I have watched enough of this woman to have caught her ridiculous "interview" with her husband, who was shilling his book. I caught her exercise in egoism when Fox was celebrating its 15th anniversary with flashbacks, she put up a highlight reel of her past 2 years ("look how different my hair is!") Media-made personality, yes. Journalist, hell no.
8
The only thing I would like to hear on Fox News would be its death rattle.
5
The sub-title on the cover of the magazine ("Can Megyn Kelly make Fox News appeal to people who …well read 'The New York Times'") is almost comically arrogant about the presumed NYT readership and commensurately dismissive about those who enjoy Fox News broadcasting. Many read the NYT not for its opinion pieces, which seem ever to tend harder left, but for its excellent writing in the news, arts and books and sports areas. (Yeah I like Sunday Styles too, Modern Love and the wedding page, especially). If you could marry the Fox perspective with all this you would have a boffo newspaper.
3
Oh come on, for goodness sake! Look at nightly news, local news, cable news and with few exceptions it's all about sex appeal. Complain all you want but it is what every channel is looking for and will use once they find it.
A bit pompous with your assumption that a person who views Fox is not well-read enough to get the joke about Tom Wolfe the author, aren't you?
7
This sounds like barely a story at all. So, she picked on Karl Rove when he refused to acknowledge that Obama had won the election. Maybe at Fox news, conceding that much to reality seems like a big deal - except that Fox news itself had declared that Obama had won - so all she was really doing was making fun of somebody who had flipped out under stress. I despise Rove as much as anybody, but making fun of a momentary fugue state like that doesn't really approach dealing with how wrong and harmful he has been. And it's the same with the episode with the SEALs. It sounds like she is willing to make little personal attacks that might be surprising - but the attacks are just little personal "gotchas", there doesn't seem to be anything like a fresh point of view. Oh well...
5
"Kelly beat the networks on election night ..."
No she didn't. She stuffed blow-hard Karl Rove. The other networks were way ahead of Fox in not airing Rove's lunacy about Ohio.
Methinks the author has exhibited a bit of Stockholm syndrome with respect to Kelly, also known as uncritical celebrity gush.
I actually read the entire article, pausing from time to time to recover from sugar shock.
The best I can figure out, a Megyn Moment involves inviting a certified political or social knuckle dragger on the program and taking the time to douse him with a bit of common sense.
And imagine being in the position of calling yourself a journalist and thinking it impolite to disclose your real political views even at the dinner table.
What? You mean you do it just for the money, Megyn?
What a gal!
She must only hope that her kids grow up to be like her. Not!
No she didn't. She stuffed blow-hard Karl Rove. The other networks were way ahead of Fox in not airing Rove's lunacy about Ohio.
Methinks the author has exhibited a bit of Stockholm syndrome with respect to Kelly, also known as uncritical celebrity gush.
I actually read the entire article, pausing from time to time to recover from sugar shock.
The best I can figure out, a Megyn Moment involves inviting a certified political or social knuckle dragger on the program and taking the time to douse him with a bit of common sense.
And imagine being in the position of calling yourself a journalist and thinking it impolite to disclose your real political views even at the dinner table.
What? You mean you do it just for the money, Megyn?
What a gal!
She must only hope that her kids grow up to be like her. Not!
3
A hundred years-worth of deceased NY Times editors would roll over in their graves if they knew The Times published the final quote in this story. Roger Ailes, president of Fox News: "... We're becoming the place most people go to to get the truth."
6
While Ms. Kelly's feistiness is admirable, I still find her unwatchable. Like other Fox female hosts, she too often comes off as a vengeful fury ready to annihilate a guest whose opinions she does not agree with. Granted, as little as I have seen of her show, she never reached the demented anger of a Judge Jeanine, a Fox News weekend host. No matter what the virtues are of her show over O'Reilly's and Hannity's, it is still the world according to Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch. Karl Rove made an ass of himself and Fox News on 2012 election night. But he is stll both contributing to Fox News and writing a weekly column for Murdoch's Wall Street Journal. When Murdoch bought the Chicago Sun Times in the 1980s Mike Royko jumped to the Chicago Tribune. Asked what he didn't like about Murdoch's approach to journalism, Royko said you can judge a newspaper by how accurate it tells you what is happening in your city, your country and the world. No matter how pretty the face on the screen, Fox News fails that test.
The thing that is silly is the left's ant-Fox derangement. It is a kind of litmus test among liberals that if they cannot slip snide comments about Fox into every conversation, then they are not appearing to be as smart as they think they are. And with all their sense of superiority, most of them have never really watched the shows they are so determined to criticize.
For me Bill O'Reilly is a case in point. At my first exposure he seemed crude. But if you actually watch the guy for awhile, you realize that while he is opinionated, he is not ideological at all, and underneath the bluster, is a regular guy. And while he is not the smartest guy in the world, he knows that. What O'Reilly is confident about is his values. But his show goes out of the way to bring on guests who disagree with him. That is something you almost never see on MSNBC.
For me Bill O'Reilly is a case in point. At my first exposure he seemed crude. But if you actually watch the guy for awhile, you realize that while he is opinionated, he is not ideological at all, and underneath the bluster, is a regular guy. And while he is not the smartest guy in the world, he knows that. What O'Reilly is confident about is his values. But his show goes out of the way to bring on guests who disagree with him. That is something you almost never see on MSNBC.
3
When I was 11, I was called into the principle's office. My mom has just given birth to my younger brother. Something was wrong though. They weren't quite sure what though at the time, but testing began.
30+ years ago I learned what Prader-Willie was. For 30 some years I have been trying to explain Prader-Willie to friends, extended family, even curious strangers if they asked. For 30+ years I have watched my mom and step-father devote their lives to our special family member, my younger brother who was diagnosed with Prader-Willie.
Try explaining to someone what it is like for someone with this condition. Try explaining why the fridge is wrapped in chain and locks. It's difficult trust me. I've never posted a comment to NYT and the only reason I am posting today, is to say thank you. To all the kind words posted in the reader feedback forum. This condition will never get the mainstream attention of down syndrome and likely will never be cured. That's okay though, quite frankly I am a changed person in life and as a human being because of my brother with Prader-Willie. I wish I could only be a fraction of how kind and gentle a soul he is. I wish everyone has a chance to meet someone with Prader-Willie.
Thank you,
Jeremy
30+ years ago I learned what Prader-Willie was. For 30 some years I have been trying to explain Prader-Willie to friends, extended family, even curious strangers if they asked. For 30+ years I have watched my mom and step-father devote their lives to our special family member, my younger brother who was diagnosed with Prader-Willie.
Try explaining to someone what it is like for someone with this condition. Try explaining why the fridge is wrapped in chain and locks. It's difficult trust me. I've never posted a comment to NYT and the only reason I am posting today, is to say thank you. To all the kind words posted in the reader feedback forum. This condition will never get the mainstream attention of down syndrome and likely will never be cured. That's okay though, quite frankly I am a changed person in life and as a human being because of my brother with Prader-Willie. I wish I could only be a fraction of how kind and gentle a soul he is. I wish everyone has a chance to meet someone with Prader-Willie.
Thank you,
Jeremy
I remember in 2008 Anderson Cooper asked candidate Obama a question about his lack of experience in governing and Obama citing his experience in running his campaign as an example of his capabilities. His entire time in office has shown that he still believes governing is the same as running his campaign, that is compromise is caving to what he wants.
