MediaBuzz

Tags ››› MediaBuzz
  • Fox News Under Fire For Undercovering The Women's March

    Blog ››› ››› BRENNAN SUEN

    Fox News is receiving criticism for its minimal coverage of the historic Women’s March on Washington and dozens of sister marches worldwide that brought together millions of people to stand up for human rights under the Donald Trump administration.

    The New York Times reported that the Women’s March on Washington alone had “at least 470,000” attendees. Washington Post transportation reporter Faiz Siddiqui tweeted that January 21 was the “second-busiest day in metro history” for Washington D.C.’s public transportation system, with over one million trips taken. Across the country, one compilation of march attendance estimated participation of between 3.3 and 4.2 million people in various women’s marches, making it one of the largest manifestations of political activism in U.S. history:

    Despite the historic nature of the event, however, Fox News dipped in and out of their coverage of the march while CNN and MSNBC covered it almost non-stop throughout the day. The Los Angeles Times’ Mary McNamara reported that minimal coverage on Fox compared to MSNBC and CNN  “firmly reinstated” the “historical divide between Fox News and its compatriots.” McNamara continued that though Fox correspondent Jennifer Griffin “reported from the scene … it was a far cry from minute-by-minute analysis of a huge news event,” while also adding that Fox figures “questioned whether the crowd estimates were accurate” or whether liberals “refuse to accept reality.”

    PolitiFact compared closed captioning transcripts of the three networks for terms “women,” “march,” and “Women’s March” and found large disparities between Fox and the other two cable news networks.

    The Hollywood Reporter’s Frank Scheck pointed to CNN and MSNBC’s “daylong coverage of the protests” before stating that “the massive anti-Donald Trump demonstrations around the world may well be the start of a new political revolution, though you'd never know it if you were tuned into Fox News.” Scheck added that “Fox pretended that nothing special was going on” and that when the network did report on the march, “it was often in a smug, dismissive tone.”

    On January 22, the day following the march, Fox News media critic Howard Kurtz offered a tepid admission his network had not given enough coverage to the marches, saying on his show MediaBuzz that “perhaps” Fox News “undercovered it.” Kurtz also suggested that a CNN headline about the marches sending a “message to Trump” was “overplaying what happened”:

    HOWARD KURTZ (HOST): Yesterday CNN and MSNBC offered virtually nonstop coverage of a huge Women's March here in the nation's capital and in other major cities across the country. We're back with the panel. So while CNN and MSNBC were wall-to-wall, Fox kind of dipped in and out, perhaps undercovered it. I'd be interested to hear your view on that. CNN headline: "Women's marches across the U.S. send message to Trump." Was that overplaying what happened? Was there a clear message?

    JOE TRIPPI (FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR): I don't think it was overplaying it yesterday. I mean yesterday was pretty big. It was pretty big news. I think you can get into did they overcover and did Fox under, and probably both of those arguments are correct in my view. We should have probably done more.

    Other critics of Fox’s coverage took to Twitter to point out the disparities between Fox, CNN, and MSNBC:

  • Conservatives Downplayed Fake News. Yesterday It Almost Had A Body Count.

    While Right-Wing Media Dismiss Fake News, "Alt-Right" White Nationalists And Misogynists Use It To Harass

    ››› ››› ALEX KAPLAN

    An armed shooter opened fire at a Washington, D.C., pizzeria in order to “self-investigate” a false conspiracy about the restaurant pushed by fake news websites and spread by fringe right-wing media outlets. Yet right-wing media figures have dismissed and downplayed the impact of fake news, calling it “satire and parody that liberals don't understand,” saying it is “in the eye of the beholder,” and claiming that concerns about fake news are “silly” and “nonsense.”

  • Fox’s Kurtz Pushes Fake Clinton Quote That A Different Fox Host Already Apologized For Airing

    Multiple Outlets Already Reported Leaked “Bucket Of Losers” Quote Is Fake

    Blog ››› ››› ZACHARY PLEAT

    Fox News’ media critic Howard Kurtz attributed a fake quote to Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, predicting that she would have to answer in tonight’s presidential debate for calling primary opponent Bernie Sanders’ supporters a “bucket of losers.” But Snopes.com and BuzzFeed have already reported that this quote -- originally posted at a fake news site -- is fabricated, and Fox host Megyn Kelly apologized on Friday for pushing the quote on her own show.

    On the October 9 edition of MediaBuzz, Kurtz said Clinton is certain to face debate questions about quotes taken from stolen emails that were recently released by WikiLeaks:

    HOWARD KURTZ (HOST): Hillary Clinton will undoubtedly face a new line of questioning at tonight's debate here in St. Louis about her highly lucrative Wall Street speeches, parts of which were made public in hacked emails obtained by WikiLeaks. While running to the left against Bernie Sanders, she had said in these speeches that she favored, quote, “open trade and open borders,” a stunning contradiction with her public position. She also called Sanders' supporters a “bucket of losers.” And despite her tough on big banks rhetoric, Clinton said this in one speech: “Wall Street insiders are what is needed to fix Wall Street.” Clinton's spokesman said the, quote, “stolen documents” could have been orchestrated by Russian officials trying to help Donald Trump, but would not say they were fake.

