Greta Van Susteren on Sunday took issue with CNN's Howard Kurtz for a report he did on "Reliable Sources."
In it, Kurtz falsely accused Fox News of going "out of its way to avoid a lot of reporting on its parent company's troubles" involving the British tabloid "News of the World" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
HOWARD KURTZ, HOST: Fox News loves a good scandal. But when it involves the parent company, not so much. The network owned by Rupert Murdoch has tread lightly when it comes to the phone hacking debacle at Murdoch's British paper.
According to the liberal group Media Matters from July 4th through July 13th, CNN ran 109 segments on the Murdoch mess, MSNBC ran 71, Fox News just 30. CNN has even reported on Fox's lack of reporting.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: The British media scandal involving Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation has put Fox News in a bit of a bind. The network has apparently gone out of its way to avoid a lot of reporting on its parent company's troubles.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KURTZ: Not a word about this international story last week on Fox's media show Fox News Watch which the panelists joked about off the air.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CAL THOMAS: Anybody want to bring up the subject we're not talking about today for the streamers?
JIM PINKERTON: Sure, go ahead, Cal.
THOMAS: I'm not going to touch it.
JUDITH MILLER: With a ten-foot turbine.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
Actually, it did more than "tackle" it.
"Fox News Watch" on Saturday did two segments on the scandal encompassing two thirds of the program.
Kurtz conveniently ignored that detail.
As far as Van Susteren is concerned, that's not all Kurtz ignored (h/t Mediaite):
On your CNN show today in which you were critical of Fox News Channel and what you say is Fox’s lack of coverage on the hacking scandal, you neglected to mention that on ON THE RECORD at 10pm we have, in our last two live broadcasts, covered the news story. We did it in a responsible manner. I urge you to go back and check. It was just the facts and no sugarcoating. Your omission today skews a fair analysis.
I should add that I am sending you this message publicly because last time you did not do your homework on another topic I politely sent a message to you privately.
Nicely said.
Of potentially greater import, does Kurtz really think 30 reports on this subject by Fox from July 4 through July 13 is them ignoring the story?
When we see media outlets bury things that go counter to their agenda, we typically see no coverage of the issue or next to none.
30 reports in ten days not only means three a day, but also that Fox is continuing to cover the matter.
With this in mind, rather than following in the footsteps of what Kurtz referred to as a "liberal group," he should have done more homework on this subject to include Thursday through Saturday broadcasts.
Maybe then he could have offered his viewers a much fairer analysis that might have praised Fox for turning the spotlight on itself instead of dodging a sensitive subject.
Or would that be too much like media analysis for Howie?