1
Sometimes for sheer newsensational entertainment, I flick the channel between both FOX and CNN, which on cable here in the Boston area are on back-to-back stations. If there are a couple of major stories ongoing concurrently, you can be sure that one or the other is ensuring not to be covering the same, regarding of possible equal immediate importance. And if they are both covering the same story, it's so obvious that their anchors and guests approach the stories, their questions, and answers firmly based in focusing on their trademark rhetoric and stances. They're both shams.
1
Dye her hair black and she is Angie Harmon.
I see a woman who had to work really hard to succeed and did.
Along the way, however, her ambition seems to have overtaken her principles. I suspect if offered a job elsewhere with more money or prestige, she would walk. Even if it were, god forbid, on the left. Not to worry, she would adjust....
Along the way, however, her ambition seems to have overtaken her principles. I suspect if offered a job elsewhere with more money or prestige, she would walk. Even if it were, god forbid, on the left. Not to worry, she would adjust....
Why does the NYT pretend that FOX "News" is a legitimate news network? It is nothing more than a simplistic, reductive, right-wing propaganda tool. Each time they say they are "fair and balanced", they mock the intelligence of their viewers. The network is similar to the boy who cried wolf in that any legitimate criticism of the Obama administration or Democratic agenda just blends in with their unending noise.
I understand why some of the manifest nitwits and chuckle heads on "Fox and Friends" and their other shows are lucky to have a home on FOX and the indulgence of Roger Ailes. Why an intelligent, ambitious person such as Ms. Kelly chooses to work at this farce of a "News" operation escapes me.
I understand why some of the manifest nitwits and chuckle heads on "Fox and Friends" and their other shows are lucky to have a home on FOX and the indulgence of Roger Ailes. Why an intelligent, ambitious person such as Ms. Kelly chooses to work at this farce of a "News" operation escapes me.
12
I watch FOX because it covers stories the others won't. In 2008 we were left bereft of any information about a presidential candidate. Those of us who dug fr it from the Illinois papers and other sources as well as FOX found what the networks were hiding. In 2015 it continues. I want the news not not what you censor Networks. The reporting on some subjects has been horrendous with careful editing to produce opinions. A few years ago a presidential candidate was rumored to have a child from an adulterous affair. The newspapers and station in my state would not report on it even though this man was US Senator here. To find out I went to FOX. If no one is watching the networks any more it is because they have been dishonest with us. And I agree with Joe Klein. Brett Baiers' 6PM news program is better than anything else out there.
2
America will never get better with the Fox News poison needle hanging from the arms of half our population. Fox News has done to The Greatest Generation what Tokyo Rose & Axis Annie couldn't do when they were young & it's totally disgusting that this fake news network would lie & scare old people for profit.
Yes, MSNBC leans left & gets as loud as Fox at times but the difference between Fox & MSNBC are FACTS.....MSNBC uses facts...Fox News doesn't! That's proven over & over by non-partisan fact-checkers.
I want facts only even if they don't support my own political views. Without facts our country is adrift & on the way down.
Nothing says you're not very smart like telling people you watch Fox News
Yes, MSNBC leans left & gets as loud as Fox at times but the difference between Fox & MSNBC are FACTS.....MSNBC uses facts...Fox News doesn't! That's proven over & over by non-partisan fact-checkers.
I want facts only even if they don't support my own political views. Without facts our country is adrift & on the way down.
Nothing says you're not very smart like telling people you watch Fox News
21
The vast majority of those who criticize FOX News or its opinion shows do not watch FOX on TV. FOX does a very good job telling both sides of a news worthy story. One doesn't get that from very many other media groups. Up until FOX became a major source of information the American people could only get the opposing political points of view from talk radio. For decades the left was used to having their own way without being challenged in any meaningful way, until FOX that is. They don't like it one bit, because what they are doing is now being challenged and held up to scrutiny as never before. The left doesn't take opposing views very well. They viciously attack anyone who dares to challenge them even when they are obviously wrong, which is most of the time.
7
Is this post an example of Fox-style analysis?
Fox News has several million viewers.
In America there are hundreds of millions.
But only in the real world.
Fox News has several million viewers.
In America there are hundreds of millions.
But only in the real world.
3
I can't help but wonder... if Ms Kelley was shorter, less toned, struggling with weight gain and perhaps a few years older, would her journalistic prowess be so noteworthy?
15
Now that Fox has an objective anchor, the next step is to have an anchor That is a fiscal conservative & a Social Liberal. I'm sure many Americans who find themselves floundering without a party would flock to Fox.To carry this further,I'm sure I'm not alone as a person who would prefer a small Government,who also share my progressive views on woman's choice,a strict separation of Church & State,& Civil Rights for all Americans, regardless of,their race, religion,or their sexual orientation.If there was a political party that espoused these views, it would temper the views of the two major parties, or even become the major political party.
1
When Occupy Wall Street protesters were being pepper-sprayed, Megyn Kelly saw no problem. "It's a FOOD product," she blithely quipped. I give her a ten for wit but a two for social consciousness. She may be a fox but first and foremost she's a Fox.
8
Megyn's comment that "cheaters never prosper," as she interviewed someone on the low rung of the NFL concerning "deflate gate," just shows how little she knows about most of what she "reports" on.
8
Classy lady. Smart, and in control. A real worthy newsperson, Fox should be grateful.
8
I get that MSNBC, like Fox, has a particular political slant (to state the obvious). But Fox's slant is dishonest, "facts" are invented, narratives are entirely fiction, and the spin is beyond control. At least your average MSNBC host's opinions and leanings are presented honestly and are subject to debate, questions and disagreement.
I still watch Fox on occasion just to understand it, certainly not for news. Boy is is it painful.
I still watch Fox on occasion just to understand it, certainly not for news. Boy is is it painful.
8
Sorry, but the likes of MSNBC and CNN can be the same. Main differences, unfortunately: FOX has something in their anchor clauses, I think, that all their female newscasters must get strawlike, very yellow blonde hair dye jobs. And CNN et al. on the liberal side need to present nerdy, inarticulate anchors and guests wearing affected black-frame eyeglasses sandwiched between very goofy commercials (which come on every 3 seconds and last for 10 minutes or so).
I don’t watch the news, or any other television, but tuned into a Fox News with Megan Kelly on a flight last week. I was simply aghast at her behavior and how she did not allow reasoned argument to go forward in a civil manner. She represented a very most magnified version of what is wrong with media today. She violates the Code of Ethics set forth by the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) that has been in place since 1909 – I just looked this up because I was so aghast.
When reviewing the ethics she may have violated, the most noteworthy was her lack of “support the open and civil exchange of views, even views they find repugnant. She simply shut down what I found to be informative and reasoned arguments. This kind of journalism undermines democracy and should not be tolerated by the profession or the public.
I wish I could give a more detailed account of the discussion I heard, but I can’t recall its detail now. And I certainly don’t wish to tune in again. Watching her had been a very sad moment of awareness to the low level to which journalism had sunk at Fox. The journalism profession needs to step up and enforce their code of ethics or the government will need to regulate it, and I'm not sure how that could work.
When reviewing the ethics she may have violated, the most noteworthy was her lack of “support the open and civil exchange of views, even views they find repugnant. She simply shut down what I found to be informative and reasoned arguments. This kind of journalism undermines democracy and should not be tolerated by the profession or the public.
I wish I could give a more detailed account of the discussion I heard, but I can’t recall its detail now. And I certainly don’t wish to tune in again. Watching her had been a very sad moment of awareness to the low level to which journalism had sunk at Fox. The journalism profession needs to step up and enforce their code of ethics or the government will need to regulate it, and I'm not sure how that could work.
6
Ms. Kelly is not a trained journalist and that is part of the blurring going on.
Someone who is not holding herself or himself to journalistic ethics should not be identified as a journalist.
