This documentary confirmed my worst suspicions about Fox "News". As a European in the US I was shocked to watch biased, unresearched vitriol spew out of a channel which then sanctimoniously called itself a news channel. The documentary shows employee after employee confirm what most in the industry already know. Interference with news content, selection and misrepresentation of news content, presentation of opinion as news content. Murdoch makes Citizen Kane look like a saint. Unfortunately, this is not a movie, it is for real. It is not much of a democracy when one man (Rupert Murdoch) can decide the presidency of the United States. (And he not even a US native).
68 Reviews
May be too esoteric for partisan viewers
Alan-4020 July 2004
Well if you go on the vote history you can tell who is a Fox fan or not -- almost all votes are 10 or 1. My vote was 8 -- the only one. That's what this work deserves because although it is very good it has flaws.
One problem with this movie is that it is based on the ringing message (paraphrased): For democracy to work you have to have a media that does its job based on journalistic principles and ethics.
Thing is, fans of Fox News could not care less about any of that. They want "their side" to win win win and to them Fox News is the ONLY outlet that made it possible to hear the "truth" over the tyranny of the "liberal media." They also what professional-wrestling style drama where the bad guy (Kerry, Kennedy, Clinton etc) is built up into some sort of super-monster (that is also cowardly and cheats all the time) which makes the victory all that much more sweeter.
So Fox delivers. Outfoxed shows how it works -- but the story is just as much "what went RIGHT at Fox News" as opposed to "what went WRONG with TV journalism." It is very satisfying to see documented what many of us have already known -- how Republican/White House talking points become injected into the zeitgeist with almost no resistance. From Fox to CNN to MSNBC, then from there into talk radio and mainstream media. When you hear a keyword like "flip flopper" repeated by a dozen different anchors/pundits in 1-second shots strung together it is really impressive.
Outfoxed is part of the backlash to Fox News and right-wing dominance of media. It will be interesting to see how far right-wingers will go to "debunk" this "propaganda." In any case it should be required viewing for all media consumers and most particularly all journalism and political science students. We'd be better off for it.
One problem with this movie is that it is based on the ringing message (paraphrased): For democracy to work you have to have a media that does its job based on journalistic principles and ethics.
Thing is, fans of Fox News could not care less about any of that. They want "their side" to win win win and to them Fox News is the ONLY outlet that made it possible to hear the "truth" over the tyranny of the "liberal media." They also what professional-wrestling style drama where the bad guy (Kerry, Kennedy, Clinton etc) is built up into some sort of super-monster (that is also cowardly and cheats all the time) which makes the victory all that much more sweeter.
So Fox delivers. Outfoxed shows how it works -- but the story is just as much "what went RIGHT at Fox News" as opposed to "what went WRONG with TV journalism." It is very satisfying to see documented what many of us have already known -- how Republican/White House talking points become injected into the zeitgeist with almost no resistance. From Fox to CNN to MSNBC, then from there into talk radio and mainstream media. When you hear a keyword like "flip flopper" repeated by a dozen different anchors/pundits in 1-second shots strung together it is really impressive.
Outfoxed is part of the backlash to Fox News and right-wing dominance of media. It will be interesting to see how far right-wingers will go to "debunk" this "propaganda." In any case it should be required viewing for all media consumers and most particularly all journalism and political science students. We'd be better off for it.
Pretty solid case, I hope somebody is paying attention
scubergmu25 December 2004
Outfoxed does an excellent job of diagnosing why people talk so much about the Fox News network. For while Fox has some of the highest ratings of any of the news networks, it is also commonly criticized for its not so "fair and balanced" programming. It is chronicled in this film how Fox succeeds in bringing in the viewers the same way that best-selling polemics and political talk radio do, they serve up to their audience heroes and villains. This method is so effective because the major issues facing this country and the world are generally very complicated, and require a reasonable amount of background information in order to make a sober judgments. However, most people have neither the time, nor the inclination for anything like that. Most do not follow politics to learn, to be challenged, or to take action, they simply want to feed their outrage. If their anger about the world around them can be explained away by blaming the people they already have ideological differences with, well that's just awesome. So, they often take refuge in the consistent, simplified, outrage-inducing commentary of their oh-so familiar talking heads. This, to me is the essence of Fox News. From its on-air discussion groups, to its choice of stories, as well as its evening talk shows, it is all about spoon-feeding people with stories of heroic conservatives, fighting to strengthen America against its enemies, both foreign (terrorists) and domestic (liberals). The film demonstrates how Fox news achieves this through a steady feed of news reporting that is highly regulated, intentionally biased, and aligned around a predetermined ideological slant.
As far as I'm concerned, to explain the behavior of FoxNews by saying that it is simply "standing up for the conservative perspective in a sea of mainstream media liberalism" as many conservatives do, is highly misleading. I believe one can rightfully stand up for any perspective they want, just so long as they aren't forced to resort to dishonest, intentionally biased reporting in order to make or bolster their case. In Outfoxed, director Robert Greenwald makes a very compelling case that Fox News, in the interests of carving out that niche for itself, does that far more than the other news networks.
However, since it is exposing the methods of a successful conservative organization, the conservatives who hear of Outfoxed will most likely write it off as nothing more than liberal propaganda. That to me is the ultimate problem with the polarized American political scene. Just about anyone who would be interested in the subject matter of this film as politically oriented as it is, has probably already made up their mind about Fox News one way or the other.
As far as I'm concerned, to explain the behavior of FoxNews by saying that it is simply "standing up for the conservative perspective in a sea of mainstream media liberalism" as many conservatives do, is highly misleading. I believe one can rightfully stand up for any perspective they want, just so long as they aren't forced to resort to dishonest, intentionally biased reporting in order to make or bolster their case. In Outfoxed, director Robert Greenwald makes a very compelling case that Fox News, in the interests of carving out that niche for itself, does that far more than the other news networks.
However, since it is exposing the methods of a successful conservative organization, the conservatives who hear of Outfoxed will most likely write it off as nothing more than liberal propaganda. That to me is the ultimate problem with the polarized American political scene. Just about anyone who would be interested in the subject matter of this film as politically oriented as it is, has probably already made up their mind about Fox News one way or the other.
Caution: this review is written by an Australian who's never actually watched Fox News. But, hey, wasn't the big R Australian once?
colettesplace17 December 2004
When I was at university, it was the left-wing politicians who spun the best propaganda. They wore cooler clothes, had better slogans and made up bright snappy posters satirising 1950s domesticity (in itself a form of propaganda). But if 1967 film The Battle of Algiers is a training manual for terrorists, consider Outfoxed, the new documentary about Rupert Murdoch's Fox News cable channel, a how to for right-wing misinformation.
Rupert Murdoch is up-front about his goals for Fox America's most watched cable network to promote conservative values. Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism demonstrates just how fundamentally this distorts the truth, misinforms the public and compromises the integrity of any journalist employed by Fox news. Government surveys show that of all news consumers, Fox viewers had the most inaccurate perceptions of the truth for example one-third of them believed that weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq.
Fox's slogans include "Fox News Fair and Balanced" and "We Report You Decide". Does the second one remind you of anything? That's right, the ABC's CNNNN, who more accurately transformed the slogan into "We Report You Believe". I never realised that CNNNN's Firth Factor had a real-life counterpart, Fox's The O'Reilly Factor, and was nauseated by Bill O'Reilly. He's the most biased and aggressive shock jock I could envisage, who disrespects the truth and annihilates any guest who dares disagree with him. In comparison, Jeff Kennett in his heyday was as innocuous as a little fluffy kitten. In the US, most Fox viewers wouldn't even understand that CNNNN is a comedy.
Outfoxed is an argumentative essay rather than an impartial examination of the truth, but considering the propaganda machine it's taking on, how could it be otherwise? What's so impressive about this film is its pace. In a rapid-fire 77 minutes, filmmaker Robert Greenwald interviews dozens of former Fox employees, media analysts, and intersperses it with Fox footage to prove his points. Not only is the film jaw dropping, but it's as entertaining and shocking as anything the Fox behemoth could pump out. It made me cry. *****/***** stars.
Rupert Murdoch is up-front about his goals for Fox America's most watched cable network to promote conservative values. Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism demonstrates just how fundamentally this distorts the truth, misinforms the public and compromises the integrity of any journalist employed by Fox news. Government surveys show that of all news consumers, Fox viewers had the most inaccurate perceptions of the truth for example one-third of them believed that weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq.
Fox's slogans include "Fox News Fair and Balanced" and "We Report You Decide". Does the second one remind you of anything? That's right, the ABC's CNNNN, who more accurately transformed the slogan into "We Report You Believe". I never realised that CNNNN's Firth Factor had a real-life counterpart, Fox's The O'Reilly Factor, and was nauseated by Bill O'Reilly. He's the most biased and aggressive shock jock I could envisage, who disrespects the truth and annihilates any guest who dares disagree with him. In comparison, Jeff Kennett in his heyday was as innocuous as a little fluffy kitten. In the US, most Fox viewers wouldn't even understand that CNNNN is a comedy.
Outfoxed is an argumentative essay rather than an impartial examination of the truth, but considering the propaganda machine it's taking on, how could it be otherwise? What's so impressive about this film is its pace. In a rapid-fire 77 minutes, filmmaker Robert Greenwald interviews dozens of former Fox employees, media analysts, and intersperses it with Fox footage to prove his points. Not only is the film jaw dropping, but it's as entertaining and shocking as anything the Fox behemoth could pump out. It made me cry. *****/***** stars.
