Fox News had breached the program code in three areas: "respect for truth", "opportunity to take part", and "personal view programmes opinions expressed must not rest upon false evidence". Fox News admitted that Gilligan had not actually said the words that John Gibson appeared to attribute to him; Ofcom rejected the claim that it was intended to be a paraphrase. (See<ref> [http://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv/obb/prog_cb/pcb_11/upheld_cases Standards Cases - Upheld cases; The Big Story: My Word], [[Ofcom]], January 28, 2004</ref>). Gibson has also called [[Joseph C. Wilson|Joe Wilson]] a "liar", claimed that "the far left" is working for Al Qaeda<ref>[http://mediamatters.org/items/200601200009 Matthews, Gingrich, Hannity, others seize on new bin Laden tape to discredit war critics], [[Media Matters for America]], January 20, 2006</ref> and stated that he wished that Paris had been host to the 2012 Olympic Games, because it would have subjected the city to the threat of terrorism instead of London.<ref>[http://mediamatters.org/items/200507080002 Fox's Gibson on "golden opportunity" missed: If France had been selected for 2012 Olympics, terrorists would "blow up Paris, and who cares?"], Media Matters for America, July 8, 2005</ref> Gibson ran a segment [http://www.foxnews.com/video2/launchPage.html?051607/051607_bs_911debate&Fiery%20Debate&Big_Story&Rudy%20Giuliani%20squares%20off%20with%20Rep.%20Ron%20Paul%20about%209/11%20at%20GOP%20debate&Politics&-1&Fiery%20Debate&Video%20Launch%20Page&News] on the exchange between [[Ron Paul]] and [[Rudy Giuliani]] at the Republican primary debate on the motives of the [[9/11 terrorist attacks]]. The majority of the segment was centered around the [[9/11 Truth]] movement; Gibson said that the movement has "infected" many people "including Ron Paul", though Ron Paul has never subscribed to 9/11 conspiracy theories, and believes that [[Al-Qaeda]] perpetrated the attacks. * [[Steven Milloy]], the commentator for FoxNews.com, has been critical of the science behind [[global warming]] and [[secondhand smoke]] as a carcinogen. In a [[February 6]] [[2006]] article in ''[[The New Republic]]'', [[Paul D. Thacker]] revealed that [[ExxonMobil]] had donated $90,000 to two [[non-profit organization]]s run out of Milloy's house.<ref name="tnr">"Smoked Out: Pundit for Hire." Paul D. Thacker. ''The New Republic'', 6 Feb 2006.</ref> In addition, Milloy received almost $100,000 a year from [[Philip Morris]] during the time he was arguing that secondhand smoke was not carcinogenic.<ref name="pmbudget">[http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/kwk84a00 Philip Morris budget for "Strategy and Social Responsibility", detailing $180,000 in "fees and expenses" paid to Steven Milloy]. Accessed 5 Oct 2006.</ref> Milloy's website, junkscience.com, was reviewed and revised by a [[public relations]] firm hired by [[R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company|RJR Tobacco]].<ref name="rjrmemo">[http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/syq70d00 Activity Report, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., December 1996, describing R.J.R. Tobacco's input into Milloy's junkscience website]. From the [http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/ Legacy Tobacco Documents Library] at the [[University of California, San Francisco]]. Accessed 5 Oct 2006.</ref> In response to Thacker's disclosure of this [[conflict of interest]], Paul Schur, director of media relations for Fox News, stated that "...Fox News was unaware of Milloy's connection with Philip Morris. Any affiliation he had should have been disclosed."<ref name="tnr"/> *[[Bill O'Reilly (commentator)|Bill O'Reilly]], the host of ''The O'Reilly Factor'', is notable for controversial comments and is a frequent target of media critics. ''See also: [[Criticism of Bill O'Reilly]]'' === Discredited military & counterterrorism editor=== *[[The New York Times]] ran an article entitled "At Fox News, the Colonel Who Wasn't" by [[Jim Rutenberg]],<ref>[http://sec-global.com/services/ctp/vsg/news/020429.html SEC | VeriSEAL | News: At Fox News, the Colonel Who Wasn't<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> revealing that [[Joseph A. Cafasso]], whom Fox had employed for four months as a Military and Counterterrorism Editor, had