Someone who is not holding herself or himself to journalistic ethics should not be identified as a journalist.
11
I don't think you have to be a trained journalist to adhere to journalistic ethics, it's two different things. It shouldn't be a stretch to understand journalistic ethics for someone trained in the law, as MK was, to boot.
Was Anderson Cooper trained as a journalist...?
Was Anderson Cooper trained as a journalist...?
2
I am a conservative who gets sick watching this vicious woman speak. She is awful.
12
I'm sorry but I cannot see how the word relevance can be used when you are talking about Fox. I do not understand how an intelligent person can work for an organization that is not real. I know that those who work for Fox aren't stupid, is it just the money they make? Do they enjoy slanting the"news" to fit such a right wing agenda?
5
If Ms. Kelly wants to be a journalist she will have to move to a legitimate news channel. Propaganda, infotainment and spin don't count. Fox is poison. I know people who watch Fox and believe Iraq was connected to 9-11, that Fannie-Freddie caused the Great Recession, that massive inflation has been just around the corner for 5 years, that Obama is a Socialist born in Kenya and that what's good for the 1% will trickle down to the rest of us. I don't doubt that Ms. Kelly is very bright and capable. Yet, as long as works at Fox she will never be a journalist. Pity.
12
In 2008 media failed to perform due diligence on candidate Barack Obama, and I eventually began watching Fox News for the other side of the story. Fox is no more silly and egregious than MSNBC, in its one-sided reporting or in the mainstreamers who worship at the feet of an agenda of their choosing. We the People aren't necessarily involved in that agenda.
I am neither liberal nor conservative but a journalism major who looks for the truth. Don't discount "alternative" news sources and the power of Megyn Kelly, who is displacing Bill O'Reilly as the Fox's premier pundit. Feminists of the world, why aren't you watching?
I am neither liberal nor conservative but a journalism major who looks for the truth. Don't discount "alternative" news sources and the power of Megyn Kelly, who is displacing Bill O'Reilly as the Fox's premier pundit. Feminists of the world, why aren't you watching?
6
Fox has made a mistake with Ms. Kelly. The 1 in 4 Americans who believe the Sun orbits Earth will not understand her "content".
3
What a great photo by Stephanie Sinclair. Wow. I'd love to know what the lighting was. Ambient? Off camera flash? Either way super job. Beautiful separation between her and the other people. Composition superb.
She's an actor, not a newsperson. Every moment is about her success in the ratings. That any American would spend time watching this AS NEWS points to same kind of problem we had with Selma, Johnson. We potentially have an entire audience (millions?!) who are misinformed, who perhaps have seriously skewed, half-developed ideas of what is happening in the country and the world. It's dangerous and it's a disservice to the public. But oddly enough, the public will see that she makes millions.
6
Am I the only person who thought Ms. Kelly's election night walk and comment about "Republican math" was hardly any great moment in take-down journalism but rather one last attempt to pander to the Fox chorus of Obama haters?
5
As her employer Rupert Murdoch once said (Meet the Press, I believe), he's "not in the news business," he's "in the ratings business."
6
Seems that all the left leaning detractors, can not accept a absolutely beautiful woman who is also sharp and intelligent.
5
Good for Ms. Kelly. Fortunately, there are also tens of millions of American women working real jobs every day who are even smarter than she.
7
Sorry... Megyn Kelly with her oh so serious voice and mannerisms is a complete turn-off at so many levels. Prefer when female reporters project a natural and believable personna instead of a shadow male presence they deem as "credible."
4
Lord, do you have this wrong. Why persist in trying to make this a competition between news networks? With all of the cable news options why would any viewer depend upon only one? Unless, perhaps, they care to hear one message, delivered by a blond? You seriously underestimate the viewing public. Certainly quality news stories come from so many of the news sources available for viewing on cable networks. No one news network deserves a top spot, especially in light of the wide variety of choices. delivered by a wide variety of personalities, some of them actual journalists, not a blond wearing spikey heels whose purpose is to deride her guests.
2
I chuckled when I saw your piece on Megyn Kelly, and in reading the readers comments my faith in womanhood was once again renewed. Most of the comments attacked her womanhood and her sexuality, giving little credit that not all blondes are dumb. But out came the knitting needles with barbs, taking her to the woodshed from her Prada shoes to her hair style. Rather than applauding the fact that when put up against a male dominated arena (TV nightly news) she has put he boys in their place, second best!
2
Anyone who doesn't see the bias in her performance every night is blinded because they share the same bias - Obama phobia. I've watched her many times and I marvel at how anyone could take her seriously. Her facial expressions are beautifully nuanced to cue the audiences emotions - typically outrage at Obama. Their whole agenda is to inspire fear and anger in their audience and having a black man who happens to be a Democrat is manna from heaven for the Fox News business plan.
7
Interesting that the Gov't she rails against is the same one her mother worked for (VA), and I'm sure put food and benefits on the table. How quickly people forget. I will never forget my humble roots.
7
The story ledes with one hopes a great example of Ms. Kelly's independence. Instead, what we find is her discussing a completely unimportant subject of one Seal arguing about another. It's banal, completely, and that's the problem with so much of our news today, everyone has doubled down on minor kerfluffles of no real importance..
(Aside from the fact that the author tells us how she might go against the Fox corporate position and then proceeds not to do that.)
I have watched exactly 15 minutes of her in my life. On election night 2012, I switched over to watch the Republican fanatics lose. Yes, it was great fun watching Karl Rove lose his mind. This article gives me no reason to want to revisit my trip to the fantasy land of Forx, Kelly or no.
(Aside from the fact that the author tells us how she might go against the Fox corporate position and then proceeds not to do that.)
I have watched exactly 15 minutes of her in my life. On election night 2012, I switched over to watch the Republican fanatics lose. Yes, it was great fun watching Karl Rove lose his mind. This article gives me no reason to want to revisit my trip to the fantasy land of Forx, Kelly or no.
5
As scripted as the information on a cereal box, Ms. Kelly is just another shill of Roger Ailes, owner of Fox News, just another talking head to administer propaganda for The Republican Right.
4
Beware of a wolf in sheep's clothing. Anyone fooled by this woman is a fool. The fact that she embodies the played out standard of American beauty makes her all the more generic.
6
Sorry. When we get such gems as "Santa is White" there's no need to go there. If you want both sides, and most of us probably do, the only choice is to do your own digging. That includes media outside the US. The view into our House of Madness is alarming at times.
10
Many of us are doing just that. The Amsterdam News and The Guardian have a bias but they do a better job of reporting what is happening here than the news organizations here.
Without her looks she'd be in Kansas. She's a shill for the John Wayne myth of cowboy independence the conservatives and Fox endlessly promote. Everything about her and Fox is a sham.
5
For all you fox haters who can forget Steve Croft's interview with Obama and Hillary patting each other on the back and having a lovefest on stage. 60 minutes, was one of the greatest news shows ever. The entire. CBS network is one of the most biased on television., is nothing but a lapdog for the Democratic Party. Don Hewitt must be turning over in his grave
5
The recent termination of Sharyl Atkinson is proof. The networks are in the business of protecting its favorites and keeping real news off the air.
1
You almost lost me at "Fox News".
I've no idea who the Megyn Kelly is, since I dropped cable 6 years ago. (I couldn't find a cable bundle without Fox News in the package and it was one of a select few channels I could, in no way, pay the slightest amount of money for.)
I've no idea who the Megyn Kelly is, since I dropped cable 6 years ago. (I couldn't find a cable bundle without Fox News in the package and it was one of a select few channels I could, in no way, pay the slightest amount of money for.)
