• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

Perhaps the most significant technological innovation in the delivery of news to its audience, after the printing press, was television cable news. Ted Turner’s CNN debuted in the summer of 1980. The network few thought could succeed instead created the 24-hour cable news cycle, forever transforming how current events and political commentary are packaged and presented to customers. Even as Internet news providers are killing traditional newspapers, television news and commentary channels – in particular, Fox News – hold powerful sway in popular culture.

This was painfully apparent in the last few weeks, as televised news personalities, their networks and satirists pretending to be news personalities made national news, mostly by running their mouths. Stephen Colbert managed to disgrace himself, Democrats and Congress (no mean feat) by bringing his inappropriately in-character schtick to a congressional hearing. Colbert is a one-trick pony; the comedic entity who spawned him, Jon Stewart, was himself at the center of a the high-profile meltdown of CNN’s Rick Sanchez.

Stewart, remember, as “anchor” of Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show,” is slowly forgetting that he’a comedian who makes fun of the news. As he invites infamously liberal politicians onto his show and tosses them softballs so they can make fun of conservatives, it’s painfully obvious that he’s living out the Bill Maher career life-cycle. Bill Maher today is an angry, venomous twit, and if he was ever funny, it doesn’t show. The same fate awaits Stewart.

But I digress. Rick Sanchez, whose tenure at CNN was characterized by wretched liberal bias and open hostility to conservatives, recently lost his mind. He accused Stewart of prejudice and ranted about “the Jews.” One or the other was too much for his bosses. While it does seem strange that Sanchez was only fired after her took a shot at a fellow leftist, his departure from CNN is no loss to the journalism world.

Joseph Farah’s book “Stop the Presses: The Inside Story of the New Media Revolution” explains why traditional news sources are gasping for breath amid Internet, talk radio phenomena

Sanchez was among those lefties in the media who participated in a loosely confederated campaign to marginalize Fox News – which brings me to my point. Fox News began operation in October of 1996. Four years later, nearly a third of Americans were among the network’s sometime viewers. Even the left-leaning Huffington Post has been forced to acknowledge Fox News’ influence in the marketplace: “Just how dominant is Fox News? Consider this: its morning show, ‘Fox & Friends,’ draws more total viewers on average than the top-rated NON-Fox show in cable news, MSNBC’s ‘Countdown.’”

The success of Fox has stuck in the craw of many an angry commie-lib. Democrats have been gnashing their teeth over the network’s existence since its debut. Back in 2004, Julia Angwin chronicled the libs’ political assault on Fox in the Wall Street Journal. The drumbeat to falsely accuse Fox of being somehow less than a “real” news source has only grown louder since.

Our brittle, defensive president, Glorious Leader Obama, has never been good with criticism. He has repeatedly chipped away at the stature of the presidency by identifying – and whining about – his critics, taking on private citizens by name. Jann Wenner’s fawning article in Rolling Stone is a perfect example; Obama condemns Fox News as “destroying America” because the prevailing sentiment expressed by the network, as he sees it, is one with which he disagrees.

Fox News’ staff have challenged these hypocritical assertions of “conservative bias” before. In the case of the Rolling Stone interview, Fox’s O’Reilly quickly hit back, rightly pointing out that Obama unfairly demonizes anybody who dares to disagree with him. In the same interview, Obama hinted ominously at “darker elements” within the tea-party movement. Leftists delight in painting their opponents as vaguely “dangerous” – even as their fellow libs assault those whose opinions they despise.

Critics of Fox continue to howl despite the fact that every other network news source and the majority of traditional “journalists” are demonstrably biased to the left. Even MSNBC reported on the trend three years ago – a trend identified in 1992 by the New York Times’ William Glaberson. The numbers only get worse as time progresses; no less than 65 percent of donations from journalists are to Democrats.

Yet we’re supposed to believe that the major news outlets – the “media professionals” who sneer at Fox News and try to marginalize it as less than legitimate, fighting to deny the nation’s most prominent news network a front-row seat for White House press conferences – aren’t injecting their political preferences into their reporting on world events and domestic politics? Keep in mind that the seat vacated in the White House briefing room (which was given to the Associated Press) was formerly held by the shriveled, Yoda-like animated corpse of Helen Thomas, a “journalist” so biased that she was fired for saying publicly that the Jews should leave Israel and go back to Poland or Germany.

Never was this institutionalized bias among news sources more painfully obvious than in the Journolist scandal. Had a cabal of Republican or conservative-leaning reporters colluded to bias their news coverage in defense of a Republican candidate, the story would have made the daily and nightly reporting on NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC and CNN for weeks if not months. Yet the story quickly disappeared (if it was covered at all) from the major networks’ coverage, despite the fact that it confirmed every conservative’s worst fears about the liberally biased news media.

No matter how many lib watchdog groups claim otherwise, Fox News is neither more biased nor less accurate than its five major competitors. Leftists are simply angry that there is one news source among half a dozen that is not a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party. Democrats’ fellow travelers in the media will never abide dissent, and thus Fox News must be marginalized and destroyed. This is the respect “liberals” have for free speech and the free exchange of ideas. Were it up to them, they would beat you into silence for speaking in opposition to them … as they have repeatedly demonstrated with boot, fist and truncheon.

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.