Video: Fox’s “Four years of hope and change”; Update: “Not authorized at the senior executive level of the network”

posted at 1:21 pm on May 30, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

I don’t disagree with much, if anything, in this video presented earlier today on Fox & Friends.  Neither, I suspect, will many of our readers.  But does this make anyone uncomfortable at all in regard to its source?  Via Greg Hengler, here is a four-minute Fox News retrospective on Hope and Change:

Note that F&F isn’t just playing a campaign ad or a YouTube spot from an outside political action committee.  Nor does this come from the production company of one of its opinion-program hosts.  The video starts with “Fox and Friends Presents” on the screen, making this an explicit argument from the news channel itself.

Should a news organization produce and publish attack ads like this?  I know the initial response will be that other news organizations offer biased perspectives and hagiographies of Obama that go well beyond a single video … and that response is entirely valid.  However, we usually criticize that kind of behavior with other news organizations, too.  If anyone wanted to look for evidence that the overall Fox News organization intends to campaign against Obama rather than cover the campaign, this video would be difficult to refute as evidence for that claim.

Of course, that doesn’t mean that outside groups and the Romney campaign shouldn’t consider producing something like this on their own.  It makes a pretty powerful argument against another four years of Barack Obama, but that shouldn’t be the job of news-reporting organizations, even when we like the message.

Update: Looks like Fox News pulled the video. I’ll see if they repost it.

Update II: I posted the YouTube of it instead.

Update III, 4:25 PM: I had to put this post aside for a while to work on other stories and my show, but a couple of people tweeted me that Fox Nation still had the video up.  The main page has it as its headline post, but when you click on the link, it’s dead.  Furthermore, the embed video died about 10 minutes after I wrote this post, and I searched the Fox News video site for another 10-15 minutes and could not find it at all there.

Update IV: Twitter follower Jon Eisenberg found a live link at Fox for the video, so I’ll repost it in this update:


One last point: Several people in the comments argue that F&F is an opinion show, and that this is therefore fair game. That would certainly be true if they wanted to play ads run by other organizations as part of their commentary. My point is that this ad was produced by Fox News itself, and it’s clearly intended to campaign against Obama. That’s the problem with this video, and I think it was ill-advised by Fox to have produced and published it. If CBS News produced a four-minute video extolling all of Obama’s accomplishments, or a four-minute video with this dramatic music and animation ripping Romney for his years in Massachusetts and at Bain Capital, we’d be screaming our heads off, and rightly so.

Update V: TV Newser got a statement from Fox VP Bill Shine that hints at some disciplinary action:

“The package that aired on FOX & Friends was created by an associate producer and was not authorized at the senior executive level of the network. This has been addressed with the show’s producers.”

We’ll see; so far, it’s still up on the network’s website.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Im sorry, when other “news” channels run love fests for Obama day in and day out, this is a drop in the bucket. It makes a good point and I dont doubt that MSDNC would not have jumped at the chance to do this against a Republican. All Im going to say is-remember those Tea Parties and how those other channels covered them-ya. Go for it Fox, they already accuse you of it. Its a good comparison of Obama’s rhetoric versus his results.

canditaylor68 on May 30, 2012 at 2:30 PM

I see nothing wrong with it. I happen to agree with the above poster who said it was time to take the gloves off! I’m sick of us trying to take the moral high road…and getting screwed by doing so. At this point do whatever it takes to get this president booted out of office in November.

maables on May 30, 2012 at 2:26 PM

How long have you been a Fox News producer?
Stay proud! And not moral!

verbaluce on May 30, 2012 at 2:32 PM

I have a problem with you classifying this as an “attack” ad. Does it impute anything that isn’t true? Is it things that have been reported on in the past four years? I don’t consider ads that show what was promised and show what was delivered as attacks but statements of fact. Should they have made the stories into a compilation piece? Probably not.

Cindy Munford on May 30, 2012 at 2:33 PM

uh oh- they are doubling down on this.

Bensonofben on May 30, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Good, there is nothing more “fair and balanced” than the media fully vetting candidates. Anybody who objects for ethical reasons or something should take a gander at the Constitution and what it says about freedom of the press.

It is high time that we rid ourselves of the idea that the media isn’t biased. The WaPo and NYT don’t even make a pretense at fairness and yet one clip of Fox and Friends and some conservatives get in a snit and start talking of the media as if they have lofty ideals. How is this one clip more offensive than the daily propaganda put forth on MSNBC?

Happy Nomad on May 30, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Cindy Munford on May 30, 2012 at 2:33 PM

It’s about time that the right-leaning media show up at a knife fight with a gun and not a butter knife.

Happy Nomad on May 30, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Why couldn’t they have just given the video to Hannity?

It was wrong for Fox and Friends to do that. Just flat-out wrong.

Media Matters is having a field-day with this, including trying (comically, I might add) to debunk the clear facts in the presentation.

