Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism

Liberal filmmaker Robert Greenwald's "Outfoxed" provides a fascinating insight into the Fox News Channel, which, those who watch it regularly with an open mind realize, really is an extension of the propagandist arm of the Republican Party.

If you believe that Fox News Channel is actually fair and balanced, then you probably also believe the moon is made of cheese, the war in Iraq actually was crucial to the war on terrorism and that "a compassionate conservative" runs the nation.

FNC seems to believe that advocating and promoting rabid nationalism is the news media's responsibility and to that end it spouts the Republican Party and this administration's talking points. There's FNC host Bill O'Reilly damning as un-American anyone who disagrees with the war after it began because, apparently, one cannot voice opposition to the war and support our troops at the same time. And there's FNC cutting off dissenting opinions, fear-mongering (paranoia is patriotic, after all) and exploiting the American flag to make the most blatant of propagandists blush. FNC's motto should be, "We propagandize because you shouldn't decide."

Through hundreds of hours of research, Greenwald assembled a good array of clips to prove his point that Fox is anything but fair and balanced. We see Neil Cavuto, anchor of FNC's business show, telling a guest, "assuming the unthinkable happens and that Senator (John) Kerry becomes president...," and reporter Carl Cameron telling then-Gov. George W. Bush about how much Cameron's wife enjoys working for the Bush presidential campaign in 2000. Cameron then proceeds to interview Bush for a "news" story. That's fair and balanced at Fox. Cameron now covers the Kerry campaign and is the reporter who recently, soon after the first presidential debate in Florida, poked fun of Kerry in a story with fake quotes; the story then wound up on the Fox News Channel's Web site as a legitimate news article. Imagine the furor from conservatives and FNC had this happened about Bush at, say, at CNN or NBC.

We see O'Reilly completely distorting the views of one guest - the son of a Port Authority worker who was killed on 9/11 - because the young man disagreed with the Bush administration. O'Reilly seems obsessed by this guest, even berating him on air months later. Too bad Greenwald didn't include the clip of O'Reilly promising to apologize if the US found no WMD in Iraq.

"Outfoxed" has flaws. Greenwald doesn't interview anyone from FNC - would they have agreed? - or FNC supporters. We do see FNC owner Rupert Murdoch telling Congress his channel employs liberals, but can only name two. Even without thinking about it, I can name more prominent conservatives at CNN, which Republicans accuse of being liberal, though it clearly puts more conservatives on its shows than Fox does liberals.

Greenwald also doesn't differentiate between op-ed talking-heads, such as Cal Thomas, and so-called news anchors, such as Brit Hume. Then again, the line between opinion and news is blurred on FNC. One effective montage shows how FNC anchors use variations of "some people say" to spout their own opinion as news. Greenwald uses surveys showing how Hume's evening news show airs, by a 5 to 1 margin, more negative than positive stories on Kerry. If you watch Hume regularly, you will realize how slanted his show is.

Liberal commentators and former Fox News employees and consultants opine on how unbalanced FNC's coverage is. There's former CIA analyst Larry Johnson, a contracted Fox News contributor, who, despite having 8 weeks left on his contract, isn't called back after telling Sean Hannity the war in Iraq would divert attention from the real war on terrorism, an opinion Hannity disagreed with.

But the most damning evidence against FNC: Internal memos from John Moody, senior VP for news, that show how slanted the coverage is, how FNC promotes the Bush administration and conservative agenda and how a lopsided view of patriotism trumps real news at Fox.

In one memo, Moody urges staff not to make the 9/11 Commission report into another Watergate. "This is not 'what did he know and when did he know it' stuff. Remember the fleeting sense of national unity that emerged from this tragedy. Let's not desecrate that," Moody wrote. In another, he orders reporters to tout Bush's "political courage and tactical cunning" throughout the day. While on Sen. Kerry, Moody urges his staff to concentrate on the "flip-flops" and that Kerry's "perceived disrespect for the military could be more damaging to the candidate than questions about his actions in uniform."