bogus military credentials. Cafasso makes a 15 second appearance making pronouncements about the religious biases behind the Fox News reporting in [[Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism]]. ==Other criticisms== ===Criticism of media coverage=== * [[Outfoxed|Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism]], a documentary film on Fox News by liberal activist [[Robert Greenwald]], makes allegations of bias in Fox News by interviewing a number of former employees who discuss the network's practices. For example, Frank O'Donnell, identified as "Fox News producer", says: "We were stunned, because up until that point, we were allowed to do legitimate news. Suddenly, we were ordered from the top to carry [...] Republican, [[Right-wing politics|right-wing]] propaganda", including being told what to say about [[Ronald Reagan]]. The network made an official response<ref name="foxnews_outfoxed_statement">[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,125436,00.html FOX News Channel Statement on 'Outfoxed'], [[FoxNews.com]], July 13, 2004</ref> and claimed that four of the individuals identified as employees of Fox News either were not employees (O'Donnell, e.g., worked for an affiliate over which Fox News claims to have no editorial authority) or had their titles inflated.<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,125437,00.html Details About Employees Featured in 'Outfoxed']., [[FoxNews.com]], July 13, 2004</ref> * CNN founder [[Ted Turner]] accused Fox News of being "dumbed down" and "propaganda" and equated the network's popularity to [[Adolf Hitler]]'s rise to power in 1930's Germany, during a speech to the [[National Association of Television Program Executives]].<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4211395.stm Fox News 'propaganda' says mogul], [[BBC News]], January 27, 2005</ref>. In response, a Fox News spokesperson said "Ted is understandably bitter having lost his ratings, his network, and now his mind. We wish him well." The [[Anti-Defamation League]], to whom Turner had apologized in the past for a similar comparison, said Turner is "a [[recidivist]] who hasn't learned from his past mistakes."<ref>[http://www.adl.org/PresRele/HolNa_52/4629_52.htm ADL: Ted Turner Hasn't Learned From His Mistakes], Anti-Defamation League, January 26, 2005</ref> * [[Special Report with Brit Hume]] regularly features a panel of political commentators touted as an "allstar panel" and "diverse" by Fox News. The panel generally consists of three people: [[Fred Barnes (journalist)|Fred Barnes]], a self-described [[conservative]] [[War Hawk|hawk]]{{Fact|date=July 2008}}, [[Mort Kondracke]], a self-described "moderate independent" (Kondracke has said that he is "disgusted with the Democratic Party" and that the only reason he isn't a Republican is because "Republicans have failed to be true to themselves as conservatives"{{Fact|date=July 2008}}, referring to deficit spending in the [[Ronald Reagan]] administration), and [[Mara Liasson]], touted as a liberal by the program. In addition, [[Brit Hume]] himself maintains a conservative point of view, even taking up that position on the Sunday night equivalent of his own panel,{{Fact|date=March 2008}} arguing from the conservative Republican position against other, noticeably more liberal, Fox News panelists such as [[Juan Williams]]. Critics contend this overwhelmingly tilts the so-called "diverse" political discussions into one-sided conservative commentary{{Fact|date=July 2008}}. *Media watchdog group Media Matters criticized [[Your World with Neil Cavuto]] for its focus on [[soft news]] stories. The show is targeted for its coverage of [[missing white woman syndrome|missing women]], troubled celebrities, and gratuitous footage and photos of scantily clad supermodels and porn stars.<ref> [http://mediamatters.org/items/200512190010] [http://mediamatters.org/items/200605150012] Media Matters </ref>. *[[The New York Times]] editorial board criticized Fox News for employing political contributor [[Liz Trotta]], who thought talking about assassinating Democratic Senator and Presidential candidate Barack Obama was appropriate for television and laughed after saying it.