Tell Nevada Democrats to FREEZE-OUT Fox "News"

[Ian David]

ACTION: Freeze Out Fox News (4 comments )

This was originally posted by Chris Bowers at MyDD.com.

In response to the growing disgust over their decision to partner with Fox News to host a Democratic presidential debate, the Nevada Democratic Party issued the following statement last night:

"FOX News' viewership in Western states and across the country does not always get to hear directly from Democrats in an unedited and uninterrupted fashion.
The August debate in Reno will allow the Democratic Presidential candidates to speak to the Fox audience who may be hearing from them for the first time for ninety minutes unfiltered and directly."

Unfiltered, huh? Here are some "unfiltered" highlights from the last Fox News debate for Democratic presidential candidates:

{C}onsider the September 9, 2003 Democratic debate in Baltimore, Maryland, hosted by Fox News in partnership with the Congressional Black Caucus. Fox News graphics, as well as a banner over the stage, titled the event as the "Democrat Candidate Presidential Debate," a misconstruction of "Democrat" used as an an epithet. Fox News then summarized the debate with a story titled, "Democratic Candidates Offer Grim View of America," continuing with such jabs as, "The depiction of the president as the root of all evil began at the top of Tuesday night's debate...." Controversial questions included the accusation that Howard Dean had a racist gun policy by Fox News analyst Juan Williams. There were also multiple interruptions by protesters throughout the debate, leading to four arrests.

Insulting graphics, biased post-debate spin, loaded questions, conservative protesters--none of that sounds very "unfiltered" to me. Further, how much of the debate will Fox cut off entirely in order to have their in-house pundits offer negative commentary while the Democratic candidates are still speaking? Four years ago, in typically unfiltered fashion, Fox cut away from the Democratic debate they hosted a couple of minutes before it ended, in order to give arch-conservative William Bennett the first shot at post-debate spin. One also has to imagine what new ways Fox News can think of to distort the debate. For example, before it even takes place, it is not hard to imagine promotional ads along the lines of "watch to see which Democrat best remembers his Madrassa training!"

What particularly stuns me about the Nevada Democratic Party's decision here is that they first admit Fox News is biased against Democrats, and then use that as a justification for partnering with Fox News. If you believe, as the response from the Nevada Dems implies, that Fox News does not give Democrats a chance to speak in an "unfiltered" and "direct" fashion, then continuing to do business with them is entirely-self-defeating. All that does is lend Fox News, and their attacks against Democrats, credibility. At least Barack Obama and Howard Dean have both had the good sense to freeze out Fox News after they were smeared by the network. More Democrats should follow their lead, and stop shaking the hand that slaps them.

There are numerous outlets the Nevada Democratic Party could find to broadcast this debate besides Fox News: CNN, MSNBC, C-SPAN, or even live streaming video over the blogosphere. All of these outlets would provide the Democratic candidates with a much more "unfiltered" and "direct" platform to reach potential voters. Instead of providing Fox News with a means to reach a new audience--Democrats--and thereby stave off its slumping ratings, instead of giving them a golden opportunity to further distort the image of Democratic presidential candidates, and instead of providing them with credibility for all of their past and future attacks against Democrats, it would be best if the Nevada Democratic Party chose a different media partner to broadcast this debate.

In order to fight this, BlogPac has set up an email form that will allow you to contact several leading Nevada Democrats at once. Please, send an email to Nevada Democrats letting them know you oppose having Fox News host a presidential forum.

More:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matt-stoller/action-freeze-out-fox-ne_b_41800.html

[Erika]

1. Faux Noise is not a credible news source

Harry Reid needs to step in and do some educating.

[NV1962]

2. Not really convinced. Nevadans DO watch Faux en masse...

Jump up or down all you like, that's them there facts.

And frankly, I don't see CNN or MSNBC as much better.

C-SPAN? You're joking, right? Who the HELL watches that, a few isolated junkies aside?

Sorry, but all that hysterical barking is up the the wrong tree.

There are oodles of better "local" causes that I can think of -- like: jumpstarting a campaign to recall Jim Gibbons -- instead of whining and yammering to pull the national Dem candidates away from a major medium, which will have quite the welcome and refreshing change of air reaching the brainwashed idiot masses around here.

Matt Stoller et al: wrong call, Bubba. Try ousting Joe Lieberman, instead.

[Ian David]

3. Interesting discussion on BlueMassGroup

The Nevada Dems and Fox News
by: David
Thu Feb 22, 2007 at 19:33:39 PM EST

http://www.bluemassgroup.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=6403

[NV1962]

4. Howard Dean has it exactly right!

"This is about talking to voters, not a network," Dean said Thursday. "While the Fox News Channel rarely has coverage that is fair and balanced, we believe that Fox viewers, who are potential voters, should have the opportunity to see a debate between our candidates. These forums provide an important unfiltered opportunity for potential voters to see Democrats without the bias of the network."