An important documentary, raising issues with the American media questioned by media analysts for years.
jaxeed17 December 2004
I remember the first time I was confronted with Fox News, and their "news" content. At the time I was studying media in England and had read quite a bit about Rupert Murdoch's impact on global media, and how he was believed to have been boasting Thatcher and Thatcherism in the UK tabloid press when she was prime minister. As well as part of my studies we had been covering the subject of objectivity in news, and how this in actual fact is an impossibility considering that any process of selection will result in some degree of subjectivity. This does not necessarily mean the news journalists will be lying to promote their own opinions, but the process of selecting what to put emphasis on will easily result in supporting one ideology over another. As coming media journalists we were made aware of the subjectivity involved in everything down to the selection of which images to show and which not to when in the editing suites. Credible news journalists will necessarily have to be their own watchdogs, and be aware of his/her own perspective and thereby able to stop him/herself if portraying something inaccurately to boast the impact of the news story.
The first time I had a look at Fox News was soon after the 9/11 attacks. The terrible events of this day was very much featured in all the world media, and I was following the coverage from various media institutions studying the way they all approached the subject. It was very interesting to see how every channel reported the news in a slightly different way depending on the supposed ideology of the target audience. I even found variations according to time of day and day of the week. Naturally I was curious how the American media was covering this as well.
When confronted with Bill O'Reilly for the first time, I was simply wondering if this would be the last day of work for this guy, as he was throwing all of the responsibility one has as a news broadcaster out the window. Within only an hour of watching Fox News I had numerous notes on big "no no's" being performed right in front of me. If there was only one glitch, I would have been less shocked, being confident that the person responsible would be called into the producer's office for a serious talk. However, the charade just continued on and on, and I was shaking my head in despair wondering if ANYONE would actually take this as news. None on this network seemed to even attempt not to blurt out subjective comments, and covering all aspects of the conflicts seemed to be something none of these "journalists" was even considering.
Even though all news I had been following had variations, Fox News stood out as the absolute extreme by far. I guess most of Europe and especially those who have gone into the subject studying media, has known about this for quite some time already. Therefore I believe Outfoxed is a very important film for America, shedding light on some very questionable developments in the commercial media over there. This is a documentary, which means it's arguing a point opposed to what news media is supposed to do. It builds on facts that have been apparent for years, so the argument put forwards does have a strong root in reality, however harsh the critique might be perceived.
One does almost get a feeling this is too bad to be true when watching Outfoxed, but as any media knower will point out American media and also Hollywood (producing films like Rambo) has for a long time been questioned in terms of attempting to lead their audience's opinion and obscure the perception of reality. I believe watching documentaries like Outfoxed results in big sighs of relief around the world, as it finally seems also America is realizing and focusing on these issues. Thumbs up to those who dared to make this documentary, and a pat on the back to those who has watched it and realizing the seriousness of the issues raised.
The first time I had a look at Fox News was soon after the 9/11 attacks. The terrible events of this day was very much featured in all the world media, and I was following the coverage from various media institutions studying the way they all approached the subject. It was very interesting to see how every channel reported the news in a slightly different way depending on the supposed ideology of the target audience. I even found variations according to time of day and day of the week. Naturally I was curious how the American media was covering this as well.
When confronted with Bill O'Reilly for the first time, I was simply wondering if this would be the last day of work for this guy, as he was throwing all of the responsibility one has as a news broadcaster out the window. Within only an hour of watching Fox News I had numerous notes on big "no no's" being performed right in front of me. If there was only one glitch, I would have been less shocked, being confident that the person responsible would be called into the producer's office for a serious talk. However, the charade just continued on and on, and I was shaking my head in despair wondering if ANYONE would actually take this as news. None on this network seemed to even attempt not to blurt out subjective comments, and covering all aspects of the conflicts seemed to be something none of these "journalists" was even considering.
Even though all news I had been following had variations, Fox News stood out as the absolute extreme by far. I guess most of Europe and especially those who have gone into the subject studying media, has known about this for quite some time already. Therefore I believe Outfoxed is a very important film for America, shedding light on some very questionable developments in the commercial media over there. This is a documentary, which means it's arguing a point opposed to what news media is supposed to do. It builds on facts that have been apparent for years, so the argument put forwards does have a strong root in reality, however harsh the critique might be perceived.
One does almost get a feeling this is too bad to be true when watching Outfoxed, but as any media knower will point out American media and also Hollywood (producing films like Rambo) has for a long time been questioned in terms of attempting to lead their audience's opinion and obscure the perception of reality. I believe watching documentaries like Outfoxed results in big sighs of relief around the world, as it finally seems also America is realizing and focusing on these issues. Thumbs up to those who dared to make this documentary, and a pat on the back to those who has watched it and realizing the seriousness of the issues raised.
What liberal media?
anhedonia8 October 2004
Liberal filmmaker Robert Greenwald's "Outfoxed" provides a fascinating insight into the Fox News Channel, which, those who watch it regularly with an open mind realize, really is an extension of the propagandist arm of the Republican Party.
If you believe that Fox News Channel is actually fair and balanced, then you probably also believe the moon is made of cheese, the war in Iraq actually was crucial to the war on terrorism and that "a compassionate conservative" runs the nation.
FNC seems to believe that advocating and promoting rabid nationalism is the news media's responsibility and to that end it spouts the Republican Party and this administration's talking points. There's FNC host Bill O'Reilly damning as un-American anyone who disagrees with the war after it began because, apparently, one cannot voice opposition to the war and support our troops at the same time. And there's FNC cutting off dissenting opinions, fear-mongering (paranoia is patriotic, after all) and exploiting the American flag to make the most blatant of propagandists blush. FNC's motto should be, "We propagandize because you shouldn't decide."
Through hundreds of hours of research, Greenwald assembled a good array of clips to prove his point that Fox is anything but fair and balanced. We see Neil Cavuto, anchor of FNC's business show, telling a guest, "assuming the unthinkable happens and that Senator (John) Kerry becomes president...," and reporter Carl Cameron telling then-Gov. George W. Bush about how much Cameron's wife enjoys working for the Bush presidential campaign in 2000. Cameron then proceeds to interview Bush for a "news" story. That's fair and balanced at Fox. Cameron now covers the Kerry campaign and is the reporter who recently, soon after the first presidential debate in Florida, poked fun of Kerry in a story with fake quotes; the story then wound up on the Fox News Channel's Web site as a legitimate news article. Imagine the furor from conservatives and FNC had this happened about Bush at, say, at CNN or NBC.
We see O'Reilly completely distorting the views of one guest - the son of a Port Authority worker who was killed on 9/11 - because the young man disagreed with the Bush administration. O'Reilly seems obsessed by this guest, even berating him on air months later. Too bad Greenwald didn't include the clip of O'Reilly promising to apologize if the US found no WMD in Iraq.
"Outfoxed" has flaws. Greenwald doesn't interview anyone from FNC - would they have agreed? - or FNC supporters. We do see FNC owner Rupert Murdoch telling Congress his channel employs liberals, but can only name two. Even without thinking about it, I can name more prominent conservatives at CNN, which Republicans accuse of being liberal, though it clearly puts more conservatives on its shows than Fox does liberals.
Greenwald also doesn't differentiate between op-ed talking-heads, such as Cal Thomas, and so-called news anchors, such as Brit Hume. Then again, the line between opinion and news is blurred on FNC. One effective montage shows how FNC anchors use variations of "some people say" to spout their own opinion as news. Greenwald uses surveys showing how Hume's evening news show airs, by a 5 to 1 margin, more negative than positive stories on Kerry. If you watch Hume regularly, you will realize how slanted his show is.
Liberal commentators and former Fox News employees and consultants opine on how unbalanced FNC's coverage is. There's former CIA analyst Larry Johnson, a contracted Fox News contributor, who, despite having 8 weeks left on his contract, isn't called back after telling Sean Hannity the war in Iraq would divert attention from the real war on terrorism, an opinion Hannity disagreed with.
But the most damning evidence against FNC: Internal memos from John Moody, senior VP for news, that show how slanted the coverage is, how FNC promotes the Bush administration and conservative agenda and how a lopsided view of patriotism trumps real news at Fox.
In one memo, Moody urges staff not to make the 9/11 Commission report into another Watergate. "This is not 'what did he know and when did he know it' stuff. Remember the fleeting sense of national unity that emerged from this tragedy. Let's not desecrate that," Moody wrote. In another, he orders reporters to tout Bush's "political courage and tactical cunning" throughout the day. While on Sen. Kerry, Moody urges his staff to concentrate on the "flip-flops" and that Kerry's "perceived disrespect for the military could be more damaging to the candidate than questions about his actions in uniform."
What's frightening is how blindly FNC's viewers buy into the propaganda, especially when Greenwald points to surveys that show 67 percent of FNC viewers believe there's a link between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks. It's almost as if they're...dumb dittoheads. It would be nice if more people got their news from varied sources - newspapers, magazines and TV from around the world - instead of relying solely on a news channel that reiterates their beliefs.
"Outfoxed" proves that just because FNC says it's fair and balanced doesn't mean it is. Just as saying you're a compassionate conservative doesn't make you one, or saying you're constantly pursuing the truth doesn't make it so, even if you have talent on loan from OxyContin.