<ref>[http://theboard.blogs.nytimes.com/tag/liz-trotta/ Assassination Humor? Fox Crosses a Line]</ref> ===Criticism of ethics=== * During the [[Terri Schiavo|Terri Schindler Schiavo]] controversy in early 2005, most of the major personalities on Fox News &mdash; [[Sean Hannity]] (who camped outside of the hospital where Schiavo lay dying after her feeding tube was removed), [[Brit Hume]], [[Bill O'Reilly (commentator)|Bill O'Reilly]], [[Neil Cavuto]], and [[John Gibson (media host)|John Gibson]] &mdash; called for her feeding tube to be reinserted. [[Progressive]] media watchdog Media Matters for America (MMFA) criticized Fox for its coverage of the affair,<ref>{{cite web | url = http://mediamatters.org/about_us/ | title = "About Media Matters" | work = Media Matters for America | accessmonthday = November 15 | accessyear = 2007}}</ref> saying that Fox took sides by referring to the affair as "Terri's Fight".<ref>http://mediamatters.org/items/200503290002 John Gibson's and Fox News' description of Schiavo case: "Terri's Fight", Media Matters for America, March 29, 2005</ref> It also complained that Fox generally failed to disclose Schindler family spokesman [[Randall Terry]]'s anti-abortion activism as the head of [[Operation Rescue]]. When O'Reilly's stated that "the battle over Terri Schiavo's life came down pretty much along secular-religious lines. Roman Catholics and other right-to-life-based religions generally wanted Ms. Schiavo to live", Media Matters noted that although evangelical Christians had been closely divided on the issue of removing Mrs. Sciavo's feeding tube, both Catholics and non-Evangelical Protestants were overwhelmingly in favor of doing so.<ref name="mediamatters_falsely_painted">[http://mediamatters.org/items/200504010006 O'Reilly, Morris falsely painted Schiavo case as battle between religious, secular Americans], [[Media Matters for America]], April 1, 2005</ref><ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/PollVault/story?id=599622&page=1 Poll: No Role for Government in Schiavo Case], [[ABC News]], March 21, 2005</ref> When Gibson's offering the suggestion that the "political divide" was "Republicans stand for parents' right and life, and Democrats have sided for [a] questionable husband and dying", MMFA noted that in fact, a majority of Republicans also supported removal of the feeding tube.<ref name="mediamatters_falsely_painted"/><ref>[http://mediamatters.org/items/200503230005 Only on Fox: John Gibson suggested that "Republicans stand for parents' rights and life, and Democrats have sided for questionable husband and dying"], Media Matters for America, March 23, 2005</ref> When Democrats provided the media with a memo written by staffers of Republican Senator [[Mel Martinez]] suggesting ways in which the Republicans could use the issue for political gain, Fox News personalities suggested that Democrats might have forged the memo. Senator Martinez later admitted that someone on his staff had written it,<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32554-2005Apr6.html Counsel to GOP Senator Wrote Memo On Schiavo (washingtonpost.com)<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> and MMFA complained that Hume did not later mention that he had suggested an alternative possibility.<ref>[http://mediamatters.org/items/200504080008 After GOP source of Schiavo memo was confirmed, Hume, Kristol failed to acknowledge their roles in suggesting Democrats had authored it], Media Matters for America, April 8, 2005</ref><ref>[http://mediamatters.org/items/200504070005 Dissecting a right-wing smear: How conservatives used trumped-up evidence to blame Democrats for Schiavo memo], Media Matters for America, April 7, 2005</ref> * [[Carl Cameron]], chief political correspondent of Fox News, authored a bogus "news article" on the Fox News website during October 2004. It contained three fabricated quotes attributed to [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic]] presidential candidate [[John Kerry]]. The quotes included: "Women should like me! I do manicures," "Didn't my nails and cuticles look great?" and "I'm metrosexual [Bush's] a cowboy."{{Fact|date=January 2008}} Fox News retracted the story and apologized, calling it a "jest" that became published through "fatigue and bad judgement, not malice."<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134166,00.html Trail Tales: What's That Face?], [[FoxNews.com]], October 1, 2004</ref> It was not linked from the main page.