Fox News: network or political campaign outlet?

[soup]

Fox News either has very poor production editorial standards or has a tenuous grasp on the truth.

Fox News again accused of airing misleading video

For the second time in just over a week, Fox News is coming under fire for misusing old news footage. The latest flap is leading some people to charge that the cable news network is intentionally misleading its audience, while Fox claims a "production error."

Wednesday's incident occurred when Fox News host Gregg Jarrett mentioned that a Sarah Palin appearance and book signing in Grand Rapids, Michigan had a massive turnout. As footage rolled of a smiling and waving Palin amidst a throng of fans, Jarrett noted that the former Republican vice-presidential candidate is "continuing to draw huge crowds while she's promoting her brand-new book,'' adding that the images being shown were "some of the pictures just coming in to us.... The lines earlier had formed this morning."

However, the video used in the segment was from a 2008 McCain/Palin campaign rally. In response to the minor uproar that arose after clips of Jarrett's report hit the Internet, Fox senior vice-president of news Michael Clemente issued an initial statement saying, "This was a production error in which the copy editor changed a script and didn't alert the control room to update the video."

On Thursday afternoon, Fox News issued an on-air apology delivered by host Jane Skinner:

Yesterday we told you about Sarah Palin kicking off her book tour and then we spoke to Sean Hannity about an interview that he did with former Governor Palin. When introducing the segment we showed you footage of people lining up in Michigan for a book signing that evening. In the tease before the segment, the tease to commercial, we told you how those people were already lining up to meet Palin. The problem is we didn't show you the video we were actually referencing. Instead we mistakenly aired what's called "file tape" of Sarah Palin. We didn't mean to mislead anybody in that tease. It was a mistake, and for that we apologize.

The current mishap comes on the heels of a controversy sparked last week when footage from a conservative rally held over the summer was played on "Hannity" during a segment on a more recent rally. During the clip, host Sean Hannity marveled over the large turnout for a Washington, DC protest. The Daily Show later pointed out that there seemed to be some inconsistencies with the video shown on Hannity's show, namely that the atmospheric conditions seemed to vary from shot to shot. Hannity later apologized on the air for what he called "an inadvertent mistake."

Barely a week into Palin’s blitz to promote “Going Rogue,” media coverage is becoming its own story. Fox News rival MSNBC caught heat last week for using altered images of Sarah Palin on the air, for which they later apologized. On Wednesday, Yahoo! News reported Newsweek’s defense of their latest controversial cover, which Palin herself blasted as “sexist.”

Why do they seem to only make "inadvertant" mistakes when it comes to promoting a right-wing hack like Palin or theor own Glenn Beck?

[Brian]

I'm moving this over to recent news as there's no image attached, nor is there a link to the original article. Both of those are required in the featured news area.

So they made a mistake. It happens. All news organizations get footage wrong from time to time. It's no worse than Contessa Brewer not even knowing who she was talking to. That's the problem with live television, you can't correct your mistakes before they're aired. I like how MSNBC used an altered image, as stated in the article, apologized, yet it's a single sentence. Sounds like someone should be paying a little more attention to some of the stuff MSNBC puts out. Then again, if anyone watched that network, maybe they would. *shrug*

[Jack T Kirk]

Well, people actually want to watch Fox so at the end of the day, that's the only thing that actually matters. Freedom of choice, baby. The viewers have spoken.

[Lostviking]

Did you see the interview with Lou Dobbs on the Daily Show? Basically he was fired from CNN because they have decided to not longer have 'editorial news' that Lou Dobbs was famous for.

So CNN has decided to go back to the middle of the road.

Yay!


As for what the viewers want, that reminds me of the romans wanting to see the lions devour people. That's what the poeple wanted too JLP.

[vonnegut]

political campaign outlet. obvious.