3
It speaks for itself that there was no mention of Ms. Kelly's background in the discipline and skill set of actual journalism in this article, only in her transcendent abilities at snark and distraction from the shallow, one dimensional ideological boilerplate at Fox. How low we've fallen since Walter Cronkite and The McNeil Lerher Report
7
I watch because she is such an incredibly beautiful women. She has a certain allure that I find enticing.
I am not much of a politico so I do not follow politics except on voting day when I favor young over old and women over men regardless of party.
I am not much of a politico so I do not follow politics except on voting day when I favor young over old and women over men regardless of party.
What's so sad about it is that Megyn's "Kelly moments" are notable on Fox "News". Why can't they get a little more probing, a little more driving, on all the rest of Fox "News" regarding the conservative spin that pervades all their shows? For 7 hours a week they have an occasion moment that actually calls some of the extreme positions of the conservative, Republican dogma, out for its pretense to be 'mainstream'. "Fair and balanced" needs to be more than a few moments out of 7 hours a week. I miss Cronkite, Huntley, and Brinkley.
2
The way to watch the women on Fox News is with the sound off. The way to watch the men is not at all.
5
I watch Hannity to see the proper way to toss a Nerf football.
I watch Fox for entertainment purposes. Ms. Kelly has had some really strong moments. I wish, though, that she would not take the low road on certain stories. I am hoping she does this while holding her nose. In fact I would like to see the best journalists on the cable networks return to the essence of their craft: skepticism, tough follow-up questions, and an emphasis on exploring the nuances of a story. The article talks about Bill O'Reilly. He is not a journalist but an opinionator, and he talks over the people he interrogates. Hannity is just purely repugnant and is not a jounalist as well. He is an attack dog, a kind of pit bull who ironically sends his kids to a private Friends school on Long Island. Megyn Kelly is better than that and could be even more.
Fox News is Entertainment, not actual news. She is just another Fox entertainer. Not a journalist. So few of them left anywhere. I find it interesting she is uncomfortable at NY dinner parties. Sometimes that is where the rubber really meets the road. The facade isn't there and people really know if you're legitimate. I would love to be a guest on her show and have a Megan moment tried on me. I wish Johnny Thunders was still alive and she could interview him. Perhaps Mick Jagger could come in and she could Megan moment him. Or Robert De Niro. Fox News Entertainment is not news. She's more like Oprah than actual news person. Yes, I've watched enough of her to comment.
4
one thing "FoX-news " needs to realize is there viewers are baby boomers . What are the gonna do when the baby boomers all gone in a few years ? They need to do a better job of attracting milliniums and the minority .
1
As a foreigner, I always find watching the Fox News entertaining. I am thankful that we do not have this type of news reporting in Canada.
3
Bill O' Rielly and Megyn Kelly back to back is like the tandem of Gehrig and Ruth in the Yankees 1927 lineup...they know the topics discussed and are bottom line news hosts...and they add humor into the mix...give them a raise Fox News
2
I guess the key question is whether she can expand the demographic devoted to Fox, which seems at present to be Baby Boomers in the grip of cognitive decline.
5
"We hate the GOP!"
Who are you quoting?
4
And look at the mean-spirited mess you have created.
2
I am paraphrasing the posters here, who are generally left wingers who hate the GOP.
We have, and need, a two party state.
Each party should respect the other!
We have, and need, a two party state.
Each party should respect the other!
1
"As for Kelly, Ailes said, she had a long way to go to become one of the truly great television news talents, a distinction he reserves for Walter Cronkite, Diane Sawyer, Barbara Walters..."
Seriously, a very long way to go.
Seriously, a very long way to go.
9
And who says they were so great? We can fault Cronkite for Viet Nam. Barbara for Castro. They were one-sided ideologues sold as "journalists."
Name the last, true journalist. You cannot. All have a bias. None are neutral.
Name the last, true journalist. You cannot. All have a bias. None are neutral.
3
I have seen this woman on the air frequently, due to spending time with relatives who don't know any better than to watch Fox News, and she is not the individual portrayed in this profile. She is a bully and a rigid right wing ideologue, devoted to over-generalizing, stereotyping, and outright hate speech, particularly when it comes to Muslims. There is no "intelligence" here, only the smug self-satisfaction of a Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity. There is no Megyn moment, only some kind of hysteria induced by blond hair and a couple of tarted-up eyes. You think Megyn Kelly is something different happening on Fox? Get eyeglasses and a hearing aid. Better yet, read a newspaper.
40
I'd love to see your examples of Megyn's "outright hate speech." Oh, woopsie, can't think of any? Obviously folks like you don't watch FNC or Megyn.
4
well Tony, not all of us can aspire to the unmitigated partisan brilliance of
Rachel Maddow, can we? And, at least we don't have to worry about Rachel's "tarted up" eyes.
Rachel Maddow, can we? And, at least we don't have to worry about Rachel's "tarted up" eyes.
1
Yes, thank you! I had the same reaction to this article. I have watched more hours of Megyn than I care to count, and I found the profile was too soft on her. Talk about bias.
1
It's worrying that Megyn Kelly's reality distortion field is among the top-rated cable news programs.
It's even more worrisome that her show is "the place most people go to get the truth."
It's even more worrisome that her show is "the place most people go to get the truth."
15
The TRUTH , really. I prefer Bill Maher
3
Consider the source of that statement: Roger Ailes.
Big difference between Roger and Reality.
Big difference between Roger and Reality.
2
Where do you go? You go to the place with which you agree. You are as biased as they.
2
I have a whole different take on Fox News' coverage of the 2012 presidential election and Megan Kelly's walk than this article presented. I don't think I have ever seen a network take such care to not upset it's onscreen analysts, especially, obviously, Karl Rove. It highlighted the question "is Fox News a serious news network?" or is it more accurately a very skilled infomercial platform. And having watched Megan Kelly on occasion for the last three years, I am continually amazed why guests agree to be interviewed by someone so shamelessly rude. Her style is "mean girl,' not provocative.
10
Whaaaaat? Again, clearly, you don't watch. Megyn is always happy, fun, funny, and very friendly.
2
Of course it is not a serious news network. None of them are. At least television and radio news as they all have either idealogical constraints imposed on them (Fox) or with sponsors like Lockheed and Boeing to not offend (NBC). Fox News is the worst of the lot but they are all abysmal to the point of being extremely frightening. I recommend reading.
Fox is not news. It is a propaganda channel (and domestic propaganda is supposed to be illegal in this country). It broadcasts politically-motivated lies regularly (such as identifying Republican politicians in legal trouble as Democrats on their Chyron) and until last week, when their lies went global, never corrected itself. It has done more harm to the government of this country than any other single entity.
As it happens, the one time I voluntarily watched Fox for any length of time was on election night 2012 (I wanted to see how they would handle losing), and therefore got to see the archetypal Megyn Moment in real time. And now that I know that it, too, was a scripted lie, I've been relieved of the need ever to bother watching it again.
As it happens, the one time I voluntarily watched Fox for any length of time was on election night 2012 (I wanted to see how they would handle losing), and therefore got to see the archetypal Megyn Moment in real time. And now that I know that it, too, was a scripted lie, I've been relieved of the need ever to bother watching it again.
23
Your open-mindedness is why New York is such a mess.
5
Everything you say about Fox you can say about MSNBC. The only difference is that people are actually watching Fox.
Oh and most other network and papers usually forget to use the word 'democrat' when a member of that party is in trouble.
Oh and most other network and papers usually forget to use the word 'democrat' when a member of that party is in trouble.
