Allegations of bias and other controversies

The Fox News logo

Fox News (officially, Fox News Channel, FNC and commonly known as Fox) is an American basic cable and satellite television channel owned by News Corp, with Rupert Murdoch as its chairman. During its time on the air, it has been the subject of many controversies, allegations and firings.

Fox News has been alleged by academics, media figures, political figures, and watchdog groups of having Republican Party bias in their news coverage[1][2][3][4] as well as perpetuating more general views of a conservative bias.[5] Fox News has publicly denied such charges,[6] stating that the reporters in the newsroom provide separate, neutral reporting, while acknowledging their opinion programming is not intended to be neutral.[7]

Allegations of bias [ edit ]

Political figures [ edit ]

Former Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean has referred to the Fox News Channel as a "right-wing propaganda machine,"[8] and several Democratic Party politicians have boycotted events hosted or sponsored by the network.[9][10] In 2007, several major Democratic Party presidential candidates (Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Barack Obama, and Bill Richardson) boycotted or dropped out of Fox News-sponsored or -hosted debates,[9][11] forcing their cancellation.[citation needed]

Similar accusations have been levied against Fox News in response to its decision to exclude Ron Paul and Duncan Hunter from the January 5, 2008, Republican candidate debate.[12] In response, many individuals and organizations petitioned Fox News to reconsider its decision. When Fox News refused to change its position and continued to exclude Paul and Hunter, the New Hampshire Republican Party officially announced it would withdraw as a Fox News partner in the forum.[13]

While the network has been criticized for its tendency to support the Republican Party and its interests, David Frum, former speechwriter for George W. Bush, has also said, "Republicans originally thought that Fox (Fox News) worked for us and now we're discovering we work for Fox (Fox News)."[14]

Media figures [ edit ]

Larry King said in a January 17, 2007, interview with the Chicago Sun-Times, "They're a Republican brand. They're an extension of the Republican Party with some exceptions, [like] Greta Van Susteren. But I don't begrudge them that. [Fox News CEO] Roger Ailes is an old friend. They've been nice to me. They've said some very nice things about me. Not [Bill] O'Reilly, but I don't watch him."[15]

Writing for the Los Angeles Times, Republican and conservative columnist Jonah Goldberg stated: "Look, I think liberals have reasonable gripes with Fox News. It does lean to the right, primarily in its opinion programming but also in its story selection (which is fine by me) and elsewhere. But it's worth remembering that Fox (Fox News) is less a bastion of ideological conservatism and more a populist, tabloid-like network."[5]

Former Fox News host Bill O'Reilly stated in 2004 in the context of the Iraq War that "Fox (Fox News) does tilt right", but that the network does not "actively campaign or try to help Bush-Cheney."[16][17]

Media watchdogs [ edit ]

Media watch dog groups such as Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR)[3] and Media Matters for America,[4] have argued that Fox News reporting contains conservative editorializing within news stories. FAIR has asserted that the ratio of conservative to non-conservative guests on Fox News Channel shows strongly favors conservatives. In a study of a 19-week period from January 2001 to May 2001 on Special Report with Brit Hume the ratio was 25:3, and FAIR obtained similar data from other Fox News Channel shows.[18][19] Accuracy in Media has claimed that there was a conflict of interest in Fox News' co-sponsorship of the May 15, 2007, Republican presidential candidates debate, pointing out that candidate, businessman and former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani's law firm had tackled copyright protection and legislation on the purchase of cable TV lineups for News Corporation, the then-parent company of Fox News, Fox Sports, Foxtel, Fox Footy, Fox Sports News, Fox Television Studios, Fox Television Stations, Foxstar Productions, 20th Television, 20th Century Fox Television, 20th Century Fox, Fox Searchlight Pictures, 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment and DirecTV, and suggesting that Fox News might be biased in favor of Giuliani's candidacy for the Republican Party presidential nomination.[20]

Ownership and management [ edit ]

Australian-born media mogul Rupert Murdoch is the chairman of Fox Corporation, the owner of Fox News Channel. He has been a subject of controversy and criticism as a result of his substantial influence in both the print and broadcast media. In the United States, he is the publisher of the New York Post newspaper and the magazine The Weekly Standard. Accusations against him include the "dumbing down" of news and introducing "mindless vulgarity" in place of genuine journalism, and having his own outlets produce news that serve his own political and financial agendas. According to the BBC website: "To some he is little less than the devil incarnate, to others, the most progressive mover-and-shaker in the media business."[21]

Then-presidential candidate George W. Bush's cousin, John Prescott Ellis, was Fox News' projection team manager during the general election of 2000. After speaking numerous times on election night with his cousins George and Jeb,[22] Ellis, at 2:16 AM, reversed Fox News' call for Florida as a state won by Al Gore. Critics allege this was a premature decision, given the impossibly razor-thin margin (officially 537 of 5.9 million votes[23]), which created the "lasting impression that Bush 'won' the White House – and all the legal wrangling down in Florida is just a case of Democratic 'snippiness'."[24] Others, such as researcher John Lott, have responded that, by this reasoning, Fox News and the other networks were even more premature in initially calling the state for Gore, a call made while polls were still open, and which may have depressed voter turnout for Bush,[25] actually affecting the election, whereas the call for Bush later could not have, as the polls were closed by then.[citation needed]

On January 9, 2010, the son-in-law of Rupert Murdoch and the husband of Murdoch's daughter Elisabeth, Matthew Freud, stated he and other members of the media mogul's family are "ashamed and sickened" by the right leaning tendencies of Fox News in the opening salvo in a bid to displace Roger Ailes, the founder and CEO of Fox News.[26] In the previous Sunday New York Times news story featuring a profile on Ailes, Freud was quoted saying "I am by no means alone within the family or the company in being ashamed and sickened by Roger Ailes' horrendous and sustained disregard of the journalist standards that News Corporation, its founder and every other global media business aspires to, what you heard was a declaration of war, There are, practically speaking, now two factions inside of News Corp.: Ailes and Fox News, and the Murdoch children – with Rupert caught between them." Although Rupert Murdoch did not respond to the remark directly, a spokesperson for News Corporation put a statement after a Financial Times inquiry claiming "Matthew Freud's opinions are his own and in no way reflect the views of Rupert Murdoch, who is proud of Roger Ailes and Fox News."[27] Tim Arango also claims in Murdoch's 2008 biography that he voiced concerns privately to Ailes about his conduct claiming he was purportedly "embarrassed" by Fox News. Murdoch denied that claim.[28]

