RSN June Fundraising
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Peters writes: "Few things seem to pique President Obama like Fox News ... None of this has gone unnoticed inside the studios and executive suites of Fox News, which is rebuffing these White House put-downs as a denigration of the presidency."

Obama has been good for Fox News ratings. (photo: Getty Images)
Obama has been good for Fox News ratings. (photo: Getty Images)



Does Fox News Secretly Want Obama to Win?

By Jeremy W. Peters, The New York Times

19 July 12

 

onsider some recent barbs from the campaign trail. At a bar in Ohio where a television was tuned to Fox News, the president joked that one of the customers should ask to change the channel. “The customer is always right,” Mr. Obama cracked.

Last week he used the network as a punch line in his stump speech, saying that “Uncle Jim” — a fictional amalgam of his conservative critics — was “a little stubborn and been watching Fox News.”

Then there was an interview with Valerie Jarrett, one of Mr. Obama’s senior advisers. Ms. Jarrett was asked why some voters had the impression that the president was attacking the rich. “Well, they may be watching one particular network,” she sniffed. “CNN?” the interviewer teased.

None of this has gone unnoticed inside the studios and executive suites of Fox News, which is rebuffing these White House put-downs as a denigration of the presidency.

“I think it lowers the office,” Michael Clemente, Fox’s executive vice president of news, said in an interview on Wednesday. “For it to come up as regularly as it does — and it’s not every day but every other week, I’d say — it’s just unusual. Especially given the issues out there, like the lack of new jobs and Syria.”

Of all the items on the president’s plate, Mr. Clemente added, “I would like to be 15th on the list, not 3rd.”

Fox News and the Obama White House have never enjoyed a warm relationship. But after a caustic feud erupted in late 2009, the two seemed to agree to coexist peacefully. Glenn Beck, the incendiary host who called the president a racist, left after a falling-out with executives. The Fox News chairman, Roger Ailes, professed to be steering the network toward a “course correction,” an acknowledgment that it had shifted too hard to the right.

But now, with the presidential campaign entering its most competitive phase, the simmering tensions between Mr. Obama and the country’s highest-rated news channel threaten their fragile détente.

The White House and the Obama campaign in Chicago both view Fox News with a degree of skepticism. “We work with Fox News and their reporters in a professional way every day,” said Jay Carney, the White House press secretary. “But we’re not naïve about their business model.”

Turn on Fox News and much of the coverage is focused on stories that are unflattering to the White House. Far more than any other network, it chronicles daily developments in the scandal over Operation Fast and Furious, which involves a botched federal gun-tracking operation that has become a cause célèbre among conservatives. A Congressional investigation into the matter — another news event that has received careful attention on Fox — resulted in a contempt vote in the House of Representatives against Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. Fox News was the only cable news network early on to carry proceedings from the contempt hearings live.

The details of the bankruptcy of Solyndra, an alternative energy company that received $528 million in federal loan guarantees after heavily lobbying the White House, are well known to regular Fox viewers. So far this week, the story dominating Fox newscasts has been the conservative furor over a recent remark by the president that business owners owed much of their success to government investment.

Fox News tends to benefit when it covers Mr. Obama and the Democrats aggressively. Indeed, during the height of the 2009 spat between Fox News and the White House, the channel’s ratings grew 8 percent over all. And while many of its commentators and on-air guests may be rooting for a Mitt Romney victory, privately Fox executives say that a second Obama term could be the best thing that ever happened to their network.

Conversely, Mr. Obama has enjoyed hitting the Fox News punching bag now and again. During his 2008 campaign, just mentioning the network in a stump speech would rile up the crowd. A typical dig at Fox News would go something like this:

Mr. Obama would remark how engaged voters seemed to be. They were watching the debates, CNN and C-Span, he said. Then he would pause dramatically. “And Fox News,” he added, to a chorus of sonorous boos.

Political experts said Mr. Obama’s swipes at Fox News then and now seem to be in keeping with a strategy to discredit his opponents, a tactic the campaign has deployed rather effectively.

“Whoever it is who may be a source of strength for Romney, they’re out there trying to discredit them in some fashion,” said David Gergen, an adviser to Presidents Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton. “It’s an old tactic, and it often works.”

The White House insists that the president does not have a preoccupation with Fox News, and that both of the president’s recent Fox quips were ad-libbed. The remark in Ohio came in an unrehearsed exchange with a potential voter. And the “Uncle Jim” comment, while uttered during a campaign speech, was not part of the written text.

“You would be surprised how low on the list of priorities this is,” said Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director.

Mr. Clemente says he assumes that Mr. Obama feels frustrated with how he is covered, and from time to time likes to vent. The intensity of their dispute, he added, is far lower than it was in 2009.

“We’re examining and analyzing,” Mr. Clemente said. “And I think that can be annoying at times.”

After all, he noted dryly, “we’re not C-Span.”

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+11 # ronnewmexico 2012-07-19 12:45
Is it just the ratings...or is it that economically with some hems and haws and some bells and whistles.....it is the same old same old conservative economics that is remaining...

and thus the continuance unabated of Reuperts empire....is that not Fox's final aim? First the economic....so their corporation may flourish?

Is not Obama with Geithner, no arrests in subprime, no backing of those repossessed owning homes.....littl e to no regulations, and now complicitness in libor fraud......is that not it.....makes sense for Fox to support him.....ultimat ely they are the same.

I'll vote obama..for the bells and whistles...but not much more, nor expecting more..
 