If you believe that Fox News Channel is actually fair and balanced, then you probably also believe the moon is made of cheese, the war in Iraq actually was crucial to the war on terrorism and that "a compassionate conservative" runs the nation.
FNC seems to believe that advocating and promoting rabid nationalism is the news media's responsibility and to that end it spouts the Republican Party and this administration's talking points. There's FNC host Bill O'Reilly damning as un-American anyone who disagrees with the war after it began because, apparently, one cannot voice opposition to the war and support our troops at the same time. And there's FNC cutting off dissenting opinions, fear-mongering (paranoia is patriotic, after all) and exploiting the American flag to make the most blatant of propagandists blush. FNC's motto should be, "We propagandize because you shouldn't decide."
Through hundreds of hours of research, Greenwald assembled a good array of clips to prove his point that Fox is anything but fair and balanced. We see Neil Cavuto, anchor of FNC's business show, telling a guest, "assuming the unthinkable happens and that Senator (John) Kerry becomes president...," and reporter Carl Cameron telling then-Gov. George W. Bush about how much Cameron's wife enjoys working for the Bush presidential campaign in 2000. Cameron then proceeds to interview Bush for a "news" story. That's fair and balanced at Fox. Cameron now covers the Kerry campaign and is the reporter who recently, soon after the first presidential debate in Florida, poked fun of Kerry in a story with fake quotes; the story then wound up on the Fox News Channel's Web site as a legitimate news article. Imagine the furor from conservatives and FNC had this happened about Bush at, say, at CNN or NBC.
We see O'Reilly completely distorting the views of one guest - the son of a Port Authority worker who was killed on 9/11 - because the young man disagreed with the Bush administration. O'Reilly seems obsessed by this guest, even berating him on air months later. Too bad Greenwald didn't include the clip of O'Reilly promising to apologize if the US found no WMD in Iraq.
"Outfoxed" has flaws. Greenwald doesn't interview anyone from FNC - would they have agreed? - or FNC supporters. We do see FNC owner Rupert Murdoch telling Congress his channel employs liberals, but can only name two. Even without thinking about it, I can name more prominent conservatives at CNN, which Republicans accuse of being liberal, though it clearly puts more conservatives on its shows than Fox does liberals.
Greenwald also doesn't differentiate between op-ed talking-heads, such as Cal Thomas, and so-called news anchors, such as Brit Hume. Then again, the line between opinion and news is blurred on FNC. One effective montage shows how FNC anchors use variations of "some people say" to spout their own opinion as news. Greenwald uses surveys showing how Hume's evening news show airs, by a 5 to 1 margin, more negative than positive stories on Kerry. If you watch Hume regularly, you will realize how slanted his show is.
Liberal commentators and former Fox News employees and consultants opine on how unbalanced FNC's coverage is. There's former CIA analyst Larry Johnson, a contracted Fox News contributor, who, despite having 8 weeks left on his contract, isn't called back after telling Sean Hannity the war in Iraq would divert attention from the real war on terrorism, an opinion Hannity disagreed with.
But the most damning evidence against FNC: Internal memos from John Moody, senior VP for news, that show how slanted the coverage is, how FNC promotes the Bush administration and conservative agenda and how a lopsided view of patriotism trumps real news at Fox.
In one memo, Moody urges staff not to make the 9/11 Commission report into another Watergate. "This is not 'what did he know and when did he know it' stuff. Remember the fleeting sense of national unity that emerged from this tragedy. Let's not desecrate that," Moody wrote. In another, he orders reporters to tout Bush's "political courage and tactical cunning" throughout the day. While on Sen. Kerry, Moody urges his staff to concentrate on the "flip-flops" and that Kerry's "perceived disrespect for the military could be more damaging to the candidate than questions about his actions in uniform."
What's frightening is how blindly FNC's viewers buy into the propaganda, especially when Greenwald points to surveys that show 67 percent of FNC viewers believe there's a link between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks. It's almost as if they're...dumb dittoheads. It would be nice if more people got their news from varied sources - newspapers, magazines and TV from around the world - instead of relying solely on a news channel that reiterates their beliefs.
"Outfoxed" proves that just because FNC says it's fair and balanced doesn't mean it is. Just as saying you're a compassionate conservative doesn't make you one, or saying you're constantly pursuing the truth doesn't make it so, even if you have talent on loan from OxyContin.
It worked for Goebbels, why not for Murdoch?
Pingo-226 July 2004
As with FARENHEIT 9/11 (2004), I will split this review up into two parts. One, the technical part, and two, the political part.
The movie itself is well made, even though the first 20 minutes or so have a bit of sloppy editing. Too fast clips make the text a bit hard to read. The interviews are often cut, which can be seen as a "shift" in the interviewees position, but this is not always clear. Usually, when making such editings, you make a white flash to indicate that you have omitted some words from this interview.
Particulary in this movie this is very important, since the whole issue here is FOX's use of the words "fair and balanced". This documentary however isn't fair and isn't balanced, but then again, no documentary is. The moviemakers doesn't use, or even pretend, to say that this documentary is "fair and balanced", so they might get away with it, but I still believe they should make these things a bit clearer to the viewer.
Second, I must say that the length of the film (approx 1 hour and 20 minutes or so) is perfect. It is not too long and not too short. The moviemakers get their point through and in a very good way.
Where other filmmakers usually spend too much film on themselves, these guys let the FOX's material speak for itself. And does it work? Oh yes!
This film is so hilarious sometimes that one can only wonder if ANYONE with an IQ over 80 can take this O'Reilly guy seriously. He is a total jerk and treats everyone like trash, and most of what he says himself is either "shut up" or some lies. The fun part is the way this material is edited, since we can actually tell for ourselves that O'Reilly IS lieing. I had the most fun with the O'Reilly parts, but he is quite a character to make fun of too. Not much is needed, you just have to watch him and hear him and you begin to laugh. I haven't watched FOX "News" so I was stunned over the fact that they have someone that is so ridiculus on the air. O'Reilly is so embarrasing that if I was related to him in any way I would change my name.
The other part of this review, the political part: Obviously this movie is made and released in good time before the 2004 election. And it is quite obvious that the makers of this film doesn't like Bush, and that they like Kerry. With that said, I believe this film will hold better after the election than, say, FARENHEIT 9/11 will. This film will still be important after the election, and I think that is this movies strongest point.
It is quite clear that the techniques used by Murdoch in his FOX "News" channel is in many ways the same techniques Joseph Goebbels used when he was working for Hitler back in the 1930's and 1940's. Similarities like censorship, bashing of political sides they don't like, use of symbols, use of fear. I am not saying here that Murdoch or anyone associated with FOX are Nazis - I just say they use the same techniques to get their propaganda through.
And it is propaganda. Watching the FOX "News" material is quite shocking, especially the parts which deals with hard subjects like 9/11 and the Iraqi war. Not counting O'Reilly here (because no one can take that guy seriously anyway), the rest of the FOX "News" staff seems to give quite a good impression. This is where it gets dangerous, since they are literary saying the same things that O'Reilly does, but with a calm and intelligent voice that can't be ignored.
Murdoch and the Italian PM Berlusconi has also some interesting similarities. Even though Murdoch can't create his own laws, he seems to have a strong link to the US Government (especially if there is a Republican as President) which kind of grants him this power anyway. That is, of course, not free press.
And if the FOX "News" channel just said that they were Republican or Conservative or that they said that "we support Bush - not Kerry", then there would be nothing wrong with this, or at least very little.
But when FOX uses the words "Fair and balanced" and even have this as a logotype used in their shows and on their website with the impression that it is a registered trademark (!) - THEN it is something really wrong. That is actually a lie, and when a news network lies about something, what parts of what they say is true?
Obviously this is FOX' view. Intelligent people can, as FOX say, "decide" for themselves. And last time I was in the USA I only met intelligent people, so I wonder... Does anyone really take FOX seriously?
I give this documentary 8 of 10. It is interesting, fun and will still be an important film after the election. It is not perfectly edited and have some other issues, but overall, it is a good film that I hope many people watch, even if you don't agree with the point of view.
The movie itself is well made, even though the first 20 minutes or so have a bit of sloppy editing. Too fast clips make the text a bit hard to read. The interviews are often cut, which can be seen as a "shift" in the interviewees position, but this is not always clear. Usually, when making such editings, you make a white flash to indicate that you have omitted some words from this interview.
Particulary in this movie this is very important, since the whole issue here is FOX's use of the words "fair and balanced". This documentary however isn't fair and isn't balanced, but then again, no documentary is. The moviemakers doesn't use, or even pretend, to say that this documentary is "fair and balanced", so they might get away with it, but I still believe they should make these things a bit clearer to the viewer.
Second, I must say that the length of the film (approx 1 hour and 20 minutes or so) is perfect. It is not too long and not too short. The moviemakers get their point through and in a very good way.
Where other filmmakers usually spend too much film on themselves, these guys let the FOX's material speak for itself. And does it work? Oh yes!
This film is so hilarious sometimes that one can only wonder if ANYONE with an IQ over 80 can take this O'Reilly guy seriously. He is a total jerk and treats everyone like trash, and most of what he says himself is either "shut up" or some lies. The fun part is the way this material is edited, since we can actually tell for ourselves that O'Reilly IS lieing. I had the most fun with the O'Reilly parts, but he is quite a character to make fun of too. Not much is needed, you just have to watch him and hear him and you begin to laugh. I haven't watched FOX "News" so I was stunned over the fact that they have someone that is so ridiculus on the air. O'Reilly is so embarrasing that if I was related to him in any way I would change my name.