In June 2010, News Corporation donated $1 million to the Republican Governors Association.[29][30][31] News Corporation's political action committee had previously split their contributions to Democrats and Republicans by a margin of 54% to 46%, respectively.[32]

On 20-March-2018, Fox News contributor quits, slams network as 'propaganda machine' for Trump. [33]

On 22-March-2019, Vox News reported: How Fox News evolved into a propaganda operation. [34]

Reports, polls, surveys and studies [ edit ]

Polls and surveys [ edit ]

A poll conducted by Rasmussen Reports during September 2004 found that Fox News was seen as second to the CBS television network as the most politically biased network in the public view, CBS also aired dramas and sitcoms such as JAG, NCIS, CSI: Miami, The King of Queens and Everybody Loves Raymond to name a few. 37% of respondents thought CBS, in the wake of the Memogate scandal, was trying to help elect John Kerry, while 34% of respondents said they believed that FNC's goal was to "help elect Bush." George W. Bush also won in 2004 leading to his second inauguration in 2005.[35] However, a poll conducted by Public Policy Polling in January 2010 found Fox News to be the only US television news network to receive a positive rating by the public for trustworthiness with results strongly split depending on the political affiliation of the respondents.[36] A survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press showed "a striking rise in the politicization of cable TV news audiences ... This pattern is most apparent with the fast-growing Fox News Channel."[37] Another Pew survey of news consumption found that Fox News has not suffered a decline in credibility with its audience, with one in four (25%) saying they believe all or most of what they see on Fox News Channel, virtually unchanged since Fox News not Fox Broadcasting Company or FX was first tested in 2000.[38]

According to the results of a 2006 study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism a survey of 547 journalists, found that Fox News and its cable TV realm Fox News Channel were rarely cited by surveyed journalists as an outlet taking an ideological stance in its coverage, and most identified as advocating conservative political positions.[39] In the 2004 survey, 69% of national journalists cited Fox News and Fox News Channel as being especially conservative in its coverage of news.[40]

A 2019 Pew survey found that Fox News is the fifth most trusted source in America for political and election news, with 43% of all polled voters (compared with 47% of 2nd-place CNN and 34% of 9th-place MSNBC). However, it is also the least trusted with 40% of all polled voters (compared with 32% of 2nd-place CNN and 26% of 4th-place MSNBC).[41]

Studies and reports [ edit ]

The "2011 State of the News Media" Report by the Pew Center on Excellence in Journalism found that in 2010, the Fox News Channel had average daytime audience of 1.2 million and nighttime viewership of 1.1 million, higher than its cable competitors but down 11% and 9% respectively from 2009. Fox News's cumulative audience (unique viewers who watched at least 60 minutes in an average month) was 41.1 million, coming in second to CNN with 41.7 million. For 2010, CNN's digital network continued to lead Fox News's digital network online; CNN with 35.7 million unique visitors per month, compared to Fox News's 15.5 million. For the first time Fox News outspent its competitors, with a total news investment of $686 million. 72% of this investment went to program costs, reflecting their focus on high-profile hosts. They also increased their revenues 17% over 2009 to $1.5 billion, well ahead of second-place CNN at $1.2 billion.[42][43]

Content analysis studies [ edit ]

The Project on Excellence in Journalism report in 2006 showed that 68 percent of Fox News Channel cable stories contained personal opinions, as compared to MSNBC at 27 percent and CNN at 4 percent. The "content analysis" portion of their 2005 report also concluded that "Fox (Fox News) was measurably more one-sided than the other networks, and Fox News Channel journalists were more opinionated on the air."[44]

A 2006 University of California, Berkeley study cited that there was a correlation between the presence of the Fox News Channel in cable markets and increases in Republican votes in those markets.[45]

A 2010 study found that with respect to coverage of the Iraq War and the first war in Afghanistan in 2005, "Fox News was much more sympathetic to the [Bush] administration than NBC."[46]

Studies of reporting bias [ edit ]

In a 2006 academic content analysis of election news, Rasmussen Reports showed that the 2004 election coverage from Fox News Channel favoured George Bush significantly more than John Kerry.[47]

In a 2010 study of the news coverage of the 2004 political party conventions, Morris and Francia found that Fox News' reporting was more negative toward the Democratic Convention and gave Republicans more opportunity to voice their message than the other networks. The study also found that viewers who relied on Fox News' coverage exhibited attitude change toward both candidates, but particularly a lowering opinions toward John Kerry. In contrast the study found that CNN's coverage was more fair and balanced.[48]

A study published in November 2005 by Tim Groseclose, a professor of political science at UCLA, scoring political bias from twenty mainstream news reporting outlets, concluded that all "except Fox News' Special Report and the Washington Times, received scores to the left of the average member of Congress." In particular, Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume had an Americans for Democratic Action rating that was right of the political center. Groseclose's model used the number of times a host cited a particular think tank on his or her program and compared it with the number of times a member of the U.S. Congress cited a think tank, correlating that with the politician's Americans for Democratic Action rating.[49][50]

Geoff Nunberg, a professor of linguistics at UC Berkeley and a National Public Radio commentator, criticized the methodology of the study and labeled its conclusions invalid.[51] He pointed to what he saw as a Groseclose's reliance on interpretations of facts and data that were taken from sources that were not, in his view, credible. Groseclose and Professor Jeff Milyo rebutted, saying Nunberg "shows a gross misunderstanding [of] our statistical method and the actual assumptions upon which it relies."[52] Mark Liberman (a professor of Computer Science and the director of Linguistic Data Consortium at the University of Pennsylvania), who helped post Groseclose and Milyo's rebuttal, later posted how the statistical methods used to calculate this bias pose faults.[53][54] Liberman concluded "that many if not most of the complaints directed against G&M are motivated in part by ideological disagreement — just as much of the praise for their work is motivated by ideological agreement. It would be nice if there were a less politically fraught body of data on which such modeling exercises could be explored."[53]