RavenRog on May 30, 2012 at 2:39 PM

It’s time to realize this election is about the very soul of America and whether we will survive as a nation of freedom and opportunity or end up in the ash-heap with the rest of the failed democracies. This administration is at war with the citizens of the United States. It has publicly singled out private citizens for personal attack and financial ruin. We’ve been far too cautious and have allowed our critics to exploit our political cowardice (think John Boehner). While we argue about the finer points of the Marcus of Queensbury Rules in the political arena, the liberals and the lap-dog media are in a fight for their very survival and do not play by any rules. While the purpose of this thread is to critique the strategical significance of this video, I say it’s about time. Using the President’s own words, all in context, to illustrate how much damage has been inflicted on millions of Americans is refreshing and I for one will applaud anytime someone grows a pair and is not afraid to take a stand. More please.

sewer urchin on May 30, 2012 at 2:39 PM

uh no.. tax cuts cause revenue to increase.. proven by the treasury’s own stats..

This is the kind of brilliance that led the nation into fiscal insolvency. Alan Greenspan and Bernanke and other respected, mainstream GOP economists completely disagree with your childish premise. Like Glenn Beck, you don’t understand the difference between correlation and causation.
Those tax cuts were coupled with massive deficit-fueled spending, as the lower taxes were never matched with offsetting budget cuts.
Deficit-fueled revenue growth is always short-lived. The party eventually ends and in 2008 it crashed in a uniquely painful way.

bayam on May 30, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Although I didn’t like the video, I don’t see how you could call it anything but fair and balanced. They even included ALL of the things Obama improved during his term.

The Rogue Tomato on May 30, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Happy Nomad on May 30, 2012 at 2:38 PM

As an observer, I am interested. As good as their rating are comparatively, it’s still a drop in the ocean of the people who are uninformed.

Cindy Munford on May 30, 2012 at 2:41 PM

Be interesting to see Team Barry attack the ad. Knowing full well that Fox would come right back with excerpts of worship for The Chosen One from MSNBC, The View, etc

GarandFan on May 30, 2012 at 2:25 PM

..ain’t it funny how JugEarz — by dint of his absolutely dreadful performance as POTUS these past four years — has boxed himself in?

There’s a life lesson in there somewhere, Garand.

The War Planner on May 30, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Finally…!

“If the media was doing it’s job…

… We wouldn’t be $15 Trillion dollars (now $16 Trillion) in debt!” – Andrew Breitbart (R.I.P.)

Seven Percent Solution on May 30, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Why couldn’t they have just given the video to Hannity?

It was wrong for Fox and Friends to do that. Just flat-out wrong.

Media Matters is having a field-day with this, including trying (comically, I might add) to debunk the clear facts in the presentation.

RavenRog on May 30, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Why was it “wrong”?

Fox & Friends is an opinion show. It’s not a news show.

ButterflyDragon on May 30, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Why couldn’t they have just given the video to Hannity?

It was wrong for Fox and Friends to do that. Just flat-out wrong.

RavenRog on May 30, 2012 at 2:39 PM

It’s weak editorial control.

Fox and Friends is lightweight but it wasn’t like Hannity.

When you turn on Hannity you can rightly expect to see him performing fellatio on Palin or some other establishment GOP figure whilst spouting talking points he doesn’t even understand himself.

That’s never been the station’s entire MO.

CorporatePiggy on May 30, 2012 at 2:43 PM

By the way the trolls are squealing…

… the ad is spot on!

More, please…!

Seven Percent Solution on May 30, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Media Matters is having a field-day with this, including trying (comically, I might add) to debunk the clear facts in the presentation.

RavenRog on May 30, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Hmmmm,,,,looks like they are taking the bait.

flstc on May 30, 2012 at 2:45 PM

This is the kind of brilliance that led the nation into fiscal insolvency. Alan Greenspan and Bernanke and other respected, mainstream GOP economists completely disagree with your childish premise. Like Glenn Beck, you don’t understand the difference between correlation and causation.
Those tax cuts were coupled with massive deficit-fueled spending, as the lower taxes were never matched with offsetting budget cuts.
Deficit-fueled revenue growth is always short-lived. The party eventually ends and in 2008 it crashed in a uniquely painful way.

bayam on May 30, 2012 at 2:40 PM

You didn’t even argue his main point. The tax cuts did bring in more revenue during the Bush years. The spending is the real problem. You even note massive deficit spending in your post but for some reason you think revenue is the problem? Even if you want to ignore the Laffer curve you can’t deny that the government can’t tax it’s way to solvency with anything near current spending levels.

Also, for comparison, Bush’s worst yearly deficit was in the 400 billion range, Obama has multiple trillion+ yearly deficits.

gwelf on May 30, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Those tax cuts were coupled with massive deficit-fueled spending, as the lower taxes were never matched with offsetting budget cuts.
Deficit-fueled revenue growth is always short-lived. The party eventually ends and in 2008 it crashed in a uniquely painful way.

bayam on May 30, 2012 at 2:40 PM

$200 billion deficits are “massive”.

