Below is the exchange via media matters:
STEWART: You can't understand because of the world you live in that there is not a designed ideological agenda on my part to affect partisan change because that's the soup you swim in. And I appreciate that. And I understand that. It reminds me of, you know -- you know, in ideological regimes, they can't understand that there is free media other places. Because they receive marching orders. AND IF YOU WANT ME TO GO THROUGH BILL SAMMON'S EMAILS AND --
WALLACE: DO YOU THINK I'VE EVER -- How do you explain me?
STEWART: OH I THINK YOU DO A NICE JOB. AND I'VE TOLD YOU THAT ON THE SHOW. I THINK YOU'RE ONE OF THE MOST INTERESTING --
WALLACE: Do you think I get marching orders?
STEWART: I think that you are here in some respects to bring a credibility and an integrity to an organization that might not otherwise have it, without your presence. So, you are here as a counterweight to Hannity, let's say, or you are here as a counterweight to Glenn Beck, because otherwise, it's just pure talk radio and it doesn't establish the type of political player it wants to be.
If you watched Fox News Sunday you would not have seen the bolded text because Wallace - a very serious reporter - and his buddies censored edited it out. Which is sort of ironic for a man demanding that others recognize Fox as a legitimate news organization, while using the same tactics that a propaganda organ would use.
Wallace was clearly censoring Stewart so his viewers would not get the entire picture. Is that what very serious reporters do? Censor their guests to keep their viewers ignorant? How anyone can consider Fox - and yes even the venerable Chris Wallace - a legitimate news source is beyond me.