Fox News Compared To Astv

[webfact]

FOX News Compared to ASTV

M.L. Nattakorn Devakula

Amidst the current political climate where the ideological dividing lines within political parties take form, there is an obvious phenomenon that is occurring. This comes in the form politically motivated media organization. What has gone down over the past several years is quite interesting from the perspective of those who studies how influential media outlets can become.

Stylized reports by well-honed news anchors are used as the main outlets in convincing the general public. Strong and harsh words are used against targeted politicians to signal hatred towards particular groups or individuals. In the ASTV case, much of the hatred was targeted towards former PM Thaksin Shinawatra. Though there was additional fuel added for all politicians aligned with the Thai Rak Thai, People Power, and Peua Thai parties. The main objective was to distinguish 'bad' politicians out from the 'good' hence showing all mainstream press that they don't know what they are doing or at least were not digging deep enough for dirt on Thaksin-aligned politicians. This was the modus operandi and it worked to a particular extent. ASTV-Manager has been able to take charge in the rooting out of allegedly corrupt politicians, leading other bodies even the National Anti-Corruption Commission, the Democrat Party, and the courts.

For FOXNews it was rather simple: rally that conservative base hard. Over in the United States, instead of using the nation-religion-king centerpiece, FOXNews opted for a rather simple advocacy of national security over personal privacy, religio-traditional pro-life no-gay-marriage stance over the more liberal counterparts in all of those ideas. This simple advocacy resonates with folks in the heartland of America--already dissatisfied with the world that was quickly changing and values that were quickly evolving around them. By instilling fear into the hearts and minds of Americans, FOXNews has been able to sensitize Americans to rally behind its networks' anchors. Bash Obama and those liberal Democrats, rally the conservative base around the Glen Becks, the Sean Hannities, and the Bill O'Reillies, and eventually the Republican party will come begging.

Comparisons are obvious. Both ASTV and FOXNews have and always been politically motivated. They don't answer to political parties but rather political parties answer to them. In the end ASTV-Manager undercuts the Democrat Party's base in Thailand, while the FOXNews network undercuts the Republican Party's base in the United States. Look at what's gone down with the New York District Congressional Elections, the Republican Party candidate there, Dede Scozzfava, couldn't even get her own party base's support. This inevitably forced her candidacy's withdrawal 1 week prior to election date. The Democrat Party candidate, Bill Owens, actually won in that election over a right-wing independent Doug Hoffman, unofficially endorsed by FOXNews' popular anchors. The idea behind both ASTV and FOXNews is to have its own networks become such a political force that policy agendas can be dictated from the editorial room and the anchors' desks, or better yet from Sondhi Limthongkul's mansion or Rupert Murdoch's penthouses. The former is known to have wanted to emulate the latter in his hey days.

What lies ahead? The future of FOXNews is bright since it has over 2.5 million viewers each night, not bad for a news network on cable founded in 1996. It has one of the world's richest media moguls behind it in Rupert Murdoch and one of the world's richest media enterprises in News Corporation financing its venture. In due time regardless of the political hatred it spews, FOXNews will overtake all liberal mainstream network (if it has not already). Could its CEO Roger Ailes actually run for president? No one is stopping him and www.politico.com is already reporting that there is a move for such. They could conceivably form a rival party to that of the Republicans. Next year at least 10 Republican Congressional seats will be contested against independents under the umbrella of the Tea Party movement, a campaign heavily pushed by FOXNews' most controversial host Glen Beck. It will be analogous to what New Politics is attempting to do with the Democrats here.

Sondhi Limthongkul, founder of ASTV-Manager, is head of the New Politics Party. He has already transformed his engine from a media outlet into a political canvassing unit tricking younger generations using raunchy entertainment gossips and criminal news expose, while slowing massaging their brains with manipulated politicians-hating headlines of relevant news stories. Nonetheless it suffers a worse fate due to lack of funding and lack of the mainstream audience's interest. Could this change? Perhaps so but no one knows. Nevertheless the evolution and eventual devolution of FOXNews and ASTV will be cases worth studying for students of political science and media & communications in the years to come. The latter has already led an uprising against a democratically elected prime minister while the former is leading a conservative uprising against another iconic democratically president.

