Van Susteren devotes show to glowing profile of Brown
The January 22 edition of Fox News' On the Record claimed to offer, in host Greta Van Susteren's words, "the inside story" behind Republican Scott Brown's victory in the Massachusetts special Senate election "from people who know him best." But Van Susteren offered an extremely positive view of Brown, broadcast from the gym at the high school he attended and featuring interviews with Brown and the strategist and chief legal counsel for his campaign, as well as Brown's high school basketball coach and "the man credited with getting Scott Brown to join the National Guard."
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
Interview with Brown: "Tell me about your trip to Washington"
Jenkins tosses softballs to Brown. In a taped interview with Brown, producer Griff Jenkins asked the following questions:
- "Tell me about your trip to Washington. How were you received?"
- "You're 41. There's a very important issue, health care, there. What did -- what can you share with about what the other senators spoke to you about with regards to the health care?"
- "Senator [Ben] Nelson of Nebraska, we've all heard about the 'Cornhusker kickback.' Are you prepared to go to Washington and tell your now-colleagues like Senator Nelson, 'Hey, we've gotta knock that off?' "
- "What's your first priority? When you hit Washington, you're going to hit the ground running. What are the first priorities, I should ask?"
- "A lot of reporters, colleagues of mine, have been trying to now define, 'What is a Scott Brown Republican?' I ask you, what's a Scott Brown Republican?"
- "Talking about your family, on election night, take me behind the scenes. When did you know you had won? And what was happening?"
- "What are you doing now? What are you doing this afternoon?"
- "And any indication on when you'll be seated? Did you have any conversations with regards to that?"
- "And when you get there, the health care bill, dead on arrival?"
- "You clearly understood the anger, the populist sentiment with regards to the things happening in Washington in your own race. When did you really realize that would bring you a victory? And what does it mean for 2010 with other races?"
Jenkins: Basketball court site of "one of the earliest episodes, perhaps, of him being somewhat of a leader." After the taped interview, Jenkins appeared with Van Susteren to say, "We're at the Wakefield High School. This is the court where Scott Brown was the co-captain of his basketball team, and one of the earliest episodes, perhaps, of him being somewhat of a leader. He was a quiet student, you know, didn't speak out a lot, but was apparently a driven athlete." Van Susteren responded: "And I imagine quite popular. We've seen that magazine cover. I imagine he was quite popular among the other students, especially maybe perhaps the women." Jenkins added, "Full disclosure: We did try and track down his high school sweetheart, but we weren't able to do so."
Gym scoreboard displayed Brown's margin of victory. The segment ended with a shot of the gym's scoreboard, which displayed a score of 52 to 47 with 20:10 on the clock, presumably representative of Brown's margin of victory over Democrat Martha Coakley in the election:

Van Susteren, Jenkins provide friendly interviews of Brown friends
Program provides interviews with Brown's "wonder boy" campaign strategist, MA state senator who is Brown's "friend." In the following segment, Van Susteren interviewed Massachusetts state Sen. Brian Joyce (D), whom she identified as a "Coakley supporter." During the interview, Joyce stated that he was "a Scott Brown friend," repeatedly called Brown a "good guy," said that Brown was "absolutely" the "type of guy who reaches across the aisle" and "a voice of fiscal moderation." During a later taped segment, Jenkins interviewed Brown campaign strategist Eric Fehrnstrom, who Jenkins said was "dubbed by Senator-elect Brown 'the wonder boy.' " Jenkins added: "I watched him call you that. You were the wonder boy." Jenkins also asked Fehrnstrom, "You traveled with Senator-elect Brown to Washington. Take me behind the scenes there. How did that go? How was he received?" [quotes from the Nexis database]
Van Susteren speculated on "the expression on President Obama's face" while calling Brown. Introducing her interview with Brown's "college friend" and campaign chief legal counsel Dan Winslow, Van Susteren said: "OK, check out this historic moment caught on camera. That is Senator-elect Scott Brown moments after winning the election receiving a call from President Obama. You have to wonder the expression on President Obama's face as the realization the filibuster-proof Senate was crumbling had set in." Van Susteren then asked Winslow about "how the phone call happened."
Show aired interviews with Brown's high school basketball coach and "the man credited with getting Scott Brown to join the National Guard." After a clip of an interview by Jenkins of retired Col. John Encarnacao, whom Jenkins described as "the man credited with getting Scott Brown to join the National Guard," Van Susteren conducted a phone interview with Ellis Lane, Brown's high school basketball coach. Van Susteren asked him: "Coach, what kind of basketball player was he? Was he any good?" Later, she asked, "Coach, if you rewind back to that time and put yourself back in this gym where I'm standing, would you ever have dreamed that this is where Scott Brown would have ended up?" (quotes from Nexis)
Van Susteren asked, "How did Senator-elect Brown get the name 'Downtown Scotty Brown'?" Van Susteren concluded the show with clips from Brown's victory speech, which she described as "his first speech as senator-elect," followed by another interview of Winslow, in which she asked him, "How did Senator-elect Brown get the name 'Downtown Scotty Brown'?" Winslow described Brown as a "real American, somebody who has no pretense about him. What you see is what you get."
Program devoted to Brown follows On the Record's previous praise of him
Jenkins declared Brown "immensely well-liked and trusted." On the January 21 edition of On the Record, Jenkins highlighted the "secret ambitions" of Brown as outlined in his high school yearbook and interviewed "several people that know Scott Brown," including his neighbor, high school coaches, and the mechanic at "the gas station where Scott gets his pickup truck worked on," asking "what does the rest of America need to know" about Brown. At the end, Jenkins stated: "[W]e found that he is certainly immensely well-liked and trusted."