A December 2007 study/examination by Samuel R. Lichter of a self-described nonpartisan media watchdog group, the Center for Media and Public Affairs found that Fox News's evaluations of all of the 2008 Democratic presidential candidates combined was 51% positive and 49% negative, while the network's evaluations of the Republican presidential candidates 51% negative and 49% positive. The study, however, did find that Fox's coverage was less negative toward Republican candidates than the coverage of broadcast networks.[55]

A study by Media Matters for America found that between August 1 and October 1, 2013, on the Fox News Channel "69 percent of guests and 75 percent of mentions cast doubt on climate science," compared to "[half] of those quoted in The Wall Street Journal ... about 29 percent in The Los Angeles Times, about 17 percent in the Washington Post and about 12 percent in Bloomberg News."[56][57] Fox News' argument against criticism that it disproportionately represents the views of climate change deniers was to itself deny the factual figures which indicate that 97% of climate science experts worldwide hold the consensus view of human-caused global warming.[58] A 2012 report by the Union of Concerned Scientists found that, from February 2012 to July 2012, 93% of global warming coverage by the Fox News Channel was misleading. The report put the figure significantly lower—81 percent—for the Wall Street Journal. The misleading statements identified in the report included "... dismissals of human-caused climate change, disparaging comments about individual scientists, rejections of climate science as a body of knowledge, and cherry picking of data."[59][60] A similar 2013 report, also conducted by Union of Concerned Scientists, found that 28% of global warming coverage by Fox News was accurate, a nine-fold increase from the aforementioned report but still significantly behind CNN and MSNBC respectively (70% and 92%).[61]

Croft concluded that Fox News coverage glorified the Iraq War and its reporting framed the discussion in such a way as to drown out critics.[2] He quotes Christiane Amanpour as stating that there was a culture of self-censorship created by "the administration and its foot soldiers at Fox News".[2]

A May 2017 study conducted by Harvard University's Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy examined coverage of U. S. President and businessman Donald Trump's first 100 days in office by all major mainstream media outlets and broadcast networks including CNN, HLN, Fox News Channel, MSNBC, NBC, ABC and CBS.[62] It found that, altogether, Trump received 80% negative coverage from the media, and that he received the least negative coverage on Fox – 52% negative and 48% positive.[63]

Tests of knowledge of FNC viewers [ edit ]

A study by the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland School of Public Affairs, as published in the Winter 03–04 issue of the Political Science Quarterly,[64] reported that poll-based findings[65] indicated that viewers of Fox News Channel, the Fox network and local Fox affiliates, including New York and Los Angeles, were more likely than viewers of other news networks to hold three misperceptions:[64]

67% of Fox News Channel viewers erroneously believed that the "U.S. has found clear evidence in Iraq that Saddam Hussein was working closely with the al Qaeda terrorist organization" (compared with 56% for CBS, 49% for NBC, 48% for CNN, 45% for ABC, 16% for NPR/PBS).

The erroneous belief that "The U.S. has found Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq" was held by 33% of Fox News Channel viewers and only 23% of CBS viewers, 19% for ABC, 20% for NBC, 20% for CNN and 11% for NPR/PBS.

35% of Fox News Channel viewers erroneously believed that "the majority of people [in the world] favor the U.S. having gone to war" with Iraq (compared with 28% for CBS, 27% for ABC, 24% for CNN/HLN, 20% for NBC, 5% for NPR/PBS).

In response, CBS News and Fox News frequent guest Ann Coulter characterized the PIPA findings as "misperceptions of pointless liberal factoids" and called it a "hoax poll".[66] Bill O'Reilly called the study "absolute crap".[67] Roger Ailes referred to the study as "an old push poll".[68] James Taranto, editor of OpinionJournal.com, the Wall Street Journal's online editorial page, called the poll "pure propaganda".[69] PIPA issued a clarification on October 17, 2003, stating that "The findings were not meant to and cannot be used as a basis for making broad judgments about the general accuracy of the reporting of various networks or the general accuracy of the beliefs of those who get their news from those networks. Only a substantially more comprehensive study could undertake such broad research questions," and stated "that the correlation between viewing Fox News and holding misperceptions does not prove that Fox News' presentation caused the misperceptions", inferring that causality is not necessary to prove correlation.[70][71]

PIPA also conducted a statistical study on purported misinformation evidenced by registered voters before the 2010 election. According to the results of the study, "... false or misleading information is widespread in the general information environment ..."[72] but viewers of Fox News were more likely to be misinformed on specific issues when compared to viewers of comparable media,[73] that this likelihood also increased proportionally to the frequency of viewing Fox News[73] and that these findings showed statistical significance.[74]

A 2007 Pew Research Center poll of general political knowledge ("Who is the governor of your state?", "Who is the President of Russia?") indicated that Fox News Channel viewers scored 35% in the high-knowledge area, the same as the national average. This was not significantly different than local news, network news and morning news, and was slightly lower than CNN, standing for "Cable News Network" (41%). Viewers of The O'Reilly Factor (51%) scored in the high category along with Rush Limbaugh (50%), NPR (51%), major newspapers (54%), Newshour with Jim Lehrer (53%) The Daily Show (54%) and The Colbert Report (54%).[75]

A 2010 Stanford University survey found "more exposure to Fox News was associated with more rejection of many mainstream scientists' claims about global warming, [and] with less trust in scientists".[76] A 2011 Kaiser Family Foundation survey on U.S. misperceptions about health care reform found that Fox News viewers had a poorer understanding of the new laws and were more likely to believe in falsehoods about the Affordable Care Act such as cuts to Medicare benefits and the death panel myth.[77] A 2010 Ohio State University study of public misperceptions about the so-called "Ground Zero Mosque", officially named Park51, found that viewers who relied on Fox News were 66% more likely to believe incorrect rumors than those with a "low reliance" on Fox News.[78]