4
Kelly's treatment of Navy Seal Gilliam is hardly the maverick moment that Mr. Rutenberg makes it out to be. Gilliam challenged Fox orthodoxy by criticizing the "hero" that Fox was promoting at the time. So Kelly threw him under the bus. How is that not in keeping with standard procedure at Fox? Just like when O'Reilly, after endless, maudlin praise for the survivors of 9/11 victims, was outraged when the son of once of the deceased challenged Bush's war rationale and O'Reilly turned on the grieving kid without a moment's hesitation.
As for Kelly's "renegade" role, it's an old Ailes trick, previously performed by Shep Smith. Toss the crowd a sliver of dissent to give the false appearance of fair and balanced. This bait and switch apparently even works on media critics who should know better.
As for Kelly's "renegade" role, it's an old Ailes trick, previously performed by Shep Smith. Toss the crowd a sliver of dissent to give the false appearance of fair and balanced. This bait and switch apparently even works on media critics who should know better.
29
She is a rare combination of brains, beauty, and style whose dialogue and interviews are compelling. Quite frankly, I think she is one of the best interviewers on the air at this point in time, who seems less biased than most of her Fox News brethren (and I would also say the same about Bill O'Reilly). Her exceptionally good looks are icing on the cake.
8
Mike...pretty sure that if she didn't have those looks, there wouldn't be same compelling allure to listen, because the brains and the style is straight up Mean Girls. That you are willing to point to this in print here is brave of you.
1
The only time I have to deal with Fox News is when I visit my Mom; she has it on all the time. After five minutes or so, it becomes apparent how their headlines are skewed in such a way to highlight failures of the President and of the wacky world of the liberals, such as "White House Fails to...; "Obama Comeback Cut Short"; or "Obama Team Fuming." To me, it seems so transparently onesided and I quickly ask if we can change the channel. I can't imagine a scenario where I would watch Fox at home on my own, even if Ms. Kelly were single and came over to watch with me!
13
"DavidB.," Yes, sir! How about the NYT, or WP or, CBS/News, and... as being part of the far left wing...
I saw a clip from "The Factor" where a quite civil "guest" was interrupted continually by the "far from balanced" host with, "I can't talk to you because you're in a different universe.'
All that the gentleman was saying that everyone should be allowed to voice their opinion and observe the First Amendment. O'Really? For sure.
Many years ago, I labeled Rupert Murdoch as one of the most dangerous people on this planet. And, continue to believe this. Orwell foresaw this in 1948 -- the year that "1984" was published.
I saw a clip from "The Factor" where a quite civil "guest" was interrupted continually by the "far from balanced" host with, "I can't talk to you because you're in a different universe.'
All that the gentleman was saying that everyone should be allowed to voice their opinion and observe the First Amendment. O'Really? For sure.
Many years ago, I labeled Rupert Murdoch as one of the most dangerous people on this planet. And, continue to believe this. Orwell foresaw this in 1948 -- the year that "1984" was published.
15
NO WAY, MS. KELLY
There very few NYT readers who would not understand that MEGYN KELLY is in fact a far greater manipulator than Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity, the "Fox and Friends" crew, and...
Her most significant threat will be to the aforementioned fascist on-air "hosts," on the "no-spin" Factor and the other right wing propagandists on the Fox News Channel.
Though Ms. Kelly is quite intelligent the only persons she can convince are true-believer members of electorate who already agree with the network's 'far from balanced' mantra -- i.e., the lumpen proletariat and the "1%."
There very few NYT readers who would not understand that MEGYN KELLY is in fact a far greater manipulator than Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity, the "Fox and Friends" crew, and...
Her most significant threat will be to the aforementioned fascist on-air "hosts," on the "no-spin" Factor and the other right wing propagandists on the Fox News Channel.
Though Ms. Kelly is quite intelligent the only persons she can convince are true-believer members of electorate who already agree with the network's 'far from balanced' mantra -- i.e., the lumpen proletariat and the "1%."
9
Yeah, right. Check the facts: Pew Research that says FNC is the most fair and balanced channel. MSNBC deemed the most slanted.
3
And you are related to Megyn how?
"Teri Brown," I have had an interest if domestic and foreign affairs for many years... So, I have lived through 60 + conscious years and, therefore, have independent knowledge of what actually happened.
Yes, I do agree that MSNBC has a liberal slant. But, FOX really does not have a conservative slant like the late WFB (whom I often respected and agreed with).
The FNC sounds more like the ideology and behaviors of a South American fascist dictators or the 1970's Greek junta, or...
Two more remarks: What does Gov. Sarah Palin substantially contribute to FOX other than now as a celebrity who brings increased ratings and revenues? Compare the intelligence and knowledge of say Megyn and Maddow. Or, McDonnell and Hannity. Like, really?
Yes, I do agree that MSNBC has a liberal slant. But, FOX really does not have a conservative slant like the late WFB (whom I often respected and agreed with).
The FNC sounds more like the ideology and behaviors of a South American fascist dictators or the 1970's Greek junta, or...
Two more remarks: What does Gov. Sarah Palin substantially contribute to FOX other than now as a celebrity who brings increased ratings and revenues? Compare the intelligence and knowledge of say Megyn and Maddow. Or, McDonnell and Hannity. Like, really?
2
After years in the news business, I was invited in for an interview at FOX. I was stunned when I walked through the news room. It was sparkling clean, even the receptionist seemed to be wearing designer clothing and everyone had on heels. The newsrooms I had been in up until then had newspapers piled on desks, empty food containers and producers dressed in comfortable warm clothing in case they had to go to a plane crash and actually cover news. FOX is not news it's infotainment. I was offered the job, I was after all blonde. Sadly, this is what news has become. Might as well pay attention to Twitter, it's about the same.
25
I believe that twitter is most of the way foxx reacts to the news. It seems to be their world view.
Correct. That is what news has become, which is why I listen to the radio and hardly watch any cable tv. It stinks!
O'Reilly, Hannity, Kelly: it's enough to make my Irish eyes brim with tears.
8
Dry your eyes, you also have Charlie Pierce.
Walter Cronkite and Edward R. Murrow must be turning over in their graves to see an opinion-spouting, know-nothing like Kelly treated like a news-person.
And speaking of "news," why do so many Times profiles seem compelled to list the full range of attire (Prada, etc) worn by people being profiled? Doesn't that sort of thing belong in the Styles section, not "news"? There used to be a distinction in the Times...
And speaking of "news," why do so many Times profiles seem compelled to list the full range of attire (Prada, etc) worn by people being profiled? Doesn't that sort of thing belong in the Styles section, not "news"? There used to be a distinction in the Times...
14
So, Syracuse and law school makes her a know-nothing? Don't think so.
2
NYT's has been slumming for awhile. This is a shameful puff piece~with labels. "Let's legitimize Fox." Why on earth do that? Does the public get information from watching Fox? Nope. They get lies and hysteria.
2
Fox News may want me to view Megyn Kelly and the rest of their flock of wolves in sheep's clothing, but there is just no way this biased, hurtful, empty cable "news" station with a big "For Sale" sign on its back will ever convince me to tune in to the lies, distortions, and manipulations being broadcast there 24/7. I would sooner take up crocheting.
13
It'll take a lot more than a NYT Magazine cover to convince me that Fox News is any sort of legitimate journalistic enterprise. They have always been a platform for the bigoted and often hateful positions of Rupert Murdoch, facts be damned. And while Fox News, as you note, sometimes shows strong ratings when measured against CNN and MSNBC, take them out into the real world of broadcast TV and Fox's ratings are just a tiny fraction of the total audience for the CBS Evening News, which is by far the lowest-rated of the Big Three network newscasts. Like everything else with the false Fox News, they only look good when viewed from inside their bubble.
