The White House’s war with Fox News

New Yorker by Louis Menand | Oct. 26, 2009 (Opinion)

In 2008, half the people who watched the Fox News Channel were over sixty-three, which is the oldest demographic in the cable-news business, and, according to a poll, the majority of the ones who watched the most strident programs, such as Sean Hannity’s and Bill O’Reilly’s shows, were men. All that chesty fulminating apparently functions as political Cialis. Fox News shows should probably carry a warning: Contact your doctor if you have rage lasting ... Full Story »

Posted by Derek Hawkins - via Give Me Something To Read

More Info

Tags Help
Subjects: Politics, U.S., Media
Topics: Obama Administration, Media and Politics, Mainstream Media
Editorial Help
Posted by: via Give Me Something To Read - Oct 26, 2009 - 6:46 AM PDT
Reviewed by: Derek Hawkins (review), Walter Cox (review), Lynn R. Willis (review)
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Dwight Rousu - Oct 27, 2009 - 1:40 AM PDT
Like | | | Comments

To:


Separate email addresses with commas.
25 recipients max.

Note:

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Lrwsd_thumb
4.7
 by Lynn R. Willis - Oct. 26, 2009

This witty, well written and thorough analysis of the tiff between the White House and Fox News covers the bases on this subject. Mr. Menand makes the case AGAINST a White House attack on Fox, but provides a logical rationale for accusing the network of deliberately practicing partisan bias. I think this piece is good, informative reading.

Enough about Fox News, already.

See Full Review » (19 answers)
Member_photo_thumb
3.6
 by Walter Cox - Oct. 26, 2009

A very "The New Yorker"-ish analysis of the fine balance Obama must strike in his criticism of Fox News Channel--probably not a good idea to let Fox's obstructionist jibes go completely unanswered, and certainly not a good idea to use Executive privilege in an attempt to muzzle Fox.

See Full Review » (11 answers)
N1812091_2834_thumb
3.5
 by Derek Hawkins - Oct. 26, 2009
Derek posted this story.
See Full Review » (2 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

Sort by: Oldest | Newest Hide All Replies
NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

4.0

not enough reviews
from 2 reviews (45% confidence)
Quality
4.0
Facts
4.0
Fairness
5.0
Information
4.0
Insight
4.0
Style
4.5
Accuracy
5.0
Balance
5.0
Context
4.5
Depth
3.0
Enterprise
3.0
Expertise
3.0
Originality
4.0
Relevance
4.5
Transparency
4.0
Responsibility
4.5
Popularity
3.9
Recommendation
4.3
Credibility
4.0
# Reviews
1.0
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!