Edited to add: I've just added my $0.02 on the BlueMass blog as well.

[Ian David]

5. I'm still torn on this issue.

I'm certain though that we shouldn't be buying advertising time on Fox.

Except, perhaps, for negative ads against Republickers.

[NV1962]

6. Really?

As long as it's not an "either/or" proposition (which would be truly idiotic, either way) I see no problem in having a presence on both Fox and the widely assumed "better" MSNBCCNNABCCBS moral and intellectual cesspools.

And that applies to placing ads as well: retreat and surrender of territory is not an option.

[Jai4WKC08]

7. I don't mind having "a presence" on Fox

But I don't think they should be handling our debates.

Remember how they ran the debate right before the NH primary in '04? They set up everyone to look bad except Lieberman. Wes Clark got the worst of it, imo.

It was totally absurd that they were given that sort of influence over our primary,

[NV1962]

8. Come again?

MSNBCCNNABCCBS "handling" the debates is to blame a great deal for the failures in 2000 and 2004.

It's staggeringly naive to think that only because Fox is openly hostile "they" are the enemy; they're just the more visible one.

As to Wes Clark: I think you and I know darned well that he got the worst of it on practically every outlet that pushed for a bland, vague, slogan-driven and focus group-anointed "likable winner". And that doesn't stop at the TV channels, either; I have a few choice AP articles by Nedra Pickler covering the Dem primaries in 2004 to refresh your memory. I mean, Nedra Pickler, covering primaries - WTF!?

As time goes by I understand more and more why Bush won, and Gore and Kerry lost.

Some people apparently still believe in the figment of winning "clean wars". :shrug:

I want to simply win this, and not get lost in the idea of winning.

[Jai4WKC08]

9. There is at least one order of magnitude of difference

I'm talking about debates mostly -- we can't avoid Fox coverage and learning to deal with it.

And you know, or should know, that I absolutely support what Clark has accomplished by becoming an regular on Fox, appearing there as often as possible and frequently with the most hostile hosts like Bill-O and InHannity. I can assure you, when others in the Clark community were doubting his decision, I was in the forefront of those who saw the wisdom in it.

I also agree that all the corporate media are bad. Pickler is a good example. So are Tweety and Wolf, imo.

But Fox is far worse, and was harder on Clark than any others in the '04 campaign precisely because they knew he posed the biggest threat to Bush. Remember the Asman interview? Remember how they played over and over his remark to the vet about "beating the shit out of 'em"? Remember that there was almost never an interview where the Fox host didn't denigrate WKC after the interview was over? I specifically recall one Fox appearance after Clark's GREAT speech to roll out his tax proposal. The talking bubble-heads really went to town after that one, sniggering that it wouldn't work, and no one would go along with it anyway, and oh by the way Clark was obviously out of touch with the troops... yeah, I know, nothing to do with taxes, right? It was truly amazing what they got away with.

But for all that, the Fox debate before the NH primary was FAR worse than any of the other shit. Now, I realize it may not have been all Fox's doing. Peter Jennings was part of it and did their dirty work for them. But WKC got ripped in that debate, and completely over bullshit that no one could have seen coming. He did just fine in the others, and managed to make his points despite the goofy questions.

Bottom line, Fox is not real news. Neither are the others -- they are all entertainment now -- but at least the others make a reasonable attempt to convince people that they are reporting real news. But there's no reason whatsoever that the DNC should feel obligated to include Fox among the networks who get to carry our debates, and really no down-side to not. The debates will still get broadcast -- some other network will be happy to step up to the plate to take an extra or two. More importantly, leaving Fox out of the line-up won't make one damn bit of difference in how many people watch. People who want to tune in will change the channel to do so, and if anything newsworthy comes out of it, Fox will carry the clip just as much as they would have anyway... which is, not at all if it makes anyone but Hillary Clinton look good.

[NV1962]

11. "a reasonable attempt" isn't good enough

You can't be "a little bit" pregnant, either.

So, if the approach is to take the moral high ground, I'd expect some consistency in denouncing ALL pathetic excuses for "news" outlets to get the back of the glove. The fact that Fox News is shamelessly open in its hostility is in my opinion an asset that at least sets it apart in its honesty -- no matter my utter and absolute contempt for their "editorial" policy -- which gives fair warning to the casual, mildly intelligent and presumptive "innocent" viewer.

The insidious poison of all the others is in my opinion far more noxious and dangerous - because it gets a tacit sanction in absence of similarly high-minded and broad dismissal as Fox News gets.

