Republican Bias at Fox News Documented in New Film, Featuring Former Employees

Former Fox Journalists, Internal Memos to Blow the Whistle
on Fox Partisan Bias

Progressives Call for Media Reform

NEW YORK, July 9 /PRNewswire/ -- At a New York press conference this
coming Monday, four former Fox News employees will go on the record to expose
Fox's persistent Republican partisan bias, while releasing internal
memorandums from Fox News Channel showing executive level instructions to Fox
on how to bias the news.
The four Fox whistleblowers appear, along with three others, in Robert
Greenwald's new documentary "Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism,"
excerpts of which will be shown at the news conference. The film is a
devastating indictment of the Fox News Channel's purposeful disinformation in
the pursuit of partisan objectives. Also at the news conference, Common Cause
and MoveOn will outline their forthcoming campaign OUTFOX, starting with
thousands of house parties to show the film taking place on Sunday, July 18th.

On Tuesday, media are invited to the official film premiere and to a panel
on media consolidation and reform hosted by The Center for American Progress,
with media authors and critics such as Arianna Huffington and Eric Alterman.

WHAT: Press Conference with FOX Whistle Blowers

WHEN: Monday, July 12, 2004, 12 NOON

WHERE: Emery Roth Salon I, Ritz-Carlton NY, 50 Central Park South, New
York, New York (59th Street between 5th & 6th Avenues)

WHO: Former Fox employees; Eric Alterman (The Center for American
Progress); Robert Greenwald (filmmaker); Chellie Pingree(Common
Cause, spokesperson for coalition)

To RSVP for the press conference (at which copies of the full film will be
available), please contact Trevor Fitzgibbon or Kawana Lloyd at 202-822-5200.

At Tuesday's panel, The Center for American Progress' Media and Democracy
Project will explore the impact of today's media ownership structure on news,
journalistic standards and democratic dialogue, as well as explain why
progressives must include media policy in their political agenda. How has
media concentration affected the accuracy of news and the diversity of
viewpoints? What does it portend for informed debate and democratic
participation? Five leading writers will answer these questions and explore
issues presented in Greenwald's film. A reception will follow.

WHAT: Panel Discussion and Film Premiere

WHEN: Tuesday, July 13, 2004, Panel discussion: 5 - 6:15 p.m. Film
premiere: 6:30 - 8:00 p.m.

WHERE: Tishman Auditorium, 66 W. 12th Street, New York, New York

WHO: Eric Alterman (What Liberal Media?), Arianna Huffington
(Fanatics and Fools), John Nichols (Our Media, Not Theirs), Nicholas
Lemann (dean of the Columbia University School of Journalism) and Paul
Starr (co-editor of The American Prospect and author of The Creation of
the Media).

To RSVP to the panel discussion and film premier, call (212) 229-5808,
ext. 101, or e-mail dover@newschool.edu to reserve seating. If you require
special accommodations, please RSVP five days in advance.

SOURCE MoveOn.org; Center for American Progress


================================================== ======

And if you have to believe Matt Drudge's pitiful excuse for a news source, Fox is going to respond by playing it (equally?) dirty; but, as with 90% of Drudge's output, it's probably just bogus (I mean, instead of defending themselves against accusations of bias, they're going to attack CNN and MSNBC for that same bias? I *do* hope they start responding in a somewhat more subtle manner, other than "yeah maybe we're biased, but so are they!").

[ 07-10-2004, 05:17 AM: Message edited by: Grojlach ]

Oooooo! Republican bias at ONE news station! Why aren't these people getting worked up over the bias at the rest of the networks (CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS)? They are just panicing over the popularity of Fox.

Also what is the fuss - like surely anyone with an IQ above 30 could notice that FOX is rabibly republican. I don't think they should be taken off air or chastised or change the way they do things. The only change that should be made is via abose of definition, where they should be forced to remove the word NEWS from their broadcasts and replace it with the word COMMENTARY.

EXACTLY. I TOTALLY agree. I keep smiling seeing all the liberals whining
"OHHHH NOOO, THERES ONE STATION NOT IN OUR POCKET"... Pleeezzzze.

If ya don't like the channel, don't WATCH it!

I'll watch it if I can get it up here, but I'll be on the lookout for bias in the other direction, too. Being as it's *former* employees they are featuring, I'd be concerned about the sour grapes/revenge possibilities.

Watch it, learn from it, critique it, take it with a grain (or several) of salt.

I am curious to see more evidence of "purposeful disinformation in the pursuit of partisan objectives" and I would love to see evidence of this at other networks as well.

The repeated claims of "vast liberal media bias conspiracy" with little or no credible evidence to back them up grow more stale each time they are repeated.

And Davros I agree- Considering the slant is so blantantly obvious like it is at Fox it would not be unfair to ask for clear labeling of some or most of the 'news' programs as 'commentary'- I would begin with the "Fox & Friends" morning show. Those three yockels pass the time most mornings mocking the Dems and everyone else who doesnt toe the Bush line. Nothing even remotely like that on the other cable networks, who are busy actually reporting the news instead of injecting color commentary.

