As I’m sure you’re aware by now, because I complained about it constantly, I have a personal interest in the role of Fox News in getting my current governor, John Kasich, elected. The media personalities on Fox (Governor Kasich’s former co-workers) weren’t subtle when promoting candidate Kasich.
Too, Rupert Murdoch is a personal friend and huge donor to his former employee, Governor Kasich.
Call me crazy, but I’m wondering how Fox News can cover Kasich in a fair and balanced fashion. They campaigned for him.
So this is interesting:
Gawker, the popular blog based in New York, is going to court to investigate the relationship between the Fox News chairman, Roger Ailes, and Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey.
On Monday, the company and one of its reporters, John Cook, plan to file a civil suit against Mr. Christie’s office to try to obtain records of the communications between the two men. Mr. Cook, who regularly uses freedom of information and open public records acts to ferret out information for his Gawker articles, said the court action represents the first lawsuit filed by Gawker to obtain information.
Mr. Cook had already sent a request to Mr. Christie’s office for any letters, logs of phone calls or records of meetings between Mr. Ailes and Mr. Christie. Mr. Cook asserted that that communications trail should be available under the state’s open public records act, but in mid-June, Mr. Christie’s office said that the records, if they exist, would be exempt upon “executive privilege and well-settled case law.” To Mr. Cook, this was an implication that Mr. Ailes is a confidential adviser to Mr. Christie. After he said so in an article, the New Jersey chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union approached him and offered to take the case.
For Mr. Cook, the lawsuit may be a way to document the personal political engagement of Mr. Ailes, a person whom he has labeled a “propagandist” in repeated articles. In an interview, he asserted that the public has come to recognize that Fox News is an ideological outlet. “The next thing that I would like to be publicly acknowledged is not just that they’re ideological — they’re not just the TV equivalent of The Weekly Standard or something — they are actually a power base within the Republican Party,” he said.Through the lawsuit, Mr. Cook hopes to either obtain the records of contacts between the two men, or, alternatively, to have Mr. Christie’s office explain to a judge why each of the records is confidential. “That,” he said, “would be, in and of itself, a newsworthy outcome.”
I think the Ohio ACLU should follow the New Jersey ACLU. Transparency should certainly be in the interest of a free press, I would think, and last time I looked, Ohio had strong sunshine laws pertaining to public officials.
Linda Featheringill
Ooooh! You go, Kay!
And in the service of transparency, keep the public informed about the efforts to uncover the connections between Kasich and the Murdoch Empire.
RalfW
As much as I’ve been railing against the idiot press, this comes as a relief. It really is time for new outlets like Gawker to take on the role totally abdicated by our traditional media. Yay!
Dollared
This is great, Kay. This coudd well the route to finding out what happened “at the back door of No.10 Downing,” on this side of the pond. One breach in the wall will bring many other suits in many other jurisdictions.
I only have direct knowledge of the public records act of the soc***ist paradise of Washington State, but that executive privilege argument would not hold a thimble of water here.
I’m also wondering why this isn’t pursued by one of the major papers in New Jersey, or in Ohio, somebody like the Plain Dealer. You would think this would be a rich vein to mine, and they have no reason to think of Fox as a “Sister network.”
RalfW
While I’m at it, I’ll also say Yay! to The Guardian, who has been an amazing exemplar of how the practice of journalism can be a boon to society.
dpcap
They probably used his connections to hack into the cell phones of Democratic party officials.
RalfW
Dollared:
My partner left the local daily here in the T.C. about 18 months ago. He left partly in disgust at how toothless local media has become. Editors in chief now cower in fear of loosing suburban subscribers.
The days of local city dailies thinking they have an affirmative, intrusive role to play in detecting malfeasance is over. They’re scared shitless of how to function in a world that seems like quick sand. They have no budget for deep investigation that may not produce results, or will produce them much later.
I just gave kudos to The Guardian, but the news is they’re going broke too. It’ll be interesting to see if them breaking the Murdoch scandal will earn them much new revenue. They need it.
kay
I think it’s going to take some getting used to, conceptually, because it’s media investigating media. It’s a record’s request directed to a media person and his relationship with a state actor.