What do you call $1.4 trillion dollar deficits? Super duper extremely massive? And if deficit spending was what caused “the party” to end in 2008, why hasn’t increased deficits made it worse?

I’m not understanding the logic.

ButterflyDragon on May 30, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Well, to be fair…Fox News is not a ‘news organization’.
It’s just this example that crosses the line for you, Ed?
The false narrative that FNC is somehow a counterpoint to said bias at the networks, CNN etc. is laughable to anyone not ideologically driven enough to feel the end justifies the means…e.g. Roger Ailes.
Even Chris Wallace can’t keep a straight face for that line.

verbaluce on May 30, 2012 at 2:21 PM

strange.. Obama said the same thing.. and for once the MSM laid into him for it.

The false narrative that FNC is somehow a counterpoint to said bias at the networks, CNN etc. is laughable to anyone not ideologically driven enough to feel the end justifies the means…e.g. Roger Ailes.

or the audience which is greater than it’s competitors combined? Fox is lambasted for it’s opinion shows.. and it’s critics never make the distinction between those and it’s straight news division.. as you are.

The first line gives away your own bias.. Brett Baier is not a real Journalist? Chris Wallace?.. all right wing? The network which airs Geraldo and Shepard Smith is entirely right wing?

so what do you watch? seriously…

mark81150 on May 30, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Was there anything inaccurate in the video?

myiq2xu on May 30, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Cindy Munford on May 30, 2012 at 2:33 PM

That’s about how I feel.

Esthier on May 30, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Sure…this certainly does seem to qualify as an attack ad. But if it were only shown on F&F there’s no harm. Seems all cable news morning shows are obviously partisan…for whatever reasons, most people want gossip, dirt, and what to buy at Home depot. It’s as if these early news shows are more “talk show” than “news”, even when they mix in.

JetBoy on May 30, 2012 at 2:51 PM

This is definitely sensationalistic and over-the-top but it’s hyperbole to call it an attack ad.

Heywood U. Reedmore on May 30, 2012 at 2:53 PM

Its no secret the members of Fox and Friends are all conservative, and they don’t try and hide it. God Bless then I say.

gradyman on May 30, 2012 at 2:53 PM

Is Gretchen hot, or is it just me?

Lickmuffin on May 30, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Should a news organization produce and publish attack ads like this?

Your question makes no sense because there is no such thing as a free and legitimate news organization.

joey24007 on May 30, 2012 at 2:59 PM

Contrast the rapturous faces of Obama supporters in 2008 with the faces of Germans cheering Adolf Hitler in 1936. Remember the school children singing songs to Obama? Remember the black uniformed teens drilling to Obama inspired rap? We’ve seen this movie before and it did not end well.

“Youth is easily deceived because it is quick to hope.” ~ Aristotle 

SpiderMike on May 30, 2012 at 3:07 PM

That’s hard news right there.

And I can say it with an amazingly straight face.

JohnGalt23 on May 30, 2012 at 3:13 PM

What do you call $1.4 trillion dollar deficits? Super duper extremely massive?

ButterflyDragon on May 30, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Double secret. :)

Oh, and I’m mostly with Munford; if it’s true, there’s no argument to be had but bias, and if it’s editorial, there’s no argument to be had.

And the content wouldn’t surprise me in a Diane Sawyer special report, serialized across several episodes — or in any 60 Minutes styled magazine-show expose — speaking truth to power, mind. The graphics would need to go from “fun” to “stodgy” or something.

I think of the old media as part of the entertainment … the hippies have a … “complex.” They are all in the entertainment business, first. I really think that point of view shows a more accurate picture than continuing the “journalist” thing — which is looking a little naive. We have journalists. We don’t have many on TV.

Axe on May 30, 2012 at 3:15 PM

The first line gives away your own bias.. Brett Baier is not a real Journalist? Chris Wallace?.. all right wing? The network which airs Geraldo and Shepard Smith is entirely right wing?

so what do you watch? seriously…

mark81150 on May 30, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Well, I did give a nod to Wallace. Brett Baier? He’s not so bad – but he spends a lot of time stepping in front of any criticism…holding his ‘i am a real journalist’ shield. Does he want to have to do that so much?
All right wing? No. But mostly. Very mostly.
And I’d even leave O’Reilly out of that group.

What do I watch?
Everything. But I am not normal.

verbaluce on May 30, 2012 at 3:19 PM

Also, for comparison, Bush’s worst yearly deficit was in the 400 billion range, Obama has multiple trillion+ yearly deficits.

gwelf on May 30, 2012 at 2:46 PM

You don’t understand the concept of deficit-fuel spending and its short vs long-term implication for tax revenue. No one outside the US, and certainly our top competitors, does anything but laugh at the Laffer curve. I should know better- even discussing it with a true believer is a fool’s errand.

