[MUSIC]

Alex Jones: From WNYC in New York, this is On the Media. First, it was MSNBC challenging CNN's unique spot as the only all-news channel. Now there's another challenger, the Fox News Channel, and it's making the challenge with a twist. This enterprise is putting itself forth as the fair and balanced all-news channel. In a full-page ad in The New York Times, it promises, "politics without spin, information without opinion, news without bias." Sounds lofty, but is a news operation owned by conservative media mogul Rupert Murdoch likely to be unbiased? Here in New York City, there's another twist. A battle led by the Republican mayor to force the local cable company, Time Warner, to carry the Fox News Channel. It's a mini, layered story, and it's up next after this news, so stay tuned.

[MUSIC]

The Fox News Channel made its debut last week, and it promises something that most Americans would welcome. It says that viewers of Fox News, of the Fox News Channel, will get, "politics without spin, information without opinion, news without bias." One problem with that kind of promise is that spin, opinion and bias tend to be in the eye of the beholder. I haven't seen very much of the new Fox News Channel, but I have watched it enough to conclude that at the very least, it is news that sometimes comes heavily laced with opinion.

Let me give you a couple of examples. At 6:00 PM, the prime news hour, Fox News has what they call the O'Reilly Report, hosted by Bill O'Reilly, who makes no secret of his conservative perspective. For instance, one-night last week, his campaign analysis consisted essentially of noting that 72% of college and high school dropouts support Bill Clinton. He then declared how passionately he felt about the outrageous, that was his word, decision to grant political asylum to an illegal immigrant with AIDS. Agree with him or not? It was definitely information with opinion.

I'm Alex Jones, and on this edition of On the Media, we're going to take a look at the new Fox News Channel. The question is, is Rupert Murdoch creating an ideologically driven news channel? If so, is that a bad thing in a nation obsessed with the idea that the media has a liberal bias? There's another twist. Here in New York, the Fox News Channel has stirred up a particularly nasty Hornet's nest because another media giant, Time Warner, which is the local cable company, won't give Fox News Channel a channel, and that mid mean shutting out Fox News in the communications capital of the country.

Now the mayor of New York is lobbing grenades and antitrust suits at Time Warner, and Time Warner is denouncing political interference. Theres lots of hypocrisy, and were going to get to that later in the program. First, what about the Fox News Channel itself? I'm glad to welcome Mike Schneider, who is an anchor for the Fox News Channel. Mike, were very glad you could join us.

Mike Schneider: Alex, thanks for having me. I appreciate it.

Alex Jones: Well, I want to ask you, you're a veteran of both ABC News and NBC News. Now what's the difference between them and the Fox News Channel?

Mike Schneider: Well, first of all, if I may, I'd like to address the issue that you mentioned with Mr. O'Reilly, if I can.

Alex Jones: Yes.

Mike Schneider: You mentioned it and alluded to it as being the prime newscast hour.

Alex Jones: Well, I mean, it is programmed against the prime news hour. I don't mean that it is a correspondent to the ABC News, but it was put on as counter programming at that particularly sort of news centric hour. That's what I meant.

Mike Schneider: As such, its mission is not to do what you'd find Jennings, Brokaw, or any of the local broadcasters at that time doing. In fact, that's pretty much my mission. My broadcast comes on at seven o'clock and it is essentially what we referred to as the flagship newscaster, the principal newscast of the day. What I think you'd find with Bill's program or with Catherine Crier's or with the Hannity Colmes show, is that those shows are not pretending to be newscasts per se. What you have, though, at the beginning and in the middle of those programs are traditional newscasts, short form though they be, but those are where the essential news highlights or stories are being reported.

What O'Reilly and the others are doing is looking at those shows from their own perspectives. I think that what you would get through the newscasts that are broadcast throughout the day, and especially with my program, which is aimed at doing what the other old three networks would like to do and forever, which is to have an hour in prime time to devote to world and national events, is we're playing it as straight down the middle as we possibly can.

Alex Jones: Mike Schneider, I mean, I understand what you're saying, and I think that it is true that the first 15 minutes of the show at six o'clock is more or less a straight news report, more or less a summary. The point is, it seems to me that the Fox News Channel is devoting a significant amount of its prime time viewing news coverage, whatever you want to call it. It is devoting it to a group of shows and a group of individuals who are certainly very, very opinionated about where they stand on news events, which is quite a departure from either CNN or MSNBC, at least from my perspective.

Mike Schneider: Well, to a certain degree, perhaps, but I don't know. I mean, Larry King has made no secret over the years that he considers himself a liberal, that he wanted Mario Cuomo to run for president. Larry has been very outspoken in that. Yet most people, I think, would say that Larry tends to give his guests pretty much of a free ride regardless of their political perspectives. CNN goes over into that. If you take a look at some of the other programs they have with the likes of Novak and company, they get crossfire.

Those also are very opinion-oriented shows, but the net outcome, according to what the programmers are really aspiring to, is to have, when the day is done, a really balanced look at what's going on. I don't know that CNN necessarily has exceeded at it. I think that what Roger Ailes is attempting to do is pretty much what he did in primetime so successfully when he was at CNBC, which is to build a cast of on-air individuals who come from a variety of backgrounds who, when the day is done, will have given you a really balanced view of what's going on through a variety of perspectives.

