Search
Close this search box.

Obama: Fox News Is ‘Destructive’ To America


President Obama is pulling no punches when it comes to Fox News, declaring the cable news outlet to be “destructive to [America’s] long-term growth.”

In a more than 8,000-word interview with Rolling Stone Magazine, Obama compared the cable news channel to papers owned by William Randolph Hearst at the turn of the 20th century that unabashedly pushed the media titan’s own political views.

“You had folks like Hearst who used their newspapers very intentionally to promote their viewpoints. I think Fox is part of that tradition – it is part of the tradition that has a very clear, undeniable point of view,” Obama told the magazine.

Officials in the Obama White House have long made Fox News a punching bag, launching a full blown offensive last year when aides declared the network to be “opinion journalism masquerading as news.” Then-White House Communications Director Anita Dunn said the cable outlet “operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party,” and top aide Valerie Jarret called Fox “clearly biased.”

But the new comments from Obama constitute the president’s most direct attack yet on the network owned by business mogul Rupert Murdoch.

Fox News pushes “a point of view that I disagree with. It’s a point of view that I think is ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a country that has a vibrant middle class and is competitive in the world,” Obama said.

“But as an economic enterprise, it’s been wildly successful. And I suspect that if you ask Mr. Murdoch what his number one concern is, it’s that Fox is very successful.”

Fox has yet to respond to the president. But during the administration offensive against the network last year, network spokesman Michael Clemente slammed the White House for continuing “to declare war on a news organization instead of focusing on the critical issues that Americans are concerned about.”

(Source: CNN)



11 Responses

  1. This marxist who is out to break down everything the U.S. has stood for for over 200 years, has the chutzpah to say that Fox is ““destructive to [America’s] long-term growth.”???
    He and his “aishes chayil” (lol) are an EMBARRASSMENT to this country!

  2. This proves Obama is a wimp. When John Adams got ticked off at the press, he had the editors arrested for sedition (this did have something to do with fact he was not only a one term president, but the last of his party to ever be elected president – but Obama’s economic policies are such that he doesn’t have to throw temper tantrums to self-destruct).

  3. Vote all democrats out especial Harry Reid. Get the democrats running. I can hear it now because the 2012 election it is because of the republican senate and the republican house that is why the country is in the shap it is.For the last 2 years it is because of Bush. It is because of obama an egotisical Maniac. he has not a clue
    how the Americas think He has been lost in his Marxist world since he was born and raise by Marxist parent, marxist friend and marxist church

  4. If a Republican president called MSNBC “ultimately destructive to the country”, the ensuing firestorm from the Left would turn every sukkah into a 4th of July sparkler, coast to coast.

  5. New Corp is a public company. It is legally obligated to make money as best it can. Obama admits that “But as an economic enterprise, it’s been wildly successful. And I suspect that if you ask Mr. Murdoch what his number one concern is, it’s that Fox is very successful.”. What does he want News Corp to do? lose money? He should be asking how people who he thinks are so wrong be so popular.

  6. it is unfortunate that the president is engaging in self censorship… if Obama didnt think it would hurt him he would say a more complete truth: the more complete truth is that much of Fox is intentionally planned dissemination of jingoism, emotional phrases that don’t help anyones lives, and worst- Republican statements of “fact” – that are indeed false. Also, Fox often presents statements of fact when the statement is unverifiable. If someone presents an unverifiable statement of fact that without even so much as a claim put forth that there is objective evidence in support of the claim, and the critiques denounce the statement as false, then the one who made the statement is false.
    If i say there is a lion in the other room and i have no idea if there is- or is not- a lion in the other room, then i am a liar.
    ( * If you present a statement of fact when no evidence is even offered, then that is a lie. Most recently, a couple of days ago, the Republican Party presented a position on economic “recovery” for the U.S. that they want to execute when they win the House in November. In the position paper, and after wards, even now, despite the claimed beneficial future results in their plan, NO ATTEMPT HAS EVEN BEEN OFFERED BY THE REPUBLICANS AS TO WHAT THE MATH IS BEHIND THE CLAIMED STATEMENTS OF FACT IN THEIR PLAN. They offered no MATH at all.
    On the other hand, every professional trained in economics who offered a position on the math claims the Republican claims in the plan are impossible. — that there is indeed no math that can back up the statements of fact claimed in the Republican plan. But Fox reports the PLAN as though it is one real legitimate side of the story. So is much of the mass media.
    Pathetic

Leave a Reply


Popular Posts