No one is denying that government spending, esp entitlements, is the main cause the nation’s fiscal pain. As to your point that it’s impossible to tax your way out of the problem, that’s actually untrue. The Germans and many other countries do just that, although it’s not a path I want to see the US follow. Some higher revenue is needed to solve the problem as every serious evaluation of the deficit has concluded.

bayam on May 30, 2012 at 3:26 PM

I thought Fox and Friends was an opinion-program. They don’t make much pretense of being unbiased on the morning show. I watch it, and like it, but I don’t see it as a straight news program. Of course, I consider the Today Show a left-wing opinion-program, they don’t make much pretense of being unbiased either.

mbs on May 30, 2012 at 3:39 PM

This is the kind of brilliance that led the nation into fiscal insolvency. Alan Greenspan and Bernanke and other respected, mainstream GOP economists completely disagree with your childish premise. Like Glenn Beck, you don’t understand the difference between correlation and causation.
Those tax cuts were coupled with massive deficit-fueled spending, as the lower taxes were never matched with offsetting budget cuts.
Deficit-fueled revenue growth is always short-lived. The party eventually ends and in 2008 it crashed in a uniquely painful way.

bayam on May 30, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Oh… I’m sorry.. having lived through those years pre-net and everything.. I kind of thought I remembered them. As well as the lame democrat excuses for why they could never explain how the revenue went up… so they said .. oh.. it was “our spending” which hiked the economy. The problem with Causation and correlation on your argument is when purely Keynesian policies are tried the effect on the economy is feeble at best. Every time just spending is tried.. like Stimulus it fails.. though friends of Obama made out like fat rats..

So if there is anyone confused here.. can’t it also be said it was your argument since you claim increased spending greased the skids.. when there were also tax cuts.. so what was that about

you don’t understand the difference between correlation and causation.

you’re claiming credit for an improvement which never happens with just spending alone.

Other than a public union employee or other recipient of Obama’s friends of democrats slush fund.. you won’t find many Americans who think the stimulus worked.. and polling supports that.

Nobody buys your line anymore.

The city of Columbus used stimulus to hire 60 new police officers.. and Obama was there to claim credit for it with cameras in tow.. what really happened?

Six months later everyone of them was laid off because the stimulus was used up.. and those mew cops didn’t even break in their new shoes before losing their jobs.

Obama never acknowledged or came back cameras in tow for that one either..

Maybe you’ll explain to me I didn’t really see what I saw as you did with the Reagan tax cuts..

mark81150 on May 30, 2012 at 3:59 PM

You don’t understand the concept of deficit-fuel spending and its short vs long-term implication for tax revenue. No one outside the US, and certainly our top competitors, does anything but laugh at the Laffer curve. I should know better- even discussing it with a true believer is a fool’s errand.

No one is denying that government spending, esp entitlements, is the main cause the nation’s fiscal pain. As to your point that it’s impossible to tax your way out of the problem, that’s actually untrue. The Germans and many other countries do just that, although it’s not a path I want to see the US follow. Some higher revenue is needed to solve the problem as every serious evaluation of the deficit has concluded.

bayam on May 30, 2012 at 3:26 PM

If there is no merit to the Laffer curve then explain how multiple times in American history tax revenue went up after tax cuts – usually after deep tax cuts (see Reagan and Coolidge). The Laffer curve doesn’t state that revenue will always go up after a tax cut but that at a certain point taxes become so punitive that they retard growth and encourage those with lots of money and assets to use their wealth in tax friendlier ways (e.g., they avoid paying those higher taxes). It’s ludicrous to suggest that the tax code has no effect on the habits of those it targets. You can argue about which tax rates cause the rich to withdraw their wealth and shelter it and which don’t but the Laffer curve is real. I trust Thomas Sowell’s analysis a lot more than I do yours.

Also, every other country with a welfare state is in massive debt – they don’t pretend like we do that you don’t need to levy very high taxes on the middle class in an attempt to pay for it but even they can’t pay for it.

gwelf on May 30, 2012 at 4:05 PM

If there is no merit to the Laffer curve then explain how multiple times in American history tax revenue went up after tax cuts

And when it rains the sky often turns dark. So dark skies cause rain? You’re completely tone deaf to my previous remarks regarding deficit spending and still don’t understand the difference between correlation and causation.

It’s ludicrous to suggest that the tax code has no effect on the habits of those it targets

If it’s so ludicrous then explain to us how higher taxes have stifled growth in Germany and countries in northern Europe.

bayam on May 30, 2012 at 4:15 PM

gwelf on May 30, 2012 at 2:46 PM

You don’t understand the concept of deficit-fuel spending and its short vs long-term implication for tax revenue. No one outside the US, and certainly our top competitors, does anything but laugh at the Laffer curve. I should know better- even discussing it with a true believer is a fool’s errand.