    But at least one of those quotes was fake. On October 7, BuzzFeed reported that the “bucket of losers” quote is from a fake transcript “published by the totally dubious site RealTrueNews.org,” and that “the transcript is clearly a hoax.” BuzzFeed also showed that the fake quote was published before WikiLeaks released the stolen emails containing speech excerpts. On October 8, internet rumor debunking website Snopes.com called this claim that Clinton demeaned progressive voters as a “bucket of losers” false, adding that right-wing media outlets including InfoWars, Gateway Pundit, and Fox News were duped into reporting the fake quote as true. Both websites credited the progressive website Crooks and Liars for publishing video of Fox host Megyn Kelly apologizing for airing the quote. Kelly admitted at the end of her show, “That was apparently a doctored quote and not real. And we apologize for that error.”

    Kurtz should immediately do the same for airing a fake quote that his network already admitted was not real. And maybe he should read executive vice president John Moody’s January 2007 memo in response to a false Fox & Friends story about President Obama, which states in part: “For the record: seeing an item on a website does not mean it is right. Nor does it mean it is ready for air on FNC.”

  • Trump Is On A Crusade To Influence The Presidential Debate Moderators

    Blog ››› ››› CRISTINA LóPEZ G.

    Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump continued his effort to manipulate the upcoming presidential debates, claiming on Fox News that they are “a rigged system” and thus debate moderators will be unfairly hard on him to avoid being “hammered” with criticism. Trump is attempting to ensure that either debate moderators fail to hold him accountable for his lies, bigotry, and conflicts of interest, or that if they do he can attack them as biased during or after the debates.

    On September 18, Trump phoned into Fox’s Sunday morning media criticism show, MediaBuzz, and complained to host Howard Kurtz that the debates are “a rigged system,” pointing to recent criticism of NBC’s Matt Lauer, who moderated the September 7 Commander-In-Chief Forum. Lauer was widely panned for his fact-challenged effort, in which he failed to challenge Trump on his lie about his position on the Iraq war. Trump told Kurtz that “they hammered Lauer” to “game the system” so that the presidential debate moderators will “go after Trump.” Trump’s solution, he told Kurtz, is to “not even have a host.” Asked by Kurtz if debate moderators Lester Holt of NBC News, Martha Raddatz of ABC News, Anderson Cooper of CNN, and Chris Wallace of Fox News are currently being “pressured into not being fair” to him, Trump replied “sure.”

    This is a textbook example of what The Washington Post’s Callum Borchers has explained as Trump “working the refs.” Trump previously went after Cooper in a September 15 interview with The Washington Post, accusing him of bias and saying “I don’t think he should be a moderator. CNN is the Clinton News Network and Anderson Cooper, I don’t think he can be fair.” Borchers explained that this is a deliberate strategy by Trump: by criticizing Cooper, Trump is trying to prevent tough questioning from the moderators:

    To understand why Donald Trump took a shot at Anderson Cooper in an interview with The Washington Post on Thursday, you have to go back to something he said three days earlier. Reflecting on last week's Commander-in-Chief Forum, moderated by NBC's Matt Lauer, Trump said Monday on CNBC that "everyone's saying that [Lauer] was soft on Trump" — which is pretty much true.

    Trump then explained what he thinks criticism of Lauer means for the upcoming presidential debates: "Now the new person is going to be really hard on Trump just to show the establishment what he can do."

    Clearly the Republican nominee is worried about the political equivalent of a make-up call in sports. He knows many journalists believe Lauer blew the call, so to speak, by failing to whistle Trump for claiming falsely that he opposed the invasion of Iraq. And he thinks Cooper and the other debate moderators — Lester Holt, Martha Raddatz and Chris Wallace — will overcompensate by being extra tough.

    Trump wants to prevent that from happening. So he's working the refs.

    Trump appears to have already managed to influence the Commission on Presidential Debates’ selection of moderators. The commission reportedly struggled to choose journalists because of Trump’s “aggressive attacks on the media and complaints about unfair treatment.” According to network news executives, NBC’s Holt and Fox’s Wallace -- who faces a massive conflict of interest due to his close relationship to Trump adviser Roger Ailes --  were chosen to “appease” Trump.

    Wallace has already announced he has no intention of calling out candidates if they lie during the debate. Trump, who expressed his support for Wallace’s decision not to do his job, is now trying to manipulate the other debate moderators into following Wallace’s lead.