{{Fact|date=January 2008}} *The network has also drawn repeated criticism for falsely or poorly identifying guests on political programs. On the January 6, 2006 edition of Fox News' [[Hannity & Colmes]] two former Congressmen were brought on to discuss the "formula for success for the Democratic Party to win in 2006." One, [[Jimmy Hayes]], was identified in a caption as a Democrat. He had become a Republican in 1995. The other, [[George Nethercutt]] Jr., was not identified by party but is also a Republican.<ref>[http://mediamatters.org/items/200601090013 Fox falsely labeled former Rep. Hayes as Democrat; ignored party reversal], Media Matters for America, January 9, 2006</ref> Also, during an edition of ''[[The O'Reilly Factor]]'', congressman [[Mark Foley]], a [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican]] in trouble for writing sexually suggestive e-mails and [[instant messages]] to underage congressional pages, was misidentified as a [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democrat]] in the onscreen text. Senator [[Arlen Specter]] was also mislabeled as a Democrat on ''Special Report with Brit Hume''.{{Fact|date=August 2007}} Connecticut Senator [[Joe Lieberman]], who won in the 2006 election as an "Independent Democrat" after losing in the Democratic Party primary election, was featured on ''Hannity's America'' with the [[Lower thirds|superimposed text]] under his name indicating that he was a Democrat.<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQj2_xhdUvU Fox Goofs Again! Labels Joe Lieberman a Democrat by YouTube], [[YouTube]], June 9, 2007 </ref><ref>[http://www.newshounds.us/2007/06/11/fox_news_goofs_again_or_was_it_deliberate_labels_joe_lieberman_a_democrat.php FOX News Goofs Again. Or Was It Deliberate? Labels Joe Lieberman a "Democrat." by Marie Therese], Newshounds: We Watch Fox So You Don't Have To, June 10, 2007 </ref> ===Criticism of individuals=== * Critics of the network contend that Fox specializes in "political sabotage" by putting up moderate-to-conservative "Democrats" as token liberals against more staunchly conservative Republicans. Critics cite the following people as examples of this: ** [[Pat Caddell]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mediamatters.org/items/200409160005|title=Who is Pat Caddell?}}, Media Matters for America, September 16, 2004</ref>- Who has called the Democratic party a "confederacy of gangsters" and defended [[Ann Coulter]] when she said she couldn't talk about [[John Edwards]] if the word "[[faggot (epithet)|faggot]]" was off-limits.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,256949,00.html|title=Ann Coulter Defends Edwards Comments}}</ref> ** [[Susan Estrich]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mediamatters.org/items/200406090009|title=Hannity & Colmes substitute host Estrich: progressive standard-bearer?}}. Media Matters for America, June 9, 2004</ref>- Known for her opposition to liberal Democrats and support for the [[Democratic Leadership Council]], and who once told [[Sean Hannity]] that she was his "biggest [[Liberalism|liberal]] friend." ** [[Zell Miller]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mediamatters.org/items/200412170001|title=FOX News contributor-to-be "Democrat" Zell Miller}}. Media Matters, December 16, 2004</ref> The former Democratic Georgia senator is a hawkish conservative. Miller was a frequent guest on Fox News, a major critic of the Democratic Party. Miller spoke at the 2004 National Republican Convention. * Another allegation of Fox's critics is that it sometimes ridicules protesters. For example, during the 2004 [[Republican National Convention]], Bill O'Reilly referred to some of the protesters as "terrorists" (though he added, "most protesters are peaceful").<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/specials/elections/conventions/chi-0409030248sep03,1,6976681.story?coll=chi-navrailnews-nav&ctrack=1&cset=true | title = Fox News scores with GOP, spurs protesters | accessdate = 2007-12-11 | coauthors = Leon Lazaroff and John Cook |date=2004-09-03 | publisher = ''[[Chicago Tribune]]'' | quote = }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,130209,00.html|title=Small Minority of Protesters Can Cause Big Trouble}} by Bill O'Reilly, [[FoxNews.com]], August 26, 2004</ref> Fox News online columnist [[Mike Straka]] referred to anti-war protesters at the [[September 24]], [[2005]] march in [[Washington, D.C.]] as "jobless, anti-American, clueless, smelly, stupid traitors" and "protesters from hell".