No one is denying that government spending, esp entitlements, is the main cause the nation’s fiscal pain. As to your point that it’s impossible to tax your way out of the problem, that’s actually untrue. The Germans and many other countries do just that, although it’s not a path I want to see the US follow. Some higher revenue is needed to solve the problem as every serious evaluation of the deficit has concluded.

bayam on May 30, 2012 at 3:26 PM

um.. no.

The proof of the Laffer Curve pudding

Written by Tim Worstall | Sunday 10 April 2011

There are still those who refuse to believe that the Laffer Curve can possibly exist: despite it being simply a mathematical identity, something that simply is true, by definition.

Leaving aside those ignorants, all of the interesting discussion comes in trying to determine what actually is the revenue maximising rate. We know some things with certainty: it’ll be different for different taxes, we know that the rate on womens’ incomes is lower than that on mens’, the long term rate is lower than the short term and so on. But Scott Sumner makes an interesting claim:

The Germans you cite did engage in tax cutting.. their own laffer curve and they are the only stable prosperous economy in Europe right now..

Strange.. you said nobody else tried it…

and the German left immidiately cried failure are you are.. yet.. the German economy is doing fine.. better check that causation and correlation thing again.

A die hard tax proponent will find any excuse to tax.. any number of ways.. and never repeal an old tax to institute a new one. How about we go to a straight up consumption tax.. junk the IRS and go to a national sales tax.. you don’t consume you don’t pay taxes.. you buy a yacht you do.. or a flat tax..

the problem is.. democrats never replace a tax.. they just layer on new ones which is why I spend six bucks for a pack of cigarettes and think of terrible things to do to democrats just for that reason.. gotta love the “progressive regressive” tax system on cigarettes.

But no.. the laffer curve does exist outside the US. The left just takes every chance to charge it doesn’t.

mark81150 on May 30, 2012 at 4:17 PM

If newspapers can run editorials and other opinion pieces, why can’t a cable network?

At least, unlike other television channels and unlike news stories in print, Fox labels its opinion piece as such.

bgoldman on May 30, 2012 at 4:17 PM

I don’t want to get into a tax debate.. it’s tiresome and time consuming. But a quick search turned up that Germany did sigifigant tax cuts in their 2000 tax reform.. and Europe has always had signifigantly lower growth than the US has. Yet even after tax reform and new taxes.. the German economy not only survived but never got into the trap the others have….

But taxes have always kept the cradle to grave Europeans to a less than 5% growth rate for decades.. when ours during boom times like… oh those infamous 80′s are much higher.

I’m at a loss as to why the only solution the democrats like is tax increases when the math shows from tax increases alon on the rich.. they just don’t get anywhere near the revenue needed. Cutting is a deal breaker for the.. reform.. also a deal breaker..

You can confiscate the entire wealth of every American over a million and it’d fund this government a couple of months..

So taxing the rich is doomed to fail…

Signifigant reforms.. real cuts and lowering capital gains might get us there.. but raising taxes just goads people into tax shelters and hiding their income.. and yes.. lots and lots of democrats fail to pony up their taxes..

mark81150 on May 30, 2012 at 4:29 PM

The video is still up, right on the front page of foxandfriends.com and in the videos section of foxnews.com.

Stu Gotts on May 30, 2012 at 4:31 PM

Should a news channel sit passively while one political party tried to openly destroy it? Survival and saving America for the folks who still desire freedom from intrusive government come first in my book. It is merely doing what the many Marxist media folks are doing -fighting to control truth -only they wish to preserve it, while the left sees it as just another weapon of deceit to manipulate.

News to the left and this administration is nothing but another foam pillar to manipulate the masses into eventual submission.

Don L on May 30, 2012 at 4:34 PM

And when it rains the sky often turns dark. So dark skies cause rain? You’re completely tone deaf to my previous remarks regarding deficit spending and still don’t understand the difference between correlation and causation.

If it’s so ludicrous then explain to us how higher taxes have stifled growth in Germany and countries in northern Europe.

bayam on May 30, 2012 at 4:15 PM

I did mention deficit spending – I said it was the primary issue. You still haven’t been able to refute the claim that tax cuts increased revenue. Spending went up under Reagan but revenue went through the roof after he cut taxes. If tax cuts had nothing to do with the large economic growth under Reagan and I’m confusing causation with correlation then why don’t you explain to me drove the tax revenue up?

gwelf on May 30, 2012 at 4:36 PM

But…but…that is from Faux Spews! I know better not to watch that bilge! — Citizen drone from Libtardia

Decoski on May 30, 2012 at 4:43 PM

Hmmmm,,,,looks like they are taking the bait.

flstc on May 30, 2012 at 2:45 PM

The fact that Fox News set up “bait” for the left affirms the substance of the criticism of this piece.

cjw79 on May 30, 2012 at 4:44 PM

If it’s so ludicrous then explain to us how higher taxes have stifled growth in Germany and countries in northern Europe.

bayam on May 30, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Actually, sport, Germany lowered taxes as they were suffering stagnation. 50% seems to be about the magic point on that Laffer Curve and many Euro nations lowered to or below that very mark. Thanks for playing.

