I think all media outlets all have an agenda, but in my own experience, Fox does less of the "gatekeeping" than the other major news outlets.
With that said, one of the worst things I believe any news outlet can have is a political agenda. I am against any enterprise which holds the public trust - particularly those involved in dissemination of information - in taking any position. It leads to people developing a skewed perception and therefore inaccurate way of thinking about the world. Some call this "wrong-headed."
We saw it happen with the 2008 election: if one relied solely on the major broadcast news sources, he'd come away with the sense that Obama offered the greatest hope for the future, and would change everything for the good.
One year after he was elected, Obama has demonstrated nothing of the sort. He is really just another politician looking to control things the way he wants to. His actions have alienated young voters. Youthful political particpants are vulnerable to this sort of thing because they have virtually no experience with the workings of the world, and therefore haven't learned what liars and ideologs polticians can be. In Obama and the Democrats, they learned.
Had these voters watched Fox (rather than derided them as harshly as they did), they would have had a different perspective: one that was not entirely negative, but raised serous questions into Obama's readiness and comport for the office. Wisdom is the key.
The point is, when a news outlet doesn't ask hard questions and take an oppositional stance - whether they support a candidate or not - they will never learn the truth about anything. Intellectuals like to talk about the postmodern idea of deconstruction, in which oppositional stances are taken particularly for the sake of critical analysis, but in Obama, they didn't do this. I guess they were too busy enjoying that shiver up their leg.
Public Policy Polling: Fox leads for trust
No comments:
Post a Comment