When Howard Kurtz announced that he was leaving CNN to become a media analyst at Fox News, he said that…
“Fox wouldn’t have hired me if it wasn’t interested in my independent brand of media criticism. So, I’m very comfortable that I’ll have the freedom to criticize anyone I need to in my new role.”
First of all, Fox never hires anyone for their independence or accuracy. In fact, the further you stray from reality, the better your employment opportunities at Fox.
Secondly, Kurtz has not been as comfortable, or as independent, as his statement suggests. Media Matters has published a study that shows that Kurtz has rarely criticized Fox when there were obvious opportunities to do so. For instance, he said nothing about the controversial firing of Fox’s head of communications, Brian Lewis. He said nothing about the much-ridiculed interview of author Reza Aslan by Christian reporter Lauren Green. These were two of the biggest media stories in the two months since Kurtz moved to Fox, but not one word was said or written about them.
Today Kurtz posted the latest issue of his Media Buzz column on Fox News. In it he purports to cover the publication of a study (pdf) from Harvard University’s Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy. It’s a pretty mealy review of the study’s fascinating insights with regard to the impact of social media on modern political campaigns.
Somehow Kurtz managed to leave out entirely a portion of the study that directly referred to Fox News. The study’s author, Peter Hamby, spoke to Mitt Romney’s senior adviser Eric Fehrnstrom (of Etch-a-Sketch fame), about how the campaign took advantage of the friendly environment provided by Fox:
Fehrnstrom: We’d much rather go on a Fox program where we know the question is going to come up and Mitt can give his answer and it’s not going to a frenzy of questioning. He will be able to give his response. There may be a follow up or two, and then that’s it. The frenzy is not something that you would willingly do if you had other options. It’s like here you can either do this frenzied news conference, or we can do a more sedate studio appearance with Sean Hannity. I’d take the sedate over the frenzy any day.
It’s funny how that remarkably candid admission escaped Kurtz’s notice. If you are reviewing an academic study that specifically cites the organization for whom you work, it would be appropriate to make some mention of it. But since this casts a negative (or accurate) light on Fox, Kurtz elected to ignore it. That’s not exactly a fulfillment of his promise to be independent or to criticize anyone. In fact, Kurtz is behaving more like Fox’s PR agent, promoting his client’s interests and suppressing bad publicity. For someone who identifies himself as a media analyst, it is the death knell of credibility.
By the way, here is what Kurtz’s new colleagues at Fox had to say about him prior to his joining the team:
Be Sure To “LIKE” News Corpse On Facebook
He sounds like what Roland Hedley has become on Doonesbury…
Having anyone at Fox criticize Fox for anything would be akin to a Catholic Cardinal criticizing the Pope. It ain’t gonna happen, no matter what bullshit story Kurtz threw at us shortly after his new Fox gig. I do hope we hear some truth from Roger Ailes’ former right-hand man, on what goes on around there. A lot of stuff other than journalism or should I say, everything but journalism. There certainly is no evidence of any journalism being practiced at Fox.
Media Matters is full of crap. Howard Kurtz will be a welcome addition to FNC. As for that “controversial firing” – just because left-wing jackals say it was controversial doesn’t make it so.
Media Matters didn’t say he’d be an “unwelcome” addition. In fact, they said he’d be a “welcome addition.” Then they showed why Kurtz’s coverage is “welcome” at Fox News. Calling someone “full of crap” does not actually refute their argument. And any major network firing their head of communications with no warning and having security escort them out of the building is controversial, whether it’s Fox News or MSNBC, especially so when that person has been with the network since it started. “Just because left-wing jackals say the sky is blue doesn’t make it so.”
When he does get “tough” on FNC it will be to criticize Kirsten Powers, Bob Beckel, or some Democrat who doesn’t tow the Fox/teapublican line. Then all the FoxNews shows will point to his “independence” for criticizing a Fox pundit.
Laughable
Wrong. He has doled out criticsm to Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, etc. Expect that to continue the next time incidents come up.
I say b.s. On the link to the firing of Brian Lewis the guy that runs this site was trying to say Fox News went on a smear campaign against him, but I watch sometimes every day, other times at least once a week. And I never heard them talking about this at all – what smear campaign? Someone on the comments there made a good point too ‘Now why isn’t Fox News wag(ing) “all out war” on you for your fun little anti-fox blog being that you question their “omnipotence” all the time?’ I love how much these sad liberals hate Fox News, it’s almost as if they’re obsessed with them. I love your link to the amazon page for that absurd book, one of the comments to it supported its contents and quoted an example of how Elizabeth Warren compared China’s 10% spending on infrastructure to 2.5% here, and Fox News talking about her talking about that in an article gave it a headline she praises communism – and that’s a falsehood? No, it’s true, China is communist, and if she is comparing China’s infrastructure spending to the US’ and saying we should be more like them, than yeah, she’s saying we should be more like them – more like communist China, how is that a lie? She aspires America to be more like China, why didn’t she compare America to a normal, non-communist country? Liberals have serious mental disorders.