Outfoxed: La guerre de Rupert Murdoch contre le journalisme
Original title: Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism
IMDb RATING
7.5/10
6.3K
YOUR RATING
Documentary on reported Conservative bias of the Rupert Murdoch-owned Fox News Channel (FNC), which promotes itself as "Fair and Balanced". Material includes interviews with former FNC emplo... Read allDocumentary on reported Conservative bias of the Rupert Murdoch-owned Fox News Channel (FNC), which promotes itself as "Fair and Balanced". Material includes interviews with former FNC employees and the inter-office memos they provided.Documentary on reported Conservative bias of the Rupert Murdoch-owned Fox News Channel (FNC), which promotes itself as "Fair and Balanced". Material includes interviews with former FNC employees and the inter-office memos they provided.
Ronald Reagan
- Self
- (archive footage)
Ted Kennedy
- Self
- (archive footage)
Rupert Murdoch
- Self
- (archive footage)
Roger Ailes
- Self
- (archive footage)
Featured reviews
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).
The documentary, although flawed (which republican is going to actually view it with an open mind...?), has some major points and the annihilation of "journalism" as it is known elsewhere is made obviously.
What comes out as obvious is the fact that, as a person puts it, this form of control is even more vicious than authoritarian governments: leaving the people "free" of believing that they are indeed free and well informed is a machiavelic way of control. What is sad is that it works so well.
Watch it, just so as to make sure you never watch Fox (ever or ever again).
What comes out as obvious is the fact that, as a person puts it, this form of control is even more vicious than authoritarian governments: leaving the people "free" of believing that they are indeed free and well informed is a machiavelic way of control. What is sad is that it works so well.
Watch it, just so as to make sure you never watch Fox (ever or ever again).
As with FARENHEIT 9/11 (2004), I will split this review up into two parts. One, the technical part, and two, the political part.
The movie itself is well made, even though the first 20 minutes or so have a bit of sloppy editing. Too fast clips make the text a bit hard to read. The interviews are often cut, which can be seen as a "shift" in the interviewees position, but this is not always clear. Usually, when making such editings, you make a white flash to indicate that you have omitted some words from this interview.
Particulary in this movie this is very important, since the whole issue here is FOX's use of the words "fair and balanced". This documentary however isn't fair and isn't balanced, but then again, no documentary is. The moviemakers doesn't use, or even pretend, to say that this documentary is "fair and balanced", so they might get away with it, but I still believe they should make these things a bit clearer to the viewer.
Second, I must say that the length of the film (approx 1 hour and 20 minutes or so) is perfect. It is not too long and not too short. The moviemakers get their point through and in a very good way.
Where other filmmakers usually spend too much film on themselves, these guys let the FOX's material speak for itself. And does it work? Oh yes!
This film is so hilarious sometimes that one can only wonder if ANYONE with an IQ over 80 can take this O'Reilly guy seriously. He is a total jerk and treats everyone like trash, and most of what he says himself is either "shut up" or some lies. The fun part is the way this material is edited, since we can actually tell for ourselves that O'Reilly IS lieing. I had the most fun with the O'Reilly parts, but he is quite a character to make fun of too. Not much is needed, you just have to watch him and hear him and you begin to laugh. I haven't watched FOX "News" so I was stunned over the fact that they have someone that is so ridiculus on the air. O'Reilly is so embarrasing that if I was related to him in any way I would change my name.
The other part of this review, the political part: Obviously this movie is made and released in good time before the 2004 election. And it is quite obvious that the makers of this film doesn't like Bush, and that they like Kerry. With that said, I believe this film will hold better after the election than, say, FARENHEIT 9/11 will. This film will still be important after the election, and I think that is this movies strongest point.
It is quite clear that the techniques used by Murdoch in his FOX "News" channel is in many ways the same techniques Joseph Goebbels used when he was working for Hitler back in the 1930's and 1940's. Similarities like censorship, bashing of political sides they don't like, use of symbols, use of fear. I am not saying here that Murdoch or anyone associated with FOX are Nazis - I just say they use the same techniques to get their propaganda through.
And it is propaganda. Watching the FOX "News" material is quite shocking, especially the parts which deals with hard subjects like 9/11 and the Iraqi war. Not counting O'Reilly here (because no one can take that guy seriously anyway), the rest of the FOX "News" staff seems to give quite a good impression. This is where it gets dangerous, since they are literary saying the same things that O'Reilly does, but with a calm and intelligent voice that can't be ignored.
Murdoch and the Italian PM Berlusconi has also some interesting similarities. Even though Murdoch can't create his own laws, he seems to have a strong link to the US Government (especially if there is a Republican as President) which kind of grants him this power anyway. That is, of course, not free press.
And if the FOX "News" channel just said that they were Republican or Conservative or that they said that "we support Bush - not Kerry", then there would be nothing wrong with this, or at least very little.