During campaign, Fox News gave Brown platform to raise money
Brown previously appeared as guest on Van Susteren's show. As Media Matters for America has detailed, Fox News hosted Brown several times prior to his January 19 election, providing him a forum to raise funds, and Fox News hosts and guests encouraged donations to his campaign. Brown was a guest on the January 11 edition of On the Record.

















And I'd even credit her with an acceptable degree of objectivity during her early days with Fox...
But her focus on stories of legal relevance now seem secondary to being just another Fox variety show of ever creeping style of mind numbing political agenda. (? echo chamber brainwashing from being at Fox or perhaps a form of Alaskan Stockholm Syndrome?)
She is showing us yet another face, as is her 'right', but a jury of peers are vacating her judgments.
Apparently tough questions are only for their Demcratic guests.
Imagine FNC's reaction if ABC did a puff piece like this on the Prez ???
I'm fine with the hypocrisy argument because it's true, but really, "IF" Abc or another media outlet did a puff piece on Obama?
You failed, as usual.
It's like you claimed that it happens on both sides of the aisle in an attempt to excuse Van Susteren's behavior, but provided no evidence that it does.
It's not at all like a claim that it rains sometimes. It's a claim that puff pieces about Presidents are done all the time by news organizations like ABC or Fox News. They aren't.
But even if you're still not convinced, here's a good study that indicates the media is/was in the Obama corner during the general election, period. So puff pieces or no, you have zero legs to stand on in terms of Brown coverage = media bias.
[url= http://www.journalism.org/node/13308]Obama = Good.[/url]
Also, Another puff
Sue, give it up. You are nastier by the day and that mouth of yours has always landed you in the yank tank around here, it will again unless you straighten up. Just keepin' it real.
All soft & gooey on conservatives and nothing nice to say about Dems or libs.
Even you have to admit that they're not a real news source.
And this is no big deal, Brown isn't even in office yet. So what is the harm? I know MMfA always wants to dehumanize everyone they don't like, fits the agenda here. But really.
Fox News claims to be "fair & balanced" and demonizes all other media for doing the exact same thing.
They are full of falsehoods and cheerleading for the GOP.
I don't care about your politics. MMFA is here to call out the conservamedia on their misleading claims and hypocrisy.
The nastiness comes from you and from your side. And I don't care if someone else got banned by MMFA. I'm not Sue, and I wouldn't trust your version of events in any case on any topic, since you've proven yourself to be a liar who is obsessed with your personal animus towards multiple posters who have your number.
Oh, and Sue, the only act around here is your persistent denials that you're Sue. I would drop the pretense anymore, you are as transparent as saran wrap. As for my personal animus towards you, nah, that's not it. Just watching you scream victim and whine like a baby whenever someone exposes your silliness, that's why.
Nothing personal :)
But thanks for once again proving that your personal animus controls many of your posts. I love it when you keep digging YOUR hole deeper and deeper. I understand that me calling you account for your behavior makes you very unhappy. Too bad, so sad.
When people attack me, I am a victim of their attack, but instead of behaving in the way you want me to behave, I trounce you every time. I get it that it's incredibly frustrating for you. Again, too bad, so sad that I don't cooperate with your nonsense. Just like the Obama White House and MMFA, we've decided to NOT cooperate with that baloney any more.
You live in a fantasy world if you think it's unreasonable for you to be asked to provide evidence of your assertions!
But thanks for proving that you couldn't do it. Which is what I knew would happen. You claimed that Obama has had similar puff pieces done, but couldn't even provide one example. I always appreciate it when people prove their own lack of character and honesty.
Not one.
Do YOU have a TV? If so, and you've seen such reports, one would think you could have provided a link instead of making a personal attack and implying that I'm ignorant or ill-educated or uninformed about what's actually on TV. But you didn't provide such an example. ALL you were capable of doing was making a personal attack.
That doesn't help your case, dum-dum. It hurts your case when you allege that I'm am ill-informed yet you can't provide a single piece of evidence to back up your allegation!!!
Scott Brown for prez omg!!
Not me. I understand. First off, you just had to do the feel-good interview, since a Faux Con won an election, and it's been looking pretty bad for your side the last couple of election cycles. After all, the NY-23 seat, lost to a Democrat after over 100 years, had to be pushed out of the election coverage spotlight by something, right? Haiti clearly wasn't up to the task.
I also understand that, because of existing and well codified journalistic standards, you're not really a journalist. You and your technical team just go and do as Mr. Murdoch says, don't you? Because that's how you keep your job. Heaven help you if you ever, you know, investigated anything, or even worse, spoke the truth.
Much better just to do transcription and re-broadcast service for Rush Limbaugh, right? Much better to smile pretty and cash the checks and bathe and bathe and bathe and never feel clean. Ever wonder why that is? Because you're bought and sold, one more piece of meat in Daddy Murdoch's collection of talking heads.
I understand, Greta. Really.
I wonder if she will give Scott Brown the same Moniker?
Mr. News
He will be out of there by 2012, god's willing. Amen!
Well she is a scientologist. So what else would people expect!
It's amazing to see how many people would sell their integrity for a wad of cash. But then these same people had little integrity to begin with and Fox knew it. They just needed some puppets to go out and read talking points all day.
Since the viewers aren't interested in news all they want is to hear how all their problems were caused by someone else and that they have an outlet to vent.
time publishes definitive obama puff piece
He's a troll. No doubt about it.
as for truth, i'm not surprised you see none in the onion article... but rest assured, they did not write that as an abstract humor piece out of whole cloth... there is a valid reason it's funny, as it was quite topical during obama's campaign, and still is to a lesser degree... the truth is in the gist, not that time actually wrote such an article...