Quote:
Originally Posted by Befuddled_Stoner  Haven't people to the left of Fox's target audience always complained about Fox being the mouthpiece of the Bush administration? And isn't Karl Rove widely acknowledged as "Bush's Brain"?
I'd imagine that Fox coming out and hiring Rove as an analyst is tantamount to them screaming "WE HAVE A STRONG NEOCON BIAS!!!" at the top of their lungs.
And considering this is the news channel that touts themselves as "Fair and Balanced," screaming their bias at the top of their lungs doesn't seem like a move that will increase their credibility. Does this mean that Fox is dropping the bull**** about their neutrality? Perhaps they've totally stopped giving a **** about viewers who aren't calcified republicans? |
I always find complaints about Fox News to be disingenuous just because of the implicit disregard for the massive amounts of left wing bias in most every other aspect of the mainstream media. It's like complaining about someone being rude to your mother while someone else is in the process of violently raping her.
I also don't see how hiring the most prominent political strategist in the country as a political analyst is demonstrative of bias. If they were, say, insinuating that Barack Obama, based on unnamed sources, is having an affair as a major part of their news cycle, or if they ceased to report on the war when things were going poorly (in case you've forgotten the New York Times running a front page story suggesting McCain might be having an affair based on unnamed sources, or noting how coverage of what's going on on the ground has dropped off almost entirely since the surge started to work, and only focuses on dead troops ignoring every single story indicative of progress) then you might have a point, but come on, hiring an extraordinarily qualified job candidate for a job, what bias does that demonstrate?