Source: Prachatai

[awd]

This comparison has been made on ThaiVisa for years now. ASTV is a FOXNews ripoff and appeals to much the same mindset.

[chuckd]

Having wasted my time watching MSNBC's Keith Olberman and Chris (Thrill running up my leg) Matthews, Fox is a breath of fresh air.

If you people think Fox is biased, you should watch the other US networks. They are all, save Fox, in the tank for Obama, and therein lies the problem.

[awd]

Keeping this Thai related, the right-wing, pro-military mindlessness of both ASTV and FoxNews are identical. And I agree that Obama, with his incredibly stupid escalation of the War Against Afghanistan and penchant for killing civilians with un-manned drones (essentially a suicide-bomber without the suicide) is inhumane as well.

[Ulysses G.]

If you people think Fox is biased, you should watch the other US networks. They are all, save Fox, in the tank for Obama, and therein lies the problem.

The so called "liberals" are so brainwashed that they think it is fine for news programs to be biased - as long as it is towards their philosophy. Actually, they are so brainwashed, they don't even realize that most news networks are chock full of left-wing propoganda.

FOX is not any more biased than the BBC or CNN, but a lot more entertaining.

[TAWP]

A note, when it comes to military interventions, the Democrats have been very good at starting wars and conflicts too. More than the republicans infact. Nixon even went to election on a peace-platform (peace with honor though) and they did eventually pull out under his administration.

Don't let the last 8 years catastrophic rule by the neo-cons (Democrat dropouts) fool you. Traditional republicans are not pro-war, pro-intervention nor pro-policing the world.

What both sides now have is a rule in true spirit of corporatism.

To bring it back to .th - I don't watch ASTV, but it is hardly surprising that there would be a radical counterpart to the equally deranged red stations.

[Deke]

While the Fox News opinion/commentary shows are obviously very conservative, their regular news reports aren't any different from CNN/BBC, etc.

On the other hand, ASTV is purely a political station. Therefore, not the same at all in my opinion.

I'd compare ASTV more to something like the Taliban would broadcast in Afghanistan.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

Right; I think it's fine for a political organization to have a TV station. I don't like it however when clear propaganda is presented as news, even fair and balanced news. So I'd compare Fox News more readily with The Nation. I have no issue with ASTV, you know who they are and what they stand for.

[Thai at Heart]

Right; I think it's fine for a political organization to have a TV station. I don't like it however when clear propaganda is presented as news, even fair and balanced news. So I'd compare Fox News more readily with The Nation. I have no issue with ASTV, you know who they are and what they stand for.

Absolutely agree. It is one thing to know what you are being fed when you already knew that at some point it walked and quacked like one so it must be a duck. It is far more dangerous when mainstream media cloaks itself with the illusion of "being fair and balanced". It wouldn't matter with what they dressed Fox, it is so obvious as to be almost comical. ASTV is a new and interesting development in Asian media. It might not make any money, but it can move people.

What worries me more is the media generally do move the opinions of millions simply because people have forgotten that it is important to absorb contrary opinion.

[bonobo]

I agree. ASTV is blatantly what it is with no apologies.  I can accept that and put that under the Freedom of Speech type of category.  Fox is a sham.  Not that it is wrong to have conservative views.  But right at the letterhead, the "fair and balance" claim is ludicrous.  Call a spade a spade and accept that the editorial slant is conservative and let it go at that.

[sokal]

This article is garbage. The US is traditionally a conservative country, always has been and judging by FOX News ratings, it always will be.

