Estrich claimed Hume, Cameron, Fox News Live anchors "do their jobs every day without giving anyone a hint of who they support in their private lives"
SUMMARY: Fox News contributor Susan Estrich included Brit Hume, Carl Cameron, and the anchors of Fox News Live among those at Fox News who don't "put a point of view forward." But Estrich overlooked statements by each clearly expressing "a point of view" and even indicating "who they support." She also ignored numerous instances, documented by Media Matters, of hard-news reporters at Fox advancing conservative misinformation.
In a May 21 FoxNews.com column, Fox News contributor Susan Estrich included Washington managing editor Brit Hume, chief political correspondent Carl Cameron, and the anchors of Fox News Live among "the hundreds of other people" at Fox News who -- unlike commentators Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, and John Gibson -- don't "put forward a point of view" but rather "do their jobs every day without giving anyone a hint of who they support in their private lives." But Estrich overlooked statements by each expressing clearly "a point of view" and even indicating "who they support." Hume told The Washington Post that he is a "conservative"; Fox News Live anchor David Asman has referred to Republicans as "we," and Cameron was involved in two incidents that gave clear "hint[s]" about whom he supported during the last two presidential elections. During the 2000 race, a video showed Cameron and George W. Bush discussing opportunities for "counterpunches" against then-Vice President Al Gore; in 2004, FoxNews.com retracted a report in which Cameron falsely attributed quotes to 2004 Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) in an attempt to ridicule Kerry for purportedly receiving a manicure. In addition, Media Matters has documented numerous instances in which Hume, Cameron, and many of the "hundreds of others" of purportedly hard-news reporters at Fox have been sources of conservative misinformation.
Estrich was responding to critics of Fox News in general, but specifically Bob Cesca's May 17 entry on the Huffington Post weblog. She wrote that, based on what critics have said, "You'd think there was no news organization at Fox, that we ran nothing but O'Reilly, Hannity and Gibson, 24/7."
In fact, some at Fox have given more than a "hint" of "who they support in their private lives":
- Carl Cameron: As Media Matters has noted, Robert Greenwald's film Outfoxed includes footage of Cameron and then-candidate Bush talking before an interview in 2000. Cameron told Bush that his wife was now "having fun" campaigning with Bush's sister and talked about Bush's opportunities for "counterpunches" against Gore. Cameron claimed that the editing of the clip in the film created the impression of bias on Cameron's part.
Also, on October 1, 2004, FoxNews.com retracted and apologized for Cameron's fake "Trail Tales" report that falsely attributed quotes to Kerry in an attempt to ridicule Kerry over receiving a manicure, which Cameron reported he received on September 30, 2004. The network reportedly reprimanded Cameron and stated that "[t]he item was based on a reporter's partial script that had been written in jest and should not have been posted or broadcast." The network blamed the "error" on "fatigue and bad judgment, not malice."
However, as Media Matters noted at the time, prior to the September 30, 2004, presidential debate, Cameron reported on Special Report with Brit Hume that Kerry got "a predebate manicure." Fox News hosts and contributors, including Estrich, quickly picked up on Cameron's report, discussing the reported manicure five separate times in the three hours preceding the debate.
From the September 30, 2004, edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume:
HUME: Carl, what's up with the manicure? Does he regularly get manicures?
CAMERON: Not so regularly. But suffice it to say in his hotel spa, some of the ladies today were particularly amused and excited about their appointment with John Kerry to get him set up for tonight's debate.
[...]
HUME: I've had a manicure in my life. It was a rather pleasant experience. But do you think it was the thing to do today, perhaps?
ESTRICH: No! No! No! Look, I get my nails done all the time. I mean, I'm a fool for manicures. But obviously, what John Kerry needs to do tonight, among other things, is make a connection with average working people. And probably the way to start doing that is not with a manicure. Now, you've had them. But my guess is most men don't stop on their way to an important event with a manicure. But my hope is for John Kerry's sake, is that tonight people will forget about the manicure.
Recently, after USA Today reported that the National Security Agency (NSA) is collecting millions of Americans' phone-call records, Media Matters noted Cameron's suggestion that "the idea that so many Democrats are complaining about the NSA programs without really knowing what they are is precisely why so many Republicans say Democrats just aren't serious about security." However, Cameron's report ignored complaints by Republicans about the NSA's collection of call records. Media Matters has noted many other examples of Cameron's false or misleading reports.
- David Asman: As Media Matters documented, Fox News Live anchor Asman responded to Sen. Trent Lott's (R-MS) suggestion that Senate Republicans had the necessary votes to invoke the so-called nuclear option -- and that such a step was necessary -- by asking Lott why Republican senators had compromised on the issue. Why compromise, Asman asked, "if we should have done it and if we had the votes to do it?" Asman later clarified that it was "you guys in the Republican Party" who had the votes.
- Brit Hume: According to an April 19 Washington Post profile by media critic Howard Kurtz, Hume said, "Sure, I'm a conservative, no doubt about it." While Hume, according to Kurtz, further stated that he would "ask people to look at the work," Media Matters noted the many false and misleading reports Hume has made as a Fox News host and commentator.
Media Matters has noted many other Fox News "news" figures who have repeatedly and persistently provided false or misleading information to Fox viewers.
From Estrich's May 21 FoxNews.com column titled "Fox News Under Attack, Again ... ":
If he were the only example of an attack on Fox News today or this week or this month, I would do what I tell my children to do with name callers, which is to ignore them. But just today, in addition to Cesca's assault (on Gibson, O'Reilly, and Hannity), I read another attack on "Fox pundits" -- singling out Neil Cavuto for "sucking up" -- and another round occasioned by Tony Snow's first briefing at the White House.
Mr. Cesca's mistake, and it is a common one, is that he confuses reporters and anchors, who are paid to be objective and cover the news, and do so, with commentators and hosts, who are expected to put forward a point of view. Is there anyone in the world who would expect impartiality from Bill O'Reilly? From Sean Hannity?
I remember the days when John Gibson was a reporter, but he isn't one anymore, and he doesn't pretend to be. He doesn't cover the news, he comments on it. That's his job. What does Mr. Cesca expect?
I'd certainly be the last to complain if Mr. Cesca were arguing that he'd like to see more progressives like me with their own shows or regular slots on Fox News, but that's never their point. You'd think that Sean Hannity's liberal co-host, Alan Colmes, didn't exist, reading the criticism. You'd think there was no news organization at Fox, that we ran nothing but O'Reilly, Hannity and Gibson, 24/7.
What about Fox News Live? What about Greta Van Susteren, whose only agenda, as far as I can tell, is to help find missing girls and punish wayward teachers? What about Brit Hume and Brian Wilson and Carl Cameron and Ramblin' Rick [Leventhal, FoxNews.com reporter and blogger] and Steve Harrigan and Shep[ard] Smith and Laurie Dhue and the hundreds of other people who do their jobs every day without giving anyone a hint of who they support in their private lives?
Enough is enough. What gives people who have never worked a day in the news business the right to throw stones and call names with impunity, because Fox News is the target?
I've taken a lot of heat from the left for working for Fox News, and frankly, I'm a little bit sick of it. The truth is that I've been very well treated at Fox: I say what I want; I'm treated with respect; and I'm paid well.
What happens to these people when they go to Fox? Do they submit to a brainwashing process? Even Bill Hemmer has started spouting GOP propaganda. Maybe we should organize an intervention .. at least for the ones that can still be saved! ;-)
send them to deprogramming camps before it's too late!
They must think we're stupid or something. If you work at fox, you're reichwing. Except Alan Colmes. He's just batty.
Seriously, unless the FOXNEWS talking heads are incredible method actors, you can read their private views like an open book; they wear their opinions on their sleeves! Do you really think that privately, Brit Hume gives huge sums to the DNC? When he isn't reading Hustler, Cavuto is intently studying Das Kapital? And virtuous John Gibson and his buddy Bill O'Reilly, do you think when they aren't battling for the survival of Christmas, they're Black Mass devotees? (OK, Devil worship among the FOX crew, that might not be that farfetched!) Sean Hannity... do you really think he's a sensitve, touchy-feely kinda guy off the air who is bullied by midgets? Do you think he lets Colmes get a free punch after every show? These FOXNEWS types are hypocrites and liars, but I think we all know who they support, despite Billy O's claims that he's an independent. Uh, no.
For a Fox News Democrat.
I guess they think they're doing some good - what they are doing is validatinf Rupert Murdoch's vision of America and all the lies repeated by Hannity, Hume, et al.
I've tried to get Alan to quit for years, but he's hooked on that Big Fox Cash like it was China White.
individual that got walked out of FOX a couple months ago ?
Estrich completely ignores Cesca's main point, which was the sudden recent increase in overt racist rantings by FOX News commentators. She certainly seems to enjoy playing the victim though.
adj : marked by excessive enthusiasm for and intense devotion to a cause or idea; "rabid isolationist" [syn: fanatical, overzealous, rabid] n : a person motivated by irrational enthusiasm (as for a cause); "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject"--Winston Churchill [syn: fiend]
So they are just souless robots reading pre-approved reading a teleprompter? Or is Estrich lying through her teeth, which is more realistic?
their robots. As Estrich nor anyone else from Fox News would spread false information.
I'm assuming because Estrich says she is "paid well" that she's at Fox of her own free will. In any event, it does appear that the Stockholm Syndrome has taken hold.
Ding ding ding...We have a winner!
Money OBVIOUSLY buys Susie's LOYALTY :-O
Yup **Democratic/Liberal** Susan Estrich will say nice stuff (lies?) about her FOX chums cause the money is pretty great.
Cyndi Lauper once sang a song called "Money Changes Everything"...guess in Susie's case she was RIGHT (no pun intended)
Anyone who's seen the movie outfoxed knows Estrich is not being honest. I can still recall the young fox reporter about interview the president and before the camera's rolled he was telling the president how his wife worked for Bush's re-election. This Woman is clearly a LIAR and should ignored by rational people.
Fox news....rational....giggle.
I've always perceived Estrich to be from the left. I don't agree with her here, I've seen Hume put forth a point of view that is clearly conservative. It's not difficult to spot. On election night 2004 on the FOX roundtable one of the guys said "It's looking very good for us." Hume interjected, "You mean Republicans?" We had a wry smile on his face.
Of course, I saw Bernard Shaw on CNN tilt left all the way before he retired, I remember him covering the 1996 GOP convention laughing and shaking his head at the floor speech when they went back to him in the studio. Guess they panned back a little soon for you there, Bernard. FOX doesn't have a monopoly on this stuff.
Maybe there are occasional, or even more-than-occasional, slips at other networks, but fox is full-on propaganda. Suggestions to the contrary are misguided.
I couldn't get past the title of the article without laughing.
It's nice to know that Estrich said that we're not to expect impartiality from O'Reilly and Hannity. So, where's the fair and balance in that? Far Right - Right - Right of Middle. I guess the balance falls somewhere on the Right.
That even commentators don't have the responsibility to provide accurate information when giving their opinion?
That's the issue. It's not that they are not entitled to have their stupid opinions. It's that they are not entitled to their own facts.
So she's treated with respect, is she, and she's paid well. Well, she does have an obligation to not support people who have abused the truth when they are accurately accused of abusing the truth.
No need to attack her , it was just her opinion.
A good progressive wouldn't stake the claim that Hume "put[s] forward a point of view" but rather does his job every day without giving anyone a hint of who he supports in his private life.
She should know better. Actually, she does. She doesn't bite the hand that feeds her.
I'm getting quite tired of this "opinion" defense. Just because someone says something that can't be proven as absolute fact (meaning there's some intellectual analysis required) doesn't mean that such comment has to be automatically accepted. LLTime tried this same nonsense earlier regarding O'Reilly's "opinion" of his political leanings. Estrich's comments are so far removed from the evidence of reality that either she is delusional or intellectually dishonest. You have heard the phrase "intellectually dishonest", haven't you? That's when someone says something so ridiculous that you have to look at them and say "come on...I know you don't really believe that". It's either a phony opinion or it's remarkably ill-informed, and either way it deserves to be "attacked".
This women deserves respect, she was the Chairperson of the Dukakis Campaign and has fought hard for womens rights and the rights of the oppressed.
by appearing on FOX, she is lending a small shred of credability to this godawful "news" network. She must know about their misleading stories and outright lies. All Dems should boycott this horrible medium, and go where journalists report the news. Until she does, I'm not certain what side she is on.
She has been a champion of liberal causes and I give her credit for shining a light in the darkness at Fox News.
But she is wrong on this point and she deserves to be called out on it.
Hume and Cameron and most of the Fox News pundits are shameless shills for the administration and conservative propaganda. For Estrich to assert otherwise just makes her look silly. She insults her audience by saying as much.
And her audience also deserves respect.
She is not a stupid woman, at least not stupid enough to believe that the FOX NEWS CHANNEL does not have Republican and/or conservative political agenda which they seek to advance through deceptive coverage of news events. She, like Alan Colmes, is a sell-out. They swallow their pride and work for FOX NEWS CHANNEL for the money, even though they know they are being marginalized there and speaking too forcefully in favor of the Democratic and/or liberal and/or progressive viewpoint will be probably guarantee that their contracts with FOX NEWS CHANNEL giving them fat paychecks will probably not be renewed.
THANK YOU. njguy93@yahoo.com
I can understand wanting to reach "the middle", as Estrich puts it in her post, as well as the left or right. But Estrich and Colmes are put on Fox by Roger Ailes as token punching bags or whipping boys for the pleasure of the right-wing bullies. Their presence has the carnival equivalent of a dunking tank. By being there as human dart boards, Estrich and Colmes more often than not hurt -not help - the progressive cause.
Are they there against their will?
No.
Sure they're paid well, but seemingly can say whatever they'd like. Are they kinder to the Right than you'd like? I'm sure they are.
Colmes is just a lousy debater. A third grader could tear his arguments to shreds. Estrich goes out of her way to be fair. You're just bummed because you wish she was as partisan as you are Dave.
>>>Are they there against their will?
No. Did I say they were? No. Next:
>>>Are they kinder to the Right than you'd like? I'm sure they are.
I didn't say that, either. But they are vastly outnumbered and out-shouted on Fox on purpose. That is not an accident--that's deliberate casting, and that's my point. Right-wingers are entertained by the pummeling & browbeating. Fox knows it, and gives the Fox fan want he or she expects. They deliver.
>>>Colmes is just a lousy debater.
And that's not by chance either. He's on Fox because he obviously looks weak in the Don Knotts mold, next to Hannity. That's the way Fox & Hannity like it.
>>>Estrich goes out of her way to be fair.
She does, which is more than can be said of her conservative co-workers. Again, that's by Fox News' design. Estrich is "paid well", by her own admission, and plays her part.
My point is that it's fine for Estrich to want to go after "middle" America, and not just the left, or the right. But Fox isn't the place to do it. Because Fox is designed for the right-wing viewer that wants to see her overwhelmed, scoffed at, or trivialized by right-wing hosts and guests. The Fox fan is not open-minded. In other words, on Fox, the best Estrich can hope for her arguments is a tie, never a win.
- He's on Fox because he obviously looks weak in the Don Knotts mold - dave_chicago
What about Brit Hume...who do their jobs every day without giving anyone a hint of who they support in their private lives?
That's a joke, right?
What gives people who have never worked a day in the news business the right to throw stones and call names with impunity, because Fox News is the target?
You have to be an experienced journalist to spot bs?
The truth is that I've been very well treated at Fox: I say what I want; I'm treated with respect; and I'm paid well.
It's not what they say to you; it's what they say about you. In any event, what does this have to do with the obvious bias of various individuals, e.g., Hume, at Fox?
Estrich seems to avoid directly addressing the substance of any criticism here. She seems to be saying that it doesn't really matter what Gibson or anyone says. She will be a loyal (well-payed) lapdog.
I don't throw around the word "racist" much, but I cannot at all come up with any other word to describe Gibson's remarks that Estrich is affraid to address.
If you watch Hume read the news there's absolutely no doubt about his opinion on nearly every story he reports. He can barely mention Gore or Hillary Clinton without resorting to sneers and eyerolls. And if he's reporting that they've slipped up in some way, Hume can barely contain his glee. His affect completely gives him away, and I don't think he even attempts to hide his opinion.
I think she should have included many contributors to FOX’s daily fair and balanced brand of news reporting. She could have named non-partisans like Ann Coulter or Newt Gingrich, for example, as professionals who only report and comment on what they know to be the truth without letting their personal politics interfere in any way. And why overlook Rush Limbaugh (a true gem of a news guy who should have his own nightly program at FOX) as someone who shines as a fair and straight-shooting commentator? FOX's approach to news reporting and those "well-paid" souls who've signed on to spread the Fox party line will one day be recognized for their true roles in creating the kind of nation few dreamed possible.
I went to the Huffington Post blog this morning Bob Cesca responds to Ms Estrich column it is worth the read. I do not know how to link but here is the address.
[link to www.huffingtonpost.com]
But I didn't realize Susan Estrich was a comedian until I read this. The question must be asked...is she serious? Has she fallend and hit her head? Perhaps she has had some kind of recent psychological trauma in her life? She certainly can't be taken seriously. Not that I ever did.
I particularly like the comment that FOX News is somehow separate from O'Rielly and Hannity, etc. Yet, she draws Greta as the comparison to the FOX News anchors. Isn't Greta Van Susteren a commentator?
Estrich should have compared the bias of CNN anchors to FOX News anchors.
Susan is right, they have great reporters and one of them said this about Fox News.
Broadcast Dreams: Courses and seminars with TV industry insiders and execs.
Monday, Oct 03 David Shuster Slams Former Employer: Some FNCers "Would Cut Corners Or Steal Information...[Or] Just Make Things Up" MSNBC correspondent David Shuster says his critical reporting about the Bush administration wouldn't have been welcome at his former employer, the Fox News Channel.
In an interview with The Hoosier Times, Shuster recounted his six-year tenure at FNC:
"At the time I started at Fox, I thought, this is a great news organization to let me be very aggressive with a sitting president of the United States (Bill Clinton)," Shuster said. "I started having issues when others in the organization would take my carefully scripted and nuanced reporting and pull out bits and pieces to support their agenda on their shows."
"With the change of administration in Washington, I wanted to do the same kind of reporting, holding the (Bush) administration accountable, and that was not something that Fox was interested in doing."
He continued: "Editorially, I had issues with story selection. But the bigger issue was that there wasn't a tradition or track record of honoring journalistic integrity. I found some reporters at Fox would cut corners or steal information from other sources or in some cases, just make things up. Management would either look the other way or just wouldn't care to take a closer look. I had serious issues with that." OOOPS.
That article was in the Bloomington Herald-Times. A very good newspaper BTW.
She is a pathetic shill working for an organization that spews propaganda in the service of the GOP 24hrs a day. FOX is NOT a news organization! They are a delivery vehicle for lies, spin and propaganda. Estrich suckles at the teat of evil and laughably wears a veneer of progressive ideology.
Millions of people know EXACTLY what FOX news is and they also see straight through Estrich's BS.
and not being able to take a hint. Perhaps Ms. Estrich is literally clueless.
"The truth is that I've been very well treated at Fox: I say what I want; I'm treated with respect; and I'm paid well."
What did Milton say? "Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven."
If Tony Randall had a retarted son a long time ago, it could have been Carl Cameron. Whenever Fox has a Republican and a Democrat on to discuss an issue, it usually turns into 2 against 1 with whatever host/anchor person siding with the Republican.
Great leadership is nothing more than great manipulation. Better figure that out people... Of course somewhere in the fog of manipulation is the truth. And the truth will lead you to a rational state that you will hate finding out that you are being manipulated!!!!
I have zero sympathy with Estrich. "I have taken heat from left working for Fox" she whines, big deal. Susen tell us who has called you an "ugly fat wife, Satan" ? as Imus did Senator Hillary Clinton, or a phony bastard as he did of Al Gore? Who questions your patriotism if you are a liberal? as Sean Hannity does on his radio show almost every day. When did Limbough last call you a femenazi? You have taken your 30 pieces of silver. Live with it.
UtahLiberal said it best ... Susan, you've willingly sold out, so stop whining about the people complaining of your betrayal.
You want to know the reason we have had Republican Rule by the Bush family for 10 years (Bush 1=4, Bush2=6)? Its because of Susan Estrich. YES, SUSAN ESTRICH.
It was this disgusting and terrible campaign manager that was INCOMPETENT and allowed Willie Horton, Lee Atwater, Karl Rove.......attack ads, character assisinations and all things we see today by her disgusting efforts with Micheal Dukakis in 1988.
The Right has used her like a drum, beat her like a drum and now uses her as a "joke" mouthpiece to prop up all they do. What pride does she have.....none. The Right has played her, used her and now still uses her......to attack.....those she is to speak for. Well, I have had enough of her trashing Dems and throwing games for the "so-called" home team. She is a Traitor, a discrace......and she should have gone to crap pile of the WORST CAMPAIGN MANAGERS .....EVER......
Along with Donna Brazille, BobShrum and Pat Cadell. These loosers are triumped by the right to pay them for their good work in electing Repugs. Estrich is the one that started it all, she gave us this mess..............and if really knew her legacy she would shut up and go away! But, she has none....just like the rest that won't go away!!!
Can anyone still seriously say that the media leans left when self-proclaimed progressives say they respect Estrich? Since the first time I saw her come on Fox as the "lib spokesperson" and spend her 2 minutes explaining how pathetic the Dems are and how awesome the GOP is, I have been stunned by her appearances.Are sensible people so starved for a voice of reason that even she'll satisfy them, even if she's only begging Hannity to not hate her? Pa-freakin-thetic! And Brit Hume, keeping his colors hidden? Yikes! If even the most brain-dead conservative buys Humes act(Guest pretends to disagree with GOP, Brit pretends to listen with interest and be persuaded, guest pulls a U-turn, explains why GOP is right, or media is lying, Brit looks startled and enlightened, is won over to Bush & Co.'s way of thinking, everybody's happy) I worry about this country. By the way, two of my favorite Fox- O'Reilly make-believe moments: Billo interviewing GWB shortly before the 2004 election, BO thanks Bush for having the courage to come on- Bush starts laughing, tells BO not to be too tough on him.Oblivious BillO,straight-faced,tells him he's brave. BUSH GETS THE JOKE!Bilo doesn't! that is SLOW! #2- Dem guest, shortly before same election, is setting up a hypothetical situation for BillO. He begins with a given: "So it's election day, Bill, and you go vote for Bush..." BillO: "Well, you don't know that, I'm still weighing the issues!" After at least a year of Swift Boat guests, insulting Kerry and reporting as fact every right-wing blog rumor about him, and fawning over and excusing every defect of Bush and the GOP, HE'S NOT SURE YET?? Is somebody in his audience swallowing this log? YIKES!! I guess that's what fair and balanced is.Here's someone that says they're a Dem, but they'll play a part on Fox for the right money.
I assume that Ms. Estrich is being held prisoner by her salary.
Bought and paid for.