What's frightening is how blindly FNC's viewers buy into the propaganda, especially when Greenwald points to surveys that show 67 percent of FNC viewers believe there's a link between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks. It's almost as if they're...dumb dittoheads. It would be nice if more people got their news from varied sources - newspapers, magazines and TV from around the world - instead of relying solely on a news channel that reiterates their beliefs.

"Outfoxed" proves that just because FNC says it's fair and balanced doesn't mean it is. Just as saying you're a compassionate conservative doesn't make you one, or saying you're constantly pursuing the truth doesn't make it so, even if you have talent on loan from OxyContin.

I remember the first time I was confronted with Fox News, and their "news" content. At the time I was studying media in England and had read quite a bit about Rupert Murdoch's impact on global media, and how he was believed to have been boasting Thatcher and Thatcherism in the UK tabloid press when she was prime minister. As well as part of my studies we had been covering the subject of objectivity in news, and how this in actual fact is an impossibility considering that any process of selection will result in some degree of subjectivity. This does not necessarily mean the news journalists will be lying to promote their own opinions, but the process of selecting what to put emphasis on will easily result in supporting one ideology over another. As coming media journalists we were made aware of the subjectivity involved in everything down to the selection of which images to show and which not to when in the editing suites. Credible news journalists will necessarily have to be their own watchdogs, and be aware of his/her own perspective and thereby able to stop him/herself if portraying something inaccurately to boast the impact of the news story.

The first time I had a look at Fox News was soon after the 9/11 attacks. The terrible events of this day was very much featured in all the world media, and I was following the coverage from various media institutions studying the way they all approached the subject. It was very interesting to see how every channel reported the news in a slightly different way depending on the supposed ideology of the target audience. I even found variations according to time of day and day of the week. Naturally I was curious how the American media was covering this as well.

When confronted with Bill O'Reilly for the first time, I was simply wondering if this would be the last day of work for this guy, as he was throwing all of the responsibility one has as a news broadcaster out the window. Within only an hour of watching Fox News I had numerous notes on big "no no's" being performed right in front of me. If there was only one glitch, I would have been less shocked, being confident that the person responsible would be called into the producer's office for a serious talk. However, the charade just continued on and on, and I was shaking my head in despair wondering if ANYONE would actually take this as news. None on this network seemed to even attempt not to blurt out subjective comments, and covering all aspects of the conflicts seemed to be something none of these "journalists" was even considering.

Even though all news I had been following had variations, Fox News stood out as the absolute extreme by far. I guess most of Europe and especially those who have gone into the subject studying media, has known about this for quite some time already. Therefore I believe Outfoxed is a very important film for America, shedding light on some very questionable developments in the commercial media over there. This is a documentary, which means it's arguing a point opposed to what news media is supposed to do. It builds on facts that have been apparent for years, so the argument put forwards does have a strong root in reality, however harsh the critique might be perceived.

One does almost get a feeling this is too bad to be true when watching Outfoxed, but as any media knower will point out – American media and also Hollywood (producing films like Rambo) has for a long time been questioned in terms of attempting to lead their audience's opinion and obscure the perception of reality. I believe watching documentaries like Outfoxed results in big sighs of relief around the world, as it finally seems also America is realizing and focusing on these issues. Thumbs up to those who dared to make this documentary, and a pat on the back to those who has watched it and realizing the seriousness of the issues raised.

'Outfoxed', directed by Robert Greenwald is a documentary examining the institution known as the Fox News Channel, a cable news network that is as fierce in its conservative agenda as it is about denying said agenda. Greenwald dissects the channel and disproves their credo 'Fair and Balanced' with interviews by former Fox News employees, media watchdog groups, anonymous sources and plenty of Fox's own footage. Through these various sources, Greenwald aims to prove that the obvious conservative slant that poses as 'fair and balanced' is the king of the mountain on a dangerous slippery-slope.