I think it’s fascinating, and tracks the Murdoch case. What do you do when the watchdog joins forces with the watched? Is there a public interest in one media outlet watching another? Surely there was in Murdoch/England. How does that combine with the state side (Christie, Cameron) and the fact that one media outlet or entity will be investigating their competitor(s)?
If FOX is in bed with the state actors they’re covering, well, that’s a new question.
NorthernMNer
Remarkable that Gawker is now the heir to the Cronkite/Brinkley tradition of doing actual investigation/follow-up in journalism.
The access-obsessed MSM should feel some level of shame that a website who’s bread and butter are things like True Blood recaps is now outstripping them at their own game.
They won’t, of course.
RalfW
I enjoyed that little joke!
kay
Well, be careful, because I was having a panic attack when our last GOP Governor, Taft, asserted his ridiculous “privilege” argument to dodge records law and it was upheld by our hacktastic supreme court. (pdf)
So check. One can’t take anything for granted with these crooks. I predicted very bad things when Taft won on it, but my screeching was ignored :)
RalfW
More seriously, what is happening here is what has been the case in England for many years: media outlets with specific political leanings. I lived there in the mid-80s and it took a bit for me to adjust, but once you know that the spectrum runs Telegraph-Daily Mail-Times-Independent-Guardian, R to L, you start to learn how to synthesize your own understanding (if you have time). Always seemed heavy on the right, with the Independent trying to be that, and really just the Guardian on the left.
I skimmed the Tepegraph at home in the a.m. (conservative roomie), read the F.T. (business-conservative, not expticitly Tory), Times and Guardian at work (my bosses/biz owners were one flaming near-socialist liberal, and one blue-blood “I say, what-ho” chap – best friends since Oxford). It was always fascinating to detect the biases. But I’m like that.
Anyhoooo. My rambling point is that the US is clinging to the “objective press” notion, but functionally it’s not true. And despite the “media is liberal” bullshit, just like England, the conservative to liberal ratio is probably really 3:1 in the US of A media.
Yes, reporters on average tend to be liberal. Editors and publishers, however, tend to be conservative. And they have the power. They set the tone.
Amir_Khalid
My understanding is that Fox News is quite shameless about its partisanship, at least in the US. And this kind of influence is clearly undue. But would it actually break any laws there? Because if it doesn’t, I can easily imagine Christie the Corpulent answering any questions about it: “What’s your name — Kay? You know what, Kay, it’s none of your damn business… ” followed by bragging about how he pays more than your total income in state and local taxes, and then by whining about the onerousness of his duties as governor and then finished off with dark mutterings about liberals who want to give it all away on a platter. After all, this is a man who learned about governance as a devout viewer of The Sopranos.
Kay
That approach actually didn’t help the former governor of Ohio, Bob Taft. The GOP had (essentially) stolen money that was slated for workers comp and Taft stonewalled and hemmed and hawed, blocking a records request ( he won that round) and many still went to prison and the rest got creamed (for corruption) in the next election.
Violet
How long before Republicans do away with the Freedom of Information Act? It’s obviously a plot by Democrats to destroy the government.
ruemara
So…much…good…news!
kay
But that isn’t what he’s claiming. He concedes that FOX is conservative. That’s the comparison to the Weekly Standard.
What he wants to know is if FOX is directly recruiting and supporting candidates, because that starts to shade into a competitive edge in free media for Ailes-chosen candidates.
He wants to know if they’re directly involved in what is the job of a political party. If they are, people should know that, because that makes them the media arm of the Republican Party, little different than a GOP website or ad.
It’s the difference between a newspaper editorial page endorsing the Party candidate, and a newspaper owner calling a candidate and asking that he run.
RalfW
No argument from me on any of that, kay.
I think FOX already is an arm of the Republican Party, and welcome anything that can show a factual connection.
I was clumsily trying to make a point that in addition, the notion of “objective journalism” is effectively dead in the US, and it’d be healthier to acknowledge that.
kay
Oh, agreed. I have loftier goals, though. What I’d like admitted (or refuted) is the notion that there is a public interest in knowing how far in bed they are and with whom. Does that mean they give deference or cover for their chosen politicians? Should people take that into consideration?