[sokal]

Keeping this Thai related, the right-wing, pro-military mindlessness of both ASTV and FoxNews are identical. And I agree that Obama, with his incredibly stupid escalation of the War Against Afghanistan and penchant for killing civilians with un-manned drones (essentially a suicide-bomber without the suicide) is inhumane as well.

The reason the US spends so much money on defense is to reduce civilian casualties with more accurate weapons. Wait till communist China is the worlds superpower and wait till they have their own 9/11 and see what they do. China would nuke Afganistan off the face of this earth. And you think Americans are bad :D

[Ulysses G.]

I agree. ASTV is blatantly what it is with no apologies. I can accept that and put that under the Freedom of Speech type of category. Fox is a sham. Not that it is wrong to have conservative views. But right at the letterhead, the "fair and balance" claim is ludicrous. Call a spade a spade and accept that the editorial slant is conservative and let it go at that.

I don't see other news organizations calling themselves "liberal", even though their editorial slant is in that direction. Why should FOX be the only one that has to play under different rules?

[awd]

I agree. ASTV is blatantly what it is with no apologies. I can accept that and put that under the Freedom of Speech type of category. Fox is a sham. Not that it is wrong to have conservative views. But right at the letterhead, the "fair and balance" claim is ludicrous. Call a spade a spade and accept that the editorial slant is conservative and let it go at that.

I don't see other news organizations calling themselves "liberal", even though their editorial slant is in that direction. Why should FOX be the only one that has to play under different rules?

Most other US news organization lean toward Obama (yes, the Obama that believes that the more Muslims we kill with unmanned drones the safer we will be) which clearly make them conservative. The belief that Obama is a liberal is patently absurd. The Bushobama administration, with its fundamental belief in military resolutions, is not a liberal institution. The military-industrial complex is running America and their present hate-filled half-Irish President is doing no one any good.

[Ulysses G.]

Cool man.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

This article is garbage. The US is traditionally a conservative country, always has been and judging by FOX News ratings, it always will be.

You know what, I agree with that. And I think it's absolutely fascinating to hear conservative viewpoints explained well, and in a mature manner. There are some truly interesting, super smart people in the Republican party. Some of my best friends are conservative, both intellectuals or more down to earth people.

So with all that quality out there, and obvious cases to be made and presented to the public, why does Fox feel the need to devote so much time to infantile BS? And I'm talking especially about the shows that aren't 'hard' news, or even shows that (like ASTV) 'you know who it is and what they stand for', such as mr. O'Reilly's show which I enjoy. What riles me the most is shows like their morning show, and most of their 'commentators'. Don't tell me there aren't conservatives who cringe at the truckloads of BS being dumped all over America by those people.

[Ulysses G.]

I don't consider myself to be a conservative, but I tend to target liberals more than conservatives as they are so smug about their beliefs.

I don't mind the morning show on FOX, but I'm not overly fond of Shawn Hannity. he pumps out the same old Republican rheteric every day without a thought.

The one I really think is a nut is Glenn Beck. He was OK when he was on CNN, but now he is in outer space.

A lot of people knock Bill O'Reilly, but he can be quite sensible.

[bonobo]

I agree. ASTV is blatantly what it is with no apologies. I can accept that and put that under the Freedom of Speech type of category. Fox is a sham. Not that it is wrong to have conservative views. But right at the letterhead, the "fair and balance" claim is ludicrous. Call a spade a spade and accept that the editorial slant is conservative and let it go at that.

I don't see other news organizations calling themselves "liberal", even though their editorial slant is in that direction. Why should FOX be the only one that has to play under different rules?

Who wrote anything about news agencies labeling themselves as liberal or conservative?  You are reading what you want into my statement.  I merely think that Fox's "fair and balanced" letterhead is patently ridiculous.  It isn't "fair and balanced."  All news agencies networks and newspapers will tend to have an editorial slant one way or the other.  And that is fine, as long as they present the straight news with as little slant as possible.  Fox is worse at this than some, better at it than others.  But the point is that Fox is trumpeting itself as "fair and balanced" when it is anything but.