In 'Outfoxed', Greenwald more than backs up his assertion, and is able to do it with an obviously low budget. (You have to love the Power Point-esque captions and scene breaks) But the most compelling aspects of the documentary are the interviews and footage itself. Because of the near-dictatorship status of its owner, Rupert Murdoch, there is an obvious sense of danger surrounding the former employees who appear on camera; because it is clear that their current jobs could be in danger just for speaking out about the proceedings at the channel. This fear is most exemplified by the three former employees who not only refuse to talk on camera, but won't talk unless their voices are obscured as well. Probably the best coup was getting veteran journalist Walter Conkrite to speak out on the subject, because even his brief time on the screen lends a definite air of respectability and trueness to the subject. Of course, the footage is amazing, particularly the pieces on Bill O'Reilly. Not having seen Fox News (I chose to ignore it in the past) I knew he was a blowhard by reputation only, but watching the way he treats his guests was enough to make my blood boil.

The film 'Outfoxed' was made with the help of various grass-roots organizations; one of them being MoveOn.org, and the last ten minutes of the film examines what the average outraged viewer can do to take action against this kind of dirty journalism. Without seeing the film, one could construe this as an unnecessary addition, or a 'bleeding heart liberal' moment, but once one looks at the ramifications of the actions of the network, particularly in this fairly precarious political climate we exist in today, I very firmly feel that the call to action was not only warranted but necessary. I watched the film twice in one afternoon because, after being completely outraged the first time, I had to take it and show it to my boyfriend a couple of hours later. While there were times I was so aghast at the lies and dirty journalism I laughed, the truth is that this subject is anything but funny, and 'Outfoxed' is a good, (and short) documentary that should be watched, particularly by Fox News Channel viewers. 7/10.

Shelly

Outfoxed does an excellent job of diagnosing why people talk so much about the Fox News network. For while Fox has some of the highest ratings of any of the news networks, it is also commonly criticized for its not so "fair and balanced" programming. It is chronicled in this film how Fox succeeds in bringing in the viewers the same way that best-selling polemics and political talk radio do, they serve up to their audience heroes and villains. This method is so effective because the major issues facing this country and the world are generally very complicated, and require a reasonable amount of background information in order to make a sober judgments. However, most people have neither the time, nor the inclination for anything like that. Most do not follow politics to learn, to be challenged, or to take action, they simply want to feed their outrage. If their anger about the world around them can be explained away by blaming the people they already have ideological differences with, well that's just awesome. So, they often take refuge in the consistent, simplified, outrage-inducing commentary of their oh-so familiar talking heads. This, to me is the essence of Fox News. From its on-air discussion groups, to its choice of stories, as well as its evening talk shows, it is all about spoon-feeding people with stories of heroic conservatives, fighting to strengthen America against its enemies, both foreign (terrorists) and domestic (liberals). The film demonstrates how Fox news achieves this through a steady feed of news reporting that is highly regulated, intentionally biased, and aligned around a predetermined ideological slant.

As far as I'm concerned, to explain the behavior of FoxNews by saying that it is simply "standing up for the conservative perspective in a sea of mainstream media liberalism" as many conservatives do, is highly misleading. I believe one can rightfully stand up for any perspective they want, just so long as they aren't forced to resort to dishonest, intentionally biased reporting in order to make or bolster their case. In Outfoxed, director Robert Greenwald makes a very compelling case that Fox News, in the interests of carving out that niche for itself, does that far more than the other news networks.

However, since it is exposing the methods of a successful conservative organization, the conservatives who hear of Outfoxed will most likely write it off as nothing more than liberal propaganda. That to me is the ultimate problem with the polarized American political scene. Just about anyone who would be interested in the subject matter of this film as politically oriented as it is, has probably already made up their mind about Fox News one way or the other.

This documentary confirmed my worst suspicions about Fox "News". As a European in the US I was shocked to watch biased, unresearched vitriol spew out of a channel which then sanctimoniously called itself a news channel. The documentary shows employee after employee confirm what most in the industry already know. Interference with news content, selection and misrepresentation of news content, presentation of opinion as news content. Murdoch makes Citizen Kane look like a saint. Unfortunately, this is not a movie, it is for real. It is not much of a democracy when one man (Rupert Murdoch) can decide the presidency of the United States. (And he not even a US native).