Alex Jones: Well, let me ask you this then, so we're talking about the same thing.

Mike Schneider: Sure.

Alex Jones: When you talk about the Fox News Channel and you talk about that 15 minutes segment at the beginning of the show and you talk about what you do, that is where the words news without bias, information without opinion, that's where those words apply. When it comes to something like Bill O'Reilly's Show or Catherine Crier Show, then those words really do not apply.

Mike Schneider: I wouldn't say that they don't apply because I don't think you're going to see bias there. What you're going to see is you're going to see questioning done through the perspectives of these various different individuals. Hannity and Colmes, Hannity was hired very early on in the formative stages of Fox News, and Roger was going around referring to a liberal to be named later. There was no secret that they were looking for people of different perspectives there. Biases, I don't like the word bias. It has a whole bunch of pejorative connotations, I think.

Alex Jones: Why do you think the advertising uses that word?

Mike Schneider: Well, news without bias, I agree very strongly because it's a negative word. People don't like bias. It's prejudice. It evokes images of bigotry. What we're talking about here are outlooks that may be perceived in the questioning that's done throughout the various primetime programs. I have to remind you that that is the primetime block of the day and that the newscasts of the day are aimed at evoking what we would hope to be as fair an images as possible, and that the prime newscast of the day, mine, that's my mission, that's my job. That's why I was brought in and that's why I'm doing it.

Alex Jones: Let me ask you, can you give us any examples of how Fox News has handled and treated something more fairly and without bias and opinion than either CNN, MSNBC or one of the major networks?

Mike Schneider: Well, to compare over the past month, I couldn't. I'll tell you why. In the process of putting something on the air within a six-month period, you tend to be so immersed in it that you can't really-- I haven't had a chance to watch how anybody else has handled anything else. We've been working anywhere from 18 to 20-hour days. I would leave it to Columbia Journalism Review and Washington Journalism Review to sit back and put together some studies of how the stories have differed over the course, say, of a month.

I don't even know that a week is necessarily fair because there were people at some of our competitors who were still walking around a week ago today convinced that we would never be able to get it on the air, period. I would just say that I think that if you take a look at what we've done in the first week of our existence, that you'd be hard pressed within any of the newscasts during the day or within my show to find any evidence of anybody not playing it fair at all.

Alex Jones: What's been Rupert Murdoch's personal role in putting the channel together?

Mike Schneider: He's writing checks. As far as I know, he's writing checks and that's it.

Alex Jones: He's also doing some promotion for you, I know.

Mike Schneider: Well, in terms of promotion, I think Roger holds the dual titles of chairman and CEO of Fox News. Roger has taken on this role very heavily. He's the guy who runs this operation. I got to tell you, and I'll make this as strongly worded as possible. In my own personal experience, what you're seeing on the air with the Schneider report, which is seven o'clock Eastern Time and live across the country, is a show that I design myself, which I write the bulk of, and what I don't write, I edit very heavily. I am deeply involved in story selection and in terms of reports that come in from around the world that we don't like them. If I don't like them, they don't get on the air. I have not heard one word from Rupert all this time.

Alex Jones: Well, let me ask you this. What if you did hear a word from Rupert?

Mike Schneider: Well, it depends on, if he wants to give me an attaboy, that's fine.

Alex Jones: What I mean is, what if he said, "Listen, Mike, that was a little too sort of like the other pro liberal media for my taste. I think the real fair thing to do would have been to really nail so and so or something." All I'm saying is this-

Mike Schneider: What will I do if he tried to impose his editorial-

Alex Jones: The thing is this. I mean, there was an article in The New York Times this morning by Bob Lipsyte about how he quit the New York Post after he found that his copy was being tampered with.

Mike Schneider: Well, they haven't found a way between the time that I write something on the script and say it, they haven't found a way to shut me up. I've quit bigger, higher paying jobs for lesser reasons. If my editorial freedom, if my personal integrity was being impinged upon in any way, I'd be out the door in 15 seconds.

Alex Jones: Well, the thing is, it would seem to me Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch are quite logically, and it makes good sense, they are using the credibility that you have and that Catherine Crier has to give credibility to the Fox News Channel.

Mike Schneider: Okay, I appreciate that.

Alex Jones: I think the thing is, how did they pick you, and what does that mean to you as far as what they're saying that they're going to offer? This new standard of fairness.

Mike Schneider: Well, remember, I left NBC a couple of years back. I came over here. I was working for Fox before Roger Ailes even appeared on the scene. It was a previous regime which brought me in. Those questions, even before Ailes arrived, were being asked about, "Are you worried about Murdoch this? Are you worried about Murdoch that?" I say no. I do this because I like to do it. I've been doing it for 20 odd years and I have always prided myself on independence. If you can go and dig up any manager I've ever worked for, they'd be the first to tell you that I'm not a very easy person to necessarily manage because I'm very headstrong about the way I want to go about doing my job.

I have not had one lick of interference from anybody. As much as Murdoch may be the world power that he is, I think he knows better than-- if you're trying to build an operation that is putting itself out, building itself as being something that's going to play it straight down the line, he knows better than to not only from a commercial standpoint, but just from a critical editorial standpoint to try to bend anything. It's not only bad journalism, it's bad business. They're spending a ton of money trying to make this thing commercially successful. There aren't enough conservatives out there to make an operation viable if you're just playing to them and not playing to the great mass of Americans.