<ref>[http://mediamatters.org/items/200507060002 Fox & Friends' Kilmeade called G8 protesters "morons without jobs," insisted new Goldberg attack book not skewed], Media Matters for America, July 6, 2005</ref><ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,170465,00.html Grrr! Protesters From Hell] by [[Mike Straka]], [[FoxNews.com]], September 27, 2005</ref><ref>[http://www.newshounds.us/2005/09/27/mike_straka_believes_all_demonstrators_are_jobless.php Mike Straka Believes All Demonstrators are "Jobless"], News Hounds, September 27, 2005</ref>' [[Image:Moske fox svt.jpg|thumb|230px|The Fox News report on Malmö was replayed on Swedish television, here on [[SVT1]]]] * [[Iran]]ian-[[Sweden|Swedish]] newspaper commentator Behrang Kianzad wrote in the [[Expressen]] newspaper that "there are lies, damned lies and Fox News",<ref name="revirosengard">[http://expressen.se/index.jsp?a=214197 Expressen: Räven går i Rosengård] Behrang Kianzad</ref> in response to a Fox News story about allegedly [[Muslim]] violence in the city of [[Malmö]]. The report focused on the borough of [[Rosengård]] where 2 out of 1000 school students were ethnic Swedes.<ref name="breakpoint" >Harrigan, Steve [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,139614,00.html Swedes Reach Muslim Breaking Point] Fox News, November 26, 2004</ref> Kianzad wrote that rock throwing against police, firefighters and ambulance personnel happened "not just in Rosengård and not as a Muslim custom."<ref name="revirosengard" /> *In August 2006, Serene Sabbagh and Jomana Karadsheh, Jordanian-Arab freelancers who were working for Fox News as producers, resigned from the network, citing its coverage that month of the [[Israel]]'s conflict with [[Hezbollah]] in [[Lebanon]]. Their resignation letter read in part: "We can no longer work with a news organization that claims to be fair and balanced when you are so far from that...Not only are you [Fox News] an instrument of the Bush White House, and Israeli propaganda, you are war mongers with no sense of decency, nor professionalism." Sabbagh said, "I was devastated at the way that Fox was handling the coverage from Lebanon in the U.S., and I felt there was bias, the slant, the racist remarks, the use of the word "we" meaning Israel, and it was just unbearable up until basically the massacre at Qana... I switched to Fox News to hear some of their anchors claiming that these little kids that were killed... were human shields used by Hezbollah. And one of the anchors went as far as saying they were planted there by Hezbollah to win support in this war... this is when I decided, me and my colleague Jomana, to hand in our resignation." [http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/16/148232] * On [[January 19]], [[2007]], reports and commentary by Fox News personalities featured an anonymously sourced article in the conservative web magazine ''[[Insight (magazine)|Insight]]'' that claimed that associates of Democratic Senator [[Hillary Clinton]] had discovered that Senator [[Barack Obama]] had attended a "Muslim seminary" as a child in Indonesia. The term "Muslim seminary" refers to a specifically-religious form of [[madrassa]] (school). It was determined within days that Obama had instead, just as he had said in his memoirs, attended first a Catholic and then a modern public elementary school. The latter was, as Obama had written, "predominantly Muslim" (as Indonesia is predominantly Muslim), and not a [[seminary]] of any kind.<ref>www.examiner.com/a-534540~Can_a_past_of_Islam_change_the_path_to__president_.html</ref><ref>{{ cite news | url=http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/obama.madrassa/index.html | title=CNN debunks false report about Obama | publisher=[[CNN]] |date=2007-01-22 | first= | last= | accessdate = 2007-01-26}}</ref> On [[31 January]] [[2007]], the ''[[Washington Post]]'', suggested that because of FNC's reporting of the ''Insight'' article, Obama had "frozen out" the network's reporters and producers while giving interviews to every other major network. After the incident [[John Moody (journalist)|John Moody]], a vice president at Fox, wrote to staff: "For the record: seeing an item on a website does not mean it is right. Nor does it mean it is ready for air on FNC. The urgent queue is our way of communicating information that is air-worthy. Please adhere to this."