Now back to your regularly scheduled bout of the vapors over Fox daring to show a video in which you aren’t capable of arguing a single point.

MNHawk on May 30, 2012 at 4:48 PM

Another thought; News organizations are not just in the business for information dissemination. They are corporations seeking profit to survive and continue their services. Obama and company have made it their business to scapegoat business, so fighting back for survival is justified.

I fully expect Chrissy Matthews to sputter, stutter and scowl tomorrow when he reads the hand delivered White House talking points.

Don L on May 30, 2012 at 4:53 PM

But does this make anyone uncomfortable at all in regard to its source?

Once upon a time (2008), I would agree. Today, however, this video is a Public Service Announcement about Public Enemy #1.

(Sorry. It’s just that I keep having this nightmare. Godzilla is destroying my country, and just in the nick of time, help arrives, but all they can do is argue about what size plastic darts to use.)

ziggyville on May 30, 2012 at 4:57 PM

My point is that this ad was produced by Fox News itself, and it’s clearly intended to campaign against Obama. That’s the problem with this video, and I think it was ill-advised by Fox to have produced and published it. If CBS News produced a four-minute video extolling all of Obama’s accomplishments, or a four-minute video with this dramatic music and animation ripping Romney for his years in Massachusetts and at Bain Capital, we’d be screaming our heads off, and rightly so.

The days of fighting fire with smoke are over if you want to prevail in politics, Mr. Morrissey.

All gloves apparently off. I, for one, am glad.

Scruw the madmen to obtain even a semblance of logic.

You certainly aren’t proposing a McCain-like campaign, are you?

jersey taxpayer on May 30, 2012 at 5:08 PM

You certainly aren’t proposing a McCain-like campaign, are you?

jersey taxpayer on May 30, 2012 at 5:08 PM

I’m proposing that news organizations shouldn’t be campaigning at all, at least if they want to be considered news organizations. Let Mitt Romney and the super-PACs campaign. That’s what they’re supposed to do.

Ed Morrissey on May 30, 2012 at 5:12 PM

All the hand-wringing over this, representative of many on our side, is why the left eats our lunch.

Sure, we’ll lose the country and freedom on earth, but hey, we played by the rules!

avgjo on May 30, 2012 at 5:15 PM

In the past, I may have agreed with the premise that it was wrong for a news network to produce something like this. But the problem is that the Left is 100% constantly attacking Republicans. The entirety of their airtime is an anti-Republican ad. So one ad by Fox News isn’t a big deal. There isn’t even a pretense of not being biased anymore by the MSM. So why should Fox not have opinion pieces?

MrX on May 30, 2012 at 5:17 PM

If CBS News produced a four-minute video extolling all of Obama’s accomplishments, or a four-minute video with this dramatic music and animation ripping Romney for his years in Massachusetts and at Bain Capital, we’d be screaming our heads off, and rightly so.

Ed, have you seen 60 minutes?
If you want to argue that news organizations should be unbiased in their reporting I’d claim that this is not possible and we shouldn’t condemn something that is – whether we like it or not – is common practice in the mainstream. Sure, they don’t go as over the top in the production but they still do this all of the time. It makes no sense for us to try to play the game by a different set of rules.

gwelf on May 30, 2012 at 5:23 PM

Actually, sport, Germany lowered taxes as they were suffering stagnation. 50% seems to be about the magic point on that Laffer Curve and many Euro nations lowered to or below that very mark.

You people are hilarious- no one in Germany was applying the Laffer Curve but following the well established prescription of tax cuts in response to a recession. No one questions that lower taxes stimulate a sluggish economy.
Where do you come away with these conclusions, Glenn Beck?

Germany’s taxes remain at about 40% of GDP, while in the US the figure is nearly half that amount. To see Germany as some model for right wing economics is absurd.

Spending went up under Reagan but revenue went through the roof after he cut taxes.

You continue to reinforce a basic failure to comprehend.
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/07/a-few-laughs-with-the-laffer-curve/

bayam on May 30, 2012 at 5:26 PM

All the hand-wringing over this, representative of many on our side, is why the left eats our lunch.
Sure, we’ll lose the country and freedom on earth, but hey, we played by the rules!
avgjo on May 30, 2012 at 5:15 PM

Well said. I’m not even sure what the high minded ideal is that’s being defended here. A world without media bias is a fantasy – never has existed and never will. The more we pretend otherwise the easier we make it for liberals in the media to pretend they are not liberals.

gwelf on May 30, 2012 at 5:29 PM

bayam on May 30, 2012 at 5:26 PM

So are saying tax cuts in a recession encourage growth but reduce revenue?

