The war between Fox News Channel and Obama began when Obama’s administration fired back against Fox, saying that Fox is ‘biased’ and not a ‘real news station’. Rahm Emanuel, the chief staff of president Obama said, "It is not a news organization so much as it has a perspective". This dispute sparked controversial arguments from the public regarding the president’s decision to attack Fox channel. This also brings our attention to the news reporting channels like Fox and MSNBC. Are they really reliable? Are they ‘reporting’ the news, or simply giving their biased opinions?
First of all, I do not think it is a good move for Obama and the White House to attack Fox news. For a president to attack a cable network is a very odd move to make because they are at a different status and levels in our society. Even though Obama’s claims might be true, I still feel that it is a bit arrogant to attack a person or organization that does not hold as much power as you. Furthermore, Obama is actually helping Fox’s ratings go up. Fox is receiving free publicity because the famous saying, ‘any publicity is good publicity’ is true.
The public quarrel between Fox and the president brings up another concern and issue in journalism: the accuracy and quality of news reporting. Since I only moved to Boston a few months ago, I am not very familiar with the US news channels. I decided to compare Fox and MSNBC to see which network is less opinionated and biased. After a bit of research, I discovered that Fox is more conservative, and MSNBC is more liberal, however, both networks offer news and commentary. Their news stories are all very opinionated and their opinions are often influenced by their beliefs and values. This type of reporting is not ‘true’ reporting. Hopefully, people watch the Fox to be entertained, rather to be informed. True journalism should report both sides of the story, allowing readers themselves to feel what is right and what is wrong. Journalism should be a report...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document