In 2011, a study by Fairleigh Dickinson University found that New Jersey Fox News viewers were less well informed than people who did not watch any news at all. The study employed objective questions, such as whether Hosni Mubarak was still in power in Egypt.[79][80][81]

Internal memos and e-mail [ edit ]

Daily memos [ edit ]

Fox News Channel executives exert a degree of editorial control over the content of the network's daily reporting. The channel's Vice President of News, John Moody, controls content by writing memos to the news department staff. In the documentary Outfoxed, former Fox News employees talk about the inner workings of the channel. In memos from the documentary, Moody instructs employees how to approach particular stories and on what stories to approach. Critics of Fox News claim that the instructions on many of the memos indicate a conservative bias. The Washington Post quoted Larry Johnson, a former part-time Fox News commentator, describing the Moody memos as "talking points instructing us what the themes are supposed to be, and God help you if you stray."[82]

Former Fox News producer Charlie Reina explained, "The roots of Fox News Channel's day-to-day on-air bias are actual and direct. They come in the form of an executive memo distributed electronically each morning, addressing what stories will be covered and, often, suggesting how they should be covered. To the newsroom personnel responsible for the channel's daytime programming, The Memo is the Bible. If, on any given day, you notice that the Fox anchors seem to be trying to drive a particular point home, you can bet The Memo is behind it."[83][84]

Photocopied memos from John Moody instructed the network's on-air anchors and reporters to use positive language when discussing pro-life viewpoints, the Iraq War, and tax cuts, as well as requesting that the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal be put in context with the other violence in the area.[85] Such memos were reproduced for the film Outfoxed, which included Moody quotes such as, "The soldiers [seen on FNC in Iraq] in the foreground should be identified as 'sharpshooters,' not 'snipers,' which carries a negative connotation."[86]

Two days after the 2006 election, The Huffington Post reported that its news department had acquired a copy of a leaked internal memo from Moody that recommended the following: "... [L]et's be on the lookout for any statements from the Iraqi insurgents, who must be thrilled at the prospect of a Dem-controlled congress." Within hours of the memo's publication, Fox News Channel anchor Martha McCallum, went on-air on the program The Live Desk with reports of Iraqi insurgents cheering the firing of Donald Rumsfeld and the results of the 2006 congressional election.[87][88]

Bill Sammon e-mail [ edit ]

In December 2010, Media Matters for America released a leaked October 2009 e-mail between Fox News Washington managing editor Bill Sammon and the network's senior producers, which seemed to issue directives slanting Fox News' coverage of President Barack Obama's health care reform efforts. In the e-mail, Sammon instructed producers to not use the phrase "public option" when discussing a key measure of President Obama's reform bill, and instead use the terms "government option" or "government-run health insurance[,]" noting negative connotations; Sammon also suggested that the qualifier "so-called" be said before any proper mention of the public option. Another e-mail by Fox News senior vice president Michael Clemente accepted Sammon's conditions. Critics claimed that Sammon took advice from Republican pollster Frank Luntz, who appeared on Hannity shortly before the e-mail was written and made the same suggestions in identifying the public option. Critics also noticed that reporters and panelists on Special Report with Bret Baier used the term "public option" before the e-mail was sent, but used the term "government option" immediately afterwards. Sammon, in an interview with Howard Kurtz for The Daily Beast, defended the directive and denied he was trying to skew Fox News' coverage.[89]

Later that month, Media Matters released an e-mail by Sammon from December 2009, in which he pressured Fox News reporters to assert that "theories are based upon data that critics have called into question" in light of the Climatic Research Unit email controversy.[90][91]

English Wikipedia edits [ edit ]

In August 2007, a new utility, WikiScanner, revealed that English Wikipedia articles relating to Fox News had been edited from IP addresses owned by Fox News,[92] though it was not possible to determine exactly who the editors were. The tool showed that the article for Shepard Smith was edited from Fox News computers, removing mention of an arrest.[93]

Photo manipulation [ edit ]

2008 [ edit ]

Fox News Channel image of Steinberg superimposed on a poodle, and Reddicliffe superimposed on the man holding the poodle's leash

Left: Original photo of Right: Photo aired on Fox News Channel. Original photo of Jacques Steinberg Photo aired on Fox News Channel.

Left: Original photo of Right: Photo aired on Fox News Channel. Original photo of Steven Reddicliffe Photo aired on Fox News Channel.

On the edition of July 2, 2008 of Fox and Friends, co-hosts Brian Kilmeade and Steve Doocy aired photos of New York Times reporter Jacques Steinberg and Times television editor Steven Reddicliffe that appeared to have been crudely doctored and photoshopped, apparently in order to portray the journalists unflatteringly. This occurred during a discussion of a piece in the edition of June 28 of The New York Times, which pointed out what Steinberg called "ominous trends" in Fox News' ratings.[94]

According to Media Matters, the photos depict New York Times reporter Jacques Steinberg with yellowed teeth, "his nose and chin widened, and his ears made to protrude further." The other image, of Times television editor Steven Reddicliffe, had similar yellow teeth, as well as "dark circles ... under his eyes, and his hairline has been moved back."[95]

During the discussion, Doocy called the Times report, written by Steinberg, a "hit piece" ordered up by Reddicliffe.[94] The broadcast then showed an image of Steinberg's face superimposed over a picture of a poodle, while Reddicliffe's face was superimposed over the man holding the poodle's leash.[94]

Times culture editor Sam Sifton called the photo that was aired on the Fox News Channel "disgusting," and the criticism of the paper's reporting a "specious and meritless claim" while denying that it was a "hit piece."[94]

2020 [ edit ]

