Information War on Fox: No Upside for Obama Administration

Last week, one of my former students wrote me about the Whitehouse/Fox News Channel hullabaloo.  

Jennie was enrolled in the first class I ever taught at the Annenberg School of Communication, University of Southern California.  The class was “War, Media and Propaganda,” and I taught it in spring 2002.  I was writing a book then called Information War: American Propaganda, Free Speech & Opinion Control Since 9/11.  

Information War was a direct response to the Bush-Cheney administration and government propaganda efforts to silence dissent in the media and among citizens.  

In 2002 it was like shooting fish in a barrel to find examples of the last administration’s opinion control efforts.  Bush and company certainly benefited from a close ideological tie to the Fox News Channel programming as well as most talk radio.   

But it’s not just ideology alone that directs people to certain favored media.  It’s a perceived tone.  It’s shared values.

Fox News Channel has a programming style that comes across as less media elite than MSNBC or CNN.  I’ve had many a conversation with my FNC-viewing friends who say that they feel an affinity with the network for not making fun of or dismissing their more conservative social and economic values.   

So my student Jennie wondered what I thought about certain members of the Obama administration telling other news networks not to treat Fox like a real news organization.   

My response was this:

It’s utterly ridiculous for the Obama administration to call out Fox News Channel. They don't know what they are up against; it's not just a cable news network.

Many FNC viewers consider themselves part of a social movement. Whether or not one agrees with everything discussed on FNC isn't the point.

It's very dangerous territory to tread for the Obama administration elite troika of Rahm Emanuel, Anita Dunn and David Axelrod.  Anita Dunn started the finger pointing with her appearance on Howard Kurtz’s Reliable Sources. She said, "Fox News often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party."  David Axelrod followed with his revelation that Fox News “is not really news.”  “It’s pushing a point of view.”  Rahm Emanuel told CNN that President Obama considers Fox News “not a news organization so much as it has a perspective.”  And so what?

Is this really what we’re paying these government officials to do for the American people?

I’m sure these comments earns brownie points with those who loathe Fox News Channel and its “Foxification” influence on other cable news networks.  These same comments strengthen the core beliefs of conservatives but also marginalize independents who want a government in Washington that transcends petty partisan diversions.    

This is an administration put in office on a campaign pledge of practicality over ideology.  In the Fox case, it is treading on ideological terrain.  I don’t think it is the job of Obama’s top staff to use government time to go after Fox.  

Obama got it right earlier this week when he was asked about the information war between the White House and his administration. He said, "It's not something I'm losing a lot of sleep over.”  To further emphasize his point, he said, “I think the American people are a lot more interested in what we're doing to create jobs or how we're handling the situation in Afghanistan.”

You are right, Mr. President.  Jobs at home and global interventions seem a bit more important these days, especially on the eve of your first year anniversary in the White House. 

Dr. Nancy Snow is associate professor of public diplomacy at Syracuse University where she teaches in the Newhouse and Maxwell Schools.  Her most recent book is Persuader-in-Chief: Global Opinion and Public Diplomacy in the Age of Obama. 

 

Follow Nancy Snow on Twitter: www.twitter.com/drpersuasion

Comments

[gretchenart]

Not actively going after Fox at all. Just defending themselves against an obviously hostile organization whose stated goal is to be the opposition to Obama and who actively supports drumming up that opposition through its "news" programs. That makes them fair game for criticism and the President is right in simply stating the obvious equivalent of the "Emperor has no clothes" in this case the Fox has no news, only opinions.

[AnnfromCA]

This is a very polite way of saying, Obama's priorities are messed up. I agree.

[atretrioeciii]

And a very clever way of not reporting both sides of the issue. Everyone knows the administration doesn't consider foxnews are "news network". She should at least be telling us WHY the administration has taken that stance.

Organizing a political protest like the "9/12 March" is not something a "news network" should be doing. That is a job for a political organization. Too bad she couldn't have written something about that.

[miksmaster]

You don't think it's the job of Obama's top staff to use government time to go after Fox.
I disagree. The rest of the media is like sheep. Jake Tapper of ABC came out in support of Fox. George Will made some pro-Fox statements. No one gets it. The spotlight needs to be turned on Fox so casual watchers will understand what they are substituting for news. I really don’t care who does it as long as somebody calls Fox out and brings their lies to light.
You said “In 2002 it was like shooting fish in a barrel to find examples of the last administration’s opinion control efforts.”
Fox was a very, very big part of the Bush Administration’s “opinion control efforts”. People need to know that. Maybe they don’t know what they’re up against, but I give them credit for taking them on. If they don’t, they may end up like John Kerry did in 2004. Smeared out of the presidential race.
If Obama’s top staff does not go after Fox, who will?

[Rollingballafire]

I'm with you...if not the WH then who??? They've been so wicked, I'm behind his decision all the way.
Fanned

[baba2nde]

I am afraid you are not in the ballpark at all. The White House is calling out fox for actively organizing protests against the government, not for distorting, contorting or spinning the news beyond recognition, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#33456104

And, Dr Persuation, I am not persuaded that there is anything resembling war here.

[miksmaster]

I agree. Great comment.

[Balzac]

The way Fox News is going to be humbled is by lack of access. They have a siege mentality against the White House as if they're entitled to access. Well, they're entitled to what the public is entitled to - no privileged access and no interviews at all.

Fox News is not entitled to one single interview from any member of the administration. That's not "going after Fox News". That call not feeding the snout that keeps biting your hand. Fox News doesn't have a strong reputation, so this policy of starving the beast is going to pay off for the White House.

All the White House has to do is stop taking the bait. Stop giving them interviews, and stop taking the bait when Fox News carries on with their "angstivist" propaganda siege. No responses to the foot-soldiers. Direct criticisms and fines toward the corporate executives. Let them personally be held accountable, not their mangy dogs.

[gretchenart]

Exactly! Fox News often is the only network not carrying Obama's addresses to the nation, etc. They cannot take their own medicine!

[Balzac]

Good point. Fox News ignores him as they choose. He's also free to ignore them.

[Rollingballafire]

Years ago, I don't think anyone minded when the administration put out a warning about listening to Tokyo Rose, what's the difference with sending out a warning about Fox?

[atretrioeciii]

Ahh.. a historical reference! Fanned!!

[Rollingballafire]

back at ya eciii

[bronceye]

Dan Rather and Helen Thomas get a respite. Fox should be defined.

[kevwells]

Dr Snow, I think perhaps you are missing some of the finer points being made in the conversation, so to speak, the WH is having with the American people about Fox. You are absolutely correct when you talk about Fox being part of a social movement of sorts---that is precisely why Fox needs to publicly called to account. Fox is about ratings, which equal revenues. Fox is not "Fair and Balanced"--unless it thought that actually being "Fair and Balanced" would result in higher revenue. It is perfectly legitimate for the Obama administration officials to say so. The public deserves to hear the other side of the story. Fox "journalists" yammer on 24/7 about anything they think will drive ratings and resonate with the villagers that believe that nonsense hook, line and sinker. Discrediting Fox is a brilliant way of restoring some actual "Fair and Balanced" reporting of facts, not dogma. Maybe VIllager Bubba will wake up one morning and that nagging doubt he had about Beck, Hannity and the rest of those "I graduated at the bottom of my class in J school" characters will resolve itself into a realization that perhaps the WH and the rest of the real news organizations out there might just deserve a listen.

If it takes a few hours of some staffers time to pull that off---I'm all for it.

[audadvnc]

Snow's analysis is wrong. Faux has spent every day since the Inauguration in full attack mode against Obama. For this to go on without return comment would mean that the WH was acquiescing to the attacks. Obama played this one correctly.

[BarryChamplain]

The Obama Administration is not stupid. Despite all the public expressions of concern from Fox "News"'s "fellow" media, they're aware that they're walking into a buzzsaw. But it's one they have no choice but to enter, despite the howls of Outrage [tm].

Whatever harm can come to them by having Villagers cluck their tongues and Fox "News" cry totalitarianism (the refugees from the Nixon administration actually had the straight face to bemoan the fictitious presence of a "Nixon-type enemies' list"!), the WH knows what it's doing. It's put the topic of Fox "News"' political tactics on the table. Despite the chest-thumping of Fox personalities, this is not something Roger Ailes ever wanted. THEY would choose the topics. It was never supposed to be about them. This was not in the war plan.

[NC4Obama]

Funny since Ailes was a media advisor for the Nixon campaign.

[Charmed]

Obama didn't go after Fox, he called them out....I think this is part of that change people claim they don't know about. fox is NOT a real news station and those are just the facts.

[SEQUOIABISON]

Not to defend ones self against slanderous unfounded lies, is tantamount to saying they are true.

During the presidential campaign Obama and his excellent staff never allowed more than 24 hours pass without responding to unjustified criticism.

I fail to see what has changed, do we expect the president to just get slapped around by a bunch of right wing Obama haters on Fox and take it like a man and never respond?

He cannot allow this constant defamation of his character to go unchallenged. These people have an extreme propaganda political agenda, they are not the least bit interested in reporting fair and balanced news, especially about a president they despise.

[DangerClose]

Based on your argument Becks "red phone" should be ringing off the hook..... oh, thats right. Beck has done nothing but use others own words (audio and video) against them trying to defend that would equal " who ya gonna believe me or your lying eyes" ...

[Rollingballafire]

I'm sorry, but the phone is just a toy, and Fox and Friends edits the heck out of the videos to make people appear to be saying things they really didn't say. That's why we don't like Fox.
If you watch Beck when he does interviews away from Fox, he tells you he doesn't believe what he's saying, he puts vapor rub on his face to make himself cry, it's just entertainment and a good way for him to make lots of $$$$.
You've been duped.

[nomobull]

neither because he uses their words against them by doctoring and taking out of context. next time he uses a sources try doing research . you might be surprised to discover how much of their words he misquotes or the true context in which they were spoken,

[Seldon]

I think you are making way to big a deal with this. They are simply saying Fox isn't a real News organisation. It is just words, this does not take up a whole lot of brain power, time, energy, or tax payers dollars. This is not a war.

besides, it is true. Fox has a court decision to say that they can legally lie
http://www.relfe.com/media_can_legally_lie.html

They want the authority of being a news organisation but when called on their flat out lying they say "Oh we were just providing commentary". It is about time Fox is called out to put up or shut up. Unless they contractually agree to adhere to the truth, as they can best manage, or be sued for fraud, or be content with merely being an opinion group without the access that actual news groups deserve.

[tartentart]

Thank you Seldon, I couldn't agree more. fox is not news, it's just fox and bad at that!

[littleolwinemakerme]

I don't see this as "going after them" as much as calling "them " out for their lies and obvious obfuscation. Faux "News" is harmful to civil dialogue and to America.

[Indon]

Confronting misinformation is a very practical thing to do.

And Obama faces no greater source of misinformation than Fox.

So that's your 'war'. Fox lies, Obama says, "Hey, Fox lies a lot, maybe you guys should stop taking them so seriously," Fox calls it a war, and... you call it a war too because you take Fox seriously.

That's why calling them out is a practical matter.