<ref>{{ cite news | url=http://blog.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/2007/01/obama.html | title=Obama's Grudge Factor | publisher=[[Washington Post]] | date=2007-01-31 | first= | last= | accessdate = 2007-01-31}}</ref> {{Seealso|Barack Obama presidential campaign, 2008#Coverage of Obama's childhood and heritage}} * In March 2007, the Democratic Party in Nevada pulled out of a planned debate to be hosted by Fox. Its spokesmen cited a joke by Fox News CEO [[Roger Ailes]], which hinged on President George W. Bush confusing the names of Barack Obama and Osama bin Laden, as evidence that Fox News is biased against the party. Fox News chairman David Rhodes responded to the cancellation by saying that the Democratic Party is "owned by [[MoveOn.org]]" (which had created a petition against the debate).<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/10/debate.canceled/index.html |title= Dems cancel debate over Fox chief's Obama joke| publisher= CNN|date=2007-03-11|accessdate=2007-03-11}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/10/debate.canceled/index.html |title= Dems cancel debate over Fox chief's Obama joke| publisher= CNN|date=2007-03-11|accessdate=2007-03-11}}</ref> *In June 2007, when Louisiana Democratic congressman [[William J. Jefferson|Bill Jefferson]] was indicted on corruption, racketeering and bribery charges Fox News ran a video of Michigan Democratic congressman [[John Conyers]], also African-American. Conyers criticized the network for "a history of inappropriate on-air mistakes" and the network's "lackluster" apology (which did not name him),<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/06/05/john-conyers-responds-to-fox-news/|title= Conyers responds to Fox News| publisher=Crook and Liars|date=2007-06-05|accessdate=2007-06-05}}</ref> and a second, more specific apology was issued.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070606/ap_on_en_tv/tv_fox_wrong_tape|title=Fox News apologizes again for tape goof}}</ref> In November 2006 Fox News had aired footage of then-Rep. Harold Ford Jr. (D-TN) while talking about Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mediamatters.org/items/200706060006?f=h_topic|title=Fox News' African-American elected official mix-up not its first|accessdate=2007-06-05}}</ref> * On [[January 21]], 2008, Fox's ''The Live Desk'' broadcast a discussion for the [[Xbox 360|XBOX 360]] [[video game]] ''[[Mass Effect]]'', for which author Cooper Lawrence was consulted as a psychology specialist. Lawrence argued that the game was misogynistic and depicted full digital nudity. During the interview, [[Spike (TV channel)|Spike]] host and video-game journalist [[Geoff Keighley]] had Lawrence admit that she had never played the game. On [[January 26]], Cooper apologized and admitted she only heard about ''Mass Effect'' a few minutes before the segment and has since seen it played, noting that it was less graphic than episodes of the TV show ''[[Lost (TV series)|Lost]]''.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/26/arts/television/26mass.html?_r=4&ref=arts&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin| title= Author Faults a Game, and Gamers Flame Back}}, The New York Times, January 26, 2008</ref> ==Fox News responds== In June 2004, CEO Roger Ailes responded to some of the criticism with a rebuttal in an editorial in the [[Wall Street Journal]]'s ''OpinionJournal'',<ref>[http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005157 Elite, Arrogant, Condescending; The L.A. Times' editor is terrified of Fox News. How pathetic.] by Roger Ailes, OpinionJournal, [[Wall Street Journal]], June 2, 2004</ref> saying that Fox's critics intentionally confuse opinion shows such as ''[[The O'Reilly Factor]]'' with regular news coverage. Ailes stated that Fox News has broken stories harmful to Republicans, offering "Fox News is the network that broke [[George W. Bush]]'s [[Driving under the influence|DUI]] four days before the election" as an example. The DUI story was broken by then-Fox affiliate [[WPXT]] in [[Portland, Maine]], although Fox News correspondent [[Carl Cameron]] also