Alex Jones: I'd like to ask you, our listeners, what do you think of the idea of the Fox News Channel? How biased are CNN and MSNBC and Fox News? Is there real bias or just slight variations? What do you think? Our number is 1-800-343-3342? That's 1-800-343-3342. This is On the Media from National Public Radio.

I'm Alex Jones, welcome back to On the Media. We're going to be talking all this hour about the Fox News Channel. I think that the real thing about the Fox News channel in New York that has caught people's attention is an incredible flap that's been going on. A couple of days ago, the New York Daily News had a media column that began, "Toss a dart at the Time Warner Fox News Channel dispute and hit a hypocrite." I have to say, I think the man who wrote those words hit a bullseye. His name is Eric Mink and he is the daily news television critic, and I'm happy to welcome him to On the Media. Eric, we're very glad to have you with us.

Eric Mink: Thanks for having me, Alex.

Alex Jones: I also have with me Mike Schneider, who's a very respected journalist and the anchor, a new anchor, one of the anchors at the Fox News Channel. He is also here to talk, at least for the next few minutes, about what the Fox News Channel is trying to do in order to fulfill the mission that it has given for itself, which is to be able to set a really new standard for fairness. Eric Mink, before we get to the flap between Time Warner and Fox News, what do you think about what Mike Schneider has said about the fairness standard, and where do you think that the Fox News Channel fits into this sort of media world?

Eric Mink: Well, I think the slogans that they're using are really just that. They're advertising slogans. They're playing to, they're exploiting this belief among the American public that there's a liberal bias to the media, which, quite honestly, I don't buy. I think its ingenious of the marketers at Fox. I would think Roger Ailes is the primary genius behind it, because the first question that arose when it was learned that Fox was going to launch a news channel was bias. The reason that that question arose, as your discussion obviously showed, is that Murdoch has shown in the past a willingness to bend his news operations to his political whim.

Alex Jones: Have you been watching?

Eric Mink: I was able to watch the first day because I was out of town in a market that happened to carry the Fox News channel. I have not watched since then.

Alex Jones: What do you think from what you've seen?

Eric Mink: I think Mike makes exactly the right kinds of points. I think those newscasts, the bulk of their programming during the day is sort of like a CNN headline news with a little discussion section added in each half hour. I think those seem to be playing right down the middle. I think the four hours in the evening are what they are labeled, which is they express the sensibilities of those people. I talked to Ailes before this thing launched, and he said the problem is not prejudice or bias or inclination. It's unlabeled bias, an unlabeled opinion. What they intended to do was make sure that their stuff was clearly labeled and not masqueraded. I don't have a problem with them doing those four hours in the evening.

Alex Jones: Well, the thing is, if you have the same people who are tied in with reporting the news, and, Mike Schneider, I'd like to get your response to this. You've got, it seems to me, a confusion of things here. You've got perhaps more overtly labeled opinion, but you also have much more overtly labeled expressions of opinion from people who are speaking for Fox News.

It's not just the people who they have on that they're interviewing that are expressing these opinions, but I mean, for instance, as I was saying, Bill O'Reilly was talking about how outrageous this thing was about the immigration decision and so forth. I have to admit, when I was watching that, I was a little bit taken aback. I didn't quite know how to respond, and it was different. It was different from anything that I have seen.

Mike Schneider: Well, I give the viewers a lot of credit, first of all, in terms intelligence. I think that they can distinguish between a newscast and a talk and information show. I think that if you take a look at some of the-- the way we populated our programs over here, you find a fairly wide range of opinion and you find that it's clearly labeled. I mean, I think back to when I worked at some of these other places. At NBC, you had people like Russert who obviously came out of the Democratic camp. When I worked at ABC, you had a number of people close to Roone Arledge who actually had worked for Republican, for the White House under the Republican administration.

I think you have to be very careful. When you take a look at somebody like with Roger's background and automatically assume that because he was a Republican media consultant, that brings a whole range of prejudices to the doorstep. I did a lot of work for Roger when I was still with NBC over at CNBC, and I would defy anybody over there to find a bias in the programming that he put on the air there.

I think that if you want to take a look at where Roger's going with this, you take a look at his track record in television and not in politics, and you'll see that he's really interested in just putting on a quality news network. That above and beyond everything is his prime motivation. If you take a look at what Murdoch's motivations are, take a look at the amount of money he's spending and take a look at the creditors who are expecting a return, the shareholders, and you'll find what his prime motivation is.

Alex Jones: Well, that's interesting. I don't mean to say that he's not motivated by money, but it seems to me that he's motivated by a lot of other things as well.

Mike Schneider: He obviously has a wide range of interests. I haven't worked for him in any other venue, so I don't know what he's done or why he's done it. All I can talk about is my own personal experience. If you see me walk out the door in five seconds notice, you'll know that obviously something has changed, but I have not-

Eric Mink: I'd like to hear about that ahead of time, Mike, if you don't mind.

Mike Schneider: Eric, it's either you or Grappy. One of the two. It depends on who I'm closer to at the moment.

Eric Mink: I suspect the post would not play that story very well.

Mike Schneider: You may have a point there, but I don't know for sure. Can I mention one other thing, Alex, too, about the Time Warner flap?

Alex Jones: Sure.

