Outfoxed: The Sad State of Media Criticism

I think we can all agree that those who are proponents of objectivity in journalism are either ignorant of most modern journalistic ethical literature or disingenuous.

I think we can all agree that the FOX news channel is biased. It is biased, in the sense of the above, but also in the sense of a conscious concentration and manipulation of certain attitudes that shape and frame the news.
All that said, Mike Greenwald, the documentary’s director, undercuts any decent argument he could make by employing some over handed tactics and some sloppy rhetoric.

The experts he employs to add substance and evidence to his claims about Fox news all come from well documented liberal background, men and women who have already spoken out against Fox news, not necessarily from the solid ground of journalistic integrity.

The parade of agenda biased journalists skew their credentials as experts (even if we are to concede that they do in fact know what they are talking about in the first place) as well as subvert any notions of untainted evidence.

The former Fox news employees were also misrepresented. For example, Mr. Du Pre of the West Coast Bureau, who is responsible for some of the most potentially damaging comments, is not really from the West Coast Bureau. He was from the local Los Angeles Bureau and was let go from Fox news for “biased reporting.” So not only does the production create false implications, but also Mr. Du Pre has an incredibly biased agenda against his former employer.

Even the statistics are tainted (yeah, “even” implies that they normally wouldn’t be. And yeah, everyone knows the idiom “there are lies, goddamn lies, and statistics.” I just wanted that conjunction). Yet, they are more than tainted, they are embarrassingly sloppy in their impurity. When presenting the number of people Rupert Murdoch can reach on a daily basis, Greenwald adds each constituent together, ignoring those people who could fall into multiple categories. People who have basic cable can also access the Internet. Those groups are not mutually exclusive, yet Greenwald adds them all up for the largest number possible.

Perhaps the biggest problem though, is his refusal to create a baseline from which to compare Fox news’ journalistic culture to other news outlets. There are no, this is what CNN does, and look how biased Fox news is, points.
The best example of this is the memos from Fox high command that supposedly generate and perpetuate propaganda and bias. Perhaps these memos are biased. I can not, though, as a viewer, know what to think for certain without relevant comparisons.

Yet, even these memos don’t seem biased. And Greenwald over handed attempts to make them appear biased subverts any credibility he has left. My favorite example of this is the memo pertaining to the coverage of Abu Grahb prison. The memo reads something along these lines:

“People are upset over the Abu Grahb prison photos. And they are rightfully so. Today, we’re going to show a US citizen captured and presented to us bound and gagged. Where is the sympathy for this man?” (apprx)

The narrator though skips the second line, as that piece of text fades into the background. Greenwald obviously removes the piece of fairness from the memo. This presentation is about as absurd as asking Mrs. Lincoln how the play was despite the assassination. The removal of a vital piece of text from the narration is in poor taste, but to leave the original memo in is, plainly, stupid and sloppy.

If someone ever brought this script into the writing center, I would have serious concerns as a tutor. As a citizen watching this film, I also have serious concerns, concerns about the state of media criticism.