In June 2020, the Fox News website published digitally altered photographs of Seattle's Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone, to include a man armed with an assault rifle from earlier Seattle protests; also added to the photographs were smashed windows from other parts of Seattle. In a separate incident, the Fox News website ran articles about protests in Seattle, however the accompanying photo of a burning city was actually that of Saint Paul, Minnesota in the previous month.[96] Although the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone was peacefully occupied, "Fox's coverage contributed to the appearance of armed unrest", stated The Washington Post. The manipulated and wrongly used images were removed, with Fox News stating that it "regrets these errors."[97]

9/12 newspaper ad controversy [ edit ]

On September 18, 2009, Fox News Channel took out full-page ads in The Washington Post, the New York Post, and The Wall Street Journal with a prominent caption reading, "How did ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, and CNN miss this story?" with pictures of a Tea Party movement protest on the United States Capitol lawn. A still picture in the ad was in fact taken from a CNN broadcast covering the event. The veracity of this ad was called into question on the air by then-CNN commentator Rick Sanchez, along with others pointing to various coverage of the event.[98][99][100] CNN, NBC News, CBS News, MSNBC, and ABC News Radio provided various forms of live coverage of the rally in Washington throughout the day on Saturday.[98][100][101][102]

Fox News' vice president of marketing, Michael Tammero, responded, "it's fair to say that from the tea party movement ... to ACORN ... to the march on 9/12, the networks either ignored the story, marginalized it or misrepresented the significance of it altogether."[103]

Obama administration conflict with Fox News and the Fox News Channel [ edit ]

In September 2009, the Obama administration engaged in a verbal conflict with the Fox News Channel. On September 20, 2009, President Obama appeared on all the major news programs except Fox News, a snub partially in response to remarks about the President by commentators Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity and general coverage by the Fox News Channel with regard to Obama's health care proposal.[104][105] Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace called White House administration officials "crybabies" in response. Following this, a senior Obama adviser told U.S. News that the White House would never get a fair shake from Fox News.[105]

In late September 2009, Obama senior advisor David Axelrod and FNC co-founder Roger Ailes met in secret to try to smooth out tensions between the two camps without much success. Two weeks later, White House officials referred to FNC as "not a news network". Communications director Anita Dunn claimed that "Fox News often operates as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party."[106][107] President Obama followed with "If media is operating basically as a talk radio format, then that's one thing, and if it's operating as a news outlet, then that's another,"[108] and then-White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel stated that it was important "to not have the CNNs and the others in the world basically be led in following FNC."[109]

Within days it was reported that Fox News had been excluded from an interview with administration official Ken Feinberg, with bureau chiefs from the White House Pool (ABC News, CBS News, NBC News, and CNN) coming to the defense of Fox News.[110] One of the major bureau chiefs stated, "If any member had been excluded it would have been the same thing, it has nothing to do with Fox or the White House or the substance of the issues."[111] Shortly after this story broke the White House admitted to a low-level mistake, but said that FNC had not made a specific request to interview Feinberg. Former Fox News White House correspondent and current CBS News chief Washington correspondent Major Garrett responded by stating that he had not made a specific request, but that he had a "standing request from me as senior White House correspondent on Fox to interview any newsmaker at the Treasury at any given time news is being made."[112]

On November 8, 2009 the Los Angeles Times reported that an unnamed Democratic consultant was warned by the White House not to appear on Fox News again. According to the article, Anita Dunn claimed in an e-mail to have checked with colleagues who "deal with TV issues" and had been told that nobody had been instructed to avoid the Fox News Channel (for 24-hour news) except for the Fox Broadcasting Company (for special report coverage). Patrick Caddell, a Fox News contributor and former pollster for Jimmy Carter said he had spoken with other Democratic consultants who had received similar warnings from the White House.[113]

Jon Stewart reported on his November 11, 2009, broadcast of The Daily Show that Fox News Channel pundit and co-host of Hannity and Colmes Sean Hannity misrepresented video footage purportedly showing large crowds on a health-care protest orchestrated by Rep. Michele Bachmann. Stewart showed inconsistencies in alternating shots according to the color of the sky and tree leaves, showing that footage from Glenn Beck's much larger 9/12 rally, which had occurred two months earlier, had been spliced in with the other shots. Hannity estimated 20,000 protesters were in attendance, the Washington Post estimated 10,000, and Luke Russert reported that three Capitol Hill police officers guessed "about 4,000."[114][115] Sean Hannity apologized to his viewers for the error during his November 11, 2009 broadcast.[116] Stewart periodically accused FNC of playing video footage out of context, such as when Hannity played footage of Obama stating the DREAM Act could not be passed by executive order to make the president seem hypocritical although when the footage is continued Obama goes on to clarify that the president does have the authority to halt deportations.[117]

On November 18, 2009, FNC anchor Gregg Jarrett told viewers that a Sarah Palin book signing in Grand Rapids, Michigan, had a massive turnout while showing footage of Palin with a large crowd. 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."[118] The video was actually taken from a 2008 McCain/Palin campaign rally. Fox News 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."[118] Fox offered an on-air apology the following day during the same "Happening Now" segment citing regrets for what they described as a "video error" with no intent to mislead.[119]

In September 2010, FNC anchor Sean Hannity was criticized notably by Stewart and CNN anchor Howard Kurtz, for selectively editing a video of an Obama speech on his program. Before playing the clip, Hannity remarked that there was a "rare moment of honesty" in Obama's speech, playing a video of Obama saying:

Taxes are scheduled to go up substantially next year, for everybody.

It quickly cuts back to Hannity, with Hannity saying, "I know the anointed one will make sure that happens."[120] But upon further inspection, what President Obama fully said was:

Under the tax plan passed by the last administration, taxes are scheduled to go up substantially next year, for everybody.