Mike Schneider: With all the complaints about the Republicans coming to Murdoch's aid and assistance and some sort of secret deals going on and how unseemly it might be. The name that popped out at me in this entire thing, one of the key supporters of getting the Fox News channel on the air in New York city is a guy by the name of Ray Harding. You know who that guy is? I know who that guy is.

Alex Jones: Explain who he is.

Mike Schneider: Ray Harding is the head of the Liberal Party in New York. He is one of the true believers in old time liberalism and as pure a liberal as you're going to get anywhere. He is one of the guys who has come forth and said, "Yes, we've got to find a way to get this channel on the air in New York City." Time Warner isn't playing fair in square, and there's a variety of things that obviously you and Eric will go into later on that story. It's not just Giuliani. It's not just Pataki. It's not just this Republican club that's out to help Murdoch here. Ray Harding is the antithesis of those guys when it comes to politics. He also is a supporter of finding a way to break up what is kind of a-- I'm not going to call it censorship, but it certainly is a monopolistic deprivation of opportunities.

Alex Jones: I want to get at least one caller on the phone before we let you go, Mike. Marilyn in Bergen County, New Jersey, you're on the air.

Marilyn: Yes, hi. I am so angry with this Murdoch and Fox News Network. I can't tell you in here last-- well, it started last Monday and TCI, the cable company we have, and of course, it's a monopoly, we don't have any other choice. Has put it on, and in order to put it on, they have taken away 12 hours of C-SPAN 1, and they've taken away another 12 hours of another station that I don't know about. I'm not interested in it. I called up, I had heard the rumor that in order to get on this cable company, Murdoch is paying $10 per subscriber to the cable company to get online. Now, I think this is absolutely just incredible. This is how he's doing it.

Alex Jones: Mike Schneider?

Mike Schneider: Well, I believe the caller has a point in this sense, is that I happen to live in North Jersey, so I also know that we got a channel allocation here which deprives not C-SPAN 1, but C-SPAN 2, and also a channel that was broadcasting subjects of interest to catholic viewers. There obviously have been channels that have been bumped to make way for us in this area and around the country as well. The $10 ahead-

Marilyn: $10.

Mike Schneider: Exactly. That is not standard operating procedure, but there is an awful lot of incentives that go into various different operations, picking up and running channels. You have to remember that these cable operators are business people. They're looking for returns on their investments.

Marilyn: Obviously. I understood that the cable companies usually paid the networks in order to carry them. I thought it was the opposite.

Mike Schneider: You know what, Eric Mink probably knows a lot more about the must carry regulations and the financial incentives, but I will tell you this, TCI, there's another reason for TCI to be carrying us.

Marilyn: He's angry with Turner.

Mike Schneider: No, TCI happens to have, it's run by the gentleman by the name of John Malone. John Malone has an option of purchasing in. He's a partner or will be a partner in this operation.

Eric Mink: As he tends to be with all the channels.

Alex Jones: I'm not sure he's partners in just about everything.

Mike Schneider: I know that's the man. We talk about Turner and Murdoch, but it's John Malone, maybe the man with hands spread across the globe more than anybody else.

Marilyn: I don't know what the consumer can do. I called the township because, evidently, they have a franchise to carry their programs here in Wyckoff, but they can't do anything about it. They filled out a form and sent it in.

Mike Schneider: You know what, I tend to agree with the caller to a certain extent because, I think, there's an awful lot of channels out there. If TCI really, or any of these cable companies really want to make an impact on us as viewers and offer us choice, why don't they knock some of these freebie porn channels off the air. They say channels for these various different pay per view movies. Knock some of them off and let the marketplace decide on who they really want to watch.

Alex Jones: I tend to agree with you. Marilyn, thank you very much for your call. Mike Schneider, I thank you for being with us. I wish you could stay for the whole hour, but I do appreciate your coming and giving us 30 minutes of your time. Best luck.

Mike Schneider: Alex, thanks very much. Best to you and to Eric as well. Thank you.

Alex Jones: This is On the Media from National Public Radio. I'm Alex Jones. Welcome back to On the Media. We're talking about the new Fox News Channel. My guest here in the studio is Eric Mink, television critic for the New York Daily News, who has written some very provocative things, especially last week, about the sort of, I don't know, battle royal, I think is a fair way to describe the battle going on. The Fox News channel is waging to get on the air of the Time Warner cable system in New York City. Eric, we're very glad to have you with us.

Eric Mink: Thank you. I sort of shoot out on 6th Avenue, but--

Alex Jones: I see. We're now also joined by Mark Jurkowitz, who's the media writer and ombudsman for the Boston Globe. Mark is a longtime Rupert Murdoch watcher. Mark, very glad to have you with us.

Mark Jurkowitz: Thanks, Alex. Good to be here.

Alex Jones: Also with us is Elizabeth Lesly, media editor at BusinessWeek, who's been paying close attention to what on one level is a major league spat between some egomaniacs and at a more serious level, a real test of some serious issues like antitrust and whether politicians can dictate what goes on cable channels. Elizabeth, welcome.

Elizabeth Lesly: Thank you.

Alex Jones: Eric Mink, give us, if you would, in shorthand terms, an idea of what this fight in New York City now is all about.