The other part of this review, the political part: Obviously this movie is made and released in good time before the 2004 election. And it is quite obvious that the makers of this film doesn't like Bush, and that they like Kerry. With that said, I believe this film will hold better after the election than, say, FARENHEIT 9/11 will. This film will still be important after the election, and I think that is this movies strongest point.
It is quite clear that the techniques used by Murdoch in his FOX "News" channel is in many ways the same techniques Joseph Goebbels used when he was working for Hitler back in the 1930's and 1940's. Similarities like censorship, bashing of political sides they don't like, use of symbols, use of fear. I am not saying here that Murdoch or anyone associated with FOX are Nazis - I just say they use the same techniques to get their propaganda through.
And it is propaganda. Watching the FOX "News" material is quite shocking, especially the parts which deals with hard subjects like 9/11 and the Iraqi war. Not counting O'Reilly here (because no one can take that guy seriously anyway), the rest of the FOX "News" staff seems to give quite a good impression. This is where it gets dangerous, since they are literary saying the same things that O'Reilly does, but with a calm and intelligent voice that can't be ignored.
Murdoch and the Italian PM Berlusconi has also some interesting similarities. Even though Murdoch can't create his own laws, he seems to have a strong link to the US Government (especially if there is a Republican as President) which kind of grants him this power anyway. That is, of course, not free press.
And if the FOX "News" channel just said that they were Republican or Conservative or that they said that "we support Bush - not Kerry", then there would be nothing wrong with this, or at least very little.
But when FOX uses the words "Fair and balanced" and even have this as a logotype used in their shows and on their website with the impression that it is a registered trademark (!) - THEN it is something really wrong. That is actually a lie, and when a news network lies about something, what parts of what they say is true?
Obviously this is FOX' view. Intelligent people can, as FOX say, "decide" for themselves. And last time I was in the USA I only met intelligent people, so I wonder... Does anyone really take FOX seriously?
I give this documentary 8 of 10. It is interesting, fun and will still be an important film after the election. It is not perfectly edited and have some other issues, but overall, it is a good film that I hope many people watch, even if you don't agree with the point of view.
Low on budget and style but high on information and impact
FilmOtaku6 November 2004
'Outfoxed', directed by Robert Greenwald is a documentary examining the institution known as the Fox News Channel, a cable news network that is as fierce in its conservative agenda as it is about denying said agenda. Greenwald dissects the channel and disproves their credo 'Fair and Balanced' with interviews by former Fox News employees, media watchdog groups, anonymous sources and plenty of Fox's own footage. Through these various sources, Greenwald aims to prove that the obvious conservative slant that poses as 'fair and balanced' is the king of the mountain on a dangerous slippery-slope.
In 'Outfoxed', Greenwald more than backs up his assertion, and is able to do it with an obviously low budget. (You have to love the Power Point-esque captions and scene breaks) But the most compelling aspects of the documentary are the interviews and footage itself. Because of the near-dictatorship status of its owner, Rupert Murdoch, there is an obvious sense of danger surrounding the former employees who appear on camera; because it is clear that their current jobs could be in danger just for speaking out about the proceedings at the channel. This fear is most exemplified by the three former employees who not only refuse to talk on camera, but won't talk unless their voices are obscured as well. Probably the best coup was getting veteran journalist Walter Conkrite to speak out on the subject, because even his brief time on the screen lends a definite air of respectability and trueness to the subject. Of course, the footage is amazing, particularly the pieces on Bill O'Reilly. Not having seen Fox News (I chose to ignore it in the past) I knew he was a blowhard by reputation only, but watching the way he treats his guests was enough to make my blood boil.
The film 'Outfoxed' was made with the help of various grass-roots organizations; one of them being MoveOn.org, and the last ten minutes of the film examines what the average outraged viewer can do to take action against this kind of dirty journalism. Without seeing the film, one could construe this as an unnecessary addition, or a 'bleeding heart liberal' moment, but once one looks at the ramifications of the actions of the network, particularly in this fairly precarious political climate we exist in today, I very firmly feel that the call to action was not only warranted but necessary. I watched the film twice in one afternoon because, after being completely outraged the first time, I had to take it and show it to my boyfriend a couple of hours later. While there were times I was so aghast at the lies and dirty journalism I laughed, the truth is that this subject is anything but funny, and 'Outfoxed' is a good, (and short) documentary that should be watched, particularly by Fox News Channel viewers. 7/10.
Shelly
In 'Outfoxed', Greenwald more than backs up his assertion, and is able to do it with an obviously low budget. (You have to love the Power Point-esque captions and scene breaks) But the most compelling aspects of the documentary are the interviews and footage itself. Because of the near-dictatorship status of its owner, Rupert Murdoch, there is an obvious sense of danger surrounding the former employees who appear on camera; because it is clear that their current jobs could be in danger just for speaking out about the proceedings at the channel. This fear is most exemplified by the three former employees who not only refuse to talk on camera, but won't talk unless their voices are obscured as well. Probably the best coup was getting veteran journalist Walter Conkrite to speak out on the subject, because even his brief time on the screen lends a definite air of respectability and trueness to the subject. Of course, the footage is amazing, particularly the pieces on Bill O'Reilly. Not having seen Fox News (I chose to ignore it in the past) I knew he was a blowhard by reputation only, but watching the way he treats his guests was enough to make my blood boil.
The film 'Outfoxed' was made with the help of various grass-roots organizations; one of them being MoveOn.org, and the last ten minutes of the film examines what the average outraged viewer can do to take action against this kind of dirty journalism. Without seeing the film, one could construe this as an unnecessary addition, or a 'bleeding heart liberal' moment, but once one looks at the ramifications of the actions of the network, particularly in this fairly precarious political climate we exist in today, I very firmly feel that the call to action was not only warranted but necessary. I watched the film twice in one afternoon because, after being completely outraged the first time, I had to take it and show it to my boyfriend a couple of hours later. While there were times I was so aghast at the lies and dirty journalism I laughed, the truth is that this subject is anything but funny, and 'Outfoxed' is a good, (and short) documentary that should be watched, particularly by Fox News Channel viewers. 7/10.
Shelly
I'm no bleeding heart liberal, but I'll never watch Fox News again
dbborroughs2 August 2004
This is a scathing dismantling of Fox News. It is in effect a total obliteration of any notion that the station is fair and balanced. It is a simple and systematic explanation of how Fox works and why they report what they do.
My politics are decidedly all over the place. I am neither wholly liberal nor wholly conservative, it all depends on the subject. I do regularly watch Fox because I do like some of their reporting. However after seeing this I'm left to question everything that they do on every level. Fair and unbiased indeed.
The film is light years better than the earlier "Uncovered" about the Iraq War. I would say that its a perfect position paper against Fox News except for the final ten minutes or so where the film shifts focus and asks the viewer to become active in changing how news is reported. Its a valid track to take, but it somehow takes away from the films central point of Fox's biased reporting.
9 out of 10.
My politics are decidedly all over the place. I am neither wholly liberal nor wholly conservative, it all depends on the subject. I do regularly watch Fox because I do like some of their reporting. However after seeing this I'm left to question everything that they do on every level. Fair and unbiased indeed.
The film is light years better than the earlier "Uncovered" about the Iraq War. I would say that its a perfect position paper against Fox News except for the final ten minutes or so where the film shifts focus and asks the viewer to become active in changing how news is reported. Its a valid track to take, but it somehow takes away from the films central point of Fox's biased reporting.
9 out of 10.
This coin only has one side
StevePulaski24 March 2014
Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism is a documentary that lambasts media bias, specifically the conservatively-slanted Fox News, when the documentary itself is biased in the regard that it makes Fox News out to be the only network that is corporate-controlled and guilty of watering down or slanting its stories with a specific partisan agenda. Because of this, director Robert Greenwald seems to be effectively pushing his own agenda that media bias is wrong when it's slanted in the right direction but makes little to no mention of the "liberal bias" in news we've heard all too much about.
First off, I speak as a viewer anxious to watch a documentary about an issue that truly effects every American and how we obtain our information and our news. I'm not offended by Outfoxed's otherwise substantial critique of Rupert Murdoch, Fox News, or its practices, many of which rightfully deserved. I'm slightly disturbed, however, by the documentary's lack of peripheral vision. It's so easy to attack Fox News for its conservative bias, on-air flubs, and independent/right-leaning pundits who act as on-air columnists rather than reporters, but to dig deeper and find accusations of media bias all across the grid would be a challenge worth commending. Greenwald segregates his view to Fox News, which, unintentionally, becomes documentarian finger-pointing when you realize that rather than effectively give us equal opportunity critiques of the media's delivery of information, Greenwald is simply trying to give us one side of the issue while greatly suppressing the other side.
Grading the film on its own terms - a seventy-two minute critique on Fox News and Murdoch - the film finds ways to be marginally successful. It opens with PowerPoint-style graphics stating when Rupert Murdoch first bought pieces of media equipment, to when he first acquired different TV networks, to what he currently owns, to how many people watch a network he owns. Former Fox News producers and behind-the-scenes technical workers speak to Greenwald, however, with disguised voices for fear of the network's retaliation, which should already tell us something. Other apparently brave souls choose to keep themselves open and identified, all of whom argue Fox's blatant bias and dictative ways.
