<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FAIR Blog &#187; Fox News</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fair.org/blog/tag/fox-news/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fair.org/blog</link>
	<description>The national media watch group</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 21:21:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Fox Reporters Worried About Their &#039;Credibility&#039;</title>
		<link>http://www.fair.org/blog/2010/03/15/fox-reporters-worried-about-their-credibility/</link>
		<comments>http://www.fair.org/blog/2010/03/15/fox-reporters-worried-about-their-credibility/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:08:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter Hart</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Glenn Beck]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Howard Kurtz]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=13906</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz turns in a profile of Glenn Beck today (3/15/10) that includes a few interesting anecdotes. He reports that "Fox staffers note that veteran producer Gresham Striegel left the network after clashing with Beck and say the host has surrounded himself with loyalists" from his own radio company, and that "a vice president [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <strong>Washington Post</strong>'s Howard Kurtz turns in a profile of Glenn Beck today (<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/14/AR2010031402312_pf.html">3/15/10</a>) that includes a few interesting anecdotes. He reports that "<strong>Fox</strong> staffers note that veteran producer Gresham Striegel left the network after clashing with Beck and say the host has surrounded himself with loyalists" from his own radio company, and that "a vice president was assigned 'to help keep an eye on that program' and review its content in advance--a full-time job."</p>
<p>Kurtz also notes that some <strong>Fox</strong> reporters aren't crazy about what his new fame is doing to them:</p>
<blockquote><p>Beck has become a constant topic of conversation among <strong>Fox</strong> journalists, some of whom say they believe he uses distorted or inflammatory rhetoric that undermines their credibility.</p></blockquote>
<p>Yes, Beck is somehow undermining <strong>Fox</strong>'s credibility in a way that that <a title="FAIR Archives: Bill O'Reilly" href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=19&amp;media_outlet_id=27" target="_self">Bill O'Reilly</a>, <a title="FAIR Archives: Sean Hannity" href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=19&amp;media_outlet_id=65" target="_self">Sean Hannity</a>, <a title="Extra!: Fox at the Front" href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1096" target="_self">Geraldo Rivera</a> and <a title="Extra!: Are 2,000 Deaths 'Negligible'?" href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3531" target="_self">Brit Hume</a> hadn't managed to do yet.<br />
<!--preview-break--><br />
<strong>Fox</strong> has always been conservative-- it was <a href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1067">founded on an explicitly political agenda</a>, after all--albeit one that <strong>Fox</strong> anchors and personalities would occasionally try to argue was merely a myth cooked up by the liberal media.</p>
<p>So what these <strong>Fox</strong> reporters are really saying is that Beck's presence on <strong>Fox</strong> makes it more difficult to fool people.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fair.org/blog/2010/03/15/fox-reporters-worried-about-their-credibility/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fortune Journalist--and Mitt Romney Adviser?</title>
		<link>http://www.fair.org/blog/2010/03/02/fortune-journalist-and-mitt-romney-adviser/</link>
		<comments>http://www.fair.org/blog/2010/03/02/fortune-journalist-and-mitt-romney-adviser/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 19:23:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter Hart</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fortune]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mitt Romney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nina Easton]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=13781</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sasha Issenberg reports in the Boston Globe (3/2/10) that Fortune magazine Washington bureau chief and Fox News pundit Nina Easton advised Republican Mitt Romney on his recent book No Apology. Easton told the Globe that she "offered some writer's advice on things like structure and how to better tease out themes in his writing."
This isn't the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sasha Issenberg reports in the <strong>Boston Globe</strong> (<a href="http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/03/02/dc_journalist_provided_writers_advice?mode=PF">3/2/10</a>) that <strong>Fortune</strong> magazine Washington bureau chief and <strong>Fox News</strong> pundit Nina Easton advised Republican Mitt Romney on his recent book <em>No Apology</em>. Easton told the <strong>Globe</strong> that she "offered some writer's advice on things like structure and how to better tease out themes in his writing."</p>
<p>This isn't the first time Easton has had conflict-of-interest issues; her husband was a media consultant to Romney's 2008 presidential campaign, and earlier worked for John McCain's bid, entanglements that Easton dealt with by avoiding writing about her spouse's boss (<strong>L.A. Times</strong>, <a title="LAT: News, Politics: An Uneasy Union" href="http://articles.latimes.com/2007/mar/19/nation/na-prezmedia19" target="_blank">3/19/07</a>). <!--preview-break--> As Issenberg notes:</p>
<blockquote><p>Many news organizations have policies explicitly forbidding reporters and editors from offering any support for political figures or their campaigns. A spokesman for <strong>Time Inc.</strong>, which owns <strong>Fortune</strong>, did not respond to a request for comment on Easton's role.</p></blockquote>
<p>Presumably <strong>Fox News Channel</strong> doesn't mind this sort of thing, but what's <strong>Time/Fortune</strong> going to do?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fair.org/blog/2010/03/02/fortune-journalist-and-mitt-romney-adviser/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sarah Palin in the No Spin Zone!</title>
		<link>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/11/20/sarah-palin-in-the-no-spin-zone/</link>
		<comments>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/11/20/sarah-palin-in-the-no-spin-zone/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:32:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter Hart</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill O'Reilly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sarah Palin]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=13341</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sarah Palin's highly anticipated visit to Fox News Channel's O'Reilly Factor saw the famously tough-as-nails host ask the tough questions of the right-wing leader:
O'REILLY: OK. The latest poll has you with a 23 percent favorable, 37 percent don't know. You do the math, OK. And you're up at 60 percent of people who could like [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sarah Palin's highly anticipated <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,575933,00.html">visit </a>to <strong>Fox News Channel</strong>'s <strong>O'Reilly Factor</strong> saw the famously tough-as-nails host ask the tough questions of the right-wing leader:</p>
<blockquote><p><strong>O'REILLY:</strong> OK. The latest poll has you with a 23 percent favorable, 37 percent don't know. You do the math, OK. And you're up at 60 percent of people who could like you. You are the biggest threat because you are a star, media star, whereas you're the only Republican. There aren't any other Republicans who are media stars but you. Now, that's why they're attacking you so vehemently. Do you know that?</p></blockquote>
<p>In other words, "You <em>could</em> be really popular some day, and don't know you know how that makes liberals crazy?"</p>
<p>Nothing but the tough questions from that guy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/11/20/sarah-palin-in-the-no-spin-zone/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bill O&#039;Reilly and Cuban-Style Tax Rates</title>
		<link>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/11/06/bill-oreilly-and-cuban-style-tax-rates/</link>
		<comments>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/11/06/bill-oreilly-and-cuban-style-tax-rates/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:42:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter Hart</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill O'Reilly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fidel Castro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nancy Pelosi]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=13282</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fox News host Bill O'Reilly, commenting on a tax increase in California:
That could happen on the federal level. Already Nancy Pelosi and her far-left crew want to raise the top federal tax rate to 45 percent. That's not capitalism. That's Fidel Castro stuff, confiscating wages that people honestly earn.
Setting aside the truth of the charge [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Fox News</strong> host Bill O'Reilly, <a href=" http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,572026,00.html">commenting</a> on a tax increase in California:</p>
<blockquote><p>That could happen on the federal level. Already Nancy Pelosi and her far-left crew want to raise the top federal tax rate to 45 percent. That's not capitalism. That's Fidel Castro stuff, confiscating wages that people honestly earn.</p></blockquote>
<p>Setting aside the truth of the charge against Pelosi, Fidel Castro <a href="http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=213">must have been</a> the president of the United States in 1982-86, when the top rate was 50 percent. Or maybe all of the 1970s, when it was 70 percent. Or from 1950-63, when it was 91 percent.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=213"></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/11/06/bill-oreilly-and-cuban-style-tax-rates/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