Eric Mink: Well, it's about money. That's as shorthand as you get it. Murdoch is the third party to try and get in. He's late getting into this all-news cable channel business. As a result, he's employing all sorts of tactics to try and gain an advantage that he lost by being late. One of them, and by the way, I think it's perfectly appropriate for him to do so, is to lobby the governmental people that he thinks can do him good. My problem is with the reactions of those elected officials.

Alex Jones: Well, Elizabeth, do you consider this to be something of importance, or is this a tempest in a teapot that's sort of entertaining for people in New York and kind of dismaying for them perhaps in some ways, but not really of great importance?

Elizabeth Lesly: Oh, I think it's tremendously important. Is a business issue for both Fox and Time Warner. As a political issue, it's of interest to First Amendment watchers regardless of where they live.

Alex Jones: Well, what do you think that issue is as far as you're concerned?

Elizabeth Lesly: First Amendment wise?

Alex Jones: Yes.

Elizabeth Lesly: Whether or not Time Warner has any particular responsibility to take what appears to be any comer in terms of allowing them access to the subscribers to Time Warner's cable system in New York City. Fox is arguing that it has a right, because it's offering a news channel, to have access to those cable subscribers. Obviously, a judge in New York didn't agree on Friday when she issued a temporary restraining order barring them from getting immediate access to the channel.

Alex Jones: Now, for those of you who are not followers of this particular fight, let me just explain it in very, very simple terms to you that make it clear, I hope, what is really being fought over. Time Warner is the local cable company. The problem is, Elizabeth, correct me if I'm wrong, that all of the channel spaces, as far as Time Warner is concerned, are filled. They are using that as the basis for denying access to the Fox News channel.

Elizabeth Lesly: That is what Time Warner at least has been quoted as arguing as the problem, but I don't think that's the issue. They make choices about which channels they're going to give slots to every year, and there are always more channels than there are slots. Time Warner, for whatever agenda it's pursuing, as long as it has that cable franchise, can pick and choose as it pleases.

Alex Jones: Mark Jurkowitz, do you see a First Amendment issue here?

Mark Jurkowitz: I see a lot of issues here. I think there's a legitimate First Amendment issue, but I think the broader issue is, of course, the big playing field now with all this integration, with all this consolidation of not only programming but delivery systems, you're really seeing, I think, in this particular battle, the fault lines drawn like they've never been drawn before. I think that's good for the consumers who need to wake up to this issue.

Alex, I'd say something else, too. Obviously, we don't have the hassle in Boston that you guys are having now, but watching Giuliani getting involved in this and Time Warner going after Giuliani, I don't know what Rupert Murdoch's politics are. They're generally considered conservative, but he certainly has a wonderful way of politicizing his media. I mean, this is not the first time he's gotten politicians directly ensnared in his corporate agenda.

I mean, he used Mario Cuomo back in the '80s to help him get the New York Post back. In 1988 back up here in Boston, Senator Edward Kennedy was instrumental in doing some legislative work that wouldn't allow him to keep both his TV station and the Boston Herald and the attack that he launched on Kennedy on the pages of the Boston Herald editorials that called him fat boy on page 1. I mean, it was a jihad. This history that Rupert Murdoch has of getting his various media outlets directly involved with politicians and using them as a cudgel, I think is also dangerous.

Alex Jones: You've raised a very interesting point. I mean, it is true that the people who have lined up with Rupert Murdoch in this particular fight are the governor of New York, the mayor of New York, a senator from New York state, and the attorney general of New York. Eric Mink, doesn't that kind of make you a little queasy?

Eric Mink: Well, what it tells me is that they are very well aware of the track record that Mark just pointed out and actually less than currying favor with Murdoch because their actions were going to be tested in court. Assuming that the Time Warner had the stomach for the fight, and they clearly do, I would think what was the price of not advocating Murdochs case here?

Was the price going to be becoming the object of some sort of campaign in the New York Post, on Channel 5 here, or those media outlets where Murdoch is willing to exercise his influence? I really don't have very much trouble with the Fox News Channel, at least as presently constituted, except that I don't see that it's offering the consumer a service of very significant difference from what's already available.

Alex Jones: I want to get our listeners in on this conversation. Rose in Teaneck, New Jersey, you're on the air.

Rose: Hello.

Alex Jones: Hi there. You're on the air, Rose.

Rose: Oh, thank you. How could anybody possibly say that this is a biased station? Did anybody listen to MSNBC after the Republican or during the Republican convention? Did anybody listen to Channels 2, 4, 7? Did anybody know what these people were saying? How about John Hockenberry? How about Tom Brokaw on MSNBC? The things they were saying about Republicans during the convention were atrocious. Why were any Democrats even interviewed during that convention? You want to talk about bias.

Alex Jones: Okay, you've raised an interesting point. Mark Jurkowitz, how would you respond to what Rose is saying?

Mark Jurkowitz: I would say that the issue of bias in the news media has been for about 10 to 15 years now, probably since the writing of the media elite back in the early '80s, one of the great political hot button footballs of all time. There are people in this country who have been convinced, and convinced often by alternative media, particularly talk radio, frankly, that there's this incredible liberal bias in the news media. They see it everywhere. They believe it exists despite a lot of evidence to the contrary, including the fact probably that Bill Clinton's had the roughest treatment of any president in history by the news media, and so they're looking for a leavening effect.

