by Mark Silva
FOX News had to go to China to get President Barack Obama.
When the traveling president sits for a round robin of television news interviews in Beijing, FOX's Major Garrett says he'll be in the loop of five that get 10 minutes apiece with the president.
Garrett "tweeted'' this from China: "I will interview POTUS on camera Wed am here in Beijing. 4 other networks will too. 10 mins per. Many had asked. Can say now.''
CNN senior White House correspondent Ed Henry also gets an interview with the president, which will start airing at 6 am EST Wednesday on CNN's American Morning.
Henry promises the president will address "important issues facing him back home such as health care and whether to send more troops to Afghanistan.''
When the president sat for a round of Sunday morning news shows not long ago to press his health-care agenda, FOX was cut out of a loop that included the major broadcast networks, CNN and Spanish-language Univision.
The White House has asserted that FOX is not really a news network in the traditional sense of a news network - the outgoing communications director at the White House has called FOX "an arm of the Republican Party.''
So perhaps the inclusion of Garrett in the Beijing talks with the president represents a new phase in U.S. relations with FOX News Channel, the media equivalent of détente.
Don't look for Obama to bow, however.
Comments
"the outgoing communications director at the White House has called FOX "an arm of the Republican Party.''"
So says The Swamp, which has been called by many observers "an arm of the Democratic Party."
Posted by: Bruce | November 17, 2009 12:14 PM
A new study shows the Fox is in fact the MOST BALANCED of the major news organizations. Per S. Robert Lichter in Forbes magazine:
"The CMPA study compares ABC, CBS ( CBS - news - people ) and NBC evening news shows and the first half hour of Fox News Channel's Special Report, which most closely resembles its broadcast news counterparts. (CNN and MSNBC have no comparable flagship evening news show; more on Fox's polarizing talk shows momentarily.)
So how could Fox have both the most balanced and the most anti-Obama coverage? Simple. It's because the other networks were all so pro-Obama. CMPA analyzed every soundbite by reporters and nonpartisan sources (excluding representative of the political parties) that evaluated the candidates and their policies. On the three broadcast networks combined, evaluations of Obama were 68% positive and 32% negative, compared to the only 36% positive and 64% negative evaluations of his GOP opponent John McCain.
In fact, Obama received the most favorable coverage CMPA has ever recorded for any presidential candidate since we began tracking election news coverage in 1988. The totals were very similar--within a few percentage points--at all three networks. (These figures exclude comments on the candidates' prospects in the campaign horse race, which obviously favored Obama.)
Meanwhile, Fox's Special Report was dramatically tougher on Obama, with only 36% favorable vs. 64% unfavorable evaluations during the same time period. But McCain didn't fare much better, garnering only 40% favorable comments vs. 60% negative ones. So the broadcast networks gave good marks to one candidate and bad marks to another, while Fox was tough on both--and most balanced overall."
Read more at www.forbes.com
Posted by: Bruce | November 17, 2009 12:49 PM
Drudge reported last week that Garrett was getting the interview in china and the White House flat out denied it.
This administration does nothing but lie!
http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/1109/Report_Fox_getting_Obama_sitdown.html#
Posted by: Dave | November 17, 2009 2:19 PM
Bruce,
The CMPA's president is a paid Fox News Analyst. Formerly he headed the American Enterprise Institute.
Another frequent Fox contibutor, Malcom "Steve" Forbes. Forbes Magazine Steve Forbes!!!!
Most balanced my Aunt Fannie!
Are you high or just stupid?
Posted by: kg123 | November 17, 2009 4:30 PM
Hey Bruce - can you tell us why Sarah Palin censored the CBS network and refused to talk with its correspondents? That's just as bad as President Obama not calling on a Fox News reporter during a press conference, right???
Posted by: BC | November 17, 2009 5:15 PM
"A new study shows the Fox is in fact the MOST BALANCED of the major news organizations. Per S. Robert Lichter in Forbes magazine:"
Actually he said that when comparing the three nightly nationals shows and ONE 30 minute segment of a show on fox, that fox was more balanced. That hardly translates to the whole organization.
Then again, what can we expect from Bruce. Someone who equates CNN employees donating on an entire $45000 over 9 years as being proof of bias. Anything to try and spin things to meet his views.
Posted by: martin | November 17, 2009 6:19 PM