Los Angeles Times reported Roger Ailes, the savvy and hard-charging television executive who transformed the Fox News Channel from an upstart enterprise to the top-rated cable news network said "Democrats tend to go over there and watch," Ailes said, then paid his rival a rare compliment, noting its high-tech set: "I think CNN did a good job, also. They bought enough equipment to outfit all the movie theaters in America."
Maybe they are going in the Left Wing movie business. They slant their news to much for me. I like mine "Fair and Balanced".Still, he said he was confident that Fox News, known for its outspoken conservative commentators, would fare well in an Obama administration. While all the cable networks saw large audience drop-offs in the week after the election, Fox News retained 70% of its prime-time viewers, while CNN held on to 42% and MSNBC kept 60%.
Good for Fox News."If we keep doing what we're doing, which is tell the truth and let the chips fall where they may, I think we're going to be fine," he said.
The TRUTH is always the best policy, unless your wife asks how a dress fits.Ailes said he had not given any orders about how the network should treat Barack Obama, despite a recent report that he had instructed Fox News hosts to show deference to the president-elect.
Deference is proper.The election is over, and Fox News treated both candidtes in a "Fair and Balanced" fashion. We should now give Obama a chance to do things, but keep a close eye on what he is doing, and as the Loyal Opposition we should speak up if we think he is going down thw roung road. And maybe we can hold him as close to the center as the position he took before the election, rather than off the ragged left edge as many on the left will be pulling him. And we should see soon whether he is his own man, and if so which of the two Obamas he will be, or whether he will just be Reid and Pelosi's lap dog.Rather, he said he told staffers at a meeting that "all presidents deserve time to get their team on the ground and get organized."
They are supposed to be doing that before Jan 20, and if he is making mistakes there, we have both a right and an obligation to let our thoughts be heard, but we should not bundle in theings said during the campaign unless his actions go against what he said then."As American citizens, we all believe we are innocent until proven guilty," he said. "I think we should extend that same rule to our leaders in our country.
I don't think we have to expect a jury trial on every thing they do, but a trial in the court of public opinion is fine, and if a jury trial seems justified the constitution does provide for Impeachment, which is like a jury trial, although it should be used only in extreme conditions, and only if you know you have enough opposition votes to get the required 2/3 vote in the Senate if the charges are true. The Republicans should not have impeached Clinton, because while he was technically guilty of a crime they knew they could not get the Democratic votes to convict, and if they had not done it to Clinton, the Angry Left might not have screamed Impeachment every time Bush did something they do not like. We should be able to complain about things the president does, and have the mdeia report fairly both sides of the argument, without having to draw up Articles of Impeachment in the House.And therefore we have some obligation in a new presidency not to attempt to destabilize it.
But we don't have the obligation to withhold information or lie about it to prop up an unstable President. The stability we should be worried about is the stability of the Country, and to the Constitution which defines how the country should be run.It does not mean we wouldn't cover something that came and it was new information."
I hope not.Whether the network's hosts will heed his advice remains to be seen, he said, adding wryly: "Who knows? Most of them do whatever the hell they want."
And that is why we watch them.