14
Correction: The CBS Evening News is the highest-rated evening news program, with 8.8 million viewers. Fox News averages 1.2 million viewers in the same time slot. This Times commenter regrets the error.
3
SometimeS? Nope. Fox News ratings have consistently beaten CNN and MSNBC for many years. ANd of course FNC can't beat broadcast news. Those channels are seen in many, many more households who don't get cable. Actually MSM news audiences are shrinking. Try watching instead of reading Media Matters.
1
Megyn used to work 100-hour weeks as an attorney in NY State, according to her husband. She is the mother of boys - imagine having her come by a son's classroom on cupcake day after the Michelle diet rules evaporate!
She combines the sense of humor with honest love for country. The hysterical right is correct to fear conservative women like her, Joni Earnst, Gov. Martiez, and others. They make the sale of media feminism to liberals look like one of the worst deals since Time-Warner bought AOL.
The howls here and on the hardest Left about Fox News look like the sting of the failed investor now, who put all their hopes of the Dan Rathers and Rachel Maddows, only to discover just how woefully out of touch they always were with Americans.
Maybe it is good that the Occupiers don't try the stock market.
She combines the sense of humor with honest love for country. The hysterical right is correct to fear conservative women like her, Joni Earnst, Gov. Martiez, and others. They make the sale of media feminism to liberals look like one of the worst deals since Time-Warner bought AOL.
The howls here and on the hardest Left about Fox News look like the sting of the failed investor now, who put all their hopes of the Dan Rathers and Rachel Maddows, only to discover just how woefully out of touch they always were with Americans.
Maybe it is good that the Occupiers don't try the stock market.
6
I find it interesting that you are so sure Ms. Kelly's politics is "conservative." The better bet is that she is apolitical, but very knowledgeable about what feeds her viewers and keeps them watching. She is an entertainer. Your mention of "failed investor" indicates you know this, too. It is all about money, nothing about analysis of the news or providing the information an electoral needs to make a wise decision at the polls.
I would have invested in Rachel Maddows' show, whether it had potential to make money or not, because I value the historical perspective she provides on the subject she and her staff chooses to highlight. Yes, she is biased. But when she provided a summary of the history of US-Cuba relations, she provided her viewers with a valuable history lesson. It was also an accurate history lesson.
I would have invested in Rachel Maddows' show, whether it had potential to make money or not, because I value the historical perspective she provides on the subject she and her staff chooses to highlight. Yes, she is biased. But when she provided a summary of the history of US-Cuba relations, she provided her viewers with a valuable history lesson. It was also an accurate history lesson.
3
Isn't the broader story that Fox News is winning some Whist battle on the Titanic? It is just some numbers game for Ailes and Whoever for market share before the lights go out at the nursing home.
The real damage is the leakage of ugly attitudes into our culture from these guys playing fast and loose with the truth and training an audience to respond to fear mongering and to settle for foam substitutes for actual reporters. No self-critique going on there.
Cable has become some kind of yeehaw outpost for 1980s hair festishists and guys with high school educations clawing the air. Why should we care? This has been a year when a lot of real journalists the world over got killed for important stories. We should appreciate the difference.
The real damage is the leakage of ugly attitudes into our culture from these guys playing fast and loose with the truth and training an audience to respond to fear mongering and to settle for foam substitutes for actual reporters. No self-critique going on there.
Cable has become some kind of yeehaw outpost for 1980s hair festishists and guys with high school educations clawing the air. Why should we care? This has been a year when a lot of real journalists the world over got killed for important stories. We should appreciate the difference.
25
All those dittoheads still anointing themselves the "balanced" ones and declaring Fox the oracle people seek in order to have THE TRUTH bestowed upon them. This just in, Mr. Ailes: They go to Fox to hear what they want to hear, and the rest of us are still laughing at you.
16
And your city is in such great shape because of its political choices.
1
Hey, I think it's great that Kelly is a thoughtful conservative willing to talk through and cut through the group speak in FoxWorld. It is disquieting that she got noticed by her physical appearance rather than her obvious intelligence. One imagines that there are intelligent, but pudgy brunettes walking around FoxWorld that are merely part of the woodwork. So too, the critical part of her career raises questions; when, in a bid to show authenticity and a personal ,emotive side, she used hot button stories of racial animosity and discord to get ahead. A less generous interpretation would be that when she needed to advance, she did so my helping FoxWorld's race-bait and feed white resentments and animosities. It's hard to pat her on the back for those choices.
7
I'm a Democrat but I love looking at Megyn Kelly!
4
Good looking newscaters are a reality of TV life, there's nothing wrong with it as long as that is not the only the most important criteria for the job! Have you loked at most local and national TV news personages? They are all getting to be very pretty and handsome, there's less and less normal looking people. Sooner or later you have to conclude that it is an entertainment venue and not a hard core news operation- the people's appearances are becoming more important than the news, story or forum which they moderate.
1
I had assumed (this being The Times) that I was in for a serious article about Ms. Kelly.
Then the writer chose to enlighten me as to how Ms. Kelly positions her leg as she is sitting.
Bad form, author.
Then the writer chose to enlighten me as to how Ms. Kelly positions her leg as she is sitting.
Bad form, author.
5
I'd say it is alright to show us that she can relax as any other person does. TV hosts have the high-intensity - low-intensity cycles that Jack Niclaus described playing out in his mind as he played a competitive round of golf.
Megyn Kelly has proven that even in an ideologically oriented news network there is room to expose the weaknesses in an argument. Kelly has consistently showed her viewers she is capable of insightful and poignant questions. As media continues to be increasingly polarized - so too does the political debate. Kelly is mastering the balancing act required by many journalists.
10
There are NO news networks that are NOT ideologically oriented. If you aren't aware of that you truly need to get out more. The same goes for newspapers' political, economic, and government coverage.
What's sad is that TV & radio sports coverage has fallen into the same pattern.
What's sad is that TV & radio sports coverage has fallen into the same pattern.
2
Upsetting to realize how a beautiful, smart popular person as Megyn Kelly could be used to spread Roger Ailes propaganda. Fact is, Ailes was part of the Lee Atwater, Karl Rove swift boat tactics. He is a brilliant strategist, and with Murdock's money and power and an also brilliant marketing strategy (Fox cable is the most prevalent station in the heartland) he has grown an empire that can be used to spread "swift boat" propaganda. And Fox does this, not by their anchors, but by the guests and "analysts" they have on their shows who spout off their extreme conservative agendas which is then taken up 24/7 by all of their programs for several days. Especially, I was upset over their portrayal of teachers and unions. They had one of their "analyst" say teachers got paid for getting out of school early and going to Marshall's and spending their overflow of money. And this was taken up by O'Reilly, Hannity, Fox and Friends, etc. This propaganda was virulent, misleading and extremely unfair to all teachers. And the supreme court has said that Fox, as well as other stations, can stretch the truth all they want too. Fox plays on the prejudices and fears of people, and tells them what they want to hear to confirm their opinions. This tactic, taken to the extreme, is very detrimental to a democracy. A fact based, well informed populace is the foundation of a democracy and the well being of the United States of America.
22
True, I would even point out that her mostly male media critics may be giving her too much credit, beguiled as they are by her physical beauty.
7
If it wasn't for her, we wouldn't know the exact color of Jesus:
http://mankabros.com/blogs/god/2013/12/12/the-color-of-jesus/
http://mankabros.com/blogs/god/2013/12/12/the-color-of-jesus/
10
Or Santa Claus!
2
The Megyn File and all other shows on Fox News should be declared "no go zones" for anyone who is not brain-dead.