[Ulysses G.]

As has been said, the actual news segments are "fair and balanced", it is the commentary that is mostly conservative - which is not much different from other networks except their commentary is mostly liberal.

I don't really like the "fair and balanced" claim this far down the line, but I think that when they first started out, they wanted to make the point that they presented a side of the news that noone else was showing and that is not out of line.

[bonobo]

As has been said, the actual news segments are "fair and balanced", it is the commentary that is mostly conservative - which is not much different from other networks except their commentary is mostly liberal.

I don't really like the "fair and balanced" claim this far down the line, but I think that when they first started out, they wanted to make the point that they presented a side of the news that noone else was showing and that is not out of line.

News is news, and there should be no "side" to it.  Commentary is different.  And in this area, while there could be a perceived liberal slant to CNN, although I do not see it for BBC, that is a far cry from the foaming-at-the-mouth diatribes that many Fox commentators make.  CNN may be biased in the specials and in-depth investigations it chooses to air, but within those, it tends to stay mostly neutral, letting the very subject matter make the point.  Fox chooses to have commentators spout attack after attack, telling us that the liberals are wrong instead of showing us. 

And that brings us to the OP.  ASTV is completely and utterly biased, but it does not purport itself to be anything different.  And I personally have no problem with that.  Fox purports itself to be fair and balanced, and it is not even in the ballpark to be considered such. So I don't hold that you can really compare ASTV with Fox.

[mca]

And that brings us to the OP. ASTV is completely and utterly biased, but it does not purport itself to be anything different.

Yeah I've sat through a couple of ASTV broadcasts and noticed objectivity wasn't their strongest point.

[Ulysses G.]

Several years ago, when Israel attacked Lebanon, both the BBC or CNN barely mentioned that it was because Hezbollah had gone into Israel and kidnapped Israeli soldiers. They acted as if Israel had just done it on a whim and was just slaughtering people for the heck of it. The only reason that I knew what had started it was from looking at the Internet.

I happened to go to Pattaya at that time and had FOX news on my TV. They mentioned why Israel had attacked Lebanon on a regular basis and also pointed out that Hezbollah was sticking civilians in front of rocket launching sites so that Israel would have to hit them to stop the barrage of rockets that they were firing. They also reported negative facts about Israel and the other side of the story.

To me, almost ignoring something so important to a story is nothing but blatant propoganda. Everyone is so quick to slam FOX News, but just who is not "fair and balanced"?

[bonobo]

Several years ago, when Israel attacked Lebanon, both the BBC or CNN barely mentioned that it was because Hezbollah had gone into Israel and kidnapped Israeli soldiers. They acted as if Israel had just done it on a whim and was just slaughtering people for the heck of it. The only reason that I knew what had started it was from looking at the Internet.

I happened to go to Pattaya at that time and had FOX news on my TV. They mentioned why Israel had attacked Lebanon on a regular basis and also pointed out that Hezbollah was sticking civilians in front of rocket launching sites so that Israel would have to hit them to stop the barrage of rockets that they were firing.

To me, almost ignoring something so important to a story is nothing but blatant propoganda. Just who is not "fair and balanced"?

One more time, and I will leave it at that.

I am not defending CNN or BBC, and if they "barely" mentioned something you think should have been more emphasized, fine.  That is for another forum on television journalism.  

I am posting that it is Fox who is claiming the "fair and balanced" position, not CNN, not BBC, not Al Jazeerah, not CTV, not ASTV.  And that is with what I find fault. And that is where I find that a comparison asserting that Fox and ASTV are the same is not valid.

[bendejo]

I'm not a liberal, in fact when I hear liberal drivel I get the urge to bitch-slap the wimps, but the US conservatives are such a bunch of self-serving, hypocritical, and corrupt pr_icks they turn my stomach. Ronald Reagan got rid of graft by legalizing it with the formation of PACs, turning US Congress into a big brothel (filled with the world's ugliest whores). Anyone who really thinks all this resistance to changing the health care system is not being paid for my the AMA, insurance companies, and other medical interests is either uninformed or has their head up their _ss.

