advertisement

SSN on Facebook SSN on Twitter SSN on YouTube RSS Feed

16 Comments
Columns

Media Silent on Congressional Attack on FOX News

April 9, 2019 - 7:00am
Elijah Cummings
Elijah Cummings

The U.S. House Oversight Committee (HOC), led by Rep. Elijah Cummings, has been moving in overdrive since the Democrats rose to power. They have already called President Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen in to testify in a bid to find more charges to level at the White house; they are fighting against a perjury inquiry against Cohen so he can hang around until they need him again for another fishing expedition; and there's been a grandstanding subpoena for someone who already agreed to show for a hearing.

But, wait. There's a NEXT brash move:

Cummings, D-Md., is apparently launching an investigation into the editorial practices of FOX News. He's sent a letter to a former FOX reporter, requesting documents pertaining to a civil lawsuit she brought against her former employer. What's possibly more alarming, however, is that the usual suspects who provide the dire dramatics attached to such moves -- the mouthpieces from national news networks -- have been mostly silent about the overreach.

The HOC's move represents the very thing that many in the press have been caterwauling about with President Trump, and that's a governmental threat to their industry. It's a stark non-reaction on the former FOXer, however, even though they claim Trump is attacking them and their freedom to perform their duties. Apparently when it's Democratic House members doing the attacking, that's different. Possibly because it is the reviled FOX News on the receiving end, with Donald Trump ultimately in the crosshairs.

The nation’s media have taken a PR drubbing over recent years, and that was before the revelation of a 22-month Robert Mueller investigation managed to find no collusion of any kind. A story the press had trumpeted for years, and routinely got wrong. It's created a crisis within newsrooms as they have been exposed as pushing a narrative rather than exploring the facts behind the investigation.

What has led the news outlets to this sector of the wilderness is a belief that they, as the nation’s fact-checkers, are somehow above being fact-checked themselves. They have long believed they are the lone arbiters of what qualifies as news, so they have turned a deaf ear towards other voices countering their crafted storylines. They have resented being exposed, and seem unaware how to react, once caught. Now another example of the press operating with bifurcated standards has been revealed.

The reason the HOC is even entertaining this query stems from the announced decision last month that the Democratic Party was denying FOX News' requests to host any of its presidential debates. To justify the decision, the DNC leadership cited a news item that claimed FOX had buried a story about the Stormy Daniels affair with President Trump before the 2016 election. This claim arrived from a highly questionable source, an article in The New Yorker by Jane Mayer. Mayer is an unveiled liberal partisan who recently defended her work as, “It’s not resistance, it’s reporting”. Citing Mayer as a source should have had anyone putting the brakes on accusations.

Mayer’s recent dubious achievement was in attempting to derail the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation by coming up with 11th hour “witnesses” and alleged proof the FBI was ignoring other testimonies. That her report, made with Ronan Farrow, was littered with unverifiable claims and testimonials that had zero to do with Kavanaugh, was so poorly supplied that in any other industry she would have been sent packing. But in contemporary liberal-journalist circles, she was praised.

Immediately after Mayer’s FOX News piece hit the primary figure in her article, former FOX News head editor Ken Lacorte came forward not only to defy her report, he exposed her methods. Lacorte detailed what was behind the decision on the Daniels feature in a piece at Mediaite. He laid out the reasons why the story failed to live up to proper reporting standards, and how numerous other outlets had been brought the same story, only to elect not to run their pieces. 

This explanation did not deter the HOC -- Elijah Cummings in particular. Seeing the party leadership make the move against FOX, and reference the Stormy Daniels story, he (to use a common phrase in the press) pounced. Cummings is acting with a supposed eye towards looking at some form of election subterfuge. That this is not rooted in a particular investigation has no impact on him. He hopes to find something out either to look into regulating FOX, or to ferret out some detail to justify further investigations into the president. In other words, a fishing expedition.

Despite this detailed explanation from Lacorte, many in the press supported the DNC decision. Brian Stelter -- the supposed arbiter of journalistic standards at CNN -- declared that FOX News actually brought on the decision, based on its journalistic errors as he saw them. That CNN had numerous examples of its own integrity lapses was not an issue, apparently. This is where Stelter, and his press brethren, expose their biases.

For years now he and many others at CNN, as well as players at multiple other outlets, have been loudly decrying President Trump, stating FOX is a purveyor of “fake news,” and other aggressive stances. There has been no shortage of dramatics, stating reporters are either physically endangered, or at the least that journalistic integrity is possibly stifled and the very notion that the First Amendment is being threatened. 

It is all gripping and dramatic, except at no point has the administration shut down any news outlet, to say nothing of threats of arrest. Now, however, when we see that another branch of the government is targeting a news outlet, there is a distinct lack of outcry. Brian Stelter is not standing on his chair on Reliable Sources, railing against the government overstepping its boundary. He is certainly not crying out about the infringement on press freedom. There is no noble speeches about the press needing to be unhindered in keeping the government in check.

No parity whatsoever.

No, Stelter and the other muted journalists see the legal persecution of a FOX News journalist -- even a former one -- as an acceptable reaction against a competing news outlet it resents, possibly leading to an investigation into a president they despise. It is all justifiable and acceptable. That they see no future risk to their perch by remaining silent on the matter of a government entity exacting pressure on a news source shows just how shortsighted they have been in their blind opposition to this administration.

Brad Slager, a Fort Lauderdale freelance writer, wrote this story exclusively for Sunshine State News. He writes on politics and the entertainment industry and his stories appear in such publications as Red State and The Federalist. 

Comments

Fox News is pure rightwing propaganda ... and that's exactly what Roger Ailes intended it to be. The voice of so-called 'Republicanism' and so-called 'Conservatism' ... neither of which represents the political preferences of the majority of Americans. So, who really cares if non-Republicans and non-Conservatives in Congress "attack Fox News"? Only the so-called Republicans and Conservatives. (They more than make up for attacks on Fox News with their attacks on CNN, MSNBC, "fake news" and "the press is the enemy of the people".) This article is nothing more than partisan whining.

While I am a Republican and a conservative, I agree with your comment.

It is still the government targeting a news outlet. Just because you may disagree with the source it is still a threat on the press. To say it is wrong for Trump to do it but allow the liberal Congress to do so is rampant hypocrisy.

Sorry, Brad. Fox deserves it's just rewards. It has been a propaganda tool of the GOP Tea Party and a Trump apologist for too long. Sad you don't appreciate an actual bona fide Congressional majority that does it's Constitutional job.

Rep. Cummings (D) and his fellow members of the Racist Congressional Black Caucus are no different in "mindset" than the Racist KKK was during Re-construction and Jim Crow periods. Frankly, both the CBC and KKK should implode ASAP allowing us to hopefully begin to listen to both sides through rational discussion followed by a quick compromise to solve the issue then moving onto the next.

Fortunately, the fastest growing party in this country is Independent...

Accountability is a beautiful thing. Your fake talking points about total exoneration for Trump are exactly that. As soon as we see the full Mueller report, then a determination can be made on culpability. If 45 is cleared then, then so be it, but based on the tiny snippet that Barr did provide from the report, it is clear he is not. Funny how the full Starr report was made public, but now in the interest of Nat'l Security, the Mueller report needs to be redacted...call B.S. for exactly what it is... Fortunately the public has caught on too...

@Just The Facts: I fully support your right to cling to your dreams. Keep chugging your liberal KoolAid. It must be a bummer for you and Elijah to be missing Barak's pants crease. Go to you tube and play some of Barak's old speeches with that Godly re-verb that made your and Elijas hearts swoon and flutter back in the day. That should make you mental midgets feel better until The Donald's next great success throws you babies back into depression again and again and again. # walkaway

Fortunately, I am Independent and don't drink either side's Kool Aid. If there is not a better candidate to choose from and Trump is reelected, so be it. I'd hope there would be a number of better candidates than him, but you never know with the Dems. Jobs are great, 22 Trillion deficit, 800 billion last year, record 1.2 trillion this year is not cool, and I still have to write a fat tax check back to the IRS. Speaking of mental midgets, perhaps you never paid attention in 2nd grade spelling class, or maybe that whole 95% uneducated white male thing for Trump is accurate, probably both...

The redactions in the Mueller report are required by law, to shield classified information and protect witness identities, not to hide details. The proof is that Mueller is working on those very redactions. The majority of the report is already public knowledge, and there has been zero proof of collusion at any stage.

Brad. Robert Mueller's team wrote summaries expressly redacted and prepared for public disclosure. None are being used.

That's BS Bobby W.

The fact is ... with "redactions" ... NOBODY KNOWS what was redacted except the party or parties doing the redactions. ANYTHING could be removed and, consequently, covered up! Your comment ... "The majority of the report is already public knowledge" ... is pure fantasy.

Do you not see the contradiction of those demanding we see all of Mueller's findings, but then getting upset with Mueller doing the redactions? He IS the party doing it. And yes, most of the report is public. How else do we know about the indictments, the convictions, and the guilty pleas?

Elijah is a determined obstructionist to America's wellbeing; and the Democrat Political Party is doomed in this country,... "by their own hand"!

The 'Breeze' has apparently picked up! Now, it's definitely a hot wind!

Add new comment

columns
advertisement
advertisement

Opinion Poll

Should the Florida Legislature vote to ban 'sanctuary cities'?
Older pollsResults

Chatterbox

advertisement
Live streaming of WBOB Talk Radio, a Sunshine State News Radio Partner.

advertisement
advertisement