23
Since Fox is the most-watched news channel by a country mile, that means most Americans are "brain-dead." Lovely example of the coastal elitist attitudes.
2
Fox is not the "most-highly watched news channel" because it's not a news channel.
9
I notice you missed Zeya's reference to "no-go zones", those being just the latest lies to be reported as fact by Fox News. Look up "Fox News lies" for several thousand more (most recently, claiming the Keystone pipeline will create "tens of thousands of jobs", still claiming Obamacare has "death panels", claiming NASA "fudged data" proving global warming, with more new lies every day). No other news channel or network news broadcast brazenly assaults its audience with a constant barrage of false "news." And that's why nobody with any common sense views Fox News as a credible source of factual journalism.
6
Megyn Kelly has moments of lucidity because she's smart and knows that she's playing to the lowest common denominator. But is seems that sometimes even she realizes how ridiculous the whole Fox News model is and lets herself speak from a reasonable perspective. However, one thing is remains constant. As long as there are ignorant uninformed people who want to remain that way, Fox News will continue to have an audience that eats up the half truths they sell as broadcast news.
9
And you in Chicago are doing just great. Sad. You who fight the other side are on the losing side.
1
So this creature tells the truth once in a blue moon and she gets a huge column??? Anyone that works for that filthy organization has no conscience whatsoever. They are destroying this country!
19
Oh yeah. And CA is such a model for governance. Perhaps you should listen to the other side. All you have is climate.
1
When a Kelly is wrong and won't admit it, she invariably gets angry.
This is hardly fair and balanced, and certainly not very smart.
This is hardly fair and balanced, and certainly not very smart.
9
Megan is lovely and she speaks clearly. She is basically non-political and she sticks to the facts. This is just what American television is lacking and needs. The only thing about her that I do not like is her clipped manner of speaking. It is probably only me that feels that way. More power to her.
7
This appears to be a lengthy article in praise of a rising-star that is as much a celebration of an individual's quests as it is about her employer and the lengths to which both will go in search of "success".
Readers would likely have benefited if the author had had a few "Megyn-moments" himself while he was constructing this mostly flattering piece.
Is Mr. Ailes actually suggesting that his Mr. O'Reilly, and, by "future-expectation", his Ms. Kelly, are the equal of Walter Cronkite?
Neither of these presenters are journalists, let alone actual reporters.
When "popularity" is the single, most-important ingredient and expected result, then there really is an alternate-universe in play at Fox News (entertainment).
The choices we-all make never cease to amaze.
sigh....
Readers would likely have benefited if the author had had a few "Megyn-moments" himself while he was constructing this mostly flattering piece.
Is Mr. Ailes actually suggesting that his Mr. O'Reilly, and, by "future-expectation", his Ms. Kelly, are the equal of Walter Cronkite?
Neither of these presenters are journalists, let alone actual reporters.
When "popularity" is the single, most-important ingredient and expected result, then there really is an alternate-universe in play at Fox News (entertainment).
The choices we-all make never cease to amaze.
sigh....
8
Sadly, Megyn Kelly often distorts the truth to fit the right wing agenda at FOX NEWS. She is a fresh face but is still peddling the same stale republican ideas.
13
Your analysis is incorrect. Republicans really cannot be considered right wing. They, as are the Democrats, are firmly ensconced in the left wing. Fox News is the new center, the people Ronald Reagan used to refer to as the "silent majority".
3
Actually it was Nixon who coined the term silent majority.
4
Most "news" channels these days peddle the Democratic line, so one that peddles the GOP line seems pretty fair to me.
3
Does this top pic remind anyone of the "Mary Tyler Moore Show"? The only think Kelly is missing is a hat she should be wearing to fling it into the air. I can still hear that music, "You can make it after all, ta, ta, ta, ta, hmmmmm".
Maybe I am older than most on here, Who knows?
Maybe I am older than most on here, Who knows?
4
Not to old Lost. Most who post seem to be older than 60. It seems many posters here forget they were once idealistic and thought that truth would conquer lies. Seems the opposite is true--many readers seem to agree with the repubs and their lies, especially the 60 and over crowd who can't seem to deciper what is truth and what is propaganda. Seems propaganda has won, especially for the 60 and over crowd.
2
Thanks for your reply. I see I should have proofread my previous post for right word usage, punctuation, etc.
Anyway, I read several posts on here yesterday and I had the opposite impression that you did. As the NYT is known to be liberal, it seems most of their readers are as well. I saw a lot of dislike for Ms. Kelly and Fox News on here.
Your politics and mine would not be agreeable as I am a FNC watcher. I am a registered Independent and am a moderate-conservative in my politics. When I was younger I was incredibly idealistic and naïve. I had to learn many things I believed were not possible. However, who ever claimed idealism was the province of the left and not the right? Not true. Many on the right complain about the lies of the left from pols like both Clintons, Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Holder and Jarret to name a few. I think lying has more to with politicians and not their politics.
Maybe we should trade residences because you live in a red state and are liberal. I live in a purple state that seems to be headed to blue and I lean to the right.
Btw, the average age for CNN and MSNBC viewers are not much younger than FNCs viewers. All news channels seem to attract older viewers.
Anyway, I read several posts on here yesterday and I had the opposite impression that you did. As the NYT is known to be liberal, it seems most of their readers are as well. I saw a lot of dislike for Ms. Kelly and Fox News on here.
Your politics and mine would not be agreeable as I am a FNC watcher. I am a registered Independent and am a moderate-conservative in my politics. When I was younger I was incredibly idealistic and naïve. I had to learn many things I believed were not possible. However, who ever claimed idealism was the province of the left and not the right? Not true. Many on the right complain about the lies of the left from pols like both Clintons, Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Holder and Jarret to name a few. I think lying has more to with politicians and not their politics.
Maybe we should trade residences because you live in a red state and are liberal. I live in a purple state that seems to be headed to blue and I lean to the right.
Btw, the average age for CNN and MSNBC viewers are not much younger than FNCs viewers. All news channels seem to attract older viewers.
2
You're going to make it after all. That was the MTM theme song.
Oh dear Lord. So Faux News has found an Ann Coulter-clone who peppers her interviews with the occasional question or remark that doesn't 100% tow the GOParty line and that is enough to make everyone go gaga as though it were some new heretofore unknown journalistic technique. Big deal.
12
NBC, CBS, ABC toe (not tow, Davis) the Obama party line, so why can't the solitary Fox toe the GOP line? Provides just a touch of balance on TV news, thank God.
2
Let's be honest here, whether its Kelly or any other anchor on Fox, their sole responsibility is to entertain on (non)events, rather than to thoroughly investigate. A "Megyn moment" is a spasm packaged as journalistic integrity. If asking Gilliam "what did the president do wrong" sufficiently counts as a "Megyn moment" and viewers go "wow", should we question Megyn's talent as an interviewer or the critical intelligence of her audience?
11
You can point out all the supposedly anti-radical right-wingnut positions Kelly has taken that you want, but the indisputable truth is that no one with a shred of integrity would ever work for Faux News.
20
Megyn has struck a Faustian bargain.
Megyn has personally done a lot of very specific damage to the public's perception of the Affordable Care Act, which runs contrary to the actual facts. For that alone, my view of her is very unfavorable. Fox is simply about entertainment, not educating its audience. ACA is a complicated law imposed in a complicated health care finance system. Finger-pointing based on oversimplified conversation about it has done us extraordinary harm.
11
If you set the bar low enough, anyone can be a star.
12
Remember how Fox news was all over Cliven Bundy - the racist welfare rancher out west. THAT is Fox news.
