Eric Pfeiffer of the Washington Times interviewed me yesterday for a story on the continuing controversy over President Clinton's "Fox News Sunday" interview with Chris Wallace:
"I do think this is helpful to Democrats for Clinton to go after Fox directly. It's a smart play," said Brendan Nyhan, former co-editor of the nonpartisan online watchdog Spinsanity. "Liberals are excited to see someone high-profile go after Fox News explicitly."
Politicians attacking the media is nothing new. A perceived liberal bias in the mainstream press has been a staple of Republican strategy for decades.
"A reporter has a right to ask tough questions about the issues of the day," said Michael X. Delli Carpini, dean of the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania. "The real question is the larger context it's being done in. It's not an unreasonable feeling on the part of Democrats."
Mr. Nyhan says Mr. Clinton's continued popularity with Democrats helps give his criticism of Fox legitimacy.
...Despite all the criticism, some think Fox stands to gain as much from the controversy as the Democrats. The interview with Mr. Clinton gave "Fox News Sunday" its highest ratings since the capture of deposed Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein in 2003.
"It's the Howard Stern effect," Mr. Nyhan said. "You have half the audience listening because they love it and half listening because they hate it."
This might actually be a story (cie Roger Ailes weeping) if Chris Wallace had actually let the President finish his answer(s). You almost got the impression he wanted to hear the questions and liked the sound of itl, but to actually listen to someone give a detailed answer?
Too much.
I am impressed that Chris' will apparently ask any question emailed to him, though.
I'm sure that's true.
Posted by: Lettuce | September 28, 2006 at 09:55 AM
Moving up in the world aren't we? From TAP to the Moonie rags. I give it a month for the NYTimes. :)
Posted by: Seth | September 30, 2006 at 08:20 AM