If that isn’t true, if there is no public interest, if news is just a bidness, we should probably stop telling kids noble nonsense about the Fourth Estate, and just tell them it’s like Burger King versus McDonalds.
Cat Lady
The fact that there’s no real discussion in other media about the role of Roger Ailes in the grooming and promoting of Republican candidates just shows how far off the FAIL rails the press is in this country, and that there’s anyone left who can honestly still believe in the “liberal” media is truly a testament to the power of pure propaganda and intimidation. Imagine if half of the Democratic candidates in any given presidential election had their own shows on MSNBC – the fairness doctrine would be re-enacted so fast it would make the ACORN defunding look like a slow motion tortoise race.
Given all that, Ailes’ hatred for Romney is legendary – hence all the calls to Christie, so if Romney ends up surviving the primaries it won’t be thanks to Fox and Ailes.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
Thanks, kay – as always you are insightful and correct.
I agree, but we know how much King John ignores such laws. It would be interesting to see that splashed about loudly and publicly though.
arguingwithsignposts
kay, is it possible that you could file a FOIA request? As I understand, one does not have to be a member of the media to file a request in some states.
dollared
Hi Kay,
Washington just recently averted a conservative takeover of the Supreme Court. That flank is protected for now.
Our big problem is the “liberals” are bankrolled by technology billionaires, so we will never have progressive taxation or healthy public schools. Seattle is civil libertarian, socially liberal, and fiscally regressive. Eastern Washington is the classic – a desert made to bloom with federal dollars, and controlled by a class of white agricultural landowners who run their apple orchards, wineries, potato farms and wheat farms exactly as if it was Alabama in 1840, except the slaves speak Spanish. Their major concern is that the federal government needs to stop interfering with their God-given right to free water, cheap labor, free rural electrification and agricultural subsidies.
kay
Hah! See, I was thinking technology billionaires would be great to have around, but apparently not. I’ve never been to Washington (or Oregon), but I would certainly go.
Protect your court at all costs, is my advice. Sadly, the Ohio supreme court has the dubious distinction of rulings that exactly track judicial campaign donations. I remember printing this article out when I saw it, sitting back and reading it, and being just horrified.
I once helped on a judicial campaign for the state high court. The candidate was unusual. His theme was “judges and money don’t mix”. He and his kids printed out flyers in his garage. That was about it, as far as the strategy. He was a nurse, lawyer (of course) and Vietnam vet. He lost. He just got buried by the money his opponent raised. Sad.
Roger Moore
@kay:
I’d say that the bigger problem is that elections and judges just don’t mix. An elected judiciary is just an awful, awful idea that ought to have been discarded a long time ago.
dollared
yes, technology billionaires are good on some things, but they hate unions, especially all those teachers who didn’t recognize and venerate their Asperger’s, and it just hurts too much for them to accept progressive taxation. Last time an income tax was proposed here, it was lead by Bill Gates, Sr. – a truly noble liberal Republican.
It was quashed by a well-funded group led by Jeff Bezos of we-don’t-pay-sales-taxes-either nyah nyah Amazon, and a VC whose entire fortune was built on commercializing technologies from the University of Washington, but who relentless;y demagogued all the “waste” in education. Fucking parasites.
kay
I (reluctantly) agree. The argument for elected judges is that it opens the process up to someone other than an academic star or big-firm lawyer.
Because I believe judges do need some familiarity with a whole range of people ( I know this is hotly contested with SCOTUS justices, the whole empathy thing) I was sympathetic to that argument. I DO think judges need some real-world experiences. I liked Sotomayor precisely because she had been a prosecutor. That’s a different take than corporate lawyer or judge, and there’s value in different takes. I think judges get isolated and stupid, in a very learned way, of course, unless they occasionally touch down here with the rabble.
But the massive amounts of money beat my high-minded purpose, and now I think we have to appoint them. But we’ll pay for that. We’ll get a narrower range of experiences.