As we all know, Fox News is a cesspool of Republican talking points disguised as objective news analysis. However, there has always been one bright spot in the cesspool -- Eric Burns' "Fox News Watch," a weekly media analysis show.
Burns' show was the only one on Fox News to hire true liberal commentators, rather than "Fox News Democrats" who provide the illusion of balance while actually bashing Democrats every time they fail to act like Republicans. (Neal Gabler, and before him, Jeff Cohen, were real progressives who would never be mistaken for Fox News Democrats).
Therefore, I suppose it wasn't a surprise when, about three weeks ago, we learned that Fox News had fired Eric Burns (and Neal Gabler to boot).
"Fox News Watch," one of two weekly television shows that assess the conduct of the national news media, has fired its longtime moderator and let go one of its more liberal panelists.
The changes, according to a Fox News Channel spokeswoman, are meant to take the show in a different direction. "The show will now focus more on the evolving new media, and we didn’t feel the current talent would be capable of handling the new direction," Dana Klinghoffer, a Fox spokeswoman, said in an e-mail message.
Last week, the show’s moderator, Eric Burns, was told he would be terminated within the next two months. In an interview, he said he was startled by his sudden and unexplained dismissal, although last year his employment status was reduced from staff to contributor.
In another shift, Neal Gabler, a media writer and historian who was a weekly panelist on "Fox News Watch" until last November, said that Fox had offered to renew his agreement but had never given him a new contract, leaving him in limbo. Ms. Klinghoffer disputed Mr. Gabler’s account and said the two parties could not come to terms.
Since that time, to nobody's surpise, "Fox News Watch" has turned into yet a another outlet for recycling Republican talking points:
On last Saturday’s Fox News Watch (February 23rd) moderator E.D. Hill brought up a CNN memo from management which listed, for use in reports about Castro’s resignation, the positive accomplishments of the Cuban leader – a "no-no" for the right wing. She noted that this story "surfaced" on several blogs; but didn’t identify them. Her sources – all right wing blogs - included American Pundit and Newsbusters. Hill, of course, editorialized that this was a "be nice to Castro" memo and wondered if the same thing would have been recommended in coverage of Hitler and Saddam Hussein. (Comment: wasn’t Rumsfeld being "nice" to Saddam in that famous photo?) Not surprisingly, Cal Thomas said that "big media" and the "Hollywood Left" have been "singing Castro’s praises." Stepping out of her "objective" moderator role and doing more editorializing, Hill "wondered who all those actors and actresses would visit now." (Comment: which American film stars have visited Castro; but who cares when you can bash the "Hollywood Left!") And speaking of management memos, it’s not just CNN. Fox’s John Moody issued a memo which stated "Be On The Lookout For Any Statements From The Iraqi Insurgents...Thrilled At The Prospect Of A Dem Controlled Congress"... So while CNN was just dealing with reality; Fox was going for the right wing angle.
And as for liberal voices, it looks like only Fox News Democrats need apply. Yesterday, the so-called progressives were represented on Fox News Watch by Kirsten Powers, a Fox News Democrat extraordinaire.
So, in response, I have an idea. MSNBC's current weekend programming is awful. It's wall-to-wall "stories of serial killers" and similar dreck. I think they should hire Eric Burns and give him a Saturday evening show with the very same name as the show he had on Fox News -- Fox News Watch. But despite having the same name as the Fox News show, the MSNBC would be something entirely different. Instead of watching the media in general, the MSNBC show would have the sole purpose of monitoring Fox News's biased programming! Fox News Watch indeed!
Now, sure, Fox News will complain about copyright violations. But I think MSNBC would have a decent "fair use" defense. After all, the title is for a different purpose than the title on Fox News, and therefore brings additional intellectual content, which is the heart of the fair use defense.
And if Fox News were to sue, it would bring a HUGE amount of attention and media coverage to the show, and help launch it as an immediate success. It would be Al Franken and "Lies and the Lying Liars" all over again.
What do you think? Is this a good idea? Burns could have David Brock (of Media Matters), and Robert Greenwald (of Brave New Films) on as regular guests. I think this is a GREAT idea for a show. Does anyone have any connections at MSNBC to get this party started?