Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism

The documentary, although flawed (which republican is going to actually view it with an open mind...?), has some major points and the annihilation of "journalism" as it is known elsewhere is made obviously.

What comes out as obvious is the fact that, as a person puts it, this form of control is even more vicious than authoritarian governments: leaving the people "free" of believing that they are indeed free and well informed is a machiavelic way of control. What is sad is that it works so well.

Watch it, just so as to make sure you never watch Fox (ever or ever again).

'Outfoxed', directed by Robert Greenwald is a documentary examining the institution known as the Fox News Channel, a cable news network that is as fierce in its conservative agenda as it is about denying said agenda. Greenwald dissects the channel and disproves their credo 'Fair and Balanced' with interviews by former Fox News employees, media watchdog groups, anonymous sources and plenty of Fox's own footage. Through these various sources, Greenwald aims to prove that the obvious conservative slant that poses as 'fair and balanced' is the king of the mountain on a dangerous slippery-slope.

In 'Outfoxed', Greenwald more than backs up his assertion, and is able to do it with an obviously low budget. (You have to love the Power Point-esque captions and scene breaks) But the most compelling aspects of the documentary are the interviews and footage itself. Because of the near-dictatorship status of its owner, Rupert Murdoch, there is an obvious sense of danger surrounding the former employees who appear on camera; because it is clear that their current jobs could be in danger just for speaking out about the proceedings at the channel. This fear is most exemplified by the three former employees who not only refuse to talk on camera, but won't talk unless their voices are obscured as well. Probably the best coup was getting veteran journalist Walter Conkrite to speak out on the subject, because even his brief time on the screen lends a definite air of respectability and trueness to the subject. Of course, the footage is amazing, particularly the pieces on Bill O'Reilly. Not having seen Fox News (I chose to ignore it in the past) I knew he was a blowhard by reputation only, but watching the way he treats his guests was enough to make my blood boil.

The film 'Outfoxed' was made with the help of various grass-roots organizations; one of them being MoveOn.org, and the last ten minutes of the film examines what the average outraged viewer can do to take action against this kind of dirty journalism. Without seeing the film, one could construe this as an unnecessary addition, or a 'bleeding heart liberal' moment, but once one looks at the ramifications of the actions of the network, particularly in this fairly precarious political climate we exist in today, I very firmly feel that the call to action was not only warranted but necessary. I watched the film twice in one afternoon because, after being completely outraged the first time, I had to take it and show it to my boyfriend a couple of hours later. While there were times I was so aghast at the lies and dirty journalism I laughed, the truth is that this subject is anything but funny, and 'Outfoxed' is a good, (and short) documentary that should be watched, particularly by Fox News Channel viewers. 7/10.

Shelly

I remember the first time I was confronted with Fox News, and their "news" content. At the time I was studying media in England and had read quite a bit about Rupert Murdoch's impact on global media, and how he was believed to have been boasting Thatcher and Thatcherism in the UK tabloid press when she was prime minister. As well as part of my studies we had been covering the subject of objectivity in news, and how this in actual fact is an impossibility considering that any process of selection will result in some degree of subjectivity. This does not necessarily mean the news journalists will be lying to promote their own opinions, but the process of selecting what to put emphasis on will easily result in supporting one ideology over another. As coming media journalists we were made aware of the subjectivity involved in everything down to the selection of which images to show and which not to when in the editing suites. Credible news journalists will necessarily have to be their own watchdogs, and be aware of his/her own perspective and thereby able to stop him/herself if portraying something inaccurately to boast the impact of the news story.

The first time I had a look at Fox News was soon after the 9/11 attacks. The terrible events of this day was very much featured in all the world media, and I was following the coverage from various media institutions studying the way they all approached the subject. It was very interesting to see how every channel reported the news in a slightly different way depending on the supposed ideology of the target audience. I even found variations according to time of day and day of the week. Naturally I was curious how the American media was covering this as well.

When confronted with Bill O'Reilly for the first time, I was simply wondering if this would be the last day of work for this guy, as he was throwing all of the responsibility one has as a news broadcaster out the window. Within only an hour of watching Fox News I had numerous notes on big "no no's" being performed right in front of me. If there was only one glitch, I would have been less shocked, being confident that the person responsible would be called into the producer's office for a serious talk. However, the charade just continued on and on, and I was shaking my head in despair wondering if ANYONE would actually take this as news. None on this network seemed to even attempt not to blurt out subjective comments, and covering all aspects of the conflicts seemed to be something none of these "journalists" was even considering.

Even though all news I had been following had variations, Fox News stood out as the absolute extreme by far. I guess most of Europe and especially those who have gone into the subject studying media, has known about this for quite some time already. Therefore I believe Outfoxed is a very important film for America, shedding light on some very questionable developments in the commercial media over there. This is a documentary, which means it's arguing a point opposed to what news media is supposed to do. It builds on facts that have been apparent for years, so the argument put forwards does have a strong root in reality, however harsh the critique might be perceived.

One does almost get a feeling this is too bad to be true when watching Outfoxed, but as any media knower will point out – American media and also Hollywood (producing films like Rambo) has for a long time been questioned in terms of attempting to lead their audience's opinion and obscure the perception of reality. I believe watching documentaries like Outfoxed results in big sighs of relief around the world, as it finally seems also America is realizing and focusing on these issues. Thumbs up to those who dared to make this documentary, and a pat on the back to those who has watched it and realizing the seriousness of the issues raised.

Well if you go on the vote history you can tell who is a Fox fan or not -- almost all votes are 10 or 1. My vote was 8 -- the only one. That's what this work deserves because although it is very good it has flaws.

One problem with this movie is that it is based on the ringing message (paraphrased): For democracy to work you have to have a media that does its job based on journalistic principles and ethics.

Thing is, fans of Fox News could not care less about any of that. They want "their side" to win win win and to them Fox News is the ONLY outlet that made it possible to hear the "truth" over the tyranny of the "liberal media." They also what professional-wrestling style drama where the bad guy (Kerry, Kennedy, Clinton etc) is built up into some sort of super-monster (that is also cowardly and cheats all the time) which makes the victory all that much more sweeter.

So Fox delivers. Outfoxed shows how it works -- but the story is just as much "what went RIGHT at Fox News" as opposed to "what went WRONG with TV journalism." It is very satisfying to see documented what many of us have already known -- how Republican/White House talking points become injected into the zeitgeist with almost no resistance. From Fox to CNN to MSNBC, then from there into talk radio and mainstream media. When you hear a keyword like "flip flopper" repeated by a dozen different anchors/pundits in 1-second shots strung together it is really impressive.

Outfoxed is part of the backlash to Fox News and right-wing dominance of media. It will be interesting to see how far right-wingers will go to "debunk" this "propaganda." In any case it should be required viewing for all media consumers and most particularly all journalism and political science students. We'd be better off for it.

This documentary confirmed my worst suspicions about Fox "News". As a European in the US I was shocked to watch biased, unresearched vitriol spew out of a channel which then sanctimoniously called itself a news channel. The documentary shows employee after employee confirm what most in the industry already know. Interference with news content, selection and misrepresentation of news content, presentation of opinion as news content. Murdoch makes Citizen Kane look like a saint. Unfortunately, this is not a movie, it is for real. It is not much of a democracy when one man (Rupert Murdoch) can decide the presidency of the United States. (And he not even a US native).