FOX Is Fair and Balanced? What?

We nearly sprayed a mouthful of Cheerios all over our computer screens this morning when somebody forwarded us an email alleging that when it comes to American TV networks, FOX News is the “fairest of them all.”

Are you kidding us?

If that’s true, then why has the administration of President Barack Obama been waging an all-out war against FOX?

Anyway, according to a report prepared by the Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA), it turns out that FOX really is the fairest.

From Forbes:

CMPA analyzed every soundbite by reporters and nonpartisan sources (excluding representative of the political parties) that evaluated the candidates and their policies. On the three broadcast networks combined, evaluations of Obama were 68% positive and 32% negative, compared to the only 36% positive and 64% negative evaluations of his GOP opponent John McCain.

In fact, Obama received the most favorable coverage CMPA has ever recorded for any presidential candidate since we began tracking election news coverage in 1988. The totals were very similar–within a few percentage points–at all three networks. (These figures exclude comments on the candidates’ prospects in the campaign horse race, which obviously favored Obama.)

Meanwhile, Fox’s Special Report was dramatically tougher on Obama, with only 36% favorable vs. 64% unfavorable evaluations during the same time period. But McCain didn’t fare much better, garnering only 40% favorable comments vs. 60% negative ones. So the broadcast networks gave good marks to one candidate and bad marks to another, while Fox was tough on both–and most balanced overall.

First of all, the people at the CMPA clearly have way too much time on their hands … and some serious self-loathing issues they obviously need to work on.  Seriously, people … we can’t think of anything we would rather NOT do than sit around all day and listen to a bunch of political talking heads (unless of course the head that’s talking is Jeri Thompson).

Still, the report goes on to examine the media’s coverage since Obama took office …

From Inauguration Day to Oct. 10, only 27% of Special Report’s comments on the president were favorable. That sounds like proof positive of Fox’s negative intentions. But if Fox hasn’t lost its anti-Obama edge, it has certainly lost its distinctiveness. During the same period only 35% of the evaluations on ABC, CBS, and NBC were positive. So from the administration’s point of view, Fox’s coverage has gone from being the worst of all to merely the worst among equals.

Moreover, distressing as it may seem to a president used to unusually friendly coverage, this negativity is surprisingly normal. CMPA’s earlier studies found that the broadcast networks gave almost identically negative coverage to George W. Bush (37% positive), Bill Clinton (34% positive) and Ronald Reagan (37% positive) during their first seven months in office.

These numbers are too similar for mere coincidence; instead, they represent a historical pattern. Based on the experience of the past three decades, incoming presidents should expect to receive twice as much bad press as good press and plan accordingly. In the modern era of media politics, presidential honeymoons end with the transition to power. Once they try to put their agendas into practice, Republican and Democratic presidents alike are fair game for a media anxious to tell the other side of the story.

We don’t watch network television, nor do we listen to talk radio.

Our limited brains can only handle a certain amount of information, and this week Reggie Wayne and Carrie Prejean are taking up hefty chunks of real estate that we don’t feel the need to otherwise devote to political whining.

Still, the fact that the non-FOX MSM was totally in the tank for Obama during the 2008 election is no secret.

Who cares?

As our founding editor noted in a recent speech, “if someone makes a good point – an argument that convinces you – does it really matter what network logo they have on their microphone?”

Oh, and speaking of stuff we’re saving room for in our imagination, that’s a very nice micro-belt, Ainsley …

Pic: Wide World of Women

Comments