When I heard Murdoch in the beginning, he wasn't talking about media news without bias. He was talking about a direct challenge to that, "Liberal Ted Turner," and of course, his wife, Jane Fonda. I think that a lot of people who are convinced as our caller is that there's this liberal bias in the media really wouldn't necessarily admit that Murdoch isn't going to be unbiased. They just think that that'll even up the playing field. Anybody at this point who claims to be unbiased, I think you've got to take with a real grain of salt.

Alex Jones: Rose is that true that what you want is bias, but bias of a different sort?

Rose: Let me tell you something. There is bias, and as long as there's bias on one side, then I want it equal. As far as I'm concerned, there is no equal time as far as I'm concerned. I don't believe that the liberal media, and we know they're liberal, they admit it. I don't think they should be allowed to give their own commentary in the middle of a sentence, in the middle of their agenda. I don't like it. Now, don't tell me that I'm convinced that there is a bias, because I've heard about bias. My ears, my brain tells me there's a bias. I don't still know who I'm going to vote for either, but I want Fox News. I want to hear both sides.

Alex Jones: Well, Rose, it looks like you've already got it over there in Teaneck, I think, anyway. Thank you for your call. Appreciate it.

Eric Mink: It interesting that Rose says she wants to hear both sides because that's why the Democrats were present during coverage of the GOP convention and why Republicans were present during the coverage of the Democratic convention was to allow presentation of both sides rather than just loading up on what was coming out of the podium.

Alex Jones: Elizabeth Lesly, let me ask you, I know that your specialty is the business side of all of this, but how do you weigh the political agenda that Rupert Murdoch has and the power that he has, especially in New York, with the fact that all of these heavy political figures in the Republican Party have lined up with him on this issue?

Elizabeth Lesly: Well, I think that their efforts to identify Fox News as a conservative counterbalance is a clever way to differentiate the channel from other competitors. On a qualitative measure that's what they have going for them. With the issue with Time Warner and the local political situation here in New York City, I think what struck people and got so many people to pay such close attention is that the response that Murdoch was able to get from the three highest ranking politicians in the state, or three of them so quickly in response to Time Warner's decision to carry MSNBC instead of Fox News Channel a couple weeks ago, I think is what is truly extraordinary.

There are a lot of even news services that have been waiting a while to get on Time Warner's cable system. Bloomberg Financial News service is a case in point. They also employ people in New York city. They also offer an earnest effort at presenting, in this case, financial news.

Alex Jones: Well, let me just ask you a fundamental question. If MSNBC had not been chosen and the Fox News Channel had gone on, do you think that the mayor and the others would have gone to bat for putting MSNBC? I mean, here's NBC. They're based in New York, too.

Eric Mink: No, they're based in New Jersey. Their studios are in New Jersey, and the mayor doesn't care about New Jersey. Let's get that straight.

Elizabeth Lesly: Well, actually, in the middle of July, when MSNBC was launched, Bob Wright, who's head of NBC, had picked up on-- there was this widespread feeling in the cable industry that Time Warner had basically reached an agreement with Fox to carry Fox and that they were waiting until after their acquisition of Turner Broadcasting was approved to announce it as a done deal. Bob Wright was tremendously angry at that point because carriage on Time Warner systems is so important. You didn't hear a peep from anybody after he said that. He said in a very public forum with probably 100 reporters in the room with him, and he was quite angry.

Alex Jones: You certainly didn't see the state attorney general filing an antitrust suit. I mean, it's really pretty amazing.

Elizabeth Lesly: I don't know if he's filed a suit. I think it's an investigation.

Alex Jones: Okay, investigation. I beg your pardon.

Eric Mink: Launch the day after they had dinner at Murdoch's Soiree for the launch of the news channel.

Alex Jones: I know. There was an article in The New York Times this morning that traces this political lobbying that went on to prompt this. John in Erie, Pennsylvania, you're on the air.

John: Yes, I think far from there being a liberal bias in the media, it's a right wing bias. The only choice we have is really between right wing and ultra-right wing. I was reading some media monitors who write unreliable sources in a book called Don't Blame the People by Robert Cirino, and they point out that the media loves to publicize, as Paul Smith says, media as liberal as a way of covering up the fact that it is really a right wing conservative bias and that helps to push the debate even further to the right and exclude really a liberal, let alone a leftist voice.

I think if we're going to have an alternative, we ought to have maybe 100 WBAI channels or Pacific radio channels rather than being off in the tiny margins of the ether. It just seems to me that the media being very big business, being interlocked and owned by military industrial corporations like GE and Westinghouse owning CBS and NBC, and even being penetrated by the CIA, according to William Colby at his testimony to the '70s Pike Commission in the Senate, said that they had their agents throughout the media. That's not going to be a liberal media. That's going to be a right wing media.

Alex Jones: Let me get a response from Eric Mink on that.

Eric Mink: Well, I think he brings up a good point. I don't think I would go quite as far as the right wing conspiracy idea, but the notion that the General Electric industrial conglomerate is going to be advocating some sort of wacko left wing agenda through its news operations is, to me at least, farfetched. I mean, I just don't think that's the case. I don't think there's a left wing right wing bias.

Alex Jones: Are we talking about really the difference between Democrats and Republicans versus the difference between far right wing and far left wing politics?