To Fox's credit- people like Cavuto (4:00 business news program) make it clear they have a conservative stance and opinion even though he does parrot the "fair and balanced" line as much as the rest of them. The greatest fallacy is O'Reilly's claim of "No-Spin"- That is indeed the biggest and most obvious spin there is in all of spindom.

[ 07-11-2004, 04:08 AM: Message edited by: Chewbacca ]

EXACTLY. I TOTALLY agree. I keep smiling seeing all the liberals whining
"OHHHH NOOO, THERES ONE STATION NOT IN OUR POCKET"... Pleeezzzze.

If ya don't like the channel, don't WATCH it! </font>[/QUOTE]Amen. The Republicans need at least one TV channel. Now, if the Dems could just get one radio show...

EXACTLY. I TOTALLY agree. I keep smiling seeing all the liberals whining
"OHHHH NOOO, THERES ONE STATION NOT IN OUR POCKET"... Pleeezzzze.

If ya don't like the channel, don't WATCH it! </font>[/QUOTE]Amen. The Republicans need at least one TV channel. Now, if the Dems could just get one radio show... </font>[/QUOTE]They tried NOBODY listened to it, they had to PAY radio stations to carry it. Now the Radio stations PAY the conservative talk show hosts to get their shows. ;)

I'd be suspious of it also, Allen Combs is one of the biggest Liberals that ever walked the face of the earth and He makes up the other HALF of Hannity & Combs. AC doesn't seem to have any problem speaking his mind.

I hear ya Z - I don't like the channel, and I don't watch it. Mind you - even as a non-watcher I feel a sense of outrage when they use terms like "Fair and balanced one" and "news". Things like that that are blatantly untrue should be open for a lawsuit and public challenge.

Yep [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img] its not like the Republicans are getting worked up over a certain Mr Moore film and doing the exact same thing is it [img]graemlins/laugh2.gif[/img]

As Z says, dont like it? dont watch it :D

Fox Fights Back Against 'NY Times' Over Film Story

By E&P Staff

Published: July 12, 2004 3:52 PM EST

NEW YORK At a well-attended press conference this afternoon in New York promoting the new documentary "Outfoxed," Fox News offered its rebuttal to the film, as well as a full-frontal attack on The New York Times, which published an article about the movie yesterday in its Sunday magazine.

In a statement handed out at the press conference by an unidentified woman, Fox News declared, "The illegal copyright infringement actions of moveon.org in cooperation with The New York Times, including 'cutting a deal' not to give Fox News Channel adequate time to react, is unprecedented." The Times, it said, in "taking orders from" a George Soros-funded Web site, "corrupts the journalistic process. This is the real story." It described Soros as "a left-wing billionaire currency speculator who funds many liberal efforts."

The New York Times Magazine had quoted from internal memos sent to Fox staffers by a senior vice president, which seemed to illustrate a conservative bias. Fox has since released other memos that called for balanced reporting in certain areas. (See Greg Mitchell's "Pressing Issues" column.) Fox has also argued that the Times only gave the network one day to respond before the article was finished, while the Times says it had three days to do so.

"Any news organization that believes this story is big and Fox News Channel is a problem, will be challenged by Fox News Channel in the following manner: If they will put out 100% of their editorial directions and internal memos, Fox News Channel will publish 100% 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."

The Fox statement also attempted a takedown of several ex-Fox employees, labeled by the filmmakers as "whistleblowers," who appeared in the film (and at the press conference). Fox referred to them as "low level" employees, adding that some left due to incompetence, "and none expressed concern about editorial policy while employees."

Fox said that Clara Frenk, described in the film as a "producer" at Fox News, was actually a "pool booker." Frenk, at the press conference, said she held both positions. She also challenged Fox's statement that she had "expressed no concern about the editorial process while she was employed" at the channel, explaining she had told her boss that the channel's paid consultants on the right were far more recognizable figures than those on the left.

In a separate sheet, Fox pointed out what it called inaccuracies in how the film described four of the ex-employees, claiming some worked for Fox but not Fox News. It referred to one the employee's "personnel file," revealing that "he was considered to be a weak field correspondent and could not do live shots."

At the press conference, one of the former Fox employees, Larry C. Johnson, referred to the "Stalinist environment" at Fox.

Fox in its handout distributed two recent articles about "Outfoxed" by the Washington Post's Howard Kurtz, so reporters could learn about "parts of the movie that are distorted and actually incorrect."

Following the press conference, the film's director Robert Greenwald told E&P that there were many other Fox employees who would like to speak out but are afraid. He asked Fox to "guarantee the jobs" of anyone who "wants to come forward." He also defended the overall accuracy of the film.

The press conference got a bit heated during the Q&A when a current employee of Fox said that over 15 years at the network he had never experienced intimidation or been threatened. "That's wonderful news," Greenwald replied. "But these folks had it."

He also offered to let Fox air his film "for free."

Source: http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/..._id=1000575114

[ 07-13-2004, 10:33 AM: Message edited by: Grojlach ]