contributed to the report. Upon the release of the Robert Greenwald documentary "Outfoxed", Fox News issued a statement<ref name="foxnews_outfoxed_statement"/> denouncing Moveon.org, Greenwald and ''The New York Times'' for [[copyright infringement]]. Fox dismissed their judgments of former employees featured in the documentary as the partisan views of disgruntled workers who never vocalized concern over any alleged bias while they were employed at the network. Ailes also shrugged off criticisms of the former Fox employees by noting that they worked in Fox affiliates and not at the actual channel itself. Fox News also challenged any news organization that sought to portray Fox as a "problem" with the following proposition: ''"If they will put out 100 percent of their editorial directions and internal memos, FOX News Channel will publish 100 percent of our editorial directions and internal memos, and let the public decide who is fair. This includes any legitimate cable news network, broadcast network, ''The New York Times'', ''The Los Angeles Times'', and ''The Washington Post." Ex-Fox News personality [[Eric Burns]] has suggested in an interview that Fox "probably gives voice to more conservatives than the other networks. But not at the expense of liberals." Burns justifies a higher exposure of conservatives by saying that other media often ignore conservatives.<ref>[http://www.iwantmedia.com/people/people28.html Eric Burns: Fox News Does Not Air 'Irresponsible Right-Wing Ranting']</ref> == Photo Manipulation == On the [[July 2]], [[2008]] episode of [[Fox and Friends]], co-hosts Brian Kilmeade and Steve Doocy aired photos of [[New York Times]] reporters Jacques Steinberg and television editor Steven Reddicliffe that had been doctored, apparently in order to portray the journalists unflatteringly. <ref> [http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080709.wwfox09/BNStory/International/ In viewership, Fox goes down with a fight] </ref> This occurred during a discussion of a piece in the June 28 edition of the New York Times, which pointed out what the writer called "ominous trends" in Fox News' ratings.<ref> Strupp and Mitchell </ref> According to [[Media Matters]], the photos depict New York Times reporter Jacques Steinberg with yellowed teeth, "his nose and chin widened, and his ears made to protrude further". The other image, of Times television editor Steven Reddicliffe, had similar yellow teeth, as well as "dark circles ... under his eyes, and his hairline has been moved back". <ref> [http://mediamatters.org/items/200807020002?f=h_top Fox News airs altered photos of NY Times reporters] </ref> During the discussion, Doocy called the Times report, written by Steinberg, a "hit piece" ordered up by Reddicliffe.<ref> Strupp and Mitchell</ref> The broadcast than showed an image of Steinberg's face superimposed over a picture of a poodle, while Reddicliffe's face was superimposed over the man holding the poodle's leash. <ref>Strupp and Mitchell</ref> Times Culture Editor Sam Sifton called the Fox photo work "disgusting," and the criticism of the paper's reporting a "specious and meritless claim" while denying that it was a "hit piece". <ref>Strupp and Mitchell</ref> ==See also== * [[BBC controversies]] * [[CBS News#Controversies|CBS controversies]] * [[CNN controversies]] ==References== {{reflist|2}} ==External links== * [http://www.foxnews.com FOXNews.com] * [http://www.newscorp.com/ News Corporation] - Fox's parent company. * [http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/A/htmlA/ailesroger/ailesroger.htm Museum of Broadcast Communications: Ailes, Roger] * [http://www.newshounds.us/ ''News Hounds''] - Watchdog blog critical of Fox News Channel. * [http://foxattacks.com/ FOX Attacks: They Distort. We Reply.] an anti-FOX News Channel website * [http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1319955,00.html Guardian Unlimited special report: Fox - the naked truth], October 5, 2004, Zoe Williams, [[The Guardian]] * [http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/sticksandstones.html The Fifth Estate: Sticks and Stones], [[Canadian Broadcasting Corporation|CBC]] - Bob McKeown investigates Fox News for The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, 45 min. [[Category:Fox News Channel|Controversies]] [[Category:Criticisms of companies]]