What It's Like To Watch FOX News For 24 Straight Hours

Because I am a decent, thinking person, I despise FOX News. I believe I have good reason to do this. And yet, because I'm a bleeding-heart liberal who likes to have the facts before spewing prejudices, I feel duty-bound to give FOX a chance. So I'm going to watch 24 straight hours of FOX.

I know what you are thinking. "He is a madman!" you say. "He'll make his eyes fall out and his ears bleed!" Perhaps. But I have convinced myself that it will be worth it, if only so I can count the number of times Brit Hume's jowls bob up and down over the course of a broadcast.

I have decided to commence my torture at 9p.m. I've been deliberately waiting until after The O'Reilly Factor. I'm not sure that I can take that kind of horror straight off. I need to build up to it, like trying to boil a frog. I'll watch Bill tomorrow. For now, I'll ease into it with some less unpleasant FOX programming.

What I'd forgotten is that Hannity & Colmes is the 9p.m. program.

I think I'm ready for some punishment, though. I settle in, turn up the volume, and eagerly await the Dynamic Duo's adorable interplay.

Tonight's big news is Jesse Jackson saying he'd like to cut Barack Obama's nuts off. I picked an exciting news cycle to tune in to.

Newt Gingrich is tonight's first guest. He accuses Jesse Jackson of resenting Barack Obama's getting the nomination, as if somehow Jesse was in the running. Much gleeful Jackson-bashing is done.

But the interview takes an unexpected turn as it covers other subjects. At one point, Gingrich actually disagrees with Sean Hannity, going so far as to say that Hannity has uttered "the least Reagan-like quote I've ever heard you speak in your career." Everything is measured in units of Reagans. Nevertheless, the interview ends amicably.

The next guest is Juan Williams, who discusses the black "culture of victimization." He says Jackson is just upset with Obama for "not standing with all black Americans being contrarian and opposing everything." The interview ends like this:

HANNITY: Can you name one hard decision that Barack Obama has made and stuck to?

WILLIAMS: Wow. You know, for me, I think it's not a matter of that for him right now. I can't name it for you, so I guess I give up.

COLMES: (meekly) I have an answer.

Colmes is ignored. Williams suggests that "ending tax cuts" might be one issue where Obama is consistent. The segment ends.

So far, it's just as painful as I expected. Alan Colmes is predictably pathetic, and Sean Hannity is every football jock I ever hated in high school. I wonder what Hannity and Colmes are like together off the set. I don't think Hannity returns Colmes' phone calls.

With that, Hannity and Colmes is over, and I can breathe easy knowing that I only have 23 hours of FOX left.

Greta Van Susteren is up next. The theme of tonight's show is...Jesse Jackson!

Jackson comes on the show to explain the context behind "I want to cut Barack Obama's nuts off." After some questions on the topic, Greta asks the bizarrely SAT-like question "Do you admire Senator John McCain? And if so, why?"

After the interview, Susteren gives the result of her evening poll:

Will Jesse Jackson's comments change your vote either way?

54% YES
46% NO

I have no idea what the results of this poll mean. I don't think they actually mean anything.

The rest of the broadcast consists of Gene Simmons talking about his new book on prostitution, a discussion of the JonBenet Ramsey case (which occurred in 1996, I might add), and a whole bunch of sleazy gossip about somebody named Christie Brinkley (I don't know who this is. Should I?)

It really does seem as if the "trashy" bias of the network far outweighs the "conservative" bias.

Political news represents a minority of FOX's coverage , and it actually seems like a smaller percentage here than on CNN and MSNBC, who love to deluge us with "Race To The White House" pieces. So most of the news doesn't get explicitly political treatment. It's just, well, sleazy. For example, FOX runs a story about how the economic downturn has hit unexpected sectors...in this case, strip clubs. So they show background graphics of pole dancers doing their thing, and bring a stripper on to interview about her financial situation. It's sort of like having Jerry Springer host CNBC.

Greta Van Susteren ends, and passes it over to...Bill O'Reilly! What?! I had forgotten that The O'Reilly Factor repeats at 11. I can't watch this. Not yet. I switch over to MSNBC, in the faint hope that maybe Rachel Maddow will be on. She always restores my faith in people.

No such luck. It's To Catch A Predator, a more sensationalistic and exploitative show than anything even FOX has on. It looks like I'll be stuck with O'Reilly.

I had thought that eventually I would be numbed to the sensory assault of the channel. But you don't get used to it. It just drives you nuts. It's like your television is trying to attack you. You can turn on most other channels and just zone out, letting the gentle buzz of the TV wash over you.

But not with FOX. FOX screams at you, and won't let you turn your mind down a notch. Everything is angry, bright, and in-your-face.