What Greenwald gets access to that will immediately turn heads are Fox News' memos that implore anchors to try and point out something about the Democratic Party that may make them look bad, make some sort of comment on air about some candidate, interrupt coverage of something else to something the political right is involved in, and so forth. All of these cases show how Fox News has cheapened the news element of journalism, as they constantly seem to be searching for a way to attack or blast the Democratic Party while casting the Republican Party in a better light.
A segment of the film is also devoted to the rise of "soft news" and journalism devoted to trivial news about celebrities and how Fox News has chosen to cover it. One former graphic designer for Fox News talks about how he designed an "ALERT" logo for the network to play before breaking news, like some type of disaster, some type of political bill going through office, or a developing story that demanded media coverage. He remarks how disgusted he was when he saw the "ALERT" logo - which ostensibly appears to be easy to attach onto a story that deserves front page news and immediate attention - to something like Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez's relationship or something incredibly trite and meaningless that should be nothing more than a blurb, if anything. Outfoxed doesn't wholly criticize Fox for this, but remarks how 24-hour news channels have become more about ratings than accuracy in reporting.
When Outfoxed gets observant and analytical is when it hits its stride as a film. It talks about how polls consistently show Fox News viewers as extremely misinformed when asked basic questions (have we found weapons of mass destruction in Irag? Do other countries approve of us entering Iraq?) compared to those who look towards other news outlets for their daily scoop. It also compares in a stretch of time the ratio to Republican commentators to Democratic commentators on Fox News and the result is 83% to 17% percent (5:1), respectively, with the liberal/Democratic politicians falling under the lines of left-leaning centrists who often sided with President George W. Bush on many key issues.
Finally, the other point Outfoxed thankfully brings up is the blurred line between news and opinion with its on-air reporters. Between Bill O'Reilly giving his opinion during his "no spin" "Talking Points" element of his program The O'Reilly Factor to Sean Hannity blatantly stating "'x' amount of days till George Bush's reelection" during the Bush/Kerry election season, it's so difficult to determine when the news stops on Fox and the opinion starts or vice-versa. No other news network seems to employ their pundits for their opinion like Fox News in addition to allowing them to say so much to their guests (IE: Bill O'Reilly consistently being allowed to interrupt people and telling them to "shut up" in a highly-unprofessional manner).
Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism is an interesting, albeit been-there-done-that critique of a network that will see more criticism in its entire lifetime than perhaps positivity. Despite being the most watched news network in America, it still carries baggage thicker than any other. Moreover, Greenwald has devoted much of his time as a director to shedding light on and criticizing enormous conservative industries, such as the Iraq War and even the billionaire Koch Brothers in his documentary Koch Brothers Exposed. I'd still love to see how Robert Greenwald would paint MSNBC and its blatant Democratic Party bias and see how the similarities match up.
First off, I speak as a viewer anxious to watch a documentary about an issue that truly effects every American and how we obtain our information and our news. I'm not offended by Outfoxed's otherwise substantial critique of Rupert Murdoch, Fox News, or its practices, many of which rightfully deserved. I'm slightly disturbed, however, by the documentary's lack of peripheral vision. It's so easy to attack Fox News for its conservative bias, on-air flubs, and independent/right-leaning pundits who act as on-air columnists rather than reporters, but to dig deeper and find accusations of media bias all across the grid would be a challenge worth commending. Greenwald segregates his view to Fox News, which, unintentionally, becomes documentarian finger-pointing when you realize that rather than effectively give us equal opportunity critiques of the media's delivery of information, Greenwald is simply trying to give us one side of the issue while greatly suppressing the other side.
Grading the film on its own terms - a seventy-two minute critique on Fox News and Murdoch - the film finds ways to be marginally successful. It opens with PowerPoint-style graphics stating when Rupert Murdoch first bought pieces of media equipment, to when he first acquired different TV networks, to what he currently owns, to how many people watch a network he owns. Former Fox News producers and behind-the-scenes technical workers speak to Greenwald, however, with disguised voices for fear of the network's retaliation, which should already tell us something. Other apparently brave souls choose to keep themselves open and identified, all of whom argue Fox's blatant bias and dictative ways.
What Greenwald gets access to that will immediately turn heads are Fox News' memos that implore anchors to try and point out something about the Democratic Party that may make them look bad, make some sort of comment on air about some candidate, interrupt coverage of something else to something the political right is involved in, and so forth. All of these cases show how Fox News has cheapened the news element of journalism, as they constantly seem to be searching for a way to attack or blast the Democratic Party while casting the Republican Party in a better light.
A segment of the film is also devoted to the rise of "soft news" and journalism devoted to trivial news about celebrities and how Fox News has chosen to cover it. One former graphic designer for Fox News talks about how he designed an "ALERT" logo for the network to play before breaking news, like some type of disaster, some type of political bill going through office, or a developing story that demanded media coverage. He remarks how disgusted he was when he saw the "ALERT" logo - which ostensibly appears to be easy to attach onto a story that deserves front page news and immediate attention - to something like Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez's relationship or something incredibly trite and meaningless that should be nothing more than a blurb, if anything. Outfoxed doesn't wholly criticize Fox for this, but remarks how 24-hour news channels have become more about ratings than accuracy in reporting.
When Outfoxed gets observant and analytical is when it hits its stride as a film. It talks about how polls consistently show Fox News viewers as extremely misinformed when asked basic questions (have we found weapons of mass destruction in Irag? Do other countries approve of us entering Iraq?) compared to those who look towards other news outlets for their daily scoop. It also compares in a stretch of time the ratio to Republican commentators to Democratic commentators on Fox News and the result is 83% to 17% percent (5:1), respectively, with the liberal/Democratic politicians falling under the lines of left-leaning centrists who often sided with President George W. Bush on many key issues.
Finally, the other point Outfoxed thankfully brings up is the blurred line between news and opinion with its on-air reporters. Between Bill O'Reilly giving his opinion during his "no spin" "Talking Points" element of his program The O'Reilly Factor to Sean Hannity blatantly stating "'x' amount of days till George Bush's reelection" during the Bush/Kerry election season, it's so difficult to determine when the news stops on Fox and the opinion starts or vice-versa. No other news network seems to employ their pundits for their opinion like Fox News in addition to allowing them to say so much to their guests (IE: Bill O'Reilly consistently being allowed to interrupt people and telling them to "shut up" in a highly-unprofessional manner).
Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism is an interesting, albeit been-there-done-that critique of a network that will see more criticism in its entire lifetime than perhaps positivity. Despite being the most watched news network in America, it still carries baggage thicker than any other. Moreover, Greenwald has devoted much of his time as a director to shedding light on and criticizing enormous conservative industries, such as the Iraq War and even the billionaire Koch Brothers in his documentary Koch Brothers Exposed. I'd still love to see how Robert Greenwald would paint MSNBC and its blatant Democratic Party bias and see how the similarities match up.
Its easy: just don't watch Fox
daelomin23 November 2004
The documentary, although flawed (which republican is going to actually view it with an open mind...?), has some major points and the annihilation of "journalism" as it is known elsewhere is made obviously.
What comes out as obvious is the fact that, as a person puts it, this form of control is even more vicious than authoritarian governments: leaving the people "free" of believing that they are indeed free and well informed is a machiavelic way of control. What is sad is that it works so well.
Watch it, just so as to make sure you never watch Fox (ever or ever again).
What comes out as obvious is the fact that, as a person puts it, this form of control is even more vicious than authoritarian governments: leaving the people "free" of believing that they are indeed free and well informed is a machiavelic way of control. What is sad is that it works so well.
Watch it, just so as to make sure you never watch Fox (ever or ever again).
Worthwhile but flawed
Carl_Tait17 September 2004
A mixed bag. Many of the points were excellent and convincingly demonstrated Fox's conservative bent: the pseudo-festivities for Reagan's birthday, a Bush campaigner's husband "objectively" interviewing Bush, right-slanted daily memos from the execs, and the intensely obnoxious Bill O'Reilly. However, the film was weakened by the inclusion of some trivial points and at least one ludicrous one: the fantasy that Fox was a key factor in getting the other networks to call Florida for Bush on Election Night 2000. (It goes unmentioned that Fox was actually the last network to retract Florida for Gore.)
In addition, it was clear that much of the footage was from discussion shows and was not intended as news at all, even by Fox standards. And why in the world didn't the filmmaker include even one interview with a *current* Fox News employee? Most annoying of all, the last ten minutes of the movie were a preachy incitement for the viewer to become an activist.
7/10. Worth seeing but should have been better.
In addition, it was clear that much of the footage was from discussion shows and was not intended as news at all, even by Fox standards. And why in the world didn't the filmmaker include even one interview with a *current* Fox News employee? Most annoying of all, the last ten minutes of the movie were a preachy incitement for the viewer to become an activist.
7/10. Worth seeing but should have been better.
Noble intentions behind it but a poor film
writejustincanada2 November 2005
I don't think anyone who watches this movie or who actually pays attention to the world around them would argue that Fox News is truly "fair and balanced." This documentary sets out to prove in numerous ways how Fox News is a well rehearsed, talking-points-fed propaganda arm for the right wing.
The problem is not with the message but with the film-making. This movie is a glorified Power Point presentation. And thats putting it nicely. Most of the footage from Fox News is not even taken from broadcast quality sources but rather DVRs and clips from the internet. It looks and sounds HORRIBLE. The graphics (which is the bulk of the movie) are cheap, tacky, cheesy, and totally lessen the impact of the important points that are often being made.
