well first off faux news is a particular case. it is less an information outlet than a conservative political engine, a relay for conservative memes. rubert murdoch, roger ailes--this isn't rocket science. fox's business model is predicated on the existence of a considerable conservative demographic, and so they've found themselves moving from reflecting the memes-of-the-moment within a wider conservative movement to being a central player in effectively holding that movement together in the afterglow of george w bush et al. i think it's hard to overstate the importance of faux news for the right. and as much as i would like to see faux news erased off the face of the earth, murdoch's pockets are deep enough and his committment to reactionary politics seemingly deep enough that unless some basic seachange happens in what constitutes information (or until the equal time legislation is reinstated, the repeal of which is what opened the space for conservative-land to spread into the mainstream and get its arguments confused with legitimate ones), it'll be a feature in the ever-so-free corporate dominated american media-scape.
i think that the bigger question---of conservative biais in the american press across the board--is a complicated one. it think there is without question such a biais, but some of its features are not specifically conservative (for example narrowness of coverage of international events, the tendency, which has increased over the past 20 years, to simply repeat or rebroadcast pre-packaged infotainment because it's cheap and easy)--are preconditions for conservative arguments appearing to be reasonable. but it'd take some doing to make this case in a compelling way, particularly in a messageboard context, and at the moment i haven't the time to undertake it. maybe later. or not. who can say?
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|