I agree with the President. Fox is not a news organization. News deals with fact, not fiction. Real news reporters report the news, they don't distort the news. A true news channel wouldn't create promotional ads designed to undermine the federal government.
Yet, the White House press corps balked at the Administration's refusal to grant interviews to Fox News. Why? Because of money. Fox contributes to the costs of the press pool. Money should not be the determiner of who gets to cover issues.
Last night Rachel Maddow also debated whether Fox News is a legitimate news channel. While we both agree that it is not, I disagree with her argument is that the sole reason that makes Fox News not real news is their promotional work to rally anti-government support. While this is a glaring example of one of its problems, I feel it's the real problem is reporting fiction and opinion disguised as fact that makes Fox a station that's truly askew.
While it is true news and opinion often co-exist, it is not true that they are interchangeable. Walter Cronkite didn't routinely offer commentary on current affairs. In fact the clip Maddow played of Cronkite's classic condemnation of the Vietnam War was phenomenal in that it was one of the few times he took his prided newsmans hat off and offered commentary. For me the blurring of the news versus commentary lines is a dangerous trend.
Why Fox News isn't news
Oct. 23: Rachel Re: Rachel Maddow points out what has been largely overlooked in the discussion of the White House feud with Fox News, that explains why Fox is not news.