I realize that those on the fringe, seeking change are not very popular and thus won't have millions to make a glossy movie. But that does not mean that if you take your time, plan, and above all be creative, you can't make a good movie. And thats the problem, this movie is all message and no craft. And to me, that sort of negates the purpose of documentaries. Because if it was ONLY about the message, then write an editorial in a major newspaper. Documentary film-making is about combining message and style, and using the two to heighten and sharpen one another. None of that happens here. I made stuff in high school with fart jokes in it shot on VHS that was better than this.
The problem is not with the message but with the film-making. This movie is a glorified Power Point presentation. And thats putting it nicely. Most of the footage from Fox News is not even taken from broadcast quality sources but rather DVRs and clips from the internet. It looks and sounds HORRIBLE. The graphics (which is the bulk of the movie) are cheap, tacky, cheesy, and totally lessen the impact of the important points that are often being made.
I realize that those on the fringe, seeking change are not very popular and thus won't have millions to make a glossy movie. But that does not mean that if you take your time, plan, and above all be creative, you can't make a good movie. And thats the problem, this movie is all message and no craft. And to me, that sort of negates the purpose of documentaries. Because if it was ONLY about the message, then write an editorial in a major newspaper. Documentary film-making is about combining message and style, and using the two to heighten and sharpen one another. None of that happens here. I made stuff in high school with fart jokes in it shot on VHS that was better than this.
A true eye opener and mind blower.
niktemadur18 December 2004
Warning: Spoilers
I haven't written a review here in a long time. However, after having just watched Outfoxed, I am compelled to put down my impressions while they're still fresh.
For a long time, I was indifferent to Fox the network and Fox the "news" channel. But a few years ago, as Ruppert Murdoch's modus operandi began to make itself apparent to me, I became so disgusted that I stopped being a fan of the LA Dodgers, which Murdoch owned for a period of time, and I even stopped watching the Simpsons, owned and broadcast by Fox.
At the beginning of Outfoxed, I recoiled at being subjected to relentless footage of this propaganda machine in motion. Mercifully soon thereafter, the filmmakers began to unravel, point by point, the tactics used by Fox. I found myself shifting from emotional revulsion to intellectual fascination, as if the filmmakers were presenting a toy machine, taking it apart, and pointing out how the gears, levers and pulleys work. Or, more appropriately, the filmmakers were taking a monster to the scalpel and dissecting it for all to see.
Now the heroic aspect of Outfoxed is daring, like David, to take on Goliath, but the objective value of Outfoxed is the specific lesson it provides in critical thinking: detecting the content and delivery of a propaganda machine.
Pundits will say that this sort of analysis can be applied to Outfoxed itself. However, Outfoxed presents well documented PATTERNS over extended periods of time. Furthermore, the video archive and the statistics presented, even without a narrator's commentary, speak for themselves, and it is a grotesque portrait.
Highly recommended, see Outfoxed for yourself and show it, gently, to friends and loved ones who believe that Fox News, and mainstream media in general, is a fair and balanced enterprise.
One final piece of advice: rewind and freeze-frame often, taking time to read the distracting ticker at the bottom of most Fox News broadcasts, especially in the months leading up to and during the Iraq deployment. The ticker distracts from the commentators, and the commentators distract from the ticker, so you are taking in BOTH, SUBLIMINALLY. Explosive stuff, this is.
For its' relevance, guts, content and eloquence, Outfoxed gets a 10 out of 10.
For a long time, I was indifferent to Fox the network and Fox the "news" channel. But a few years ago, as Ruppert Murdoch's modus operandi began to make itself apparent to me, I became so disgusted that I stopped being a fan of the LA Dodgers, which Murdoch owned for a period of time, and I even stopped watching the Simpsons, owned and broadcast by Fox.
At the beginning of Outfoxed, I recoiled at being subjected to relentless footage of this propaganda machine in motion. Mercifully soon thereafter, the filmmakers began to unravel, point by point, the tactics used by Fox. I found myself shifting from emotional revulsion to intellectual fascination, as if the filmmakers were presenting a toy machine, taking it apart, and pointing out how the gears, levers and pulleys work. Or, more appropriately, the filmmakers were taking a monster to the scalpel and dissecting it for all to see.
Now the heroic aspect of Outfoxed is daring, like David, to take on Goliath, but the objective value of Outfoxed is the specific lesson it provides in critical thinking: detecting the content and delivery of a propaganda machine.
Pundits will say that this sort of analysis can be applied to Outfoxed itself. However, Outfoxed presents well documented PATTERNS over extended periods of time. Furthermore, the video archive and the statistics presented, even without a narrator's commentary, speak for themselves, and it is a grotesque portrait.
Highly recommended, see Outfoxed for yourself and show it, gently, to friends and loved ones who believe that Fox News, and mainstream media in general, is a fair and balanced enterprise.
One final piece of advice: rewind and freeze-frame often, taking time to read the distracting ticker at the bottom of most Fox News broadcasts, especially in the months leading up to and during the Iraq deployment. The ticker distracts from the commentators, and the commentators distract from the ticker, so you are taking in BOTH, SUBLIMINALLY. Explosive stuff, this is.
For its' relevance, guts, content and eloquence, Outfoxed gets a 10 out of 10.
An Honest Review
generationofswine6 November 2018
It's dated. In 2004, when it came out, it was really insightful. It dealt with Fox News and their journey from the news to commentary.
Unfortunately times have changed and it's not just Fox that has made the shift. Most cable news, most 24/hr news and more than a few print sources have also made the change from news to commentary.
However, that doesn't make it any less important, if for no other reason than it documents the start of the trend to kill actual journalism in America.
Unfortunately times have changed and it's not just Fox that has made the shift. Most cable news, most 24/hr news and more than a few print sources have also made the change from news to commentary.
However, that doesn't make it any less important, if for no other reason than it documents the start of the trend to kill actual journalism in America.
Underground Review of this Film
TSHunter22 October 2004
Every ill and sin this "documentary" attacks the Fox network about it is also guilty of, on the left side of the spectrum, while attacking the right.
The credibility of this film is even more jeopardized by being made by moveon.org which is the largest group right now trying to out Bush and replace him with Kerry. The funny thing is that every attack they make on Fox, and conservatism as a whole, they pretend they are not guilty of, yet every issue they bring up they also break the so-called rules they are making. These include but are not limited to: blatant attacks, no accuracy in reporting, no balance of opinion, propaganda, political sloganeering, no fairness in reporting, slanted point of view, slick production over facts, backing of political party, etc. etc. etc. I am sick of hypocrites on both the left and the right acting like their point of view is the only one that matters and that everyone else is stupid if they don't agree with them or "get it". This so-called documentary is a joke because it totally ignores the faults of so-called liberal media, which use the same tactics as Fox does, but propagate a liberal or Democrat agenda. All media is suspect here, not just Fox. I mean give me a break, I am sick of being pandered to by both extremist sides of the political spectrum (right = left = crazy). I don't know if the day will ever come that people will be fed up enough to do anything about it, but I for one am sick of having both left and right propaganda shoved down my throat by media outlets and special interest groups. So, I think I'll just keep voting 3rd parties until the end of time. 4/10
The credibility of this film is even more jeopardized by being made by moveon.org which is the largest group right now trying to out Bush and replace him with Kerry. The funny thing is that every attack they make on Fox, and conservatism as a whole, they pretend they are not guilty of, yet every issue they bring up they also break the so-called rules they are making. These include but are not limited to: blatant attacks, no accuracy in reporting, no balance of opinion, propaganda, political sloganeering, no fairness in reporting, slanted point of view, slick production over facts, backing of political party, etc. etc. etc. I am sick of hypocrites on both the left and the right acting like their point of view is the only one that matters and that everyone else is stupid if they don't agree with them or "get it". This so-called documentary is a joke because it totally ignores the faults of so-called liberal media, which use the same tactics as Fox does, but propagate a liberal or Democrat agenda. All media is suspect here, not just Fox. I mean give me a break, I am sick of being pandered to by both extremist sides of the political spectrum (right = left = crazy). I don't know if the day will ever come that people will be fed up enough to do anything about it, but I for one am sick of having both left and right propaganda shoved down my throat by media outlets and special interest groups. So, I think I'll just keep voting 3rd parties until the end of time. 4/10
A Good Film, But Nothing New Here
alfiefamily24 October 2007
Warning: Spoilers
For anyone who has cable, and is therefore exposed to the Fox network, there really is no need to view this movie. Anything that you may want to know about Fox can be learned by watching any of the shows on this channel for a week.
"Outfoxed" is a well made documentary that offers an alternative perspective to how Rupert Murdoch and the rest of "the boys" at Fox view the media and it's role. Journalists expect a news network to be objective, and report on what's happening without providing a slanted view of the news. Rupert Murdoch believes that the media should act as advocate for a cause, or idea, or a man (in this case George Bush).
I'm willing to bet that anyone who sees this film will not "convert to the other side". I don't think that there are going to be too many people who see this film, who will not already have decided whether or not they agree that Fox is "Fair and Balanced"
But despite the well intentions of the film makers, there is ultimately nothing new that is offered as fresh perspective, in this film.
6 out of 10
"Outfoxed" is a well made documentary that offers an alternative perspective to how Rupert Murdoch and the rest of "the boys" at Fox view the media and it's role. Journalists expect a news network to be objective, and report on what's happening without providing a slanted view of the news. Rupert Murdoch believes that the media should act as advocate for a cause, or idea, or a man (in this case George Bush).