[Flutterby]

Read the ratings:

Category | Cable News RatingsRSS feed for this sectionCable News Ratings for Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Posted on 19 November 2009 by Bill Gorman

Live + Same Day Cable News Daily Ratings for November 18, 2009

P2+ Total Day
FNC – 1,495,000 viewers
CNN – 422,000 viewers
MSNBC –352,000 viewers
CNBC – 187,000 viewers
HLN –325,000 viewers

Morning programs (6:00AM-9:00AM) P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
FOX & Friends- 1,084,000 viewers (402,000) (722,000)American Morning- 360,000 viewers (116,000) (165,000)
Morning Joe- 324,000 viewers (119,000) (188,000)
Squawk Box- 143,000 viewers (49,000) (73,000)
Morning Express w/ Meade- 314,000 viewers (193,000) (248,000)

5PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
Glenn Beck – 2,512,000 viewers (651,000) (1,193,000)Situation Room—538,000 viewers (123,000) (178,000)
Hardball w/ Chris Matthews—502,000 viewers (107,000) (266,000)
Fast Money—220,000 viewers (a scratch w/49,000) (100,000)
Prime News–183,000 viewers (86,000) (118,000)

6PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
Special Report with Bret Baier– 2,235,000 viewers (472,000) (974,000)
Situation Room—546,000 viewers (117,000) (171,000)
Ed Show—495,000 viewers (118,000) (271,000)
Mad Money —200,000 viewers (61,000) (91,000)
Prime News — 256,000 viewers (116,000) (173,000)

7PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
The Fox Report w/ Shep –1,980,000 viewers (452,000) (787,000)
CNN Tonight—589,000 viewers (135,000) (222,000)
Hardball w/ C. Matthews—625,000 viewers (132,000) (295,000)
Kudlow Report — 153,000 viewers (53,000) (67,000)
Issues– 500,000 viewers (202,000) (292,000)

8PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
The O’Reilly Factor– 3,868,000 viewers (1,065,000) (1,779,000)
Campbell Brown – 569,000 viewers (126,000) (202,000)
Countdown w/ K. Olbermann – 1,041,000 viewers (288,000) (488,000)
New Age of Wal-Mart– 182,000 viewers (73,000) (108,000)
Nancy Grace – 1,036,000 viewers (355,000) (555,000)

9 PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
Hannity – 4,200,000 viewers (1,149,000) (1,984,000)
Larry King Live —835,000 viewers (208,000) (328,000)
Rachel Maddow Show —957,000 viewers (273,000) (448,000)
American Greed — 179,000 viewers (66,000) (87,000)
Joy Behar- 537,000 viewers (152,000) (240,000)

10 PM P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
On The Record w/ Greta —2,383,000 viewers (747,000) (1,247,000)Anderson Cooper 360 — 611,000 viewers (171,000) (288,000)
Countdown w/ K. Olbermann – 575,000 viewers (162,000) (286,000)
American Greed – 194,000 viewers (99,000) (139,000)
Nancy Grace –499,000 viewers (197,000) (237,000)

11 PM P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
The O’Reilly Factor —1,774,000 viewers (599,000) (1,052,000)
Anderson Cooper 360 — 409,000 viewers (117,000) (167,000)
Rachel Maddow Show —361,000 viewers (129,000) (240,000)
Mad Money – a scratch w/123,000 viewers (71,000) (89,000)
Showbiz Tonight– 370,000 viewers (149,000) (179,000)

link

[Flutterby]

Originally Posted by vonnegut

political campaign outlet. obvious.

not so obvious....

[vonnegut]

Yes, it's pretty obvious.

Although what do the ratings have to do with this?

Are you trying to make the point that most people view Fox as entertainment?

[Mr Mo]

Originally Posted by vonnegut

Although what do the ratings have to do with this?

I also would like to know what ratings have to do with their agenda. I don't watch Fox News on any regular basis, and don't really have an opinion on this issue (yet), and i have no idea how ratings have any bearing on the discussion at hand.

[vonnegut]

Originally Posted by Left-Wing Nutjob

I also would like to know what ratings have to do with their agenda. I don't watch Fox News on any regular basis, and don't really have an opinion on this issue (yet), and i have no idea how ratings have any bearing on the discussion at hand.

I guess they are trying to say that CSI:Miami is a good news outlet.