ISIL video [ edit ]

After Jordanian Air Force pilot Muath al-Kasasbeh was burned to death by ISIL in February 2015, FNC included the full ISIL video on its website. The network said it had chosen to do so, after careful consideration, in order that readers of their website could "see for themselves the barbarity of ISIS." Malcolm Nance, executive director of the think tank TAPSTRI (the Terror Asymmetrics Project on Strategy, Tactics and Radical Ideology), said that Fox News was "literally — literally — working for al-Qaida and ISIS's media arm ... They might as well start sending them royalty checks."[121][122]

Sexism [ edit ]

Sexual harassment allegations [ edit ]

On July 6, 2016, Gretchen Carlson filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against chairman and CEO of 20th Television, Fox Television Stations and Fox News Roger Ailes in the Superior Court of New Jersey.[123] In her complaint, Carlson alleged that she was fired from her program for refusing Ailes' sexual advances.[123] After Carlson came forward, six more women spoke to Gabriel Sherman of New York magazine, alleging that Ailes had sexually harassed them and that Ailes had "spoke openly of expecting women to perform sexual favors in exchange for job opportunities."[124] New York reported that Megyn Kelly told investigators Ailes made "unwanted sexual advances toward her" at the start of her career. The magazine also reported that the Murdochs had given Ailes an ultimatum—resign by August 1 or be fired.[125]

Facing overwhelming public criticism, Ailes resigned on July 21, 2016.[126] On September 6, 21st Century Fox (the then-parent company of Fox News, Fox Searchlight Pictures and 20th Century Fox) announced that it had settled the lawsuit with Carlson. The settlement was reportedly $20 million. As part of the settlement, 21st Century Fox apologized to Carlson, saying that "We sincerely regret and apologize for the fact that Gretchen was not treated with the respect and dignity that she and all of our colleagues deserve."[127]

In August 2016, Andrea Tantaros, who had been pulled from the network in April with reported "contract issues,"[128] claimed that she approached Fox News executives about Ailes sexually harassing her in 2015. She said her allegations resulted first in her being demoted from The Five to Outnumbered, and then in her being taken off the air.[129] Tantaros filed a lawsuit against Fox News for sexual harassment, also claiming that Bill O'Reilly, Dean Cain, and Scott Brown made inappropriate comments to her, and that Brown and Cain touched her without her consent.[130][131]

In April 2017, The New York Times reported that O'Reilly and Fox News had settled five lawsuits against O'Reilly dating back to 2002, in addition to publicly acknowledged settlements to Andrea Mackris in 2004 and Juliet Huddy in 2017 were publicly reported; The Times reported that FNC hosts Rebecca Diamond and Laurie Dhue settled sexual harassment lawsuits in 2011 and 2016 respectively and junior producer Rachel Witlieb Bernstein settled with Fox News in 2002 after accusing O'Reilly of verbal abuse. The amount paid to the women filing the complaints was estimated at $13 million. The Times also reported a claim by former The O'Reilly Factor guest Wendy Walsh, who declined an offer from O'Reilly to go to his hotel suite and was subsequently denied a job as a Fox News contributor.[132] 21st Century Fox hired the law firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison to conduct an investigation into Walsh's allegation; that firm also conducted an investigation into the allegations against Ailes.[133]

After the five settlements were reported, The O'Reilly Factor lost more than half its advertisers within a week;[134] almost 60 companies withdrew their television advertising from the show[135] amid a growing backlash against O'Reilly.[136][137] On April 11, 2017, O'Reilly announced he would take a two-week vacation and return to the program on April 24.[138] However, on April 19, it was reported that O'Reilly would not return to the network.[139] Co-President Bill Shine, who had been accused of covering up sexual harassment allegations, resigned on May 1.[140]

In July 2017, Fox Business suspended Charles Payne pending an investigation after a former network guest, Scottie Nell Hughes, accused him of sexual harassment. Payne denied the harassment charge but acknowledged having had a three-year-long "romantic relationship" with Hughes before the accusation was made. Hughes, who kept an apartment near 21st Century Fox's Manhattan headquarters for the duration of the affair, claimed she believed it would help her obtain a permanent position at the network.[141] Her appearances were drastically reduced after she ended the affair in 2015 and reported Payne to Fox News.[142]

In August 2017, The Huffington Post reported that Eric Bolling sent lewd text messages to two women at Fox News and one at Fox Business.[143] He was suspended pending investigation.[144] Caroline Heldman, a former Fox News guest, alleged that Bolling made numerous unwanted sexual advances towards her.[145]

Women's health care [ edit ]

In 2013, FNC's daily morning show Fox & Friends featured a segment in which contributor Dr. David B. Samadi made an appearance to discuss the cost of women's health care. In the program, Samadi argued that insurance costs more for women due to their more frequent use of health services, as opposed to men: "I just think that the whole system is not working well. I mean this is one of the examples, where men and women are totally different, there is a sex difference when it comes to the health care use, but I really think that if you pay for it, you are going to negotiate, finding out where is the best doctor, where you're going to get a better deal on all these X-rays etc., that's how you're gonna save money."[146]

Following this segment, Fox News received criticism from several online outlets.[147]

Sean Hannity and Michael Cohen [ edit ]

On April 9, 2018, federal agents from the U.S. Attorney's office served a search warrant on the office and residence of Michael Cohen, Trump's personal attorney.[148] On the air, Hannity defended Cohen and criticized the federal action, calling it "highly questionable" and "an unprecedented abuse of power".[149]

On April 16, 2018 in a court hearing, Cohen's lawyers told the judge that Cohen had ten clients in 2017-2018 but did "traditional legal tasks" for only three: Trump, Elliott Broidy, and a "prominent person" who did not wish to be named for fear of being "embarrassed".[150][151][152] The federal judge ordered the revelation of the third client, whom Cohen's lawyers named as Hannity.[150] Although Hannity has covered Cohen on his show, he did not disclose that he had consulted with Cohen.[153]

Fox News released a statement on April 16, 2018 attributed to Hannity: "Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter. I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective. I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third party."[154] Also, NBC News, the news division of NBCUniversal Broadcast, Cable, Sports and News quoted Hannity as saying: "We definitely had attorney-client privilege because I asked him for that",[155] while Hannity said on his radio show that he "might have handed him 10 bucks" for the attorney-client privilege.[150][154] Lastly, Hannity tweeted that his discussions with Cohen were "almost exclusively" about real estate.[156]