I'm willing to bet that anyone who sees this film will not "convert to the other side". I don't think that there are going to be too many people who see this film, who will not already have decided whether or not they agree that Fox is "Fair and Balanced"
But despite the well intentions of the film makers, there is ultimately nothing new that is offered as fresh perspective, in this film.
6 out of 10
See the "fair and balanced" network at its best
defitz10 October 2004
While I found this video exceptional (content and presentation), unfortunately there was nothing new for me. To anyone who is the least bit media-literate, they will have much of their world-view confirmed after watching this video. However, to the less informed this video can be very eye-opening.
Media concentration is one of the most under-reported (suprise!) stories in the country and probably one of the most important. As a regular reader of FAIR, McChesney and other media critics, this video does a great job of putting so much of Fox's hypocrisy in context (like how often O'Reilly uses his "shut up" line...despite him stating that he only said it once).
I recommend all the readers of this note to buy this video ($5.00 on Amazon used) and show it to as many people before Nov. 2 as you can. Better yet, at that price buy several and loan them to any Republicans you know and ask them to watch it.
Media concentration is one of the most under-reported (suprise!) stories in the country and probably one of the most important. As a regular reader of FAIR, McChesney and other media critics, this video does a great job of putting so much of Fox's hypocrisy in context (like how often O'Reilly uses his "shut up" line...despite him stating that he only said it once).
I recommend all the readers of this note to buy this video ($5.00 on Amazon used) and show it to as many people before Nov. 2 as you can. Better yet, at that price buy several and loan them to any Republicans you know and ask them to watch it.
Important film, but it's nothing you didn't already know
KnightsofNi1111 August 2012
In Robert Greenwald's documentary Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism we come away with one very important message. The media is controlled by corporations. This is what defines the media, and it's because of this that we have Rupert Murdoch taking over the Fox News Channel and turning it into the Conservative machine that spews out right wing bias on a daily basis. Outfoxed takes an in depth look at Fox News and brings to light what makes it tick and the tricks it pulls behind closed doors to become the most bias news station on television.
Now, back in 2004 when this came out I could see how Outfoxed would be horribly shocking. It does a great job at pulling back the curtain on Fox News and it reveals some really disturbing things about them. From the way they focus on stories that look good for Conservatives while avoiding others that won't push their agenda, to the tricks they employ to make them seem "fair and balanced" the ridiculous slogan of the network. However, it is 2012 now. Eight years have gone by and Fox News is still like it was when this film came out, but more of us know that now. Fox News is just one big joke today, a news organization that can't be taken seriously, or at least shouldn't be taken seriously. For this reason, watching Outfoxed was just taking in a lot of information I already knew or could have already gathered from my knowledge of what a moronic news organization Fox News is.
That being said, Outfoxed is very important, albeit a little redundant. It doesn't hold back on the punches it pulls at Fox, never backing down on its relentless fight to detail Fox's conservative bias. It's got a lot of great information, presents a lot of well spoken individuals to talk about the issues here, and, despite it looking like something that was edited on Windows Movie Maker, it's a pretty well made film. Mainstream media is just such a joke these days that the inspiration to remove bias from the media that the film tries to instill in its viewers is fairly futile. It's unfortunate that that is the case, but the chance of having an unbias media today just seems too fargone to do anything about it. Outfoxed does all that it can, but it may all be for nought.
Now, back in 2004 when this came out I could see how Outfoxed would be horribly shocking. It does a great job at pulling back the curtain on Fox News and it reveals some really disturbing things about them. From the way they focus on stories that look good for Conservatives while avoiding others that won't push their agenda, to the tricks they employ to make them seem "fair and balanced" the ridiculous slogan of the network. However, it is 2012 now. Eight years have gone by and Fox News is still like it was when this film came out, but more of us know that now. Fox News is just one big joke today, a news organization that can't be taken seriously, or at least shouldn't be taken seriously. For this reason, watching Outfoxed was just taking in a lot of information I already knew or could have already gathered from my knowledge of what a moronic news organization Fox News is.
That being said, Outfoxed is very important, albeit a little redundant. It doesn't hold back on the punches it pulls at Fox, never backing down on its relentless fight to detail Fox's conservative bias. It's got a lot of great information, presents a lot of well spoken individuals to talk about the issues here, and, despite it looking like something that was edited on Windows Movie Maker, it's a pretty well made film. Mainstream media is just such a joke these days that the inspiration to remove bias from the media that the film tries to instill in its viewers is fairly futile. It's unfortunate that that is the case, but the chance of having an unbias media today just seems too fargone to do anything about it. Outfoxed does all that it can, but it may all be for nought.
See the "fair and balanced" network at its best
defitz10 October 2004
While I found this video exceptional (content and presentation), unfortunately there was nothing new for me. To anyone who is the least bit media-literate, they will have much of their world-view confirmed after watching this video. However, to the less informed this video can be very eye-opening.
Media concentration is one of the most under-reported (surprise!) stories in the country and probably one of the most important. As a regular reader of FAIR, McChesney and other media critics, this video does a great job of putting so much of Fox's hypocrisy in context (like how often O'Reilly uses his "shut up" line...despite him stating that he only said it once).
I recommend all the readers of this note to buy this video ($5.00 on Amazon used) and show it to as many people before Nov. 2 as you can. Better yet, at that price buy several and loan them to any Republicans you know and ask them to watch it.
Media concentration is one of the most under-reported (surprise!) stories in the country and probably one of the most important. As a regular reader of FAIR, McChesney and other media critics, this video does a great job of putting so much of Fox's hypocrisy in context (like how often O'Reilly uses his "shut up" line...despite him stating that he only said it once).
I recommend all the readers of this note to buy this video ($5.00 on Amazon used) and show it to as many people before Nov. 2 as you can. Better yet, at that price buy several and loan them to any Republicans you know and ask them to watch it.
FoX "News" = The Propaganda Channel
brower818 April 2009
>Outfoxed< shows how FoX News Channel has developed a format intended more to manipulate the thoughts of viewers than to inform. FoX, which claims to be "Fair and Balanced" is the antithesis of fairness and balance, as the documentary shows.
The creators of >Outfoxed< give credit to FoX News for slick innovations in television journalism, including the establishment of a corporate identity (one could never confuse FoX News with some other form of TV journalism), musical motifs that set the tone, and such a device as the "FoX News Alert" that draws attention to a breaking story. But they also expose the manipulativeness of FoX News for misusing the News Alert for titillating items.
The documentary shows how those who go along with FoX News' editorial opinions get the royal treatment, yet those who run afoul of it get cut down. Bill O'Reilly is shown telling his interviewees to "Shut up!" when they go 'too far' in contradicting him and, in one case, the use of odd camera angles to make someone who disagrees with him (a son of a 9/11 victim refusing to go along with the aggressive foreign policy of the Bush Administration) look like a terrorist, bum, or monster. It also shows how FoX debased reporting at formerly-independent TV stations such as WTTG (Channel 5 in Washington DC) as Murdoch took them over.
The great fault of FoX News is that although it consumes much time of a viewer it offers little news -- but much scripted analysis intended more to convince than to inform. >Outfoxed< gets FoX... right.
The creators of >Outfoxed< give credit to FoX News for slick innovations in television journalism, including the establishment of a corporate identity (one could never confuse FoX News with some other form of TV journalism), musical motifs that set the tone, and such a device as the "FoX News Alert" that draws attention to a breaking story. But they also expose the manipulativeness of FoX News for misusing the News Alert for titillating items.
The documentary shows how those who go along with FoX News' editorial opinions get the royal treatment, yet those who run afoul of it get cut down. Bill O'Reilly is shown telling his interviewees to "Shut up!" when they go 'too far' in contradicting him and, in one case, the use of odd camera angles to make someone who disagrees with him (a son of a 9/11 victim refusing to go along with the aggressive foreign policy of the Bush Administration) look like a terrorist, bum, or monster. It also shows how FoX debased reporting at formerly-independent TV stations such as WTTG (Channel 5 in Washington DC) as Murdoch took them over.
The great fault of FoX News is that although it consumes much time of a viewer it offers little news -- but much scripted analysis intended more to convince than to inform. >Outfoxed< gets FoX... right.
No way to defend Fox---not about Left vs. Right, but True vs. False & Honest vs. Dishonest
cecrle20 May 2005
There is just no way to defend Fox News after seeing this movie. It's funny to read the negative comments people have posted about this film: it's obvious that those angry at the movie are already in way over their heads as far as allegiance to Fox News goes--their minds must be VERY made up, because how could you defend Fox news after seeing this movie if you were being intellectually honest with yourself? The MAIN POINT is that Fox swears up and down that they're "FAIR AND BALANCED" and this movie proves beyond ANY shadow of a doubt that they are NOT Fair and Balanced!!!