O'Reilly is expectedly pompous and bullying. To Dr. Michael Eric Dyson, he says condescending things like "as an academic, you can appreciate me correcting you." When Geraldo Rivera objects to O'Reilly's categorization of La Raza as a radical organization, O'Reilly tells him "Nobody cares whether you object, not even your wife and children." He also uses the words "load of crap," "stupid," and "scum" a lot. "Far-left" is his favorite insult. Who let Archie Bunker have a news show?

He also makes sure we know that he is a maverick, free-thinking independent, and not a conservative. "I'm tired of The Washington Post putting the word 'conservative' in front of my name," he complains.

After O'Reilly's show, we have a repeat of Hannity & Colmes, followed by Greta Van Susteren again! It's amazing how much recycling there seems to be. Bill O'Reilly's show is repeated for a third time in the early morning hours.

Somewhere in the night, I fall asleep. Since the TV is on, it infiltrates my subconscious, and I have FOXy nightmares for a number of hours. By the time I awake, it is morning. As I slowly rouse myself, the first words I hear are of a Blonde FOX Lady saying this:

"It's hard to talk about climate change without talking about compact fluorescent lightbulbs, soon to be forced on you by the government. But could they KILL you?"

It was not shaping up to be a good day.

The morning chatterbox people were predictably empty-headed. "A 2nd African American could soon be running for President," referring to Cynthia McKinney's Green Party candidacy. To accompany the story, FOX put up the most deranged-looking photo of Rep. McKinney it could find, prompting the always-classy Bill Hemmer to remark "What is THAT?"

Nothing much in the rest of the day was that interesting. Wildfires, a missing pregnant marine, and Jesse Jackson were the big stories. There is an interview with a couple who is selling the naming rights to their unborn child for gas money. A further investigation into why lightbulbs will kill us all. I glance at the news ticker for the first and only time. It says "Number killed in the 9/11 attacks is now 2,975." Yes, apparently September 11th is still happening.

I start to count the number of different Blonde FOX Ladies. I soon find this to be an impossible task. They cannot be distinguished. Then there's more news about wildfires, a repeat of the lightbulbs-will-kill-you report, and a story on a suspicious package found at a mall.

After about six continuous hours of this, I can no longer deal with it. I break my pledge, I go out for a sandwich. The sense of relief is tremendous. It feels good to breathe the air once more, to be back in reality. The worst thing about FOX is not its bias, but the "panic mode" that it seems to live in. Everything is a catastrophe. Immigrants will get you. Lightbulbs will get you. Wildfires will get you. Jesse Jackson will cut your nuts off.

Greta Van Susteren introduced one of her news stories this way: "It's real, it's terrifying. All the horrible details coming up next." And I think that captures the FOX philosophy fairly well. The message of the network seems to be "It's a scary world out there. You're going to need a gun and some deep-seated prejudice if you're going to make it out alive."

Of course, all networks do this. FOX may be the worst offender, but it's certainly not alone. MSNBC has taken to airing the aforementioned sex-offender show, as well as a whole slew of "inside prison" documentaries, which show just how scary life can be among Terrifying Criminals.
My journey comes to an end at 9p.m., after another riveting episode of The O'Reilly Factor (tonight's theme: Jesse Jackson!). As I flip off the television and return to my life, I realize how grateful I am not to live in the FOX mindset. It's a world where love is replaced by fear, and flashing colors and loud noises stand in for open, honest discussions. It's a crazy-mixed up land of deceit, terror, and sleaze.

John Oliver once watched FOX for eight hours, and said afterward that "I may have lost something deep down in my soul." I did 22 (if you discount my sandwich break), and while I think I escaped with my soul intact, I'm not sure I'll ever be quite the same. But at least I've still got my nuts intact.

Comments

[dikky]

Why do folks keep referring to the Republican Spin Network as "News?" The definition of "news" should be objective reporting of the happenings in the nation and the world. Fox is simply an unabashed lap-dog for the Republican party. The owner of the Fake News network even distributes talking points to his flunkies to use on their so-called "reporting."

[NYCIC]

MSNBC's "Lockup" is fantastic! Life inside the anti-universe of our penitentiary system is more revealing than the normal universe that is reported upon throughout the day on their other programs.

This writer is correct, Alan Colmes is a pathetic, neutered twit. It's like a bad dream of high school, watching a block-headed mutant beat up on some nerdy skinny guy. Also, I'm not so sure Colmes has anything on Hannity in the brain department. and that is really scary.

[johnie2xs]

Amazingly (Or maybe not so amazingly) for a number of years that I had traveled the country occupying many different motels and visiting varied types of bars, after a day of performing my job, I noticed the frequency of only Fox being offered on the motel TVs, and Fox as the news channel of choice in innumerable bars. What does this say? This is at best an anecdotal survey, but at least valid for what it is. To me it intones the ubiquitous nature of a certain species of Americans ("Ignoramus bipedimus").
We are in deep DooDoo!!

[MajorKong]

Unfortunately Fox is on 24/7 at my workplace so I have a hard time getting away from it.

[alguien]

what did you do that was so horrible that you have to spend 8 hours a day in that ring of hell?

[tecpatl]

Do yourself a favor and look for another job immediately. I'm a progressive, but I try to read and view a broad spectrum of media. I used to watch Fox News once in a while just so I would know what lies they were spewing, but my fiancee made me realize that it just made me too angry.

[tasukibeth1]

It plays 24/7 at my gym.... but at least I don't have to *listen* to it since the TVs are muted.

[ga4ry]

photo, the problem is not that the other networks ignbored the 12 -13 victories in Iraq, its the fact the the other netwoks by this point are still reporting that the wepons of mass destruction claim by the administration was a lie, that the young people who die in that hell hole day in and day out are dying for a lie. It fails to report the slaughter of civilians except in terms of victiories for democracy.
This is why FOX is vile

[Photofarm]

The problem is that the WMD was not a lie. Never was a lie, and never will be lie. The intelligence community from many countries believed it was probably true. Saddam lied, wanting others to believe he had WMD. After the fact, it turns out Iraq didn't have WMD, but that doesn't make the intial claim a lie.

[MajorKong]

The intelligence from several countries (Germany for example) indicated that there were no WMDs. We cherry-picked only the intelligence that supported our claims.

As Paul Wolfowitz noted "For bureaucratic reasons we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction, because it was the one reason everyone could agree on."

The war was going to happen one way or another. WMDs or not. We would have just picked a different reason. Once the plans were set in motion there was nothing Iraq could have done that would have appeased us. We would have simply kept setting the bar higher and higher so that they could never meet our demands.

[newgeneration]

I am convinced that this administration was going to invade Iraq, whether there was a 9/11 or not, but 9/11 became the perfect excuse to get rid of Saddam Hussein. The UN weapons inspectors,, especially Blix , I can't remember his first name, protested and even beg to avoid the invasion. They did not find any evidence of WMD and ask for more time to find at least any trace of WMD, and they ignored him. I was not living here at the time, so I don't know what kind of news were aired, but in London this whole thing was reported as it happen. The inspectors did press conferences, interviews,, I mean, they really had not proved of any WMD. The UN opposed the invasion and they still invaded. In the UK the majority of people also opposed the invasion , still Prime Minister, Blair, gave Bush even more power, by joining him in this illegal war. I think Blair's decision to support Bush cost him his Prime Minister position. Unfortunately, for America, the same thing did not happen to Bush.

[BBackSoon]

I seem to remember a little gem about Saddam claiming to have WMD so those that wished him harm in the region would not think him weak and attack. He lied because if he told the truth someone would have overthrown him. His best bet was to try to talk to the US behind the scenes. But Bush did not want to talk.

[BBackSoon]

One other thing. Saddam lied about WMD’s. That is he lied that he had them. And you say this is why we went into Iraq. But Bushco lied about him having WMD’s also, they also lied about the Yellow Cake Uranium. So both sides lied about Saddam having WMD’s but only Saddam deserved to be removed from power?

[pastgone]

George Bush stated that Iraq would have nuclear weapons within a year. The intelligence he had in front of him came to two possible, conflicting conclusions: at the earliest, five years, and NEVER. George Bush lied. The intelligence he relied up, and the statements he made based on that intelligence, are now in the public record. If you read them, you will realize that GWB and his cronies told bald-faced lies, and knew they were lying. One such statement said that the CIA determined that even though Hussein MIGHT have WMD, they believed (and there was no disagreement on this point) that he would NOT use them against the US. GWB (and henchmen) went out and told us the exact opposite of this conclusion time and time again. Oh, yes, photo, they lied. Big time.

[TheIndependenceParty]

Fox News is the reason for the invention of the V-Chip!

[framante]

For years I gave Fox News an equal share of my viewing time in an attempt to see what everybody had to say, figuring that truth lay somewhere in the middle of it all. Eventually I decided that I could predict what perspective Fox was going to put on any issue, so I saw them as, to put it kindly, superfluous. Now, when I accidentally come across them while flipping channels, my remote finger gets a reflex reaction tto instantly move on and avoid polluting my environment.

[Susan60]

Me too, I flip by FOX so fast its as if I think staying on the channel for a mere few seconds will cause mental retardation.

[peachfuzz]

Everything is measured in units of Reagans.


LOL!

[OHDemocrat]

Might be a bit off topic, but....ever noticed how there are all these "inside prison" programs on TV--NatGeo had a recurring segment too, if I recall correctly--and yet, they all fail to mention the one thing about America's prisons that we all know but cannot speak. I mean really. Why can't someone on television actually say "Prison Rape?" That Asian Reporter on NatGeo would really get into all the gory details over "turf wars in the prison yard" and the myriad of objects fashioned into deadly weapons...even going so far as to show security camera tape of inmates literally stabbing each other. And yet, no prison rape. Eighth Amendment anyone?

[certainot]

progressives love to hate fox TV but it merely exists to put a visual whipped cream on the talk radio talking points that are pounded into earholes 50-70MIL across the country.

fox, like other TV and print, can't provide the uncontested repetition really needed to intimidate and police the rest of the media and politicians. limbaugh just got a contract worth about 40MIL a year to go with a NINE figure signing bonus.

by the time the blatherers and the republican operatives show up on fox, like much of the rest of the media, repeating the irrational absurd talking points is easy because limbaugh and hannity and their wannabes have already turned them into American reality.

[bobste]

Funny thing: If I fall asleep with MSNBC or CNN on all night, I sleep fine and wake up in the am to turn it off. However, if I fall asleep with Fox on tv I'm jolted awake several times during the night by their loud promos, etc.

[Wilburrr]

Make sure you do this on a new, flat screen hi def TV. The old ones, that work on a vacuum tube, would suck even more of your brains out. Even with a new TV you can look forward to a 50 point IQ loss. After that you may even register as a Republican....

[Photofarm]

Most of what you complain about on FOX happens on all the news networks. You didn't see, or chose to ignore, the Democrat vs Republican people talking about different political issues and candidates. They give both equal time, and you hear both sides better than any other network.

[Nathan Robinson - Huffpost Blogger]

I'll give you that. In fact, I did say in the article that "all networks do this" in regard to Fear as news, and pointed to MSNBC as an example. But perhaps I didn't emphasize it as much as I could have. I know FOX is an easy target, but I think it's worthwhile to examine because it amplifies and almost caricatures the worst qualities of the other networks. The fearmongering, the flashy logos, the empty-headed anchors, the substance-free bickering, is all there on CNN and MSNBC, but it's just so much more grotesque on FOX.

Your second point is a fair one also, because as I said, I didn't see so much a political bias as a panic bias. Still, I'm not sure that I agree with you on the "balance" point. Conservative guests outweighed liberal guests (H&C's panel discussion, for example, featured Robert Novak, Bay Buchanan, and, as a counterbalance, an obscure liberal political science professor. Hardly a fair fight. And the idea of "balance" is almost pointless given that none of the panel debates ever ACCOMPLISH anything. They suffer from the same defect that always made me hate CNN's Crossfire (and Hardball, or any other news debate show), which is that when two people from opposite sides of the spectrum sit in a room yelling at each other for ten minutes, we get nowhere. FOX debates didn't really leave me with any more information when I left than when I went in.

[Photofarm]

But, if liberals/p­rogressive­s won't go on FOX news because of " bias ", they are doing this for a specific reason, to try and get rid of the right wing or conservative view point on the air waves.

The biggest news story that FOX covered and the other major network news shows missed was the fact that 12 ( or was it 13 ) of the political objectives for the surge in Iraq had occured of the 15 goals that started out. This is a major story, but the others chose to ignore it because it didn't fit their template that Iraq was wrong and a failure and another Vietnam. Which is mainly the Democrat's position on the Iraq War.

[vcsmith]

Its not so much who the guests are, as it is how they are treated. It seems that if you are not on their side your visual is reduced to a postage stamp or even muted in order to minimize your commentary.

[Nathan Robinson - Huffpost Blogger]

FOX does seem to have a higher percentage of news compared with advertisements than the other two major networks, and they do have a lot of coverage. My complaint is mainly that the coverage is devoid of real information or analysis. It's lowest-com­mon-denomi­nator journalism, designed to make us either angry or afraid.

But I will concede that this is a flaw of corporate news in general. And I should have made that clearer.

[MajorKong]

The others do it but Fox is definitely leading the race to the bottom.

[nunzia]

I have never spent any time, not even a second, watching that crap.
Then again, I don't buy those goofy tabloids at the supermarket either.

[oncethere]

Can one be declared legally insane after watching Fox for 24 hours straight?

[davemartin7777]

What a great article!

I really thought that was a fun (and damning) read.

My surprise is that there was no mention of how Fox plays that garish electric guitar riff when announcing the deaths of hundreds in China or some other terrible tragedy.

Anyone ever notice this?

What's really creepy is when they use that "music" to introduce a story about American soldiers deaths in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Being a lib, that guitar solo always hits me as being laughably out of place and inconsiderate at the least.

Now I'm bet you'll notice... if you masochistic enough to watch Rupert Murdock's stream of consciousness channeled through his sockpuppets.

Uh, horrible.