But when FOX uses the words "Fair and balanced" and even have this as a logotype used in their shows and on their website with the impression that it is a registered trademark (!) - THEN it is something really wrong. That is actually a lie, and when a news network lies about something, what parts of what they say is true?
Obviously this is FOX' view. Intelligent people can, as FOX say, "decide" for themselves. And last time I was in the USA I only met intelligent people, so I wonder... Does anyone really take FOX seriously?
I give this documentary 8 of 10. It is interesting, fun and will still be an important film after the election. It is not perfectly edited and have some other issues, but overall, it is a good film that I hope many people watch, even if you don't agree with the point of view.
The movie itself is well made, even though the first 20 minutes or so have a bit of sloppy editing. Too fast clips make the text a bit hard to read. The interviews are often cut, which can be seen as a "shift" in the interviewees position, but this is not always clear. Usually, when making such editings, you make a white flash to indicate that you have omitted some words from this interview.
Particulary in this movie this is very important, since the whole issue here is FOX's use of the words "fair and balanced". This documentary however isn't fair and isn't balanced, but then again, no documentary is. The moviemakers doesn't use, or even pretend, to say that this documentary is "fair and balanced", so they might get away with it, but I still believe they should make these things a bit clearer to the viewer.
Second, I must say that the length of the film (approx 1 hour and 20 minutes or so) is perfect. It is not too long and not too short. The moviemakers get their point through and in a very good way.
Where other filmmakers usually spend too much film on themselves, these guys let the FOX's material speak for itself. And does it work? Oh yes!
This film is so hilarious sometimes that one can only wonder if ANYONE with an IQ over 80 can take this O'Reilly guy seriously. He is a total jerk and treats everyone like trash, and most of what he says himself is either "shut up" or some lies. The fun part is the way this material is edited, since we can actually tell for ourselves that O'Reilly IS lieing. I had the most fun with the O'Reilly parts, but he is quite a character to make fun of too. Not much is needed, you just have to watch him and hear him and you begin to laugh. I haven't watched FOX "News" so I was stunned over the fact that they have someone that is so ridiculus on the air. O'Reilly is so embarrasing that if I was related to him in any way I would change my name.
The other part of this review, the political part: Obviously this movie is made and released in good time before the 2004 election. And it is quite obvious that the makers of this film doesn't like Bush, and that they like Kerry. With that said, I believe this film will hold better after the election than, say, FARENHEIT 9/11 will. This film will still be important after the election, and I think that is this movies strongest point.
It is quite clear that the techniques used by Murdoch in his FOX "News" channel is in many ways the same techniques Joseph Goebbels used when he was working for Hitler back in the 1930's and 1940's. Similarities like censorship, bashing of political sides they don't like, use of symbols, use of fear. I am not saying here that Murdoch or anyone associated with FOX are Nazis - I just say they use the same techniques to get their propaganda through.
And it is propaganda. Watching the FOX "News" material is quite shocking, especially the parts which deals with hard subjects like 9/11 and the Iraqi war. Not counting O'Reilly here (because no one can take that guy seriously anyway), the rest of the FOX "News" staff seems to give quite a good impression. This is where it gets dangerous, since they are literary saying the same things that O'Reilly does, but with a calm and intelligent voice that can't be ignored.
Murdoch and the Italian PM Berlusconi has also some interesting similarities. Even though Murdoch can't create his own laws, he seems to have a strong link to the US Government (especially if there is a Republican as President) which kind of grants him this power anyway. That is, of course, not free press.
And if the FOX "News" channel just said that they were Republican or Conservative or that they said that "we support Bush - not Kerry", then there would be nothing wrong with this, or at least very little.
But when FOX uses the words "Fair and balanced" and even have this as a logotype used in their shows and on their website with the impression that it is a registered trademark (!) - THEN it is something really wrong. That is actually a lie, and when a news network lies about something, what parts of what they say is true?
Obviously this is FOX' view. Intelligent people can, as FOX say, "decide" for themselves. And last time I was in the USA I only met intelligent people, so I wonder... Does anyone really take FOX seriously?
I give this documentary 8 of 10. It is interesting, fun and will still be an important film after the election. It is not perfectly edited and have some other issues, but overall, it is a good film that I hope many people watch, even if you don't agree with the point of view.
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.
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
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
Did you know
- TriviaThe director, Robert Greenwald, used a clip from Eric Clapton's song "Layla" for the film's closing credits in a rough edit, and then read in a magazine interview that Clapton had a long-standing hatred of Rupert Murdoch. He approached Clapton for permission to use the song in the film, and he granted its use... for free.
- Quotes
Bill O'Reilly: I'm not a right-winger, I believe in global warming!
- ConnectionsFeatured in Behind the Scenes of 'Outfoxed' (2004)
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $200,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $461,572
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $77,982
- Aug 8, 2004
- Gross worldwide
- $461,572
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content