The following day, news reports revealed that Hannity had shared another lawyer with Trump, Jay Sekulow. Sekulow had written a cease-and-desist letter to KFAQ on Hannity's behalf in May 2017, and later represented Trump in connection with the Mueller investigation.[157][158]

Coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic [ edit ]

Fox News has faced criticism for its coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic, due to pundits and guests having initially dismissed the severity of COVID-19 in the United States (following the lead of the Trump administration at the time), accused critics of exaggerating its impact to attack President Trump, and perpetuating misinformation.[159][160][161][162][163]

Tucker Carlson promoted the notion that COVID-19 leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan,[164] and on his February 24 episode, argued that "wokeness" and diversity had eased its spread. At the same time, Carlson did become more critical of the Trump administration's response on occasion, opining on March 9 that "people you trust — people you probably voted for — have spent weeks minimizing what is clearly a very serious problem."[161][165] Media Matters for America criticized Carlson in particular, as well as other Fox News pundits and guests, for using Sinophobic language such as "Chinese coronavirus", "Wuhan virus", "Kung flu", or variations, to refer to COVID-19 on-air.[166]

Sean Hannity argued on his March 9 program that Democrats and the media were trying to use COVID-19 to "bludgeon Trump".[167][168] On March 5, Trump made an appearance on the program by-phone, where he claimed that a projected mortality rate of 3.4% announced earlier that day by the World Health Organization was a "false number", and predicted that it would actually be under 1%.[169][170] On his March 10 episode (one day before the WHO declared it a pandemic), Hannity argued that the seasonal flu was still making a larger "impact" than COVID-19 (with 34 million cases against roughly 1,200 at the time), only the elderly and immunocompromised were at the greatest risk, and argued that there wasn't an equivalent, "widespread hysteria" over routine violent crimes in Chicago.[171]

Also on March 10, Laura Ingraham referred to "panic pushers" in the media, suggesting that "the facts are actually pretty reassuring, but you'd never know it watching all this stuff", and implicated that only those at high risk needed to practice social distancing (contrasting recommendations by officials that all people should practice social distancing).[160][165] Two days later, Fox & Friends co-host Ainsley Earhardt suggested that it was the "safest time to fly" since "[the] terminals are pretty much dead",[172] and the program also aired an interview with Liberty University president Jerry Falwell Jr., where he claimed that the "overreaction" to COVID-19 was "their next attempt to get Trump", and that COVID-19 was a biological weapon developed by China or North Korea to attack the United States.[173][160][161]

Concurrent with Trump's own changes in tone and attitude surrounding the pandemic, some Fox News pundits began to openly acknowledge its severity on-air, including Hannity, Ingraham and Eargardt.[161][165][174][175] Vanity Fair observed this shift in tone as an inversion of the "feedback loop" that had emerged between Trump and Fox News (resulting from Trump's discussion of stories seen on the network, particularly during Fox & Friends, on social media),[176] but noted that the network's personalities were more often "showering praise on the president rather than offering their own take on things", and that Ingraham had accused other media outlets of using the pandemic to celebrate "Trump's downfall".[175]

On March 24, after Trump began to endorse off-label use of hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19 symptoms based on anecdotal evidence, Hannity and Ingraham similarly promoted the drug during their respective programs.[177] Two days later, Trump made another appearance on Hannity, where he accused Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden of calling his early travel restrictions on China "racist" and "xenophobic" during a campaign event and on Twitter. In both cases, Biden was actually referencing Trump's racial views in general, and did not say that the restrictions themselves were xenophobic.[178][179][180] During a Coronavirus Task Force briefing on April 13, 2020, Trump screened a montage of footage taken directly from the episode of Hannity, of guests on news programs downplaying the early threat of COVID-19, as part of a video presentation that glorified his initial response to the pandemic.[181][182][183][184]

Fox News faced criticism for featuring celebrity doctors such as Dr. Phil McGraw and Dr. Mehmet Oz as guests, with both of them downplaying the impact that a premature lifting of mitigation measures and "reopening" of the country (as was being proposed by Trump) would have.[185][186] Fox News also faced backlash for providing undue praise of protests against stay-at-home orders in multiple states (such as Lansing, Michigan's "Operation Gridlock"), including interviews with participants and organizers, and pundits praising the event and making comments critical of Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer (such as Carlson calling her actions "mindless and authoritarian", and Fox & Friends co-host Brian Kilmeade predicting a larger movement against "ridiculous" stay-at-home orders).[187][188] Trump made posts on Twitter in support of the protests on April 17, reading "LIBERATE MICHIGAN", "LIBERATE VIRGINIA" and "LIBERATE MINNESOTA" respectively; the timing of the tweets corresponded with a segment on America's Newsroom that had covered them.[189][190]

Fox News pundits have also shown inconsistent views towards the wearing of face masks to lessen spread of infected droplets by the wearer. Hannity and Fox & Friends host Steve Doocy have supported the practice,[191][192] as did Carlson and Ingraham in late-March (with Carlson citing that they were "key" to controlling the pandemic in East Asia, and criticizing the government's early guidance against using them for protection of the wearer). However, as masks became a partisan political issue over the months that followed, Carlson and Ingraham began to perpetuate opposition towards the practice.[193][194][195]

Reactions [ edit ]

An academic study conducted by economists at the University of Chicago, Harvard University, and other institutions, found a correlation between viewership of Hannity and a greater number of COVID-19 cases and deaths, relative to viewership of Tucker Carlson Tonight on the same channel.[196]