 
+7 # SMoonz 2012-07-19 14:15
Fox News and the rest of the mainstream media work hand in hand pumping up Wall Street and we all know Obama has done more to help Wall Street.

Of course Fox secretly wants him to win. If it looks like they don't it is all simply smoke and mirrors and a charade.
 
 
+4 # Billy Bob 2012-07-20 05:38
But Mittens would do so much MORE for Wall Street than Obama would ever dream of!!! Are you suggesting that Mittens DOESN'T represent Wall Street? That's laughable!
 
 
0 # SMoonz 2012-07-20 08:50
Of course he would. Both Obama and Romney are bought and paid for by the same people.

However, if something ain't broke, don't fix it. If the Obama presidency is working so well for them why rock the boat? It is best to work with what you already know.
 
 
+1 # Billy Bob 2012-07-20 09:18
Obama isn't one of them as much as Mittens is. You have an agenda. Your agenda is to portray Obama as the secretly TRUE representative of Wall Street so the person you secretly want in the White House will win the election. Obama has also pissed off Wall Street a whole lot more than Mittens ever would.
 
 
0 # SMoonz 2012-07-20 23:17
Do you really think that my opinion will influence so many people that it will cost Obama the election? That would be funny and with zero likelihood.
Plus, let's be honest, Obama will be re-elected....
 
 
-1 # Billy Bob 2012-07-21 07:13
The repug party feels that internet trolls are a good use of money. So does the Pentagon. Do you think you know more about it than they do? Yes, opinions on the internet have an affect on elections or non of us would bother trying to argue with one another.
 
 
+21 # Jameswhadley 2012-07-20 02:42
Fox the highest rated news network in the country? That says it all. No country with citizens that stupid is going to thrive. We are now fat, Foxed and fu--ed..
 
 
+8 # MidwestTom 2012-07-20 04:00
At least for the first 200 years of this country the press, sometimes called the Forth Estate, fulfilled it's roll as a watchdog for the citizens. They were the ones who dug up and exposed the dirty dealing on government. It was the press who dug up and promoted Watergate. The proper roll of the press is to be honest but antagonistic, and question everything in government. That is why the first thing that new dictators do is muzzle the press. If we want an honest government, we must have a press that monitors it's every move, no matter who is in power.
 
 
+8 # Feral Dogz 2012-07-20 08:18
Quoting MidwestTom:
At least for the first 200 years of this country the press, sometimes called the Forth Estate, fulfilled it's roll as a watchdog for the citizens. They were the ones who dug up and exposed the dirty dealing on government. It was the press who dug up and promoted Watergate. The proper roll of the press is to be honest but antagonistic, and question everything in government. That is why the first thing that new dictators do is muzzle the press. If we want an honest government, we must have a press that monitors it's every move, no matter who is in power.


How strange it is then, that the "dictator" Obama has not muzzled the press. And where was the honest, antagonistic, questioning press when Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld were fabricating the "evidence" for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?
 
 
+2 # ronnewmexico 2012-07-20 08:49
How it is managed is in this way....certain avenues of reporting have only one real source...govern mental sources.
To get favorable coverage on specific issues relationships are established between governmental sources and reporters/editors.

If a reporter/editor wants to survive and get any news at all they must in these relationships produce things wanted on occasion by their sources...so they do.

Other means of covert manipulation exist depending on this relationship.. A well honed CIA tactic is (when a story of damaging truth appears)....to utilize these reporters to produce articles related to the true one but off the mark. Thusly diluting the impact and perception of truth of the initial....

So overt censorship does not exist in called democracies.... covert by such means certainly does.
AS corporations own national media...mostly things are just not reported......o ne person shooting another (in say florida)...beco mes headline news for months while extreme weather (drought related to global warming)....sin gularly only are mentioned..not in greater context.

Iraq....a thousand pro iraq mentions in all media leading up to the war for every one against...not overtly censored (the idea it was not right)...covert ly by sheer volume. Such are the means...covert, not overt.
 
 
+2 # mdhome 2012-07-20 09:27
The continuing talk about "fast & furious" is making the idea of gun control easier to talk about, AZs weak gun control laws make it super easy to get guns into Mexico even without any "fast and furious" plans. I can go into a gun dealers shop, buy a bunch of guns sell them to a person to transport them into Mexico, all within hours.
 
 
+1 # wrodwell 2012-07-20 11:10
Gosh, poor old Fox News. So, Roger Ailes has remarked that the network will be undergoing a "course correction". Presumably, the "course correction" will result in the toning-down of Fox's right wing extremist sympathies. I guess such a "correction" is feasible as long as it doesn't interfere with Roger Ailes stated goal of earning a one billion dollar profit. (I'm sure Fox will remain steadily on this particular course without any "correction"). Is Obama interfering with or bullying poor old Fox News? People seem to forget that the Bush Administration contacted the NY Times and bullied them to tone down their perceived anti-Bush propensities especially regarding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It worked; the Times allowed themselves to be intimidated and cowed. I often wonder how the talking heads at Fox News can work for a company whose CEO headed a newspaper in Britain that hacked into phones and computers and who bribed police. Gee, I haven't heard of anyone at Fox News America resigning in protest - or disgust - at Boss Murdoch's shenanigans. I guess it is about the money........wh ores, that they are.
 
 
+1 # jerryball 2012-07-21 16:06
“I think it lowers the office,” Michael Clemente, Fox’s executive vice president of news, said in an interview on Wednesday.

LOL. The biggest lowlife bar in television history taking the president to task about lowering the bar? Go fish Ms. Clemente.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN