“Fox and Friends” co-anchor Steve Doocy surprised many viewers on the morning of January 19th when he asked: “Why didn’t anybody ever mention that that man right there [Barack Obama] was raised—spent the first decade of his life, raised by his Muslim father—as a Muslim and was educated in a madrassa?”

No one ever “mentioned” it because it is false—and, even if it were true, irrelevant. Unfortunately, this malicious incident is not isolated. Fox News Channel and its affiliates have a history of mischaracterizing Democrats and bolstering Republicans. In another glaring instance, Fox News correspondent Major Garret failed to share with viewers damning sections of a Senate report on the federal government’s response to Hurricane Katrina in March of 2006. While the other three major networks reported on the reports castigation of the White House, the Department Of Homeland Security, and the Department of Defense, Garret only talked about sections criticizing Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Instead of demanding apologies every time a Democrat is treated unfairly, the Democratic Party should take a stand and boycott all Fox-sponsored events for the 2008 presidential cycle.

Of course, a total refusal to talk to Fox will not end the channel’s questionable reporting; instead it would only further negative Democratic stereotypes. But Democrats are not obligated to lend Fox’s events legitimacy by participating. As Matt Stoller, a vocal Fox critic wrote on the blog MyDD, “The goal is not to get Democrats not to appear on Fox News…the problem comes in validating Fox News as a legitimate news source.”

Two weeks ago, the Nevada Democrats took the first step when they backed out of a contract with Fox News. Fox was planning on televising a Democratic Primary debate in Nevada. But after Fox News Chairman Roger Ailes implied that Barack Obama was a terrorist, the Democrats decided to pull the plug. (Of course, these types of remarks are hardly unexpected from Roger Ailes—he was the Chief Media Strategist for President George H.W. Bush when he founded Fox News.)

The Nevada Democrats have realized is that Fox is beyond being a “Republican” news channel. Fox doesn’t just hire journalists with conservative ideology. Instead, it employs partisan mouthpieces. CNN might be perceived as liberal but its reporters don’t have a comparable track record of blatant inaccuracy. If Fox wants to correct what it perceives as a liberal bias in the media, fine. But muddying the public discourse with falsehood and provocative rhetoric is a disservice to all.

There is no denying that bias is bound to infiltrate coverage, but that doesn’t absolve “news” outlets of their responsibility to ensure that reporters are at least marginally objective. Good television reporters have an independent perspective for analyzing the news; bad television reporters have talking points and a pretty smile.

But, until Fox can prove that it is genuinely dedicated to providing “fair and balanced” newscasts, Democrats should not participate in any network-sponsored debates, interviews or press conferences revolving around the 2008 election. Such a protest would allow Democrats to make a targeted objection to the biased, dirty reporting that typifies Fox News without seeming desperate or aloof.

Fox News’ well-known byline is: “We Report. You decide.” The report from Fox is clear. And so is the Democrats’ decision: they should stop willfully giving Fox fodder for its partisan machine.



Robert G. King ’09, a Crimson editorial comper, is a history concentrator in Winthrop house.