Archive: Opinions

EditorialI am confused by President Obama's boycott of Fox News.  Wasn't he the candidate that was going to reach across the aisle to bring diverse people with differing viewpoints together to find consensus and make change?  While it is true that Fox's editorial programming is right-slanted, it is also true that CNN and the broadcast news outlets (and their cable offshoots) are left-leaning.  We all know that, and so what?  Isn't the United States one country that encourages diversity of people, opinions, and freedom of speech?  Don't all of us get one president?

Fox news shows lead the ratings.  In fact the top ten cable news shows belong to Fox according to the third quarter ratings of this year.  Not surprisingly pundit shows led the ratings with 'The O'Reilly Factor' on top, and up 12% from last year.  That translates to just under 3.3 million viewers.  Hannity was in second place, followed by Glenn Beck. 

More importantly, in my view, Fox was also in the lead for news reporting shows.  'Special Report With Bret Baier' on top with just under 2 million viewers and a 20% rise in viewership from last year.  That's a lot of people to not reach out to when they happen to be your constituents.

I have seen local people have a physical reaction when Fox News is mentioned, such is their distain for that news outlet.  They characterize people who watch Fox news as idiots or extremists, or even evil.  Such critics might be surprised to learn that in a recent Pew Research survey Fox viewers were more critical of the press than those who watch other outlets.  In particular they are suspicious of the news outlets' morals and patriotism, and Fox viewers are the only group in which more than 50% say news organizations in general are immoral.

All of that is besides the point.  If you are the President of everybody in the United States why would you not go on a network that reaches two or three million people who are actually interested in what you do?  And if you got elected on a platform that includes reaching across the aisle, why wouldn't you go on a network whose viewers have opposing views to make your case?  Obama is known for being an inspirational figure.  If he only tries to use that talent to inspire the people who are already inspired by him, is he actually inspirational?  The tree may be falling, but half the forest can't hear it.

In my opinion all the major television news outlets are fairly worthless in equal measure. The quickly diminishing value of television news is that you can get a snapshot of the day in a short period of time.  I actually hate the pundit shows -- I can only take them in small doses.  As for actual alleged news shows scanning all the cable news networks suits me better than settling on just one. 

Personally I watch network news during my lunch period, and sometimes before dinner.  I tend to take ten or fifteen minutes for lunch, and if I am lucky I can get headlines of the day by flipping between HLN, CNN, Fox, and MSNBC.  Because of commercials I am lucky if my ten minutes includes three minutes of actual news.  And because the news outlets have so much stupid junk, viewer opinions, so-called journalist opinions, and feel-good fluff I would say I am very lucky if I get any actual news all all two out of six days.

I think most people who are interested in news get it from a variety of media, but it can't be denied that television continues to be a powerful and popular medium.  And a lot of those viewers like Fox news.  A big lot.  Whatever you think about Fox news 3 million people like tuning into O'Reilly, and if that isn't a ready-made platform for the President, especially a president who apparently loves to go on TV, I don't know what is.

Is it presidential to only want to preach to the choir?  If a U.S. president is intimidated by facing Americans in a one-way medium (after all, television viewers can't reply, they can only watch), then how on earth is he going to convince Iran not to vaporize the Middle East, or the Chinese to stop pirating American goods?  Is the fact that only one Republican Congressman voted for the health care bill last weekend more because of partisanism, or more because the President didn't reach across the aisle in any meaningful way?

For me it isn't a matter of what I personally believe.  It's a matter of having a leader who was elected to lead all of us, not just those of us who agree with him.  The Fox boycott makes him look petty and less serious than I thought he was supposed to be.  I'm disappointed.  At a critical time like this these distractions don't help anyone, and they disenfranchise a large portion of American citizens. 

Another thing -- if President Obama's purpose is to make people change the channel, thus reducing Fox's revenues and viewership, I have an observation and a question:  It's not working.  And in what view of America does the President try to damage an American business just because he wants to?

Our current County Legislator vote is a microcosm of the country -- the vote is split half and half.  It is easy to forget, now that we are past that miserably long presidential campaign and we have a sitting president, that the nation is more or less equally philosophically split in half.

I have said before in this column that I am offended by people of any political persuasion who exclaim 'He isn't MY president!' because it is disrespectful to our democratic system in which we all get to be part of the process that chooses our leaders, then we get to live with our collective choice, and weigh in again a few years later.

The Obama snub of Fox is the same thing.  It says, 'They're not MY Americans.'  It is just as disrespectful, and just as dumb.

----
v5i45