In April 2020, the Washington League for Increased Transparency and Ethics (WASHLITE) sued Fox News under the state's Consumer Protection Act for allegedly "falsely and deceptively disseminating 'news'" that coronavirus was "not a danger to public health and safety." In response, Fox maintains that its "political commentary" amounts to "constitutionally protected opinions" and that hosts Sean Hannity and Trish Regan participated in an "intense public debate" over the predicted severity of the threat.[197][198] On May 27th, King County Superior Court Judge Brian McDonald decided FOX is within their 1st amendment rights. Washlite promised to appeal the case.[199] FOX fired Trish Regan, who had claimed that the coronavirus was a scam on her show on 2020-03-09. Trish Regan's last appearance was on 2020-03-13. [200] FOX claimed they should be paid $334.94, Washlite says they are entitled to $200.00 under the law. [201]

Criticism of pundits [ edit ]

Notable pundits [ edit ]

Discredited military and counterterrorism editor [ edit ]

Other criticisms [ edit ]

Criticism of media coverage [ edit ]

Criticism of individuals [ edit ]

The Fox News report on Malmö was replayed on Swedish television, here on SVT1

Iranian-Swedish newspaper commentator, author and legal professional Behrang Kianzad [278] wrote in the Expressen newspaper that "there are lies, damned lies and Fox News", [279] in response to a Fox News story about allegedly Muslim violence in the city of Malmö, Sweden. The report focused on the borough of Rosengård where two out of 1,000 school students were ethnic Swedes. [280] Kianzad wrote that rock throwing against police, firefighters and ambulance personnel happened not just in Rosengård and not as a Muslim custom. He also pointed out that the Fox News segment had false facts, namely that the city of Malmö has about 7% immigrants from Muslim countries and not 25%. Furthermore, Kianzad pointed out the rhetorics used by Fox News to imply that the city of Malmö had reached some sort of breaking point due to Muslim immigrants and that these immigrants were potential terrorists. " [279]

wrote in the newspaper that "there are lies, damned lies and Fox News", in response to a Fox News story about allegedly Muslim violence in the city of Malmö, Sweden. The report focused on the borough of Rosengård where two out of 1,000 school students were ethnic Swedes. Kianzad wrote that rock throwing against police, firefighters and ambulance personnel happened not just in Rosengård and not as a Muslim custom. He also pointed out that the Fox News segment had false facts, namely that the city of Malmö has about 7% immigrants from Muslim countries and not 25%. Furthermore, Kianzad pointed out the rhetorics used by Fox News to imply that the city of Malmö had reached some sort of breaking point due to Muslim immigrants and that these immigrants were potential terrorists. " In August 2006, two Jordanian-Arab freelancers who were working for Fox News as producers, resigned from the network, citing its coverage that month of Israel's conflict with the militant group Hezbollah in Lebanon. Their resignation letter read in part: "We can no longer work with a news organization that claims to be fair and balanced when you are so far from that ... Not only are you Fox News an instrument of the Bush White House, and Israeli propaganda, you are war mongers with no sense of decency, nor professionalism." [281]

On January 19, 2007, reports and commentary by Fox News personalities featured an anonymously sourced article in the conservative web magazine Insight that claimed that associates of Democratic Senator Hillary Clinton had discovered that Senator Barack Obama had attended a "Muslim seminary" as a child in Indonesia. The term "Muslim seminary" refers to a specifically religious form of madrassa (school). It was determined within days that Obama had instead, as he had said in his memoirs, attended first a Catholic and then a modern public elementary school. The latter was, as Obama had written, "predominantly Muslim" (as Indonesia is predominantly Muslim), and not a seminary of any kind.[282] On January 31, 2007, the Washington Post suggested that because of FNC's reporting of the Insight article, Obama had "frozen out" the network's reporters and producers while giving interviews to every other major network. After the incident John Moody, a vice president at Fox, wrote to staff: "For the record: seeing an item on a website does not mean it is right. Nor does it mean it is ready for air on FNC. The urgent queue is our way of communicating information that is air-worthy. Please adhere to this."[283]

Fox News Channel responses to criticism [ edit ]

In June 2004, CEO Roger Ailes responded to some of the criticism with a rebuttal in an editorial in The Wall Street Journal's OpinionJournal[300] (The Wall Street Journal is owned by News Corporation, which also owns 20th Century Fox, the Fox network and Fox News Channel) saying that FNC's critics intentionally confuse opinion shows such as The O'Reilly Factor with regular news coverage. Ailes stated that Fox News has broken stories harmful to Republicans, offering "Fox News is the network that broke George W. Bush's DUI four days before the election" as an example, referring to Bush's DUI charge in 1976 that had not yet been made public. The DUI story was broken by then-Fox affiliate WPXT in Portland, Maine, although Fox News correspondent Carl Cameron also contributed to the report and, in the words of National Public Radio ombudsman Alicia Shepard, Fox News Channel "sent the story ping-ponging around the nation" by broadcasting WPXT's coverage.[301] WPXT News Director Kevin Kelly said that he "called Fox News in New York City to see if we were flogging a dead horse" before running the story, and that Fox News Channel confirmed the arrest with the campaign and ran the story shortly after 6 p.m.[301]

Upon the release of Outfoxed, Fox News issued a statement[250] denouncing MoveOn.org, Greenwald and The New York Times for copyright infringement. Fox News dismissed their judgments of former employees featured in the documentary as the partisan views of disgruntled workers who never vocalized concern over any alleged bias while they were employed at the network. Ailes also shrugged off criticisms of the former Fox News employees by noting that they worked in Fox affiliates and not at the actual channel itself. Fox News also challenged any news organization that sought to portray Fox News as a "problem" with the following proposition: "If they put out 100 percent of their editorial directions and internal memos, Fox News Channel will publish 100 percent of our editorial directions and internal memos, and let the public decide who is fair. This includes any legitimate cable news network, broadcast network, The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and The Washington Post."[citation needed] Former Fox News Channel personality Eric Burns has suggested in an interview that Fox News "probably gives voice to more conservatives than the other networks. But not at the expense of liberals." Burns justifies a higher exposure of conservatives by saying that other media often ignore conservatives.[302]

Fox News personalities have also taken part in back and forth disagreements with media personalities such as Jon Stewart[303] and Stephen Colbert.[304]

See also [ edit ]