The White House vs. Fox News

by Eugene on October 18, 2009

in Media

An interesting strategy coming from the Obama administration compared to previous ones is its insistence on taking on the conservative media head on. Rush Limbaugh was a target before (and still is?), and now the White House has its cross hairs on Glenn Beck and Fox News (since the mainstream media is essentially the Left’s propaganda machine, I guess it’s not surprising).

When Chicago lost the bid to host the 2016 Olympics, there’s plenty of conservative chatter questioning President Obama and Michelle Obama’s lobbying efforts, and prompted this White House blog post:

Last night Fox News continued its disregard for the facts in an attempt to smear the Administration’s efforts to win the Olympics for the United States. In the past, hosting the Olympics has been a source of pride and unity for the country, but once again Fox News’ Glenn Beck program has shown that nothing is worthy of respect if it can be used as part of a partisan attack to boost ratings.

…and it goes on listing the “rhetoric” vs. “reality” item by item.

Apparently the designated attack dog is W.H. Communications Director Anita Dunn:

The general in this war is Dunn, 51, a veteran campaign strategist who arrived at the White House in May. She has been a force in Democratic campaigns since the late 1980s and helmed Obama’s rapid-response operation during his run. At the White House, she has become a devoted consumer of conservative-media reports and a fierce critic of Fox News, leading the Administration’s effort to block officials, including Obama, from appearing on the network. “It’s opinion journalism masquerading as news,” Dunn says. “They are boosting their audience. But that doesn’t mean we are going to sit back.” Fox News’s head of news, Michael Clemente, counters that the White House criticism unfairly conflates the network’s reporters and its pundits, like Glenn Beck, whom he likens to “the op-ed page of a newspaper.”

And senior adviser David Axelrod and Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel going on TV to be the faces of the anti-Fox White House. Obviously their job is to shield the president from having to appear on a TV program to face tough questions from reporters, especially those from Fox News.

Clearly the administration understands the threat Fox News poses to its approval rating, especially when all the news we’ve been hearing are angry town halls, tea parties, and Democrats failing to unite behind the president. But is it wise to go on the offensive against the news outfit? There’s a reason Fox News shows consistently decimate their competitors in terms of viewers — the public is tired of the liberal and left-wing mainstream media. Americans — even hardcore liberals — prefer to spend their evening with the likes of Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly, and Sean Hannity. Liberals watch them so they can curse at the TV and release their inner hate. Conservatives watch them so they arm themselves with undisputed facts learned from the programs. And independents watch them so they can be nudged to become conservatives.

I believe the White House made a grave miscalculation in this offensive against Fox News. The president’s popularity is dropping, and by attacking a reputable media organization the administration is showing its desperation. Plus, the W.H. is giving Fox News free advertisement, and sending more Americans to watch Fox News doesn’t seem to be a positive step for Obama and his men. This strategy will come back to haunt the Obama administration.

opinions powered by SendLove.to
  • http://tomdegan.blogspot.com Tom Degan

    A tale of two marches on Washington….

    One took place in the late summer of 1963, the other in the late summer of 2009. One was promoted by a preacher from Georgia named Martin Luther King, the other by a former “shock jock” from the state of Washington named Glenn Beck. Ouch! Even mentioning the two of them in the same paragraph is somehow disconcerting.

    In 1963, the the people were singing, We Shall Overcome.

    Forty-six years later, the chant was, We Shall Undermine.

    In 1963, a vast and varied demographic of the American people – all races and religions – descended on the nation’s capitol to peaceably and nonviolently protest an injustice that was occurring in certain areas of the country to people of a certain skin pigmentation.

    Forty-six years later, a Convention of Pissed-Off White People – united only by the fact that they were all habitual viewers of a single cable news channel – rolled into Washington to hurl invective at an African American president for creating a mess that he had absolutely nothing to do with creating.

    In 1963, the signs people held up were optimistic: “With Liberty and Justice for All.”

    Forty-six years later, the signs were ominous: “We Came Unarmed – THIS TIME!”

    On August 28, 1963, the hearts of people who marched on the city of Washington DC were filled with love and hope.

    On September 12, 2009 they were just full of shit.

    Let us boil the comparisons down to their juicy essentials, shall we? Martin Luther King had a dream. Glenn Beck has a scheme.

    http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com

    Tom Degan
    Goshen, NY

Previous post:

Next post: