About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

REPORT: Top Fox News programs devote scant coverage to Haiti earthquake

January 14, 2010 2:14 pm ET — 248 Comments

On January 13, Fox News' three top-rated programs for 2009 -- The O'Reilly Factor, Hannity, and Glenn Beck -- devoted a combined total of less than 7 minutes of coverage to the earthquake in Haiti, instead choosing to air such things as Beck's hour-long interview with Sarah Palin, Bill O'Reilly's discussion of Comedy Central host Jon Stewart, and Sean Hannity's advocacy for Massachusetts candidate Scott Brown's Senate campaign. By contrast, the content of MSNBC's three top-rated shows underscored the significance of the Haiti disaster; Countdown, The Rachel Maddow Show, and Hardball devoted a total of more than two hours to the earthquake.

MSNBC's top programs provide more than 18 times as much coverage of Haiti earthquake as Fox News' top shows

The O'Reilly Factor, Hannity, and Glenn Beck, Fox News' three top-rated programs for 2009, combined to devote a total of 6 minutes, 41 seconds of coverage to the earthquake in Haiti. Among the things they chose to air instead were Beck's interview with Palin -- to which he devoted nearly his entire show -- Hannity's continued advocacy for Brown; and O'Reilly's discussion of Stewart. Countdown, The Rachel Maddow Show, and Hardball, MSNBC's three top-rated shows, devoted 2 hours, 2 minutes and 33 seconds to the earthquake -- more than 18 times the coverage devoted by Fox News' top three shows. Other Fox News shows -- such as Special Report with Bret Baier and The Fox Report with Shepard Smith -- did devote extensive coverage to the earthquake.

Chart of total earthquake coverage

  Chart of earthquake coverage by show

Fox News' three top-rated programs largely ignored earthquake

According to a Media Matters review, O'Reilly, Hannity, and Beck devoted only 6 minutes and 41 seconds of coverage to the earthquake on their January 13 editions.

Glenn Beck

Segment start

Segment end

Time

5:29:11

5:29:48

37 seconds

Total

 

37 seconds

The O'Reilly Factor

Segment start

Segment end

Time

8:00:20

8:00:43

23 seconds

8:01:33

8:04:06

2 minutes 33 seconds

Total

 

2 minutes 56 seconds

Hannity

Segment start

Segment end

Time

9:00:11

9:02:17

2 minutes 6 seconds

9:30:10

9:31:04

54 seconds

9:39:40

9:39:48

8 seconds

Total

 

3 minutes 8 seconds

By contrast, MSNBC's three top-rated programs provided extensive earthquake coverage

A Media Matters review finds that MSNBC aired 2 hours, 2 minutes and 33 seconds of earthquake coverage on the January 13 editions of Hardball (7 p.m.), Countdown with Keith Olbermann, and The Rachel Maddow Show.

Hardball -- 7 p.m. edition

Segment start

Segment end

Time

7:00:15

7:12:10

11 minutes 55 seconds

7:15:25

7:22:39

7 minutes 14 seconds

7:25:48

7:36:35

10 minutes 47 seconds

7:53:43

8:00:22

6 minutes 39 seconds

Total

 

36 minutes 35 seconds

 

Countdown with Keith Olbermann

Segment start

Segment end

Time

8:00:23

8:18:15

17 minutes 52 seconds

8:20:20

8:25:21

5 minutes 1 second

8:26:46

8:33:23

6 minutes 37 seconds

8:36:56

8:38:42

1 minute 46 seconds

8:41:46

8:45:00

3 minutes 14 seconds

8:47:05

8:49:20

2 minutes 15 seconds

8:50:55

8:52:02

1 minute 7 seconds

8:55:04

9:00:15

5 minutes 11 seconds

Total

 

43 minutes 3 seconds

The Rachel Maddow Show

Segment start

Segment end

Time

9:00:20

9:12:56

12 minutes 36 seconds

9:14:00

9:15:15

1 minute 15 seconds

9:17:39

9:29:15

11 minutes 36 seconds

9:32:47

9:43:32

10 minutes 45 seconds

9:46:26

9:48:53

2 minutes 27 seconds

9:50:58

9:51:09

11 seconds

9:52:43

9:55:50

3 minutes 7 seconds

9:59:02

10:00:00

58 seconds

Total

 

42 minutes 55 seconds

[All times in charts are Eastern time.]

Drew Sandquist contributed to this item.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by westla (January 14, 2010 2:43 pm ET)
      33 9
      This may be noteworthy, but it is not a shock. Fox is nothing but a propaganda arm of the RNC, advocating their interests and demonizing Obama 24/7. If Obama somehow appears strong and in command of the assistance going to Haiti by the United States, then that is not a blemish on Obama, and no reason for Fox to air any more coverage of this catastrophe than what is begrudgingly necessary. If Obama shows leadership and strength, these are not qualities that fit nicely into Fox's narrative of him. Steer clear of that too.

      So they pimp Sarah Palin and the Massachusetts Republican nominee instead. No surprise.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by right ON (January 14, 2010 2:57 pm ET)
        16 8
        Well said.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by rkcomments (January 14, 2010 3:15 pm ET)
          14 7
          Ageed. Typical conservatives. Is anyone really surprised?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by TheSarge (January 14, 2010 8:37 pm ET)
            11 6
            Not really. Anyone that thinks 'Fox News' is an actual 'news' network is living in a fantasy world. They are simply the propaganda arm of the RNC, thinly disguised as a cable news network.

            I'm waiting for Fox Noise to start calling on their wingnut teabager pinhead moronic fanbase to start hating Hati because US tax dollars are now going to Hati to rescue people who aren't white, don't have oil wells, and aren't giving no-bid contracts to Haliburton.

            I'm taking bets on who will be the next NeoCon Nutcase to spew hatred against Hatians. Here's the short list:

            TheAdamsAppleThatWalksLikeAWoman Coulter
            Glen Beck
            Bill O'Mygodhesinsane
            Rush Limpdick
            And we can't forget Hannity Insanity.

            But your winner, who spewed hate against Hatians on the very day they got hit with an earthquake, is none other:
            Pat Robinson.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by DixieChyc (January 17, 2010 8:48 am ET)
              1 3
              TheSurge: You said -I'm waiting for Fox Noise to start calling on their wingnut teabager pinhead moronic fanbase to start hating Hati because US tax dollars are now going to Hati to rescue people who aren't white-
              Really. According to Websters Dictionary, the word racist is defined as a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others. It is a travesty that you would use the Haitian tragedy to sling tired worn-out lies, and it is rather... sigh...old. Propagandists claiming racism at every turn is like the little boy who cried wolf! When you really DO find a racist, no one is going to pay any attention. Here a racist, there a racist, everywhere a racist racist...It's rather like the boogeyman under the bed. Seriously.
              Report Abuse
      • Author by DellDolly (January 14, 2010 3:35 pm ET)
        19 2
        It's not enough to say it "may" be noteworthy. It is noteworthy. Any legit news organization should have shelved their planned segments, or almost all of them, and ALL of their soft news coverage, for this breaking news.

        Any legit cable news channel was doing the right thing. The illegitimate one was not.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by aBeck in 10-O-C (January 14, 2010 4:22 pm ET)
        14 2
        So they pimp Sarah Palin and the Massachusetts Republican nominee instead. No surprise.

        Those two themes are important to Fox right now. That much I can see.
        Haiti is an inconvenient distraction at this moment. A dilemma.
        Now is when Fox will use their "distinction" between news and opinion programming to "balance" out their coverage to suit their immediate agenda of cashing in on Sarah, wresting Kennedy's old seat away from the Democrats, and covering the Haiti tragedy.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 14, 2010 4:30 pm ET)
        10 2
        No, there is no suprise. And, I think everyone with any ounce of sanity left realizes that Fox does not report news and has no credibility. Having said that, I have no issue with Media Matters pointing it out. As long as Fox is able to sell itself as "News" it should continue to be pointed out by media watchdogs that it does not provide any service anywhere close to news coverage.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Ination (January 14, 2010 2:54 pm ET)
         
      Come on, guys, everyone knows that natural disasters are far less important than what's going on in Sarah Palin's head.

      Sarcasm, naturally. I am not surprised by this revelation whatsoever. People at Fox always criticize the left for being a bunch of mean-spirited people with nothing good to say but Bill, guess what!? You've been contradicted by none other than yourself.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by slowtyper (January 14, 2010 2:54 pm ET)
      19 2
      well that would be news coverage...and that's not the fox mission statement..

      ..and i'm sure they didn't want to upset their regular viewers who wouldn't be used to seeing so many persons of color on their programs..
      Report Abuse
      • Author by right ON (January 14, 2010 2:59 pm ET)
        3 8
        Why don't you read what westla wrote above, that is most likely the reason why the earthquake coverage avoidance on Fox, rather than some racial hysteria.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by slowtyper (January 14, 2010 11:54 pm ET)
          8 2
          it's not racial hysteria when it's a demonstrable fact..faux news..and it's viewers.. have a well deserved reputation for race bating..bigotry..and racial profiling..which includes any one from the office staff of any acorn center..any muslim in the us or world.. to the potus..

          the signs of the faux news supported teabaggers..the rants of the becks or o'riley's should be enough evidence for any reasonable person to judge..

          while westla makes a valid and accurate point as to the reasons behind the lack of coverage..i stand by my claim to a more basic..and disturbing reason..
          Report Abuse
          • Author by pilotx (January 15, 2010 1:20 am ET)
            5 2
            I hope you're wrong but as a cynic methinks there is something to what you're saying.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by Frankeee (January 14, 2010 3:52 pm ET)
        2 4
        seriously though dude, he's right. That wasn't necessary and is something that'll derail a thread faster than a paid troll
        Report Abuse
        • Author by fairliberal (January 14, 2010 11:50 pm ET)
          4 10
          But it is obviously a very popular tactic as witnessed by all the thumbs up the post received. Playing the race card is probably the favorite tactic of the left. As I type this he has 13 thumbs up and only one thumbs down. Progressive thinking at its finest.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Boxer1979 (January 14, 2010 11:58 pm ET)
            6 2
            Progressive thinking at its finest.

            Fairlib,

            Not every progressive plays the race card unless it is needed. Which I have seen people on each view spectrum lean towards. I just see and hear it more from the people who say that they are not.

            Example: Rush Limbaugh
            Report Abuse
            • Author by fairliberal (January 15, 2010 12:23 am ET)
              3 9
              How do you account for the overwhelming support it has received here? I see it here all the time. Anytime someone criticizes Obama they are deemed a racist by some here. The bigot snoopy comes to mind immediately as does harley, who hasn't shown up in quite a while. But looking over the Haiti earthquake threads the race card is being brought out once again by many. I am sure you see it too. Those fools are going to sink their own ship, they are just too stupid to realize it. Most Americans do not appreciate that crap.

              And I am no expert on Limbaugh but I do know that at least some of the claims of racism directed at him are bogus, the McNabb issue for example. I do know that his MO is to instigate and incite and he is quite good at it. Air America was equally vicious.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by pilotx (January 15, 2010 1:25 am ET)
                6 1
                To be honest there is a disturbing racial compnent to any story involving people of color no matter what thye story. Go to any news website that is carrying this story and read the comments section. I have seen some of the most disgusting and disturbing comments I have ever read. I'm all for free speech but it makes me disappointed in many of our fellow humans and Americans and I'm betting many of these ignorant posters are Fox viewer and/or tea partiers. I for one look forward to the day when we all have compassion for each other and people like Limbaugh can either help in a situation such as this or just STFU.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by faceswithin (January 16, 2010 3:42 am ET)
                     
                  I'm from the 70's and I think any one person who stands a lone and all the others want to end there right to there view harms us all. Let Fox be Fox and that gives us all freedom.
                  Report Abuse
              • Author by Boxer1979 (January 15, 2010 7:52 am ET)
                7 1
                Fairlib,

                It is equal on both sides, but when it is needed and people have their opinion about someone, you can not change their mind, so just let it be. Unless you know it to be a flat out lie.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by snoopy (January 15, 2010 9:43 am ET)
                6  
                Anytime someone criticizes Obama they are deemed a racist by some here.


                Nope, only the racists get that. Jeter, right on, wesley to name a few I have no problem with because they tend to bring facts to the table that back up anything they state. Bigots like you on the other hand never back up what you say. Y'all just throw out insult after insult and then sulk when someone like me points out how bigoted your factless rant is. Calling me a bigot for pointing out your bigotry is just icing on the cake...
                Report Abuse
                • Author by faceswithin (January 16, 2010 3:45 am ET)
                     
                  He is not throwing any thing out, you have to be blind not to see this is the truth. when do we now say oh they have the right to say what they want. The bigots are them who see bigots in ever one. If we are going to really end this color prolbem it will take all of us to do it.
                  Report Abuse
              • Author by SMTDL (January 15, 2010 12:37 pm ET)
                6 1
                Well explain the lack of coverage by Fox on this major tragedy that has invoked a response from all parts of the world?The other cable news organizations and major networks have given significant coverage and urged donations on air by continuously running info on how to donate,etc.!Why so little coverage by FOX? They were quick to parrot Limbaugh's attack on Obama's quick response... so that was important then but not much else even as the death toll increases !If this was in France,England ,Germany would it be the same coverage at Fox?..I don't know? If Barack Obama's foreign born father was Irish would there be a birther movement!?Has Fox commented or criticized Limbaugh and Pat Robertson's distasteful statements ? Why is Fox always out there by themself ..and please don't say they are the only one telling the truth.How does fair and balanced end up here?Fox pundits and entertainers have regularly defended Trent Lott's comments(then and now) as just being nice to an old man he respected...and sometimes made Hary Reid's comments the worse of the two.That is beyond mind boggling!!!!
                Report Abuse
              • Author by open_mind (January 15, 2010 3:45 pm ET)
                5 1
                But looking over the Haiti earthquake threads the race card is being brought out once again by many.
                Yes. It's those darned liberals who first brought up race with regards to Haiti. Do you even read the articles above those comments? Are you even aware that most of the comments were in regards to Limbaugh bringing up race (and putting his foot in his mouth) as he is apparently completely incapable of avoiding in nearly every occasion even remotely having to do with race? Dang libs! Lol.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by faceswithin (January 16, 2010 3:39 am ET)
                   
                you mean like what Harry just said about Obama in that book?
                Report Abuse
          • Author by slowtyper (January 15, 2010 12:02 am ET)
            7 1
            always with the whine about the "race card"..i think you protest too much..

            if you really believe they is no racial element to faux news..and it's lack of coverage of the events in Haiti..i'm sure that more folks than just me would be interested in hearing your argument..
            Report Abuse
            • Author by fairliberal (January 15, 2010 12:27 am ET)
              1 9
              Fox covered the story all day long and the claim of racism is just bogus. Plain and simple. Their are a lot of prominent blacks who appear on Fox all the time as well as on the air employees of Fox.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by snoopy (January 15, 2010 9:45 am ET)
                5  
                Really? According to the charts above fox spent very little time reporting it. Those charts are what most people call facts, BTW...
                Report Abuse
                • Author by markbfoot199 (January 15, 2010 3:53 pm ET)
                  1 4
                  Snoopy, the facts are from three shows that were opinion shows, not news shows. FYI, others things were going on besides the Earthquake, and if I remember correctly when Fox news went to breaks they were about Haiti. MMFA and folks like do have to watch Fox, I say head over to your MSNBC and CNN. We (input your insult here) will continue to watch Fox News to get all the info we CHOOSE.
                  Report Abuse
            • Author by faceswithin (January 16, 2010 3:49 am ET)
                 
              faux news nice what do you call a news that shows a white shirt and guns and will not show his head? But goes on and on about whites with guns. The man was black wouldn't you call that faux news and that was MSNBC. People that are attack like this make us all look small.
              Report Abuse
          • Author by slowtyper (January 15, 2010 12:04 am ET)
            6 1
            always with the whine about the "race card"..i think you protest too much..

            if you really believe they is no racial element to faux news..and it's lack of coverage of the events in Haiti..i'm sure that more folks than just me would be interested in hearing your argument..
            Report Abuse
            • Author by solo667 (January 16, 2010 12:09 pm ET)
                1
              Liberals whine about race. Conservatives whine about 'race cards'. He who is made of air should not accuse the wind.
              Report Abuse
          • Author by snoopy (January 15, 2010 9:37 am ET)
            6  
            Playing the race card is probably the favorite tactic of the left...


            I just love it when racists caught in the act of racism use that claim to try and cover up their intense hatred of minorities.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by Cheney2012 (January 15, 2010 11:11 am ET)
            1 8
            I would agree fairlib, except for the fact that Progressives never 'think'
            Report Abuse
    • Author by rwmacdonald2091 (January 14, 2010 3:08 pm ET)
      15 2
      It's not a news story for Fox and their viewers because it happened a predominately black country.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by pongotwistleton (January 14, 2010 3:11 pm ET)
        2 19
        Of course. All fox viewers are racists. They could care less about the suffering Haitiens, particularly the little black children. Another brilliant statement by a lemming liberal. Are you writing Uberdouche's script tonight?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by vhw28672478 (January 14, 2010 3:17 pm ET)
          14 3
          Fox News is a joke
          Report Abuse
          • Author by pongotwistleton (January 14, 2010 3:21 pm ET)
            3 21
            So is msnbc. What's your point?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by peace4all (January 14, 2010 3:47 pm ET)
              13 2
              really?, can you show me an instance of the lies told by keith or racheal? because i can show you volumes of lies by the good folks at fox. what makes fox a joke is not that they are right wing, it's that they all lie and their viewers are so unintelligent that they believe everything said on fox like the good lemmings that they are.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by pongotwistleton (January 14, 2010 4:02 pm ET)
                4 24
                From 4 till midnight, msnbc is the propoganda arm for the administration and the liberals in congress. The same is true for Fox, only they shill for the other side. Each network presses their agendas way to strongly to be considered credible news outlets.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by all your eyes (January 14, 2010 4:16 pm ET)
                  25 4
                  The major difference is that the prime time shows on MSNBC deal in facts, they discuss policy and process, albeit from a liberal perspective. The shows on Fox, on the other hand, revolve around a falsified narrative, outright lies, and vicious slander. There is no comparison.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by aBeck in 10-O-C (January 14, 2010 4:25 pm ET)
                    10 2
                    Well said.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by pongotwistleton (January 14, 2010 4:32 pm ET)
                    3 21
                    Pointing out the foibles of Fox does not make msnbc any better. Msnbc's entire primetime lineup trumpets liberal causes, and predominantly has guests who echo their same sentiments. When a token conservative is on the shows, its either someone well to the right of more mainstream conservatives, or someone whose only on the show to serve as a punching bag for the liberal host and his other guests.

                    As I said above, and personalities aside, my general beef with msnbc is that they too obviously push a one-sided agenda. Like the lineup on Fox, msnbc's lineup is full of idealogues, pressing their causes. Again like fox, its entertainment, not a credible news outlet.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by Ruby (January 14, 2010 4:54 pm ET)
                      13 2
                      Rachel Maddow often interviews conservatives--Ron Paul and Tom Ridge stand out in my mind as recent examples. And Rachel is very good at her job. She is a respectful and engaged interviewer.

                      It doesn't bother me that Fox's most popular programs are anchored by conservatives, or that they cover the issues of the day from a conservative perspective. That's what an opinion program is supposed to be. What bothers me about Fox is that they don't deal in reality. They distort, they mislead, and they flat out lie. Not to mention the fact that they shamelessly promote the tea party protests, most notably the 9/12 project. I have never seen any MSNBC personality offer free on-air promos to any anti-war protest or rallies for liberal causes.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by foghornleghorn (January 14, 2010 6:33 pm ET)
                        10 3
                        MSNBC - Promoted free health care clinics that actually helped people.

                        FOX - Promoted the Tea Parties, which are nothing but a gigantic nutjob circle jerk.

                        There's the difference.
                        Report Abuse
                      • Author by fairliberal (January 15, 2010 12:36 am ET)
                        2 10
                        A conservative presense on olbermann's show is nonexistent, he doesn't have the stones or intelligence to directly confront someone with a differing opinion. And Maddow is not much better, I recall her Talk Me Down segments, it sounds good but when you Google it all you find is poor Rachel being talked down by Howard Dean and Paul Krugman. Wow cutting egde journalism .

                        Fox actually lets libs come on and present their own points of view. And when they play dodge ball, they get interrupted.

                        I guess you forget Chris matthews and his tingly feeling in his biased coverage of the election. Even Tom Brokaw couldn't take it and had both him and olbermann bounced from the coverage. He couldn't stand working with those 2 hacks.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by pilotx (January 15, 2010 1:31 am ET)
                          9 2
                          Wrong. Rachel Maddow frequently has conservative guests onher show and invites many more that just avoid her. She has a PhD and was a Rhodes scholar who does her homework and can hold her own against any guest. Now compare her to Fox hosts, Beck is a high school graduate and Hannity is a college dropout and you know what? It shows. Olbermann has twice the intelligence of O'Reilly and any other Fox host.
                          Report Abuse
                        • Author by atretrioeciii (January 15, 2010 11:34 am ET)
                          5  
                          Oh yeah, they let liberals talk and then interrupt. Or insult. Or cut off their mic. Or like hannity chop up something and pretend it's actual news. fauxnews sponsors political marches that turn into racist hate parades.

                          An example of fauxnews character, hannity claims water boarding is not torture. olbermann challenges him. Hannity never responds.

                          liz cheyneys new fake think tankruns and ad that says MSNBC doesn't want to talk about the issues. maddow invites her to her show, and what does wimpy liz do? She goes on the hannity punk show.

                          This is the chracter of a network that creates stories to "report" on.

                          But you defend them?
                          Report Abuse
                    • Author by rms (January 15, 2010 10:10 am ET)
                      8  
                      "Pointing out the foibles of Fox does not make msnbc any better."

                      I think you are missing the point. The argument has been made that Fox preaches their point of view largely through provable dis-information, while MSNBC preaches their point of view largely through the provable.

                      If you dispute that, please make your argument - and back it up with facts.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by jesse (January 15, 2010 10:43 am ET)
                          5
                        provable dis-information


                        As a regular watcher of FOX and frequent viewer of CNN, I would like to see, for once, all this "provable dis-information" that FOX supposedly dispenses. I read and hear that claim every day, but have yet to see the proof.

                        When you get a minute, could you please post a link or two for me, that proves that FOX uses "provable dis-information."

                        FWIW, I double-check things I hear from any source, to try to determine the truth of the report. I just haven't been able to find the "provable dis-information" that you know about.

                        Thanks.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by congero6189599 (January 15, 2010 4:30 pm ET)
                          2  
                          Jesse are you blind. Just look on this web-site.
                          Report Abuse
                        • Author by DellDolly (January 15, 2010 8:47 pm ET)
                          3  
                          There's tons of it, jesse, readily available on this site.

                          It's not possible for someone with half a brain to actively search out misinformation from FoxNews and not find it - it's easy to find.

                          So, do you not really want to find it, or are you incapable of doing so?

                          In either case, it doesn't speak well of you.
                          Report Abuse
                    • Author by SMTDL (January 16, 2010 1:45 pm ET)
                      3  
                      But they aren't full of hate speech or conspiracy theories or outright lies like ,Rove,Morris,Coulter and other pundits or non fact based accusations and attacks that O'Reilly,Beck and Hannity do all the time..There is a big difference.Plus most of the MSNBC shows are fairly middle of the road exc for three.On Fox every show(24/7) exc Shepherd Smith is very slanted to the right ..even so called news ..Look at Chris Wallace and Brit Hume!!I've heard Olbermann,Maddow and Schultz correct mistakes they have made on facts or sometime just for an omission of some relevant information.Fox has doctored tapes,deliberate false information ...Like the tape of Biden quoting MCCain that they tried to pass off as Biden's words.Twice used bogus tapes to inflate attendance at Right wing events!! They apologized for the tapes then did it all over again ..but they never admit to debunked facts they have used like death panels ..they still have people using it even now! .I saw Hannity specifically refuse to comment on John Ensign and said that he didn't want to cover it..Yet he had been crowing over John Edwards forever!!Fox is way too aligned with talking points from the farthest right talk radio,websites and politicians. I do wish Olberman would have more conservatives on to debate both sides as Maddow and Schultz will do.Fox regularly quadruple teams so call "Liberals" that are usually moderates at best ( ie Juan Williams) and talk over them or cut them off with all the conservaties lined up against them.U don't see any Liberal ex Governors getting shows on MSNBC or even as regular pundits..Most of the commentators are news people whether web based or major magazines/newspapers.They use a lot of Republicans and Democrats. Fox uses lots of right wing talk show people like Laura Ingrham,even Limbaugh and Boortz and Savage,Coulter,etc.No equivalent on the liberal side with these extremists.The Fox political guests are at least 75% Republican;Dana Perino,Carl Rove,Mitt Romney,Gordon Liddy,Ollie North,Hukabee with his own show ..now the extreme Sarah Palin too!!?There is no way MSNBC is close to as partisan as Fox..MSNBC regularly criticize the President...even Maddow,Olberman and Schultz..Who ever says anything positive on Fox about the President about anything??They spent the last 8 years defending George Bush and calling anyone that criticized him..not patriotic!!They attacked this president even for The Nobel peace prize ,cheered the lost Olympic bid and even on the quick response to Haiti.. just like Limbaugh and the other Right wingers.MSNBC might be 60% slant toward liberalism..BUT Fox is 99% far right conservative.Look at their almost non existent coverage of Haiti.Beck just said the President responding quickly to Haiti and sending aid was dividing the country..When does anyone on MSNBC ever say such outrageously partisan attack stuff like that!!!
                      Report Abuse
                  • Author by OpenSource (January 14, 2010 4:37 pm ET)
                    3 13
                    That is just plain false. Have you ever watched FOX? Probably not.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 14, 2010 4:39 pm ET)
                    8 2
                    That's a good point and a stark difference. Also, I have heard both Rachel and Keith go after Obama for not being far enough to the left. Who are the right-wingers with principle on Fox? Noone. O'Reilly attempted to be tough on G-Dub, but as soon as it came out that there were no WMDs he sold out and went right back to defending him every step of the way. Hannity is completely schizo in his defense of Republicans and will go to any length and defy any level of common sense to do so. And, Glenn Beck began to take shots at G-Dub just as soon as Obama was president. But, while G-Dub was in office, he defended his indefensible positions every step of the way. As for their news programs, they found no issues with G-Dub while he was in office. They loved every idea he had, even those they now decry as dangerous under Obama. Just like their viewers, always party over principles.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by pongotwistleton (January 14, 2010 9:11 pm ET)
                      3 9
                      Mike,

                      You're correct, Uberdouche and Rachel do once in a while criticize Obama for one thing or another. But it's always and only to further a left wing agenda. When they're not defending him, they're trying to force his hand further to the left, to comply with their agenda. That's exactly why they're not credible newsmen/women. I like Maddow. Dont' like the other twit. But neither attempts to objectively report both sides of any debate. They're spokesmen for the far left. no more, and, and at least in the case of Rachel, no less.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by atretrioeciii (January 15, 2010 11:50 am ET)
                        3  
                        Now you are complaining about the complaining? They do criticize Obama but...? I guess they are damned if you do, and damned if you don't

                        Someone could give the perfect answer or solution to you, and you would still come up with something to complain about

                        Why are you here?

                        To not be convinced?
                        Report Abuse
                      • Author by congero6189599 (January 15, 2010 2:59 pm ET)
                        5 1
                        Please provide examples of Rachel Maddow calling the president A racist or Olbermann? You can wallow in your two sides BS but when one side is spouting nothing but nonsense why give it legitimacy by airing it. There were no two sides to death panels? there is no two-sides to global warming. What other side to the C street scandal or John Ensign would you like? Maybe they should ignore it, is that your gripe? KO and RM point out Republican hyprocrisy and lies when they should just ignore the dininformation and obstructionist polices of the right? Reporting them shows bias to you? One side says the world is round the other says it's flat and but in the name of fiarness both side must be presented? BS, actually my problem with the MSM is that they would air the flat earthers and give them equal air time without asking them tough qustions. I give you the Ghouliani comments about no attacks under GB to George Stephenopolous,obviously a biased hack would have jumped on that right? Instead what we got was a glaring example of Faux style reporting seeping into the MSM.
                        Hardball ranted continually against Bill Clinton/Hillary Clinton and helped pushed the lies about Al Gore. That doesn't sound like a "librul' leaning station to me,a mouthpiece of the Democractic party. Phil Donuhue(top rated show on MSNBC)was fired because he wouldn't tow the Bush administrations line about Iraq. And no station has explained or taken responsibility for airing retired Generals posing as objective military analyst while actually spouting Pentagon feed propaganda in the runup and aftermath of our invasion of Iraq. Is your memory that short or are you just ignoring that Bush was a Republican and MSNBC was in the thick of pushing his lies. I can still hear Chris "Tweety " Matthews fawning over how magnificent George looked in his flight suit bulge and all. Only the crazies on the "left" he drooled, could hate him. He's a womens president the mouthpiece of the democrats(sic)continued. MSNBC biased? If you think to the left your political compass is skewered.
                        MSNBC host a three hour morning show hosted by a Conservative Republican, where is the equivalent on Fox? MSNBC does have many Republicans on their shows. Pat Buchannan,Christe,Michelle Bernanrd,Perkins,and even birthers and gun nuts rool off the top of my head. But you pick 2 shows with host that lean center left as proof the whole station is biased. BS.
                        The point is you can't give one example of KO, RM misleading their audience by denying the other side of an argument or using documents from the Democractic Party and reporting them as their own(something Fox has been caught doing many times and not just on their opinion shows but in their fake news broadcast). Your argument is just a smokescreen an attempt to throw dust and distract when you have no real argument. You don't like MSNBC don't watch but to compare them to Fox is just pure nonsense. Michelle Bachmann was exposed as a loon on Hardball.Was it a bias for Matthews to air her then question about how ridiculous she was? So she goes over to Faux to air her BS unobstructed. Why because they are "fair and balanced?" You and i both no that is a lie. Just like Sarah Palin choose Faux because they practice real journalism. Faux is nothing more than a propaganda arm of the republican party,the admitted station of the opposition and their lack of practicing journalism refelcts that in their reporting. That to me is fundamentally different than what KO does or RM and MSNBC . But then the article was about Fauxs lack of reporting on a castrophe of 'biblical' proportions as our Secretary of State has said, glaringly exposing Faux's obvious bias stop trying to cloud the issue with your fact free nonsense about KO,and RM.
                        Report Abuse
                      • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 15, 2010 5:41 pm ET)
                        2  
                        I'm sorry, I still don't get the Uberdouche reference. Sounds like a woman in need of an OBGYN. Are we talking about Olbermann? If so, my whole point was not that they were correct in all of their criticisms of Obama (I disagree with many of them). My point was that they at least choose principles over party. That makes a difference to me in what I would consider an opinion worth listening to.

                        I may not agree with RightOn most of the time, but I do find his opinions have some merit. Hannity and Beck and O'Reilly are a complete waste of time. They have sacrificed principles for party. You should not get your news from any opinion show. But, if someone is going to listen to political opinion for entertainment, at least pick someone with some principles. Fox News has none.
                        Report Abuse
                • Author by peace4all (January 14, 2010 4:35 pm ET)
                  7 3
                  i notice that you provide no examples of said propoganga (lies) so i guess msnbc and fox are not 2 sides of the same coin. because fox lies on a daily basis.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by pongotwistleton (January 14, 2010 4:39 pm ET)
                    1 11
                    If your point is that fox is the less credible of two networks who serve opposing political agendas, then fine.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by OpenSource (January 14, 2010 6:17 pm ET)
                    1 14
                    I will give you an example of propaganda.

                    If you go to the MSNBC website, on 10-26-09, there, right on their header screams out: TALES OF HEALTH INSURANCE DISASTER!!! Supposedly fair to both sides and a ‘true news organization’ MSNBC blares anti-insurance propaganda while denying to report on what happens to health care when the government gets involved.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by foghornleghorn (January 14, 2010 6:37 pm ET)
                      7 1
                      while denying to report on what happens to health care when the government gets involved.

                      FAIL!! They have reported on the proposed bill. They just refuse to lie and fearmonger about it.

                      So tell us, what will happen when the government gets involved?

                      One thing I know is that when the government becomes the middle man, the 25% overhead for profits/CEO salaries will vanish. What do conservatives have against saving money?
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by OpenSource (January 14, 2010 6:39 pm ET)
                        2 9
                        We're spending money to save money, it's getting hotter because it's getting colder. I think you liberals need a little common sense.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by foghornleghorn (January 14, 2010 6:56 pm ET)
                          9 1
                          I see you didn't say what will happen when the government gets involved.

                          Just because you don't understand an issue doesn't mean you can't learn about it. My advice - read.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by Jesseb37 (January 14, 2010 7:13 pm ET)
                            8 1
                            Every Industrialized country in the world has government involved and in every country they overwhelmingly support it.
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by Geiiga (January 14, 2010 11:29 pm ET)
                              2 1
                              The conservative argument boils down to this: Americans are uniquely incompetent in the industrialized world, because we, alone, are not capable of having affordable universal health care.
                              Report Abuse
                            • Author by OpenSource (January 15, 2010 8:44 am ET)
                              4 7
                              Wrong. You forgot to mention the bankrupcy and unsustainability of said "industrialized countries."
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by peace4all (January 15, 2010 10:10 am ET)
                                7 1
                                what countries would those be that are in bankrupcy or on the verge of cllapsing because of health care? your opinion that you hate all countries outside the good ol u.s. of a is not a fact. please show us some proof of your assertions.
                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by OpenSource (January 15, 2010 8:58 pm ET)
                                  1 1
                                  France for one.
                                  Report Abuse
                                • Author by OpenSource (January 15, 2010 8:59 pm ET)
                                  1 2
                                  If you want proof why aren't you asking MMA for proof? I can give you all the links and the research in the world, and it wouldn't matter to you phonies.
                                  Report Abuse
                        • Author by ForTheLoveOfEllipsis... (January 14, 2010 7:14 pm ET)
                          9 2
                          We're spending money to save money,

                          So you've never spent money to insulate your house in order to save on heating and cooling bills? Maybe because you still live in your mother's basement?...
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by Timberwolf (January 15, 2010 10:12 am ET)
                            1 6
                            So you've never spent money to insulate your house in order to save on heating and cooling bills?


                            I have...but...I only insulated my own house, not the entire neighborhood. That would have been overkill. I'd love to see your credit score though.

                            Report Abuse
                        • Author by Timberwolf (January 15, 2010 9:50 am ET)
                          1 5
                          very well said
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by congero6189599 (January 15, 2010 3:56 pm ET)
                            2  
                            Beavis and Butthead just called, they want their brains back.
                            Report Abuse
                • Author by captfoster2 (January 14, 2010 4:57 pm ET)
                  4 2
                  Really? What drugs are you taking pongotwistleton??

                  It can easily be shown that Keith, Rachel, and Tweety go after Obama every chance as necessary!

                  I dare you... rather I demand that you (or any other conservative/right-wing/Republican find even one time, JUST ONCE when any of the right-wing shills over at Cluster Fox had the audacity to go after Bush/Cheney while they were in office??

                  Even one time! That's all I'm asking for! Just one example? And I'll show you several examples of Rachel, Keith, and Chris going after Obama when the need was called for!
                  Report Abuse
              • Author by fairliberal (January 15, 2010 12:08 am ET)
                1 9
                Yes I can show you an instance of a lie told by the bathtub boy.

                http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/09/17/olbermann-echoes-thinkprogress-lies-smear-palin

                http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZDg2NTA4ZGNlNjI1MWVlN2NkYTczN2JlMWU3NDYwNmQ=&w=MA==

                http://homepage.mac.com/mkoldys/iblog/C1049953760/E20060411220251/index.html


                http://homepage.mac.com/mkoldys/iblog/C1049953760/E20061228114805/index.html

                http://thecablegame.blogspot.com/2006/12/keith-olbermanns-top-ten-lies-of-2006.html

                http://www.charlotteconservative.com/index.php/2009/12/rachel-maddow-falsely-claims-ex-gay-author-gave-support-and-encouragement-for-execution-of-gays-in-uganda/

                http://politikditto.blogspot.com/2009/08/rachel-maddows-lies-lead-to-death.html
                Report Abuse
                • Author by captfoster2 (January 15, 2010 2:02 am ET)
                  8 1
                  Not Fair Nor Liberal...

                  Do you not know how to read?? My post was not about whether Olbermann lied, it was about Cluster Fox

                  Let me repeat it again:

                  I dare you... rather I demand that you (or any other conservative/right-wing/Republican find even one time, JUST ONCE when any of the right-wing shills over at Cluster Fox had the audacity to go after Bush/Cheney while they were in office??

                  Even one time! That's all I'm asking for! Just one example? And I'll show you several examples of Rachel, Keith, and Chris going after Obama when the need was called for!

                  Report Abuse
        • Author by rwmacdonald2091 (January 14, 2010 3:52 pm ET)
          11 1
          Okay, lets hear from YOU why Fox isn't putting much reporting about Haiti on the air.

          I'm waiting......
          Report Abuse
          • Author by pongotwistleton (January 14, 2010 4:00 pm ET)
            2 14
            Your explanation is asinine. I rarely watch Fox, but from what I've seen, it's difficult to argue that they're not simply an arm of the GOP. Nonetheless, I know Fox viewers and, I hate to tell you, they're every bit as sympathetic to the black victims of this disaster as your self-righteous a$$.

            As for their lack of coverage, Westla's reasoning seems decidedly more plausible then your racial smears. . .

            Report Abuse
            • Author by rwmacdonald2091 (January 14, 2010 4:13 pm ET)
              10 1
              And how many black folks did you see at the GOP convention last year?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by pongotwistleton (January 14, 2010 4:17 pm ET)
                1 15
                I didn't watch the convention, so what? Stick to your pathetic assertion above. Do you contend that the majority of fox viewers are simply indifferent to the plight of the Haitiens because they're black?
                Report Abuse
                • Author by right ON (January 14, 2010 4:25 pm ET)
                  2 16
                  It's ridiculous pong, you're right. These people that introduce a racial angle with nothing to back it up except their baiting hooks are pathetic.
                  Report Abuse
                • Author by aBeck in 10-O-C (January 14, 2010 4:31 pm ET)
                  2 9
                  Pongo is right. Interjecting race into this is an unfair generalization of motives.....and no better than what Limbaugh did yesterday.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by TheSarge (January 14, 2010 11:20 pm ET)
                    10 1
                    Oh come on. Don't pretend that the whole gang at Fox News aren't racist. We know they are. They've proven it time and time and time again.

                    Do I need to remind everyone that Glen Beck recently made the absurd (not to mention racist) assertion that President Obama is a supposedly hates white people? What about Bill O'Really and how shocked he apparently was to discover that a certain black-run restaurant he ate at was actual (direct quote) "OK" and that is was "No different" than a white-run restaurant. And do I even need to quote all the racist crap that's come out of Ann Coulter's mouth over the years? Because just the though of that lying crazy bitch makes be sick.

                    I'll stop listing neocons who are racist now, because I don't have all day to sit here and write about them. The list is just too long.

                    Let me put it in no uncertain terms for you: Fox News is run by racists for racists. All you need to do to confirm this is go talk to a teabagger or a Sarah Palin supporter and ask them if they fear Obama because he's black. They do, and the'yll say so to you. On camera.

                    Like these fine god-fearing bible-belt racists did:
                    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WD3p_g2jXh8
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by OpenSource (January 14, 2010 11:45 pm ET)
                      1 11
                      Dumb.
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by aBeck in 10-O-C (January 15, 2010 2:44 pm ET)
                      4  
                      Sarge. After some serious thought prompted by the examples you posted, I retract my comment and have given it a thumbs down. I let the horror in Haiti disrupt my cognitive judgement. Any organization (like Fox) that sponsors and features and enables racism must be "run by racists for racists".
                      Peace.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by congero6189599 (January 15, 2010 3:09 pm ET)
                        4  
                        Just like O'reily's reporting on Katrina, Fauxs man on the ground seemed to be more interested in reporting about scattered cases of looting and shots of some shop keepers armed to protect their stores. That was the angle their man on the ground was taking. No, no racism there. Incredible.
                        Report Abuse
          • Author by frsbdg690 (January 14, 2010 10:46 pm ET)
               
            Simple: there's no way to score any political points for Republicans by covering the earthquake in Haiti.

            Next question?
            Report Abuse
        • Author by SMTDL (January 17, 2010 1:41 pm ET)
          1  
          Not all Fox viewers,Teabaggers,Conservatives or Republicans are Racists..but ..you carry the water for racists all the time..when YOU defend Rush Limbaugh ,,when U defend Glen Beck, when U call the President a community organizer and ignore that he's also a constitutional Law professor,when U never see racist signs at teabagger rallies calling the president: Lying African..Monkey see Monkey spend..Obamacare Witch doctor...when u can only see Sonia Sotomayor and Henry Louis Gates as racists...when U ignore the governor of Hawaii and believe Orly Taiz....when u think Harry Reid and Trent Lott both said something racist,even when Black people tell u different then call it a double standard....when u claim Nancy Pelosi called teababggers Nazis when she only pointed out that they called the President a Nazi(WHY weren't Bush/Cheney nazis?)When U ignore the racism in some attacks on the President and claim that people are saying that everyone disagreeing is a racist... Listen more carefully at code words and ask if John Edwards or Hilary Clinton were President ..would socialism,reparations,little black manchild,bowing and scraping,uppity,apology tour,terrorist,muslim,communist,facist,banana republic,etc etc..be words we would here from the opposition to the elected administration???I don't think so and Hilary's agenda would have been about the same as Obama!
          Report Abuse
    • Author by wesley (January 14, 2010 3:10 pm ET)
      3 20
      What a gas...mmfa offering advice to the top rated cable news network on how to run their programming.

      Since the other networks are regularly pummeled in the ratings...maybe these four staffers could spend their time better by advising them on show content.

      Better stick to reporting conservative mis-information.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by DellDolly (January 14, 2010 3:41 pm ET)
        11 3
        They aren't offering advice. Glad to see the tag team efforts to tell us that there's no reason for MMFA to have posted this, though.

        Ratings are irrelevant to any discussion about quality or lack thereof.

        What this is documenting is further evidence that FoxNews isn't a legit news organization. They should have covered this breaking story. Beck's interview with Sarah Palin could have waited - there was no immediate need for that interview to be aired. And the stories that O'Reilly pushed? Most of them weren't urgent matters covering breaking news. Legit cable news shows covered the ongoing events mixed with earlier reports throughout the evening, and FoxNews didn't.

        This report covers how FoxNews continues to shirk their stated goal of being a fair and balanced legitimate news organization. That's worthy of MMFA coverage.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by OpenSource (January 14, 2010 4:59 pm ET)
          3 15
          And mmfa IS legitimate? They've lost their credibility long ago. We just come on to laugh at you lefties believing MMA's misinformation.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by congero6189599 (January 15, 2010 3:25 pm ET)
            4 1
            You are the joke unknown and you lost your credibility on another thread. MMFA's misinformation? Where have you pointed that out? Laughing at us? I bet you debate yourself and lose too! The fact is you got dusted off on the other thread, it's WE who are laughing at you.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by captfoster2 (January 14, 2010 5:02 pm ET)
          9 3
          Amen DellDolly!

          Having the highest ratings does not in any way equate to being truthful or right or decent or of having quality!

          wesley is just upset that MMfA has the temerity to call out Cluster Fox for the propaganda arm of the RNC and the right-wing tea-bagging appeasers they are!!

          Report Abuse
          • Author by wesley (January 14, 2010 5:11 pm ET)
              14
            Sorry to disappoint you cap'n but I'm not a fan of FOX news or the RNC. And those teabaggers? There are more than enough of them right here.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Boxer1979 (January 14, 2010 11:54 pm ET)
              6  
              And those teabaggers? There are more than enough of them right here.

              Not everybody teabags on MMFA. Try again when saying everybody instead of a particular person.
              Report Abuse
      • Author by ricmarc2001 (January 14, 2010 3:44 pm ET)
        3 1
        i pity the likes of you.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by ricmarc2001 (January 14, 2010 3:45 pm ET)
        4 1
        i pity the likes of you.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Frankeee (January 14, 2010 3:54 pm ET)
        9 1
        Your point of ratings equaling good, quality content is laughable. Porn sites get millions of hits a day. Their ratings are off the charts. But they don't have quality news do they? No. Getting people to watch things doesn't mean someone is a good journalist. It means that that network knows how to keep people watching.....
        Report Abuse
        • Author by wesley (January 14, 2010 3:57 pm ET)
            15
          -- It means that that network knows how to keep people watching --

          You catch on fast, frankeee.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by Ruby (January 14, 2010 5:05 pm ET)
            6 1
            so you believe ratings are an accurate indication of quality?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by right ON (January 14, 2010 5:14 pm ET)
              1 9
              I read and reread Wesley's comments and I didn't see in there anywhere where he even mentioned quality, much less ratings be an indication of it. I only see about a half a dozen people who responded to him mention it.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Ruby (January 14, 2010 6:07 pm ET)
                5  
                This is why I'm asking.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by right ON (January 14, 2010 6:17 pm ET)
                    9
                  I guess you can but why anyone would ask a question out of left field is bizarre.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Ruby (January 14, 2010 7:06 pm ET)
                    8  
                    It isn't really out of left field. Wesley is invoking ratings as a defense to criticism about Fox's quality of reporting. So I'm asking if he believes ratings to be an accurate indication of quality. I don't see this as bizarre at all.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by congero6189599 (January 15, 2010 3:35 pm ET)
                    4  
                    "What a gas...mmfa offering advice to the top rated cable news network on how to run their programming..." Wesley

                    It's better to look before you jump into something right off. You've become more than annoying.
                    Report Abuse
      • Author by rwmacdonald2091 (January 14, 2010 4:04 pm ET)
        9 2
        Wesley, Wesley my dear right wing crazy.

        MMFA is reporting on right wing mis-information. It's just that Fox is sort of like the treasure trove of mis-information. Not reporting on an event like the earthquake in Haiti, is mis-information by omission.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by right ON (January 14, 2010 4:26 pm ET)
          2 14
          Misinformation by omission is the standard now, huh? Wow, MMfA better hire a few more monitors.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by wesley (January 14, 2010 4:29 pm ET)
            2 12
            Bullseye!!

            Report Abuse
            • Author by congero6189599 (January 15, 2010 3:46 pm ET)
              4 2
              Bullseye yells the blind man! If I withhold pertinent facts from a story I'am misinforming by ommission. If I ignore as a News station a castrophic world event, as that station I'am misinforming my viewers by not giving them the significance of the event. Hard to understand I know for simpletons.
              Report Abuse
          • Author by OpenSource (January 14, 2010 4:41 pm ET)
            2 16
            Misinformation by omission is the definition of CNN and MSNBC.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by right ON (January 14, 2010 4:56 pm ET)
                7
              Well I don't watch any of them so I have no dog in the fight. I know of Fox's reputation so whatever they pull is of no surprise to me. I think westla said it best above, a propaganda arm of the RNC. I don't know about the others either, but MSNBC's evening lineup appears to be a mirrored image of Fox.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by OpenSource (January 14, 2010 5:57 pm ET)
                2 13
                I actually used to watch CNN until ACORN.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by foghornleghorn (January 14, 2010 6:41 pm ET)
                6 1
                MSNBC's evening lineup appears to be a mirrored image of Fox.

                It's not. Appearances can be deceiving. Nice to see you opiine on these cable networks without watching them.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by right ON (January 14, 2010 6:45 pm ET)
                  2 7
                  I know of Olbermann and Maddow's left point of view, just as I am aware of O'Reillys and Hannitys opposite one. Hence the mirror reference. I was talking about political point of view, but common sense has always been a little deceptive to you.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by foghornleghorn (January 14, 2010 6:58 pm ET)
                    5 1
                    Well, I'm not a mindreader. You should have said that in your post. Then maybe I could gain a little of that valuable common sense.

                    You remain a child.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by WoodstockNation1969 (January 14, 2010 8:49 pm ET)
                    4 1
                    ???????????????????????????????????????????????
                    "just as I am aware of O'Reillys and Hannitys opposite one."
                    ???????????????????????????????????????????????
                    right on
                    Are you Carrie Prejean???
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by Geiiga (January 14, 2010 11:33 pm ET)
                      2 1
                      It is a complete mirror image. Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity are a right wing shills who lie, mislead, and manipulate to advance their agenda.

                      Olbermann and Maddow, conversely, are left wing shills who use truth, facts, and logic to advance theirs.

                      Perfect symmetry.
                      Report Abuse
          • Author by rwmacdonald2091 (January 14, 2010 5:05 pm ET)
            5 1
            Aren't you the folks that are always blasting the "liberal" media for not covering certain stories? Just going by the right wing standards here.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by right ON (January 14, 2010 5:18 pm ET)
              1 9
              I don't know who "you folks" are? But any partisan media outlet picks and chooses their stories and the slant of coverage they receive.
              Report Abuse
          • Author by DellDolly (January 14, 2010 8:55 pm ET)
            8 1
            Misinformation by omission is always valid.

            Swing and a miss, Wesley and rightON!
            Report Abuse
      • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 14, 2010 4:44 pm ET)
        7 1
        Come on, wesley, you can do better than that. Good news coverage and ratings have NOTHING to do with one another. Any unbiased mind with any concern for honest coverage would know this. A generation ago, when there was actual news coverage to be seen, the networks considered their news divisions as a loss leader. Honesty and integrity and journalism should be what a news division is concerned about - not ratings. The fact that you would defend a supposed "news" network and their coverage of an international disaster as being above criticism from a media watchdog because they have high ratings tells me just how far our media has fallen. It's sad.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by wesley (January 14, 2010 5:31 pm ET)
          4 8
          First of all mike, I'm not defending FOX...I don't watch it.

          Secondly, I've just pointed out the lame attempt by mmfa to criticize their mortal enemy with this bit of drivel about what they don't cover...pure silliness.

          Third, don't be obtuse about television and television news...it is now and has always been about ratings...and not the quality of programming.

          That's why news shows have always believed the axiom that "if it bleeds, it leads"...which has nothing to do with quality and everything to do with ratings.

          Lastly, I agree that good news coverage and ratings have nothing to do with one another. Surprised? You shouldn't be.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 14, 2010 6:02 pm ET)
            7 1
            But, you are incorrect. News coverage has not always been all about ratings. There was a time not that long ago that network news divisions were judged by the journalism awards they won, not by the ratings they received. This is a somewhat recent phenomenon that was not true a generation ago.

            And, what you clearly suggested is that Fox does a better job because they get better ratings. In fact, I think you suggested that it was laughable that Media Matters would criticize what programming they choose when they pummel their opponents in the ratings and that Media Matters should instead make suggestions to the other news channels since they clearly need different programming because they are getting lower ratings. I don't see any other way to interpret that.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by wesley (January 14, 2010 6:16 pm ET)
              1 9
              -- There was a time not that long ago that network news divisions were judged by the journalism awards they won -- mike

              That's a whimsical and subjective view on your part. You know and I know that it doesn't matter how many awards a show piles up...it's hasta la vista baby if no one is watching...remember Phil Donahue?

              And you're absolutely correct in the assumption that FOX does a better job...in the ratings game...which has nothing to do with the quality.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by right ON (January 14, 2010 6:33 pm ET)
                2 12
                Wesley,

                I can just picture it. The staffer here assigned to watch each three networks coverage last night, all at the same time, sitting there in front of three TVs, juggling three stopwatches for start and stop times on each. "dammit, did I press start on this one and is that one for Fox or CNN?, I need help here!" :)
                Report Abuse
                • Author by foghornleghorn (January 14, 2010 6:44 pm ET)
                  5 1
                  I can just picture it.

                  Is this supposed to be funny? Because it isn't, especially in the age of TIVO and DVR.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by OpenSource (January 15, 2010 10:44 am ET)
                    1 7
                    So your rebuttal has to do with an opening comment that doesn't in any way reflect the content of his post.

                    You really pathetically scraped the bottom of the barrel on that one.
                    Report Abuse
              • Author by pete592 (January 14, 2010 7:28 pm ET)
                6 1
                MIKE: There was a time not that long ago that network news divisions were judged by the journalism awards they won

                WESLEY: That's a whimsical and subjective view on your part. You know and I know that it doesn't matter how many awards a show piles up...it's hasta la vista baby if no one is watching...remember Phil Donahue?
                It's obvious that Mike was talking about some other point in history, and you're talking about the modern age of cable crap news. His view of what journalism used to be is not "whimsical." The news used to be a public service that broadcasters provided without the motivation of profit. It was 60 minutes and the eventual arrival of CNN that started broadcast journalism's decent into the ratings and profit-driven crap fest that it is today.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by congero6189599 (January 15, 2010 3:54 pm ET)
                3  
                Phil Donuhue had the top rated show on MSNBC your example doesn't work. MikeHuck is correct. News rooms used to loose money to report the news . It was a given! They'd try and make up that loss in other areas. The present stiuation of news as entertainment driven by ratings is a recent development.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 15, 2010 5:51 pm ET)
                  4 1
                  I have to say, I am amazed to hear people argue that the media has always been this way. Are we this myopic and short-sighted in our views in this country? This is not the way the news was always handled. News departments were not geared to make money, they were geared to provide a service of real journalism. And, yes, these news departments did not judge each other by who had more ratings, but by who won the most prestigious awards. It is a sad state to hear that only a generation later, so many people think this is the way the news is supposed to be presented because it is all about ratings.
                  Report Abuse
              • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 15, 2010 5:46 pm ET)
                3  
                I completely miss the Phil Donahue reference. What was that supposed to prove about the media always judging their news department based only on ratings?
                Report Abuse
                • Author by congero6189599 (January 16, 2010 11:50 am ET)
                  1  
                  Yes I think he was saying that Phil D. wasn't popular so he was dropped,but if ratings were the bottom line , he had the top rated show on MSNBC at the time, it was his politics.
                  You it amazes me to in discussions here with some cons the generational gap,lack of history, or their lack of curiousity in examining anything in a full manner. News has become entertainment yet it hasn't always been that way but since thats all they've seen thats all they know. Never bothering to ask "how did we get here?" From wence did we come? It's like someone watching the Flintstones(dating myself)and believing that Capitalism has always existed,and not a process of human economic development. Since they have no understanding of the process of development of things they can't tell the difference between what is good or progressive to human development or what is holding it back. So you get these false equivalency arguments and black and white reasons for things.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 16, 2010 1:20 pm ET)
                    1  
                    True. Ironically, Phil Donahue was let go by MSNBC for his "far-left" views. And, still, they get tagged by the nuts on the right for being left-wing shills.

                    And, I think some of this is because of the educational system and, more importantly, the values taught at home. We need civics classes back for all students. It it crucial that everyone in our society understands how the system works, regardless of where they fall on the political spectrum. And, it is important that parents teach their kids that they are no more important than the generations that came before them. Learn your history, you are not so important that anything that happened before you no longer matters.
                    Report Abuse
      • Author by TheSarge (January 14, 2010 11:37 pm ET)
        7 1
        The fact that Fox News is tops in the rating is not something to be proud of. Educated thinking people who understand how to use logic and reasoning ("Liberals" as the right-wingers have been brainwashed into calling us) don't need a news channel to tell us how or what to think. We have the ability to make up our own minds. (Not to mention the ability to know when someone is lying to us, something the Fox News veiwership seems to lack.) Thus, we don't need to watch as much news as the morons that comprise the Fox News veiwership does: Without the constant droning of Fox Noise, they wouldn't know who they're supposed to hate, which would make them feel out of the loop in their hate-based "conservative" society. It's certainly a lot more convenient than wearing white sheets and burning crosses on people's lawns. You don't even have to get out of your seat and put down your remote control. Just sit there like a mindless zombie and let Fox News turn you into a racist.

        Ah, the power of television.
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtycdRBAbXk
        Report Abuse
      • Author by rendesign (January 15, 2010 12:11 am ET)
        7 2
        The fact that FOX enjoys such grand rating only serves to prove that there is an overabundance of racists and morons in this country.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by biketime (January 14, 2010 3:13 pm ET)
         
      Seems like it's the grownups v. the kids with the perpetual temper tantrums. You know, the network of the "No!" faction? Scott Farkus and Grover Dill?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by OpenSource (January 14, 2010 3:15 pm ET)
      2 18
      This is like how CNN and MSNBC barely gave an afterthought to the ACORN scandal.

      Both sides do it. We already know MMA's position on FOX. What is the point of this nonsense article?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by vhw28672478 (January 14, 2010 3:17 pm ET)
        11 2
        What scandal ?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by yepvegas (January 14, 2010 3:31 pm ET)
             
          You may have pointed out just how many hours was spent trying to boost there ratings and capitalizing on Hati by reguritating the little information available. It is horrible what happend and Im sure that there are many out there at CNN and NBC who do not look at it that way but Im sure there are some bean counters hopeing this event will boost that dismal ratings. You can bash FNC all you want but you have when you look at there ratings it speaks volumes.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by OpenSource (January 14, 2010 3:46 pm ET)
          2 14
          Still in denial. Tsk Tsk.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 14, 2010 4:47 pm ET)
            10 2
            Wow. Unknown is now trying to compare a couple of bad comedians attempting to make their own Daily Show type interviews with ACORN workers to the thousands of deaths in Haiti. Pretty remarkable how far this partisan thinking can take you in defense of Fox News. But, since you brought up the ridiculous, assinine comparison, do you really wanna compare the time CNN and MSNBC spent on the highly edited ACORN comedy tapes? I bet they spent more than 7 minutes. How far are you willing to take this nonsense?
            Report Abuse
          • Author by pete592 (January 14, 2010 11:33 pm ET)
            4 2
            Not knowing the difference between denial and asking a question. Tsk Tsk.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by peace4all (January 14, 2010 3:51 pm ET)
        16 2
        OMG, are you seriously going to compare an obvious political attack on ACORN to thousands of dead from a disaster? the news is supposed to be there to keep the people informed about events that happen in the world. fox, on the other hand is just there to spoon feed their pablum to their pant wetting fear based viewers so that they can make money and enrich themselves without concern for the people. you know, like good conservatives.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by sleepy joe (January 14, 2010 3:52 pm ET)
        14 2
        Are yo really comparing that ACORN nonsense to the deaths of 100,000 people?
        Report Abuse
      • Author by aBeck in 10-O-C (January 14, 2010 3:54 pm ET)
        13 2
        This is like how CNN and MSNBC barely gave an afterthought to the ACORN scandal.

        OMG! ACORN videos = major natural disaster and human tragedy? WOW.
        CNN and MSNBC clearly ignored the incomprehensible human suffering and bodies lining the streets in the aftermath of Breitbart's little ACORN passion play.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Quicksilver M.S (January 14, 2010 4:02 pm ET)
        10 2
        There you go again!
        Go off topic!

        What the #ell ! This is not about a fake Acorn is not the news story here!
        The problem is about HAITI !
        Even as fox reports about Haiti and Haitians it is heavy of the negitive side. LOOTING, hanging out as spectators at rescue sites, and having no one in charge!
        FOX NEX just gave the weather report for Haiti.
        *uck it it is just HOT there right now, What they need is a good rain for 7 days... THAT WOULD BE NEWS TO COVER FOR fox news.
        A FOOT NOTE:
        On the night of the Earth Quake --- The late broadcasts of Rachel Maddows and Larry King were both live .. all about HAITI. fox news still had not bothered to pick up the STORY! Fox ran rebroadcsts of thier big three!
        I AM SMOKING P*SSED!!!
        Report Abuse
        • Author by OpenSource (January 14, 2010 4:24 pm ET)
          1 14
          Ok, calm down now.

          MSNBC received some criticism on Tuesday night for running two hours of Keith Olbermann's show where the unfolding disaster was not addressed.

          Does 24/7 coverage of the carnage and suffering do anyone any good? Yes, we need to know and can be updated but if you want 24/7-then go there. There are many things going on here that need to be looked at too.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Quicksilver M.S (January 14, 2010 4:45 pm ET)
            4 2
            Fox News will do 24/7 coverage when it what they concider to be News.
            Relentless coverage 24/7 , of Fort Hood, the Miracle on the Hudson, and the shooting in St. Luois , just name a few. I left out the PantyBomber , Fox had O'Reilly and Beck on in rerun! The PantyBomber was not news to be covered by anything more than a news crawer on 12/25/09.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by OpenSource (January 14, 2010 5:02 pm ET)
              1 11
              Typical liberal bias smear.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Quicksilver M.S (January 14, 2010 5:05 pm ET)
                3  
                D^MN STRIGHT
                do what to go out for a BEER!
                Report Abuse
              • Author by Quicksilver M.S (January 14, 2010 5:13 pm ET)
                5 1
                AGAIN YOU GO OFF TOPIC!!
                To say " Typical liberal bias smear"
                a P.S.
                Keith Olbermann did open his program about Haiti!
                The offer for BEER still stands, YES or NO ?
                Report Abuse
    • Author by steelhead3686 (January 14, 2010 3:19 pm ET)
         
      Of course they won't cover it. They wouldn't even cover it if it happened in California, because it's full of liberals, homosexuals, and blah blah blah. The only way they would cover it is if it hit Rush Limbaugh's house or maybe Bush's house. However, if it causes an upheaval to people of another color and certainly of another country they couldn't care less. I wouldn't even expect Fox to cover a genocide if it meant they couldn't use it to bash Democrats or Obama and/or stir up some sort of scare frenzy. I wonder if this will stir them up and if it does I wonder how they'll spin it. I bet it will be priceless.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Digitbig (January 14, 2010 3:27 pm ET)
         
      Only 37 seconds of coverage? Really, Beck? REALLY?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by blk-in-alabam (January 14, 2010 3:28 pm ET)
      15 2
      Republican party media's theme today is "We can not say much about the earthquake because President is using the USA helping Haiti to make himself look good.Limbaugh said today the only reason the USA went into Somalia was because of a picture of a black girl with some flies flying around her head.What does this look like to you???I will tell you what it looks like to me.I see a racist republican party and their media networks(Pat Robertson is a part of that network)with a racist agenda that comes first aboue family,city,state,country,the world,and humanity.This is what many others also see too.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by pilotx (January 15, 2010 1:47 am ET)
        4  
        I really don't have a problem with Fox and Limbaugh but where I find a problem is with their viewers and listeners. After he said what he said any decent human would turn him off and never listen to him again. His sponsors would also abandon him in droves. Why are we not boycotting his sponsors and picking on little Becky? He is a bigger a-hole and spouts bigotted statements daily. And these folks wonder why we don't join the GOP. Sheesh.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by blk-in-alabam (January 15, 2010 9:12 am ET)
          4 1
          Rush Limbaugh has already lost most of his advertisers.He has no fortune 500 companies as advertisers.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by ricmarc2001 (January 14, 2010 3:42 pm ET)
      11 1
      they spent the night on fox doing the usual, bashing obama and all things deomocratic in their unending efforts to undermine the administration.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by latichever (January 14, 2010 4:49 pm ET)
        6 1
        Got to Foxnation and you will see one thread in which they say MSNBC is using Haiti to justify health care reform because Olbermann--for a couple of minutes during their hours of coverage wondered about the positive implications of health care access in the event of an earthquake in LA.

        Is NBC News Using Haiti Quake to Justify Obamacare?

        Links to an article from their good buddies at Newsbusters.

        Otherwise, they have a neutral presentation of the Pat Robertson--who is, in fact, the devil's spawn. Many of the comments differ from Robertson to the extent that they people of Haiti deserve it because they are poor and corrupt.

        Your text to link here...

        Heaven help anyway if Rush and Robertson were in fact in charge of anything.


        Report Abuse
        • Author by pongotwistleton (January 14, 2010 4:55 pm ET)
          2 11
          Got to Foxnation and you will see one thread in which they say MSNBC is using Haiti to justify health care reform because Olbermann--for a couple of minutes during their hours of coverage wondered about the positive implications of health care access in the event of an earthquake in LA.

          Yeah, I, too, saw uberdouche try to interject U.S. politics into the disaster. Thankfully, congressman Weiner quickly and kindly told him he essentially was talking out his a@@. Uberdouche couldn't resist, but the good congressman advised that his effort was futile. . .
          Report Abuse
          • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 14, 2010 5:00 pm ET)
            5 1
            What is uberdouche and who is this woman you know that uses it? Creepy.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by OpenSource (January 14, 2010 6:05 pm ET)
              3 12
              I believe Olbermann = Uberdouche. I could be wrong but either way it is a very fitting nickname.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Quicksilver M.S (January 14, 2010 6:17 pm ET)
                8 1
                Unknown1
                Do you have PitBull in you?
                You do like/love to go on the Attack!
                A Drunk , Typical liberal bias smeaer is asking you!
                If you do not what go out for a beer, I can take you to HAITI to get your hands really dirty!
                Report Abuse
    • Author by sjm9337 (January 14, 2010 4:42 pm ET)
         
      I find it interesting that the other major networks have sent their news anchors to Haiti as well as several other reporters to report from the scene. Where are the anchors from Fox News??? Not in Haiti, that's for sure!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by cyberstrike (January 14, 2010 4:42 pm ET)
         
      Just out of curiosity what was the amount of time of the Haiti Quake on CNN's 3 top shows?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by sheerinsanity (January 14, 2010 5:00 pm ET)
      9 1
      I noticed this yesterday. At 6 AM, MSNBC and CNN were devoting ongoing coverage to the disaster in Haiti. Meanwhile, the Three Stooges (Doocy, Carlson, and Kilmeade) were talking about Conan O'Brien. You tell me what's wrong with this country.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by TheSarge (January 16, 2010 9:20 pm ET)
        2  
        sheerinsanity wrote: You tell me what's wrong
        with this country.
        Where to start? There's a lot of things wrong with the USA, but I would have to put Fox News somewhere near the top of the list. Why Americans continue to let let a propaganda arm of the neo-con movement masquerade as a "Fair and balanced" news organization is beyond me. If I were Obama I'd have instructed the FCC to pull the Fox News broadcast licence the day I took office. Cite their hate speech, cite their lies, cite their misinformation, and then deny them a broadcast licence. If the neocons want to bitch about it, they can go to Fox News and... not be on the air because their licence is pulled.

        I say: Make an issue out of Fox News, shine a big light on all their bull, and let them defend their history in a court of law if they want to fight for the privilege to broadcast. Don't just let them get away with all their bull.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by eilu59 (January 14, 2010 5:02 pm ET)
         
      Didn't Fox run a full page ad about how the covered the "Tea Party" or whatever nonsense that was and the other networks didn't. Tea Party vs. Haiti disaster--which one doesn't belong in the "news" category.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Hatuxka (January 14, 2010 5:03 pm ET)
         
      Forget Fox. Have you seen the coverage we DO get from the others? That country is on the virge of chaos and in utter misery. All I have seen are CNN and MSNBC doing tight talking head shots of their correspondents. These people had to be asked to move aside so the viewer could see something of what they were wanting to describe with so much networkspeak reporter verbiage. What a time to be on an ego trip. I have seen the survival trumpeted of a pretty young white missionary from FLA, the white UN guy, pumping his fists at being pulled from the rubble of his building by this rescue group from VA (why weren't they at the hospital or a school?) and Keith Olbermann being essentially told to cool it by Ann Curry (what is Al Roker doing there?, what is Ann Curry doing there?) when he asked about the possibility of civil unrest there, suggesting that his even mentioning such a thing might give the Haitians ideas (they wouldn't otherwise have?) What an ignoramous. Kerry Sanders describing the planes on the tarmac at the Port-au-Prince airport: "here's a plane from France, a U. S. plane, a German plane, one plane that says Hispaniola, must be from Spain"--it's the name of the island Haiti is on (with the Dominican Repub, for god's sake. So with Fox, we go from real bad to worse-what else is new?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by joekaz (January 14, 2010 6:06 pm ET)
         
      Um, let's be smart folks. I'm a socially-liberal, fair-minded realist. It is sooo easy to jump on this bandwagon. But, consider this intellectually.

      Is there really more NEWS coming out of Haiti?
      The news is that a catastrophic quake leveled a struggling country.
      News will come - a unique rescue story, statistics, reaction/action/inaction
      by home government.
      But, help is on the way. Pounding these photos and finger-pointing reports
      hour after hour is exploitive.

      I like Fox, think Beck needs some communication skills, O'Reilly has his faults
      but can be surprisingly fair, Shep did tons for the people of New Orleans. It's not
      about Fox, it's about both sides and their followers ditto-ing the same thing, intellectually
      blind. Here's a story no, not one news org. covered yesterday:
      Millions Starve to Death on Daily Basis in Darfur
      what about?
      40,000 Americans Die Every Year Due to Lack of Insurance
      Sarah Palin Continues to Sidestep Every Question Regarding Her Intelligence

      There are a million news stories a day. The people of the US should not forget Haiti,
      as they didn't New Orleans or people in the tsunami's path. But ongoing efforts are
      not daily news stories. 60 minutes and the print pubs will share those.
      Love you all - but let's be smart. (please forward to Media Matters)
      Report Abuse
    • Author by nescafe (January 14, 2010 6:18 pm ET)
         
      this does not come as a surprise, the people of haiti are black.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by WiseLatina (January 14, 2010 6:31 pm ET)
         
      Why should Fox news care? These are black people that are dying.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by SpacePedestrian (January 14, 2010 6:49 pm ET)
         
      No one should ever feel satiated by the coverage provided on every other channel. This should completely dominate the 24 hour news cycle until after the Massachusetts special election on Tuesday.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by rieusoul (January 14, 2010 7:15 pm ET)
         
      Fox had 18 people down there as of approximately 4 hours ago, or embedded with the military and others on their way. It has been continuous coverage all day. I wouldn't be surprised if Greta isn't down there tonight.
      If you don't like a particular program turn the damn thing off! All you kool aid drinking people do all day is blog about Fox and especially O'Reilly, throwing him in with Hannity and Beck, both of which are opinion programs where Bill's is not. Most of you don't bother to even watch, you just pick up what one blogger says and take it for the truth.
      Personally I would rather see reporters down there and know what is going on, as horrid as it is, rather than get it second hand from another source.
      Fox also has a very long list and are adding to it as soon as they vet it of charities safe to donate if you wish to do so.
      Do NOT be knocking Fox! They'll have more people down there than the rest have actual reporters!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by pazzman69 (January 14, 2010 7:23 pm ET)
         
      I see that the usual suspects are out defending Faux again. So let's clear up this whole rateings debate. On most cable carriers $19/month basic package Fox and CNN are included. In order to recieve MSNBC you have to upgrade to the $50/month package. In the 8 yrs. that the GOP ran the white house, they made sure that only the richest (top 1%) could afford a $50/month package. But lets see how their rateings do now that Time Warner and Dish Network have dropped Faux from their basic package.
      @Pong**** I respect your views, MSNBC is a left wing media outlet. Cris Mathews rambles on and Kieth can be over the top at times. But Maddow is one of the only news personalities that tells the truth all the time(besides John Stewert of course). And the reason Republicans can't stand her is because she got your master Dick Army fired.
      And unknown1 your just an idiot.
      The only thing you can ever come up with is namecalling and saying Stalin, Hitler,ect...
      People are here for intelligent debate and your doing your side a big injustice with your mindless dribble
      Report Abuse
    • Author by doggeddem (January 14, 2010 7:32 pm ET)
      5 1
      What do 50 lives mean to these bigots who are satisfied with letting 45,000 American lives pass each year for lack of health coverage. They are racist. They are bigots. And when you put lipstick on them, they are still pigs.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by OpenSource (January 14, 2010 11:55 pm ET)
        3 8
        What lack of health coverage? What an idiotic thing to say. I suppose your factual figure of 45000 was pulled right out of your rear, where your brain is.

        The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (42 U.S.C. § 1395dd, EMTALA) is a United States Act of Congress passed in 1986 as part of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. It requires hospitals and ambulance services to provide care to anyone needing emergency health care treatment regardless of citizenship, legal status or ability to pay. There are no reimbursement provisions.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by shangobunni (January 15, 2010 3:51 am ET)
          4 1
          Hey unknown1,
          45,000 is the factual number (rounded, of course) of Americans who die every year due to lack of access to health care. We are not talking only about emergency treatment. That number (45,000) is a verifiable statistic that news articles, politicians, and the health care industry itself agree on. It includes many U.S. citizens who cannot afford the health insurance peddled by firms whose main concern is to report profits on Wall Street. They are our neighbors who were denied expensive, possibly lifesaving treatments by the very companies they had paid premiums to for years or decades. They are people who lost everything they owned because they fell gravely ill and they exceeded the lifetime cap their insurer places on benefits it pays out, so they tried to pay for treatment on their own until their family was financially ruined and then they died anyway. FOR LACK OF HEALTH COVERAGE - NOT BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T GET AN AMBULANCE RIDE!

          Report Abuse
          • Author by OpenSource (January 15, 2010 9:02 pm ET)
            1 1
            All you gave me was a vague reference to "everyone knows its 45,000 (rounded, of course!). Cite me a neutral source (if possible).
            Report Abuse
        • Author by Geiiga (January 15, 2010 9:41 am ET)
          3 1
          Harvard Study.

          Not sure how you managed to miss this one:

          http://www.harvardscience.harvard.edu/medicine-health/articles/new-study-finds-45000-deaths-annually-linked-lack-health-coverage
          Report Abuse
          • Author by OpenSource (January 15, 2010 9:05 pm ET)
            2 3
            Yeah that's credible. Harvard: consisting of people who have yet to experience the real-world application of their theories.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 16, 2010 1:22 pm ET)
              1 2
              Did you dismiss a Harvard study as incredible? Your level of ignorance is one thing - it can be fixed with a little intellectual curiosity. Your reveling in ignorance is a sickness - seek help immediately.
              Report Abuse
          • Author by Johaely (January 15, 2010 9:51 pm ET)
               
            But don't you know the data is bias so therefore it must be wrong!!!1
            Report Abuse
    • Author by Obsesd (January 14, 2010 8:03 pm ET)
         
      Can anyone say selfish? After all, it's the cornerstone of the Republican Party.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Leftright (January 14, 2010 8:56 pm ET)
         
      I noticed relief funds being raised on MSNBC (The Ed Show). I'd be curious about the relative time dedicated to raising relief funds among the networks.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Dick Zaehring (January 14, 2010 9:36 pm ET)
         
      C'mon, guys, be fair. Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity have opinion shows, not news shows.

      And besides, Haitians are not real Americans.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by zamfir273114 (January 14, 2010 9:45 pm ET)
      1 9
      FOX can't help the fact that most people don't give a damn about Haiti. Without America's money, Haiti wouldn't even be able to survive.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by rendesign (January 15, 2010 12:27 am ET)
        6 1
        Have you checked the donation tally. Record sums being donated by individuals and corporations. Obviously americans do give a damn. It's just FOX news that doesn't!
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Angus (January 14, 2010 9:54 pm ET)
         
      This isn't the least bit surprising. Read "Newsless" by Christina Schlachter, PhD. Fox News (and MSNBC) exist only for entertainment, not news. The state of news in this country is pitiful.

      No one should be surprised that the first news station on my Sirius car radio and my Tivo remote is BBC.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by mceniceros (January 14, 2010 10:02 pm ET)
         
      Call me naive, but how is Fox News still considered "news"? They should just be called "Fair and Balanced Talk Shows".

      Bill O'Reilly is an embarrassment to journalism in America.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by socialjustice1 (January 14, 2010 10:27 pm ET)
         
      Not a surprise like everyone said. Agree that Pat Robertson is indeed the shameful winner. Unbelievable! Wish we could airlift him over there and drop him in the middle of Haiti to experience the devastation.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by johnrod10 (January 14, 2010 11:01 pm ET)
      3 5
      News is ratings generated. Networks are trying to make money from selling adds. MSNBC thought they could get more viewers going with Haiti. Fox obviously did not. If you think networks are covering stories for any reason other than ratings, you are sadly mistaken, and terribly naive. Next...
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Geiiga (January 14, 2010 11:40 pm ET)
        1  
        News is not ratings driven. News is news. News networks are ratings driven, and when the drive for ratings (or, in the case of Fox, advancing an agenda) takes precedence over reporting the damn news, then they A) cease to be news networks and become half a step up from MTV, and B) are running counter to the public interest.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by johnrod10 (January 16, 2010 5:22 pm ET)
          2  
          You actually beleive there is a network out there that is interested in the public interest? Come close, Geiiga, my young patiwon. I need to tell you something. Come closer...This is going to hit you just like it did when you found out there is no santa clause. But it is my duty so here goes...are you ready?...all "news" networks are in it for the MONEY!! They dont care about the public interest or being "watchdogs" or any of that antiquated crap from yesteryear. Sorry to burst your bubble, but i feel closer to you somehow. Can we be friends?
          Report Abuse
    • Author by mediaboppo (January 14, 2010 11:03 pm ET)
         
      It's not just political calculations and disregard for the "other" that keeps them from covering Haiti - it's the personality of the network itself, and its hosts. A story like this calls for compassion, humility, and sensitivity. But these feelings are not to be found on Fox. There is plenty of scorn, sarcasm, fear, contempt, bravado, lust, and anger - but nothing from the heart. And the massive egos of men like Hannity and O'Reilly leave no room for genuine concern for their fellow human beings. They only have an hour a night, so they have to keep the focus where it belongs - on themselves. The emotional world Fox creates for its viewers is even more frightening than the partisanship and ideology.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by showmeMo (January 14, 2010 11:23 pm ET)
         

      Which is why we watch MSNBC. Sick of the unfeeling blowhards on Faux.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Boxer1979 (January 14, 2010 11:49 pm ET)
      4 3
      REPORT: Top Fox News programs devote scant coverage to Haiti earthquake

      That is because FOX Snooze is not a news channel it is a political machine of the loony right-wing. Not at all for the common sense people in this country. Whether if your views or right or left. If you have common sense you should know where FOX Snooze stands.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by OpenSource (January 14, 2010 11:51 pm ET)
        2 7
        You have it all wrong. It's loony left and wing nut right.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Boxer1979 (January 15, 2010 12:13 am ET)
          4 3
          Unknown,

          I suggest you read my post one more time. Regardless who watch FOX Snooze they know where they stand. The loony right think they tell the truth. The loony left watch it to have a one sided view point to believe any one who has a right political view is wrong. I have a left view, but I know anybody who is a true conservative would not believe that garbage that FOX Snooze spits. Whereas I know when MSNBC gets out of line. It is all about going to other news outlets to form your opinion via the internet, books, or newspapers.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by OpenSource (January 15, 2010 8:41 am ET)
            1 5
            OK boxer, I was just attempting the lighten the mood, calm down.

            Who are you to define what a 'true conservative' is?

            While we're at it lets get down to fundamental liberalism and conservatism, democrats and republicans, and discuss the label changes over the last few hundred years.

            Conservative policies generally emphasize empowerment of the individual to solve problems.

            Liberal policies generally emphasize the need for the government to solve people's problems.

            Didn't it use to be the opposite?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Boxer1979 (January 15, 2010 10:24 am ET)
              5  
              While what you write is true. Every person needs to be a little of both sides in their views, That is the only way a country or any type of govenment can survive with people elected to political positions.

              You may consider yourself conservative, but I bet you have liberal views about certain issues. I myself I am a little more extreme in my views then liberals. I balance myself in a progressive view. I want change. Liberals favor free-market capitalism. I as a progressive favor a mixed economy. Now I am conservative in some views. Like: Gun rights, and late term abortions, but I do lean progressive and think women should have the right to choice, but to a certain level of preganacy.

              I do not care for the MSM. They are bought by bogus corporations. Who chose what they want to show to viewers AND NOT REAL TRUE ISSUES!

              Report Abuse
              • Author by OpenSource (January 15, 2010 10:59 am ET)
                1 5
                A very well written post and we share many of the same views.

                However, lets not get into abortion. It's too long and drawn out of a topic, and I'm a staunch Catholic with a die-hard pro-life view.

                You are absolutely, 100% correct about the MSM. It's all bullcrap.
                Report Abuse
    • Author by WoodstockNation1969 (January 15, 2010 12:14 am ET)
      2  
      John Stewart-Daily Show 1/14/10 ,
      Exposed Rush for his distain of the Haitians people in their time of need ,and his HATE for President Obama!
      Exposed Robertson for his Understaning of the Teaching of the Son of GOD to bring aid and comfort HAITI and her people !
      Exposed Maddows who Politicies the disaster!
      All three were WRONG!! WRONG!!

      The sad thing is that all day on Fox NEWS 1/15/10, Fox will only use the Maddows part of the segment!
      WATCH AND SEE, if I am wrong with this prediction!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by konaishere (January 15, 2010 1:29 am ET)
      1  
      I have recognized this and would wish this would be brought mainstream,instead it has been nothing but the continual barrage of "Obama" bashing by the dimwit Palin and the men all taking her word as God and professor,pitiful that their party loyalities are such that they can't even show compassion,why will this not be brought out in the open this travesty.I do wonder if this is why Shepard Smith did not go and report as his coverage of Katrina was top of the line along with Anderson Cooper.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Don Quixote (January 15, 2010 2:21 am ET)
      8 1
      What is unsaid is often more telling than what is said. Fox not reporting about what at the time was thought to be 100,000 dead mostly poor Black people, and the near destruction of an entire poor nation, tells the world everything about its true colors. The Fox people are really trying to tell us something through their silence. They might as well scream it from the highest mountaintops.

      If it wasn't clear before, it's LOUD AND CLEAR now!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Bill33614 (January 15, 2010 8:48 am ET)
      2  
      Of course FOX did not do extensive coverage, the Haitian's do not vote for US Republican candidates in their country.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by DAWUSS (January 15, 2010 8:52 am ET)
      3 6
      Eh, if they want to talk about something else, they wanna' talk about something else. I'm not going to dictate what news topics they cover...
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Kwame24 (January 15, 2010 8:54 am ET)
      2  
      Thanks, Sarge and Westia very well said!!!! If it makes President Obama look strong, do not show it... If his response would have been, a colossal hot mess... make sure it is breaking "we told you so" news. This coverage is not about the President!!!! It is about getting the word out about the devastation to the poor people of Haiti! How dare they make the Haitian suffering about politics?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by jms (January 15, 2010 9:03 am ET)
      4 7
      What possible reason could there be to cover a natural disaster in another country 24/7/ad nauseam? You do segments on it, bring attention to, and move on. I have been flipping around looking for other coverage. If it is MSNBC's MO to cover human suffering in other countries 24/7 in granular detail, there is no doubt that they could do it year round -- so this is a little disingenuous.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Timberwolf (January 15, 2010 10:52 am ET)
        3 1
        What is this logic and common sense spewing forth from thy lips. Away with you, be gone...be gone.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by markbfoot199 (January 15, 2010 10:16 am ET)
      2 5
      Can we have a break down of coverage during the news segments of Fox, since they are only talking about opinion shows.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by markbfoot199 (January 15, 2010 10:17 am ET)
      2 5
      Can we have a break down of coverage during the news segments of Fox, since they are only talking about opinion shows.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by sheerinsanity (January 15, 2010 10:19 am ET)
      4 2
      Because as we all know, Princess Palin and fundraising for Scott Brown in MA is soooooooooooooooo much more important than human suffering.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by jose2 (January 15, 2010 11:53 am ET)
        1 2
        How much human suffering do you need to see in one day? I had to change the channel after staring at a child that had lost three fingers and was waiting for two days with a dirty rag wrapped around her hand.

        Apparently MSNBC gets a high from it. And some day after MSNBC gets their way and all wealth has been redistributed, where is all this aid money going to come from the next time?


        Report Abuse
      • Author by solo667 (January 16, 2010 12:23 pm ET)
           
        Judging by this site, upbraiding right-wing pundits and painstakingly tallying up minutes devoted by various right-wing media outfits to Haiti coverage is sooooooooo much more important than Haiti coverage itself. It appears that the only context Haiti is used here is as a springboard to carry on your neverending war of back-and-forth derogatory boilerplate w/ Freepers.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Timberwolf (January 15, 2010 10:49 am ET)
        3
      Fox News just aired an interview that fmr Pres. Bill Clinton gave with Major Garrett on his and fmr Pres. G.W. Bush's co-relief efforts in Haiti. I hope MMfa let's me know when MSNBC airs an interview with Bush, I'll be sure to tivo it. Maybe TheSarge or CaptnFester2 can keep me posted.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by jerho7 (January 15, 2010 11:05 am ET)
      2 6
      This site is nothing but an MSNBC love fest. Your days are numbered, come Tuesday the beginning of the end is upon you.

      Tea bagger
      Report Abuse
      • Author by captfoster2 (January 16, 2010 5:14 pm ET)
        4 1
        jerho7

        This site is nothing but an MSNBC love fest. Your days are numbered, come Tuesday the beginning of the end is upon you.

        Tea bagger


        Oh? And what happens Tuesday? You gonna go 'rogue' on us?

        Golly gee, yet another under the breathe threat from a right-winger??

        The humanity of it all...
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Timberwolf (January 15, 2010 11:34 am ET)
      2 4
      Fox is covering the disaster in Haiti, people, along with other breaking stories. In the meantime, what are the liberals doing? They're following Rahm's playbook to never let a crisis go to waste. So as one of the bluest of blue states is threatening to send a fiscal conservative to the Senate, along with the pretty loud message about their opinion of the healthcare 'reform', they will attempt to ram this disaster of a bill through. Leg Tingle, Over Bite, and Mad Cow are simply following orders to provide cover.

      On a side note, I've already posted my opinion of Pat Robertson's Haiti comments. I'm wondering if there's any buzz around the Kool-Aid cooler on Danny Glover's comment.

      Quote: "When we see what we did at the climate summit in Copenhagen, this is the response, this is what happens, you know what I’m sayin'?”

      Looks like Glover thinks the earthquake would have been avoided if we only HAD signed a pact with the Devils of Copenhagen.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by jcalton (January 15, 2010 1:42 pm ET)
      2 4
      It's politics. If the angry white male pundits give attention to Haiti, they'll have to give attention to a black president supporting black people and looking presidential (read: effective).
      Way too much potential for helping Obama and/or blacks.*

      * If you ever hear PC people try to call them African-American, please inform them that they are idiots.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by jcalton (January 15, 2010 1:42 pm ET)
      2 1
      It's politics. If the angry white male pundits give attention to Haiti, they'll have to give attention to a black president supporting black people and looking presidential (read: effective).
      Way too much potential for helping Obama and/or blacks.*

      * If you ever hear PC people try to call them African-American, please inform them that they are idiots.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by seahawks123 (January 15, 2010 1:48 pm ET)
      2 6
      Lets see. 1 news networt that doesnt spew the DNC talking points is propaganda? All the other networks talk Hati all the time to distract from the other issuses in America.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by tjones522 (January 15, 2010 4:30 pm ET)
      3  
      You failed to mention that more people heard about in the 6 minutes and 41 seconds on Fox than they did in all the 2+ hours on MSNBC, so it all equals out.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by stukes (January 15, 2010 4:38 pm ET)
      2 5
      Alot of time spent analyzing Fox's coverage--but apparently they must know something about news that MSNBC, CNN and CNBC do not--given the fact that Fox's audience is larger than all three of those combined.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by wellington (January 15, 2010 4:38 pm ET)
        4
      Wow-you all do spend a lot of time with FOX Newschannel. Do you all have jobs?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by stukes (January 15, 2010 4:41 pm ET)
      2 6
      Alot of energy spent analyzing Fox, but if they're so inept, or such liars, why do they have more viewers than CNBC, MSNBC and CNN combined?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by congero6189599 (January 16, 2010 12:01 pm ET)
        1 1
        Ratings have nothing to do with the quality or factualness of reporting . Try and follow the discussion.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Johaely (January 15, 2010 10:00 pm ET)
         
      After the earthquake i thought that it was sad that we needed such a horrible event to get together, but not even a country being shattered down is enough for people (especially "conservatives") to even forget politics and help each other. Its almost like a trend that liberals, conservatives and "conservatives" will get together and help until Rush Limbaugh opens his mouth. Then all goes to hell.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by faceswithin (January 16, 2010 3:29 am ET)
         
      keeping our eyes on what is real, may help in the coming days of the USA. we need to let all have the freedom to run there company the way they wish. with this kind of talk it's hateful and small to measure how much time or money or help one gives and one doesn't. This is the problem we have here in the USA. if one is poor why should they have doctors and care, the same as them that make more money. so if others air more time to the deaths and others didn't really isn't the same? Media matters
      Report Abuse
    • Author by solo667 (January 16, 2010 12:03 pm ET)
         
      I don't care at all about this. If someone wanted to receive in-depth information about the earthquake, they should have no trouble going online to obtain it.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by bucove (January 17, 2010 12:53 am ET)
         
      This material should be used as legal justification to pull the journalism license of FNW.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by DixieChyc (January 17, 2010 8:36 am ET)
      2 2
      I would think that Media Matters would have better things to do than to waste precious time worrying about how much time down to the minute that any of the news media spends on Haiti coverage. I, for one, have seen plenty of coverage about the tragedy - not just from Fox News but from CNN and my local stations. If you think that Fox News watchers are glued only to Fox News like cult members with Kool-aid stains on their teeth, Media Matters is sadly mistaken. And really, how sick is it to tune in all day and watch images of dead people lining the streets of Port-au-Prince? It was the same after 911. I developed PTSD from watching those terrible images that are still clear in my mind. To this day, when a clip is aired showing the Twin Towers falling, I get ill. I learned a lesson not to stare at the screen looking at death and destruction, pain and despair. I know it is happening and I help in my own way: prayers and private donations.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by grndcomm (January 17, 2010 9:24 am ET)
         
      Whine whine. FN top rated against all the competition. Is this the best you leftist can come up with, hours and minutes of Haiti coverage? I guess it is when you got nothing else.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by ZanubiyahAhmed (January 17, 2010 1:02 pm ET)
         
      Faux News is probably laying with cameras at the ready in ambush next to a collapsed grocery store waiting for some poor family, desperate to eat and drink to take water or bread, then report the "rampant looting that takes place"

      Believe me, they are there, waiting for the slaughter. mayham, and most importanly to prove Rush Limbaugh right.
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.