So while I would like to respect the people who still watch Fox News (I know some intelligent people who like the station, unfortunately) because they tend to agree with it (although it's hard to respect a station that is statistically proved to be the #1 news network when it comes to misleading its viewers into believing falsehoods!), I simply CANNOT respect the opinion of those reviewers who have seen this film and still try to claim that they are FAIR and BALANCED! It's interesting to note that the reviewers here who support Fox News conveniently sidestep addressing any of the facts & legitimate criticisms of the station (for example how do you account for the fact that you are more likely to believe falsehoods if you get your news primarily from Fox?!) and devote their comments to macho trash-talk. They are the type of people who love authoritarian father-figures like O'Reily & Hannity & Bush who tell them what to think and how to feel good about themselves--it makes them feel more sure of themselves (something they must desperately lack), and the instant their heroes are challenged, they stop listening, stop thinking, and begin fuming about "liberal cry-baby garbage", and other immature phrases which betray much knee-jerk reaction but little critical thought. (No wonder they like Fox so much--it specializes in specious name-calling in favor of FACTS and open, honest discussion--just watch the movie and listen to the people who used to work for the station!)
So fine, keep watching Fox News if you tend to agree with it (be forewarned you're more likely to believe things that simply are NOT true--such as WMDs being found in Iraq; there being proved links between Iraq and Al-Qaeda, etc.) or if it simply entertains you--it's not nearly so bad if you can honestly acknowledge its serious shortcomings. But if you can convince yourself that Fox News truly IS "fair & balanced", then you could probably convince yourself that 2 + 2 = 5 or whatever else those in power want you to believe.
So while I would like to respect the people who still watch Fox News (I know some intelligent people who like the station, unfortunately) because they tend to agree with it (although it's hard to respect a station that is statistically proved to be the #1 news network when it comes to misleading its viewers into believing falsehoods!), I simply CANNOT respect the opinion of those reviewers who have seen this film and still try to claim that they are FAIR and BALANCED! It's interesting to note that the reviewers here who support Fox News conveniently sidestep addressing any of the facts & legitimate criticisms of the station (for example how do you account for the fact that you are more likely to believe falsehoods if you get your news primarily from Fox?!) and devote their comments to macho trash-talk. They are the type of people who love authoritarian father-figures like O'Reily & Hannity & Bush who tell them what to think and how to feel good about themselves--it makes them feel more sure of themselves (something they must desperately lack), and the instant their heroes are challenged, they stop listening, stop thinking, and begin fuming about "liberal cry-baby garbage", and other immature phrases which betray much knee-jerk reaction but little critical thought. (No wonder they like Fox so much--it specializes in specious name-calling in favor of FACTS and open, honest discussion--just watch the movie and listen to the people who used to work for the station!)
So fine, keep watching Fox News if you tend to agree with it (be forewarned you're more likely to believe things that simply are NOT true--such as WMDs being found in Iraq; there being proved links between Iraq and Al-Qaeda, etc.) or if it simply entertains you--it's not nearly so bad if you can honestly acknowledge its serious shortcomings. But if you can convince yourself that Fox News truly IS "fair & balanced", then you could probably convince yourself that 2 + 2 = 5 or whatever else those in power want you to believe.
Uninformative and not very well-made.
emm13-120 September 2004
This was a pretty bad movie. I'm a political liberal, I hate Fox News for reasons that go beyond their political viewpoint, and I like documentaries - and still I thought this was a pretty bad movie. It's guilty of a few of the tricks it picks on Fox for using (fast graphics meant to "wow" and confuse) and adds a few others to the arsenal (interviewing mostly people whose views of Fox may be tainted by personal grudge; taking quotes from news shows out of context; using montages rather than quantitative data to sway the audience). Furthermore, nothing they said was newsworthy - Fox is conservative? Bill O'Reilly is a self-righteous jerk? Who would've guessed?? And the filming technique just wasn't interesting at all - the only "interesting" thing was the complete absence of any directorial narration, and that was the bad kind of interesting. If you find yourself inspired to go see it, donate the $7 it'd cost you to a left-wing think tank instead and save yourself the ninety minutes of vague annoyance and boredom.
Machiavellian Media Manipulation Via the Murdoch Machine
EUyeshima23 March 2006
It is an oversimplification to blame the Bush administration entirely for the sadly effective dismantling of our democratic processes. First, the editors of the nonpartisan Web site, www.spinsanity.org, came out with a revealing book effectively dissecting the empire of media manipulation with "All the President's Spin: George W. Bush, the Media, and the Truth". Now filmmaker Robert Greenwald pinpoints one the most egregious perpetrators, examining the Fox Network's purported hypocrisy in the wholesale undermining of journalism for political purposes. With quite a team of fact finders and investigative reporters supporting him, Greenwald's documentary provides the viewer with a valuable primer on propaganda techniques, proving once again how the subversive goal of creating fear and uncertainty in the minds of viewers is achieved by use of language and repetition. It's very much the same point raised by George Lakoff in his amazing book, "Don't Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate--The Essential Guide for Progressives". Here, Greenwald reserves his focus on one powerful man, Rupert Murdoch, and the media empire he has created. Through all the media outlets of his company, News Corp, he can reach a throat-catching 280 million people in the United States! While "Outfoxed" does present a fairly strong case against Murdoch and the Fox News Channel, so much information is presented with great haste, not allowing much time for a viewer to absorb Greenwald's findings. That's why DVD is the ideal format as some can simply pause when they start getting overwhelmed by the onslaught of facts, figures and testimonials by former Fox employees and even renowned newscasters such as Walter Cronkite. In fact, Cronkite says in the film that Murdoch never had any intention except to build a right-wing network, but that seems highly suspect given the aggressively posturing media stars that have risen since its debut. Unsurprisingly, Fox News' top host Sean Hannity comes across as an unmitigated bully, but Bill O'Reilly, arguably the network's biggest star, reveals himself in the film as someone with obvious issues around anger management and journalistic integrity. In what has to be the most revealing moment in the film, a son of a worker killed in the World Trade Center on 9/11 appears as a guest on O'Reilly's show, and he takes the host on and refuses to be intimidated by his insistent berating. When O'Reilly senses his leverage diminishing, he loses his temper, makes nasty accusations and then unprofessionally pulls the plug on his microphone. Fast and furious, this is no-hold-barred film-making. And unlike many other documentaries produced in a rush before the election, this one actually has legs afterward. Highly recommended viewing.
doesn't make any qualms about taking sides- the filmmaker presents the evidence, and interviews...
Quinoa19841 August 2005
Is Outfoxed one of the great political &/or TV documentaries? Probably not- it contains a kind of cheesy-ness at times (with the gimmick of making fun of Fox News' over abuse of the 'Breaking News' bulletins) in an attempt to act a little more as 'entertainment' than it needs to be. That being said, it's very well made otherwise, with director Robert Greenwald putting together interviews and clips that does bring the case based on Fox News' past several years on the air about how they may not be so "Fair and Balanced" as they say.
Pretty much all of the interviewees can agree on one thing: what the Fox News cable network, founded by ultra-conservative, corporate titan Rupert Murdoch (who is to the news world now what William Randolph Hearst was to journalism in the early 20th century), is a lot more like talk-radio put to TV than real, solid, constructive TV news and journalism. Personalities dominate their shows instead of real news anchors most of the time- Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Britt Hume, and others bring you the news and 'talking points' on a distinctive slant. A few ex-employees of Fox News go on the record in the documentary telling of having to stand down when trying to really bring the left's point of view.
Points keep getting made about the massive pull of right-wings and conservatives over the shows, and how little time (if and when they get it) the left does to share their points of view. And when it comes to 9/11 and the War in Iraq, forget about it. The most compelling story of the doc comes from a young man who went on Bill O'Reilly's show, who's father died on 9/11, and because he didn't totally trust Bush, O'Reilly blew a fuse in his head. The matching of the different recollections of this incident (one from the young man, the other from Al Franken) is right on the mark.
On just Greenwald's technique of putting the information forth, it's a successful film- whatever political persuasion you are or however you feel about the current state of the media, it tells it like it is, with footage that you won't see anywhere else (like a reporter fraternizing with President Bush in 2000 before an interview on the campaign, a huge no-no in journalism). It only lacks a director talented enough to put to good use the use of entertainment value with the information (i.e. Michael Moore). Still, it serves its purpose well, and gives much to look for from a director like Greenwald, who does his research down to the bone (one almost wishes this muckraking would go longer than it is).
Pretty much all of the interviewees can agree on one thing: what the Fox News cable network, founded by ultra-conservative, corporate titan Rupert Murdoch (who is to the news world now what William Randolph Hearst was to journalism in the early 20th century), is a lot more like talk-radio put to TV than real, solid, constructive TV news and journalism. Personalities dominate their shows instead of real news anchors most of the time- Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Britt Hume, and others bring you the news and 'talking points' on a distinctive slant. A few ex-employees of Fox News go on the record in the documentary telling of having to stand down when trying to really bring the left's point of view.
Points keep getting made about the massive pull of right-wings and conservatives over the shows, and how little time (if and when they get it) the left does to share their points of view. And when it comes to 9/11 and the War in Iraq, forget about it. The most compelling story of the doc comes from a young man who went on Bill O'Reilly's show, who's father died on 9/11, and because he didn't totally trust Bush, O'Reilly blew a fuse in his head. The matching of the different recollections of this incident (one from the young man, the other from Al Franken) is right on the mark.
On just Greenwald's technique of putting the information forth, it's a successful film- whatever political persuasion you are or however you feel about the current state of the media, it tells it like it is, with footage that you won't see anywhere else (like a reporter fraternizing with President Bush in 2000 before an interview on the campaign, a huge no-no in journalism). It only lacks a director talented enough to put to good use the use of entertainment value with the information (i.e. Michael Moore). Still, it serves its purpose well, and gives much to look for from a director like Greenwald, who does his research down to the bone (one almost wishes this muckraking would go longer than it is).
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