Let's put it this way: given a hypothetical forced choice, I prefer dealing with an upright S.O.B. over a deceptive and elusive weasel. Let the swords come out, screw the reign of terror imposed under a false guise of politically correct pretense.

There's NO inherent difference between Fox and all the others, content-wise - they're all as much a malignant tumor overgrowing the windows on the world that citizens deserve. Fox at least is openly hostile - which I consider a plus in honesty.

Fox is the better poison.

[NV1962]

10. Message from Tom Collins, Chairman of NV Democrats

Just in, via e-mail:

March 7, 2007

Dear Nevada Democrats:

As you know, the Nevada State Democratic Party has agreed to host a debate with FOX News that has caused some concern among some of our activist allies. Because FOX has such an editorial bias against Democrats, some of our allies believe that we should have chosen another media partner. Senator Reid shares some of these concerns and has asked us to take another look at the parameters of this debate in order to ensure that all Democrats are comfortable as we move forward.

Our objective in hosting the August debate with FOX has not been to endorse the FOX News Channel. Our objective with this debate is the same as our objective in hosting an early Nevada Caucus in general -- to have as many opportunities for Nevada voters and voters throughout the West to hear directly from the candidates for president as possible. That is why our first forum was hosted with ABC News as the broadcaster, our November debate will be hosted by CNN and the final debate in January 2008 will be hosted with another outlet.

In planning the debate, the Nevada Democratic Party has been aware of the intricacies of dealing with FOX and so we secured assurances from them that the details of the debate were mutually agreed upon such as format, panelists, set design, and the assurance of an uninterrupted broadcast without commentary. FOX has also agreed to carry the debate live on KVVU, the affiliate in Las Vegas where most Nevada voters live. Other affiliates may follow. We believe that these details will assure that voters have the opportunity to focus on the candidates and the issues and not the panelists or commentators for an uninterrupted 90 minutes.

Since reaching that agreement with FOX we were heartened to hear from so many people who supported our decision to reach out to voters wherever they may be, including those watching FOX News. The state parties of Arizona, Montana, Colorado and New Mexico joined in support of our decision along with DNC Chairman Howard Dean, many members of the Nevada media and the leaders of the Nevada AFL-CIO, Culinary Union and Professional Firefighters Association. While one of our state party’s Executive Board members has been vocally opposed to the debate, several party leaders have expressed support, including:

* Chris Wicker, Washoe County Chair: http://dullardmush.blogspot.com/2007/02/washoe-dem-chair-responds-to-FOX-debate.html

* Tom Gallagher, 2004 candidate for Congress from NV-03 http://www.nvtoday.com/index.php?option=com_content=view=251=

However we decided to take a step back and make our best effort to address the concerns that have been raised including:

* Many Democrats will want to watch or listen to the debate without supporting the FOX News Channel.

* There was a desire to include a panelist from a more progressive outlet, such as Air America, to ensure balance at the questioners table.

* There was also a desire to bolster a progressive media outlet, such as Air America or Politics TV that could use the opportunity to grow its constituency.

In answer to these concerns, we have secured an agreement to invite KJFK radio, the local Air America affiliate, to air the event live and C-Span will be able to carry the debate twice in its entirety after the conclusion of FOX’s broadcast. Additionally, the Nevada Democratic Party has an agreement to invite a local progressive voice onto the debate panel.

We will also offer PolitcsTV.com the ability to carry the live FOX News web cast feed on its site for one-time viewing. If PoliticsTV agrees, this will give national viewers who do not wish to watch FOX the ability to watch the debate live while bolstering a progressive leaning organization.

With these additions, we feel that we have addressed the concerns of our activists and our own objectives:

* To keep the debate focused on the candidates and allow unfiltered access for our viewers.

* To keep the debate focused on the issues important to Nevada voters.

* To ensure that the most people possible have access to the debate and the candidates.

With these changes, we believe we have made a good-faith effort to address the concerns laid out to us and look forward to working with the candidates and our local supporters to ensuring the best debate possible.

Sincerely,

Tom Collins
Chairman,
Nevada Democratic Party

Rock on, Tom!

[TankLV]

12. I want to go on record to state that Tom Collins is an IDIOT for even THINKING that this was a good

idea in the first place - and I told him so in a phone call prior to the developments that came to lite late that finally caused the NVDP to pull the plug on faux.

WE WERE PROVEN RIGHT AND TOM WAS PROVEN WRONG!

Glad he will soon no longer be chair - he is a BIG reason we Dems do so poorly in this state...

HE JUST DOEBN'T "GET IT"!

Don't let the door his your ass on the way out tommy boy!

You won't be missed at all, and joy will reign with your absense...