COMMENTARY

Fox News Not Welcome At DNC Debates: Network Needs An 'Alternative News' Outlet

• by Wayne Friedman , Staff Writer, March 8, 2019

Fox News Channel won’t be hostingany upcoming Democratic presidential debates next year, as per a decision made by the Democratic National Committee.

Maybe Fox News needs a good marketing facelift to change critics minds.

Ask yourself: Is this ban too encompassing? Is the conservative news channel’s senior Fox News editors/executives to blame?

The DNC decision is about the network’s too-close-for-comfort relationship between Fox and the Trump Administration. DNC chair Tom Perez called it an "inappropriate relationship." 

But should we blame the on-the-ground Fox News journalists? Do all Fox News journalists operate in some sort of monolithic block?

Not exactly. According to a recent story in The New Yorker, Fox News knew of the Stormy Daniels sexual relationship/payoff story. In 2016, Fox News reporter Diana Falzone got that story, readies it for broadcast in October of that year. She also confirmed the “catch and kill” deal with National Enquirer.

But the story didn’t run. And she eventually left Fox News.

Some other moves that didn’t go as expected:

1. Fox News’ Chris Wallace recently pressed Stephen Miller, a senior Trump adviser, on the need for a border wall.
2. Fox News' anchor Shepard Smith contradicted Trump’s claim about immigrants: “There is no invasion, no one is coming to get you.”
3. Wallace also told White House spokesperson Sarah Sanders her claim that “nearly 4,000 known or suspected terrorists come into our country illegally” was wildly inaccurate.

The problem: Stories critical of the Trump Administration are rare.

Democratic presidential candidates should be asked the hard questions -- by any and all reporters. But that works both ways.

How many times has Fox News Channel called out Presidential Trump for lies or misleading information since taking office?  According to The Washington Post, the lies total 9,014 to date. Let’s say that’s an exaggeration. So cut that in half. 4,000 lies? Still too many? Is 2,000 a good number?

Maybe it’s all about a certain daypart. Remember what Fox’s Shepard Smith said about the network's prime-time shows last year. "Some of our opinion programming is there strictly to be entertaining... We serve different masters.” Now say it on air.

Fox’s opinionated-driven prime-time programming takes on a higher marketing profile for many observers, resulting in big viewership. 

And if Fox doesn’t want to do credible journalism all the time -- just label it as such. Called it "alternative, highly-charged information you may be able to use.” Or a new riff on the old Fox marketing line (something TV Watch alluded to in the past). Turn “We report. You decide” into “We report. We decide.”

TV advertisers might appreciate it; and marketing executives might even see gains in viewers for all that entertainment.

Then, if Fox "journalist" Sean Hannity wants to go onstage during a President Trump rally, we can all calmly watch how high he jumps.