Eric Mink: I think what we're talking about really because you've seen this for a long time, I think what we're talking about is difference between competence and incompetence. I think when people see what they believe to be bias in news stories, I think what they're seeing more of is the evidence of incompetence or just failed effort of journalism, which is very hard to do well and fairly.

Alex Jones: Well, Mark Jurkowitz, what about the idea, though, that the variation is very much in the center, and it's not really-- I mean, I would submit that just as the caller, John, was saying that there's really no left wing, far left wing representation on television, neither is there the kind of right wing representation that there could be. The American Spectator doesn't have a show that is sponsored, although a lot of the perspectives of the American Spectator are represented in some of the new shows that we see, especially the more conservative ones. What do you think?

Mark Jurkowitz: Many on CNN, by the way, Alex. Many folks end up on CNN. The game is definitely played within the 40-yard lines. The countervailing argument that our caller made to the argument that is made that most journalists are liberal and they can't leave those feelings at home is that, in fact, media companies and to an ever-increasing degree are gigantic corporations with a vested interest in basically maintaining the status quo with a ton of interlocking business connections.

For all the conspiracy theories that the public have about the media, many of which are right, it's funny that with all this distrust of big business, that the idea about the way these relationships and these conglomerates might be polluting news coverage just doesn't seem to have seeped down yet to the level where people are concerned about them. I think if there's one good thing that may happen in this Turner Murdoch battle, it's to sort of humanize and personify the issue, because up till now, these media corporations have looked like these giant, faceless entities and people can't get a grip on him.

I think with Turner and Murdoch going at each other head on and putting a human face, I think people are now going to start thinking about what it may mean when CNN reports on the Time Warner merger, for example, or when Good Morning America begins to review Disney movies. That's not an issue that somehow has percolated down to the public, and if anything good comes out of this battle, I hope it will.

Alex Jones: That's an interesting point. Interesting point. John, thank you very much for your call. Mark Jurkowitz, let me ask you one follow up question to that comment that you just made about the positive effect of all of this. Have you given much thought to the idea that this is really a huge public relations-- I know it's trying to make lemonade out of lemons, but it seems to me that Rupert Murdoch, at the very least has been very effective in creating a curiosity and a demand for the Fox News Channel. What do you think?

Mark Jurkowitz: Well, that's first and foremost correct. Ted Turner, by the way, has lost part of the public relations war when he made a ridiculous remark comparing Murdoch to Hitler and then had to apologize, the anti-defamation league. Already Murdoch outmaneuvered him a little bit. Murdoch is a very crafty guy and you got to be careful, too, even when you suggest that he's strictly conservative. His record is a little mixed. Obviously, his newspapers have been conservative, but yet he owned the Village Voice at one point.

Alex Jones: Well, he left the Village Voice alone. That's right.

Mark Jurkowitz: Yes, he left the Village Voice alone. If you look at the Fox TV network that he owns, it is the least conservative family values network in the history of American television. It's pushed the edges of TNA and sexual titillation to a degree that probably angers many of the conservatives in this country. Murdoch looks to make money, and I think that's his leading ideology.

Alex Jones: Well, that's probably true. We've got more to say. We've got more calls to take. Stay with us. This is On the Media from National Public Radio. I'm Alex Jones. We're back with On the Media. My guests are Elizabeth Lesly, media editor of BusinessWeek magazine Mark Jurkowitz, media writer and ombudsman for the Boston Globe, and Eric Mink, television critic for the New York Daily News. Elizabeth Lesly, do you see this Fox News Channel as a major tentacle in a media octopus that is being created that is one of two or three out there? I mean, is this very, very important for Rupert Murdoch?

Elizabeth Lesly: It is indeed. He lacks and now quite glaringly, a major national news operation in the United States to use as a base around the world and all these distribution vehicles he has or is developing satellites and what have you. It's a flagship marquee property for him potentially. That's what he hopes that it brings to him. That's why he spent $80 million so far. He'll spend $165 million operating it in the first year. He spent a good deal of money renovating a street floor news studio in midtown Manhattan because he wants it to be very recognizable in a flagship property form. That's why he's fighting so hard.

Alex Jones: Well, now he's certainly fighting hard, but let's say hypothetically, that he is not able to do what he wants, which is to get on Time Warner in New York. I guess, is it Time Warner everywhere or is it just in New York that he's not on?

Elizabeth Lesly: Well, he's not on any of the Time Warner systems, but he's making getting on in New York the primary issue.

Alex Jones: Okay. Well, let's just say for a moment that he doesn't win and that Time Warner's back is so up and they're so mad and they are so, within their rights, that they simply are not going to let him do it. What happens to him now?

Elizabeth Lesly: Well, Time Warner's franchise with the city, I believe, is up for renewal next year. I believe it's next year. At that time, the city could legitimately put them through some sort of administrative hell and grant the franchise to a different cable operator and Murdoch could get on then. In the meantime, the problem with most cable channels is that no one cares when they're launched and no one is aware of them and they're rarely seen. Murdoch by going through this exercise, I'm sure he hoped that quickly he'd be put on the Time Warner systems and that would be the end of it. We're having an hour-long conversation about the Fox News Channel, and I bet you didn't have an hour-long conversation about TV Land when Viacom launched.

Alex Jones: We had an hour-long conversation when MSNBC came on. I guess we take news a little more seriously in that respect. Eric Mink, while we're on this subject, I don't want to leave it without hearing a how many hypocrites you think can dance on the pip of this particular pin and why?

