Obama vs. Fox: The gloves are off
White House Communications Director Anita Dunn accused Rupert Murdoch’s right-leaning cable news network of peddling right-wing “opinion journalism masquerading as news.”
“The White House is now fighting a three-front war,” said Howard Kurtz in The Washington Post: “Iraq, Afghanistan, and Fox News.” This week, in what was clearly a calculated move, White House Communications Director Anita Dunn gave a string of interviews accusing Rupert Murdoch’s right-leaning cable news network of peddling right-wing “opinion journalism masquerading as news.” Obama will still do occasional interviews on the network, said Dunn, but as Fox is really “not a news network at this point,” but more “a wing of the Republican Party,” he will treat such encounters as debates “with ideological opponents.” Obama, of course, is not the first president to feel that the media is out to get him. But given the risk of seeming petty, and of boosting Fox’s ratings, does Obama’s attack on Fox “make political sense?”
What attack? said Steve Benen in WashingtonMonthly.com. Aside from its tongue-in-cheek “Fair and Balanced” slogan, Fox News is pretty upfront about being “an appendage of the Republican Party,” and the White House was just stating what everyone already knows. Earlier this year, a senior VP went so far as to declare Fox “the voice of the opposition” to Obama, and the network has since delivered on that promise, witha steady stream of hyped “scandals,” cheerleading coverage of “Tea Party” protests, and hysterical hyperbole about Obama’s “tyrannical” reign. The final straw, said Jay Bookman in the website of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, may have been Fox’s insistence that Obama’s pep talk to schoolchildren in September was an exercise in Maoist mind control. Why shouldn’t the White House push back against such blatant propaganda?
Because it makes Obama look whiny and weak, said John Nichols in TheNation.com. Rather than attacking Fox News, Obama should be taking every opportunity to appear on the network. “If the Fox interviewers are absurdly unfair,” it is they who will look bad, while the president would look heroic for walking into the lion’s den. I’ll tell you who really looks weak, said Jim Geraghty in National Review Online, and that’s the rest of the media. In a fully functioning democracy, it is the “duty of journalists” to make elected officials uncomfortable. Why was it that only Fox covered the ACORN scandal, or White House aide Van Jones’ long history of radical rhetoric? What does it say about the state of the press in this country that there is only one news organization the president considers hostile?
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
-
What should you be stockpiling for 'World War Three'?
In the Spotlight Britons advised to prepare after the EU tells its citizens to have an emergency kit just in case
By Elizabeth Carr-Ellis, The Week UK Published
-
Carnivore diet: why people are eating only meat
The Explainer 'Meatfluencers' are taking social media by storm but experts warn meat-only diets have health consequences
By Elizabeth Carr-Ellis, The Week UK Published
-
Scientists want to fight malaria by poisoning mosquitoes with human blood
Under the radar Drugging the bugs
By Devika Rao, The Week US Published
-
The JFK files: the truth at last?
In The Spotlight More than 64,000 previously classified documents relating the 1963 assassination of John F. Kennedy have been released by the Trump administration
By The Week Staff Published
-
'Seriously, not literally': how should the world take Donald Trump?
Today's big question White House rhetoric and reality look likely to become increasingly blurred
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published
-
Will Trump's 'madman' strategy pay off?
Today's Big Question Incoming US president likes to seem unpredictable but, this time round, world leaders could be wise to his playbook
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published
-
Democrats vs. Republicans: who are the billionaires backing?
The Explainer Younger tech titans join 'boys' club throwing money and support' behind President Trump, while older plutocrats quietly rebuke new administration
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
US election: where things stand with one week to go
The Explainer Harris' lead in the polls has been narrowing in Trump's favour, but her campaign remains 'cautiously optimistic'
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Is Trump okay?
Today's Big Question Former president's mental fitness and alleged cognitive decline firmly back in the spotlight after 'bizarre' town hall event
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
The life and times of Kamala Harris
The Explainer The vice-president is narrowly leading the race to become the next US president. How did she get to where she is now?
By The Week UK Published
-
Will 'weirdly civil' VP debate move dial in US election?
Today's Big Question 'Diametrically opposed' candidates showed 'a lot of commonality' on some issues, but offered competing visions for America's future and democracy
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published