Again, forgetting and not mentioning the Laffer curve explain to me how Coolidge and Reagan both encouraged large economic growth, increased revenue and cut taxes?

gwelf on May 30, 2012 at 5:37 PM

But does this make anyone uncomfortable at all in regard to its source?

Nope. Not me. Fox and Freinds is a talk show that neither pretends to be a news show nor does it claim to be nuetral (although it may be the most nuetral talk show on television with most talk shows being way to the left). When I have watched the hosts have always proffered thier personal opinions on the stories. This was just the same although more entertaining. cbs, nbc, abc, cnn, etc. etc. will do numerous news stories today where they will pretend to be both objective and journalistic when in fact they are presenting leftist propaganda. So don’t get your panties all in a wad, ed.

peacenprosperity on May 30, 2012 at 5:37 PM

Again, forgetting and not mentioning the Laffer curve explain to me how Coolidge and Reagan both encouraged large economic growth, increased revenue and cut taxes?

And don’t forget to include John F. Kennedy also.

peacenprosperity on May 30, 2012 at 5:39 PM

Sorry, Ed is right. F&F may be right leaning but putting this up is like a campaign ad and a news org shouldn’t be doing that.

Actually, at the start of the video, I thought it was overblown – I figured it was a recap on what he campaigned on and F&F was going to discuss where we are now etc. But the graphics combined with the music that followed made it a total campaign ad.

I could see this on MSNBC but Fox should know better. I do hope they follow-up on the disciplinary action.

FWIW, the FoxNews live video is now also gone/unavailable (I assume Fox took it down).

batter on May 30, 2012 at 5:46 PM

Distraction #2,045
Who gives a damn? MSNBC’s entire news day is one long obama circle jerk.
Bring out the long knives. It’s time.

AllahsNippleHair on May 30, 2012 at 5:49 PM

Almost runs like a 20/20 piece with the dramatic music and all, and F&F is an entertainment show just like Good Morning America and the other leftwing propaganda on the MSM. F&F can have opinions if they want as well. The difference between this Fox presentation and the trash on the MSM is that the Fox presentation is all true.

woodNfish on May 30, 2012 at 5:53 PM

How long have you been a Fox News producer?
Stay proud! And not moral!

verbaluce on May 30, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Well okay then!

maables on May 30, 2012 at 5:54 PM

Why are we pretending that “news” programs and “journalists” represent some high-minded and noble profession. There are noble and professional journalists and news people but the industry as a whole is and has always been a tool of partisan politicking and other interest groups.

For some reason Americans – particularly from Cronkite forward – saw news programs as unbiased and an advocate for themselves against corruption in government and in the private sector. This was a lie and the liberals still use and abuse this myth to hide themselves and their actions. When 80-90% of supposed news rooms vote Democrat and donate Democrat you’re not going to have fairness and balance and pretending that this is somehow achievable lets those 80-90% pretend to adhere to this unachievable high-minded ideal – in other words while you strive to be fair and balanced they are striving to push their ideology.

gwelf on May 30, 2012 at 6:02 PM

How long have you been a Fox News producer?
Stay proud! And not moral!

verbaluce on May 30, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Thanks, Mr. Rather!

kingsjester on May 30, 2012 at 6:22 PM

You certainly aren’t proposing a McCain-like campaign, are you?

jersey taxpayer on May 30, 2012 at 5:08 PM

I’m proposing that news organizations shouldn’t be campaigning at all, at least if they want to be considered news organizations. Let Mitt Romney and the super-PACs campaign. That’s what they’re supposed to do.

Ed Morrissey on May 30, 2012 at 5:12 PM

Yeah, but then their ideas get shot down by Romney, like he’s got a mini Maverick perched on his shoulder.
Bring the pain, I say.

AllahsNippleHair on May 30, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Wonder what Fox News and News Corp will look like after Murdoch dies?

OmahaConservative on May 30, 2012 at 6:43 PM

Where do you come away with these conclusions, Glenn Beck?

bayam on May 30, 2012 at 5:26 PM

You’re tiresome and a dupe to boot. Sm.

CW on May 30, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Fox news
Fair and balanced
Umm….oops? I mean, they do employ 26 liberals and only one conservative, right?
I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning…er evening. I guess Rupert has been a little too busy watching his British empire implode to care? Look at the bright side, at least they haven’t been caught bribing people or hacking phones ( yet).

greataunty on May 30, 2012 at 7:14 PM

The update makes it official that Fox has no balls. How depressing.

DanaLynn on May 30, 2012 at 7:18 PM

Fox can have “balls” or journalistic standards.

Which would you prefer?

triple on May 30, 2012 at 7:30 PM

Why couldn’t they have just given the video to Hannity?
It was wrong for Fox and Friends to do that. Just flat-out wrong.
RavenRog on May 30, 2012 at 2:39 PM
It’s weak editorial control.
Fox and Friends is lightweight but it wasn’t like Hannity.
When you turn on Hannity you can rightly expect to see him performing fellatio on Palin or some other establishment GOP figure whilst spouting talking points he doesn’t even understand himself.
That’s never been the station’s entire MO.
CorporatePiggy on May 30, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Failed sex-ed, didn’t you..?

affenhauer on May 30, 2012 at 7:42 PM

Fox can have “balls” or journalistic standards.

Which would you prefer?

triple on May 30, 2012 at 7:30 PM

I’ll take both, as displayed here. And if I get a second wish, I’d love a beach house.

DanaLynn on May 30, 2012 at 7:51 PM

And this is shocking to people? Have you people ever watched Fox and Friends? Basically it’s just the three of them saying Obama sucks for three hours with some cooking recipes and dancing dogs mixed in.

SoulGlo on May 30, 2012 at 7:53 PM

And this is shocking to people? Have you people ever watched Fox and Friends? Basically it’s just the three of them saying Obama sucks for three hours with some cooking recipes and dancing dogs mixed in.

SoulGlo on May 30, 2012 at 7:53 PM

I didn’t know welfare recipients got up that early.

AllahsNippleHair on May 30, 2012 at 7:55 PM

It was an internet style video, so maybe not for a breakfast news program, but I was not sure there was anything factually wrong in this piece, someone else might show four years of change a different way, so maybe they should invite submissions now, and we can judge them for factual content. Can they have guests on that can verbally describe the same things? probably. I was making coffee this morning and it barely affected me. I was not offended.

Fleuries on May 30, 2012 at 7:58 PM

Disappointed that you use your influence to pushing the narrative that they shouldn’t have made and aired that factual video, Ed. Your influence and your voice matter, this was not helpful.

Minorcan Maven on May 30, 2012 at 8:04 PM

Video was nicely done. I can see the plausible wahmbulance because it’s a video. What’s the difference between ‘news’ persons speaking about those items, using the same figures, and the tape itself? Is it the music? Is it the juxtaposing animations with excerpts?

The purpose of it was a comparison of reality and words/actions; it succeeded. It put forward facts, which will be ignored. The video did not have scare quotes or affirmation of another candidate. Is it because the current President is a candidate for another term? Let me ask this…

If this video was done in his second term, would there still have been a problem with it?

John Kettlewell on May 30, 2012 at 8:10 PM

John Kettlewell on May 30, 2012 at 8:10 PM

^^ What John said to the nth Deg!

Minorcan Maven on May 30, 2012 at 8:17 PM

And this is shocking to people? Have you people ever watched Fox and Friends? Basically it’s just the three of them saying Obama sucks for three hours with some cooking recipes and dancing dogs mixed in.

SoulGlo on May 30, 2012 at 7:53 PM

Exactly, for most Americans this comes as anything but a shocker. Everyone, even conservatives, know that Fox News is a right wing propaganda machine. Only very, very, dim witted individuals think of it as an objective, agenda free news source.

libfreeordie on May 30, 2012 at 8:20 PM

Should a news organization produce and publish attack ads like this?

Um, yes.

Are we really asking this question in America of all placs?

Dante on May 30, 2012 at 8:29 PM

agenda free news source.

libfreeordie on May 30, 2012 at 8:20 PM

…name one you

very, very, dim witted individual

KOOLAID2 on May 30, 2012 at 8:39 PM

And this is shocking to people? Have you people ever watched Fox and Friends? Basically it’s just the three of them saying Obama sucks for three hours with some cooking recipes and dancing dogs mixed in.

SoulGlo on May 30, 2012 at 7:53 PM

Exactly, for most Americans this comes as anything but a shocker. Everyone, even conservatives, know that Fox News is a right wing propaganda machine. Only very, very, dim witted individuals think of it as an objective, agenda free news source.

libfreeordie on May 30, 2012 at 8:20 PM

Wait. You’re a dim witted individual and probably peed your pants when Olbermann got the boot. Where will you get your talking points now? But, being a resourceful dim witted individual, you found solace under Axelrod’s desk. Name an objective source of news in this country without an agenda, dim wit. Fox News has Alan Colmes and I know you have his poster above your bed along with Geraldo Rivera’s thong.

AllahsNippleHair on May 30, 2012 at 8:40 PM

agenda free news source.

libfreeordie on May 30, 2012 at 8:20 PM

…name one you
very, very, dim witted individual
KOOLAID2 on May 30, 2012 at 8:39 PM

Hey you, get out of my head. Oh yeah!!!!

AllahsNippleHair on May 30, 2012 at 8:41 PM

Everyone, even conservatives, know that Fox News is a right wing propaganda machine. Only very, very, dim witted individuals think of it as an objective, agenda free news source.

libfreeordie on May 30, 2012 at 8:20 PM

Right wing propaganda machine?

There isn’t a single thing right wing about Fox. Granted, their programming, talent, and content are pathetic, but they aren’t right wing. They are a populist, jingoistic network.

Dante on May 30, 2012 at 9:02 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3