Eric Mink: Well, apparently there is no limit to the number. I mean, you look at Murdoch, who has been this champion of free enterprise and competition, and what's he doing? He's going to federal court crying that he can't get a special break from Time Warner, that they chose to pick somebody else to cut a deal with instead of him, and that somehow he deserves relief from the government for that. That's a clear hypocrisy.

Time Warner says that they would love to have the space to put this new news channel on, but they already have CNN on which they now own headline news. They've got CNN financial news sharing a channel, and they have NBC's channel, which I still prefer to call Miznibic, since that's the way they choose to spell it. You don't have much of a real incentive for Time Warner to do it.

Roger Ailes, who was running the operation over there, we have to remember, quit NBC after getting CNBC off to a great start, and then a channel called Americas Talking, which was not so distinguished, which was converted into MSNBC and taken away from him and given to NBC News. He's irritated at that and would like nothing better than to bury MSNBC with his own Fox News Channel. Yet all of these people we're really for the-

Alex Jones: Everyone is laughing themselves with whatever rectitude they can possibly summon. Interesting. Greg, in Salt Lake City, Utah, you're on the air.

Greg: Hi.

Alex Jones: Hi there.

Greg: I was listening here staring at the ceiling, I really enjoy the topic. It seems surprising that we have a lot of people from the East Coast talking about it from BusinessWeek, New York Daily News. The original question that I thought I was going to respond to, it seems you've now gone on to other topics, was the question was, is the new network or Fox, MSNBC or CNN perspective different? And does that translate into a bias?

Alex Jones: That's still a good question.

Greg: I'm sitting here thinking, well, is that even something we want to even talk about?

Alex Jones: No, no, no, go ahead.

Greg: My view is the answer is yes. The reason I say that is because each corporation, whether it be a newspaper or magazine, has certain values, perspectives, and they have a definition of quality and a definition of success, whether it be market share or cash flow. That in turn drives behavior. When we come back to the question of does a particular news agency, whether it be electronic or print medium, does that perspective necessarily mean there's a bias? I think the answer is yes.

Alex Jones: Well, Mark Jurkowitz, how would you respond to that?

Mark Jurkowitz: Well, the old line about journalism is obviously you can only be fair. You can never be objective. To me, bias is in the eye of the beholder. I think fundamentally, the mainstream news media in this country, by and large, except for the ones that really wrap themselves in certain agendas, are in the middle of the playing field. I think that the public is intelligent enough to filter what they hear through their own perspective. There is nothing out there, frankly, right now that is going to convince people otherwise.

I think Murdoch's message in this, even if he doesn't say it overtly anymore, is, "Look, there's too much liberal slant. I'm going to switch it the other way. That's going to be considered the middle." There's a media research center which is a right wing media watchdog group, avowedly right wing. They're the ones who are always criticizing liberal media in this country. When you talk to them, they say, "We don't pretend we're down the middle. We try and create balance." I think that's the message that Murdoch is sending here. Two wrongs don't make a right, so that equation doesn't necessarily add up. I think that's a subtle message.

Alex Jones: Greg, thank you very much for your call. Elizabeth Lesly, before we leave this altogether, we're coming close to the end here. How legitimate is the antitrust issue here?

Elizabeth Lesly: Whose allegation of antitrust?

Alex Jones: The antitrust issue has been raised by Murdoch against Time Warner? Because, essentially, he's saying, "You have no right to keep me off. It's an antitrust discrimination against me. You control this cable system. I'm your competitor. You can't shut me out."

Elizabeth Lesly: Well, actually, I read through their suit a couple days ago when it was filed. What seems to be one of the central points for them is that Gerald Levin went out to Montana and spoke with Ted Turner about this and other issues over Labor Day weekend before the merger had closed. One of the allegations in the suit is of antitrust conspiracy. Their view is that Turner somehow encouraged Gerald Levin to break what was intended to be a deal with Fox News at that meeting.

Alex Jones: Let me ask you, I'm afraid we're going to have to cut to the chase. Do you think it's going to fly or do you think it's not?

Elizabeth Lesly: Well, the FTC, when it was reviewing the Time Warner Turner merger, spent many, many months looking at this issue.

Alex Jones: I'm going to have to ask you, yes or no, Elizabeth?

Elizabeth Lesly: It's not for me to say.

Alex Jones: Okay. I'm sorry. We've come to the end. We've run out of time. I want to thank Elizabeth Lesly, media editor of BusinessWeek, Mark Jurkowitz, media writer and ombudsman for the Boston Globe, and Eric Mink, television critic for the New York Daily News. The producer for On the Media is Judith Hepburn Blank, with associate producer Jennifer Nix and assistant producer Kavita Menon, production assistant Devorah Klar. Our technical director is George Edwards with audio engineer George Wellington. I'm Alex Jones.

[MUSIC]

Announcer: If you have questions or comments about On the Media, call 1-800-343-3342. Funding for On the Media is provided by the John S. And James L. Knight Foundation, the Poynter Institute for Media Studies, the Edith and Henry Everett foundation, the WNYC Foundation and National Public Radio. This program is a production of WNYC New York Public Radio in association with the Poynter Institute for Media Studies at St. Petersburg, Florida. This is NPR, National Public Radio.

 

Copyright © 2024 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.