Yeah, so most of those guys (both sides of the aisle) are in the pocket of corporations and their right-wing "think tanks" (also funded by corporations). If it was all out front it would be one thing, but all these clandestinely-sponsored editorials supposedly done only for love of country , wrapped in the flag, is utter cr_ap. These media blowhards are in love with themselves, all the rest is window dressing.

I would like Transparency International (who funds them, anyway?) to come out and call the US Congress for what it is, a bunch of paid-off stooges no better than their infamously corrupt Third World counterparts; maybe this will shame the US into doing something about it. But then again maybe not -- the 600 pound gorilla (according to neocon philosophy) needn't answer to anyone.

A New Broom Sweeps Clean

[sokal]

I agree. ASTV is blatantly what it is with no apologies. I can accept that and put that under the Freedom of Speech type of category. Fox is a sham. Not that it is wrong to have conservative views. But right at the letterhead, the "fair and balance" claim is ludicrous. Call a spade a spade and accept that the editorial slant is conservative and let it go at that.

I don't see other news organizations calling themselves "liberal", even though their editorial slant is in that direction. Why should FOX be the only one that has to play under different rules?

Most other US news organization lean toward Obama (yes, the Obama that believes that the more Muslims we kill with unmanned drones the safer we will be) which clearly make them conservative. The belief that Obama is a liberal is patently absurd. The Bushobama administration, with its fundamental belief in military resolutions, is not a liberal institution. The military-industrial complex is running America and their present hate-filled half-Irish President is doing no one any good.

There is around 50 different countries helping in Afganistan and Iraq so I dont understand what your point is. Are you aware that Thailand sent troops to Iraq ? Yes, Iraq.

[anothertorres]

The belief that Obama is a liberal is patently absurd. The Bushobama administration, with its fundamental belief in military resolutions, is not a liberal institution. The military-industrial complex is running America and their present hate-filled half-Irish President is doing no one any good.

you couldn't be more based in reality. most people refuse to understand this and therefore spout nothing but hatred back and forth between themselves. Bush and Obama are actors...

[canoncam]

FOX News Compared to ASTV

M.L. Nattakorn Devakula

What became of the author's bid for Bangkok Governor?

Anyway, anyone who watched him stumble about for years as the it-was-so-horrendously-bad-it-was-funny Channel 11 Newsline anchor should confirm that what he knows about mass media journalism would fit into a thimble.

[edwinchester]

A note, when it comes to military interventions, the Democrats have been very good at starting wars and conflicts too. More than the republicans infact. Nixon even went to election on a peace-platform (peace with honor though) and they did eventually pull out under his administration.

Don't let the last 8 years catastrophic rule by the neo-cons (Democrat dropouts) fool you. Traditional republicans are not pro-war, pro-intervention nor pro-policing the world.

What both sides now have is a rule in true spirit of corporatism.

To bring it back to .th - I don't watch ASTV, but it is hardly surprising that there would be a radical counterpart to the equally deranged red stations.

Always knew Bushes Snr & Jr were closet democrats.

Seems the Republicans were suckered into two Gulf Wars by those nasty liberals.

[rixalex]

FOX News Compared to ASTV

M.L. Nattakorn Devakula

What became of the author's bid for Bangkok Governor?

Anyway, anyone who watched him stumble about for years as the it-was-so-horrendously-bad-it-was-funny Channel 11 Newsline anchor should confirm that what he knows about mass media journalism would fit into a thimble.

I think he actually descibed himself as being something like a political analyst. He wasn't an anchor on Newsline (<deleted>, maybe).

What he's doing now i don't know... perhaps selling Nissan Tiidas in an out-of-town showroom...