10
How about the media mongers who jumped on the Duke Lacrosse case? How many lives were ruined by their knee-jerk reaction to that situation?
I have always been a Democrat and a CNN watcher, but some bars and restaurants in my area show Fox News. So I happened to watch the Karl Rove "Megyn Moment" live. I was impressed by her candor. All TV news anchors are personalities these days, but Ms. Kelly does have a strong, independent presence and solid credentials. I first noticed her during her on-camera stand for maternity leave rights. Thanks for this interesting look at her background and off-screen life.
6
I love the way the Times attacks the huge "Megyn" success story and Kelly herself in a huge hit piece. God knows it must be frustrating as hell to watch your own readership constantly shrinking and your business generally going down the tubes while your arch enemy ideologically in the marketplace has become so dominant.
As usual, the marketplace is sorting things out for themselves. People are finding Kelly and many others at Fox far more intelligent and finding that they share basic outlooks on the issues of the day. Look at the polls. The American people rank "Islamic terrorism" as their number one concern at 76% and the economy just behind that at 75%. They find it pretty odd that the president refuses to admit their is any organized Islamic terrorism. The fact that liberals think its somehow nicer not to associate Islam with the terror is viewed by the vast majority of Americans and pretty much all Europeans as being totally delusional.
There is nothing odd at all about Kelly's and Fox's success. They see things the way most Americans do. They see things the way an "overwhelming majority" of Americans see things. They do not participate in the Orwellian-speak of this administration and its press and never urinate on one's leg and claim its raining...
As usual, the marketplace is sorting things out for themselves. People are finding Kelly and many others at Fox far more intelligent and finding that they share basic outlooks on the issues of the day. Look at the polls. The American people rank "Islamic terrorism" as their number one concern at 76% and the economy just behind that at 75%. They find it pretty odd that the president refuses to admit their is any organized Islamic terrorism. The fact that liberals think its somehow nicer not to associate Islam with the terror is viewed by the vast majority of Americans and pretty much all Europeans as being totally delusional.
There is nothing odd at all about Kelly's and Fox's success. They see things the way most Americans do. They see things the way an "overwhelming majority" of Americans see things. They do not participate in the Orwellian-speak of this administration and its press and never urinate on one's leg and claim its raining...
7
"They (Fox) see things the way most Americans do." Actually, they create the hysteria that most Americans respond to. The level of political discourse in this country is horrible. Facts? Who needs 'em? Let's just focus attention on the hysteria 'du jour'. Fox does an excellent job at that. And sadly, the nation is so dreadfully dumbed down as a result. Take a look at our current Congress and weep. A thoughtful, caring and smart nation would NEVER have this Congress.
2
The theme of the comments that have made it passed the NYT filters is interesting. Why write the story at all? Perhaps because she is a successful woman worth note that could likely inspire other women, but then why only allow comments slighting her credibility? Strange.
7
Will, the ideologically pure liberal MUST at all times dicount and even decry the attractiveness of media women because they do not need politically correct feminists to crusade for their place at the table.
Ergo, those applauding the independently successful non-liberal woman simply never fit in and don't ''get it.''
Ergo, those applauding the independently successful non-liberal woman simply never fit in and don't ''get it.''
1
Thank goodness for Megyn Kelly having the guts to stand her ground and give the boys a run for their money. Keep doing what you are doing girlfriend and don't give up. We need assertive, strong, gutsy gals to lead the charge!
3
She is smart and attractive for sure, but to be part of the most divisive network in history is no great accomplishment. She is simply a tool of the 1% - like the whole Fox group.
6
Tell us how you're doin' when the money runs out.
My problem with her is the way she asks questions. Not a Kelly moment.....just her regular style of asking a question is so leading as for my wife and I to look at each other and laugh. She's pretty, bright, charismatic, but a news professional....not so much....
5
Conservative leaning newscasts needed a smart, confident, personable, ambitious, often incredulous, attractive, heterosexual female to counter the left leaning Rachel Maddow. They found it in spades in Megyn Kelly, apparently four times over as judged by the size of her audience.
1
Megyn Kelly fits superbly with the Fox news ethos: its not news, its excitement. - http://ranklikes.com/buy-facebook-visits/
1
'Ailes said, “but we’re becoming the place most people go to get the truth."' Roger Ailes, ever the master of propaganda, should never let people quote him.
1
I became a fan when she had Dinesh D'Zousa and Bill Ayres on the same show. She was great at challenging both of them. I wish she had her own show that had limited commercial interruptions. I think she would be great at a "charlie rose" type interview.
2
Kelly is like a Barbie doll ... plastic through and through
9
Murdoch himself is still gadding about apparently totally oblivious of the mounting evidence of mischief, intrigue and criminal acts surrounding his media empire. Like the emperor with no clothes he preens about, seemingly none the wiser. But the noose is drawing tighter, and short of political skulduggery and underhanded schemes of avoidance, he´ll be drawn to account. Jail time is not out of the question.
3
Why do you care at all?
Sometimes I watch Bill O'Reilly, and sometime I watch Hannity, but I never miss Megyn Kelly and Greta Van Susteren. One is gorgeous, one is plain, both are attorneys and speak with authority. I'd like to see a NY Times article on Greta. She's as interesting to me as Megyn. I am a news geek which is why Fox News is my source of real news. ABC, NBC, CBS are strictly entertainment. CNN is another branch of the Obama administration as MSNBC. Who can take seriously the latter when they hire racist Al Sharpton? Wonderful article from a newspaper I seldom read. Wish they could print more.
3
A ridiculous article. Kelly is just Sean Hannity in a skirt, a viciously partisan propagandist.
8
MEGYN KELLY . . .
...is quite intelligent and must appeal to many -- especially with her Fox anchor pro forma blond hair and sensual hard looks. While Hannity is simply a one track right wing propagandist who takes no prisoners Ms. Kelly often will be critical of her even Tea Party guests and their ilk.
On some night she outdraws the 20 year Fox veteran whose "show" is before her "show." O'Really? Yes.
Even if one realizes that Murdoch and Ailes cable news network -- they (especially Roger Ailes) know how to deliver well produced TV programs for persons sans knowledge.
While Bill O'Reilly is a master of manipulation, Ms. Kelly being far more intelligent than O'Reilly is far more adept at out manipulating The No-Spin Factor by using a more seemingly subtle and "fair and balanced" propaganda product.
And, as Bill has become a stereotype who was mocked by Stephen Colbert for a decade as Colbert refers to him as "Papa Bear" and uses words like "truthiness"... And, Bill is becoming long in the tooth after 20 years of being the mainstay at Fox.
It seems that his many books may end with "Killing O'Reilly" as all of them don't seem to actually be written by him and just put his name as the author in a brilliant but immoral manner to sell them.
It has been reported that Ailes has been critical of Bill using his name and prominence received via Fox to sell his books.
And, now my prediction: Kelly will become the main Fox honcho and may end O'Reilly's "Factor."
Let's see...
...is quite intelligent and must appeal to many -- especially with her Fox anchor pro forma blond hair and sensual hard looks. While Hannity is simply a one track right wing propagandist who takes no prisoners Ms. Kelly often will be critical of her even Tea Party guests and their ilk.
On some night she outdraws the 20 year Fox veteran whose "show" is before her "show." O'Really? Yes.
Even if one realizes that Murdoch and Ailes cable news network -- they (especially Roger Ailes) know how to deliver well produced TV programs for persons sans knowledge.
While Bill O'Reilly is a master of manipulation, Ms. Kelly being far more intelligent than O'Reilly is far more adept at out manipulating The No-Spin Factor by using a more seemingly subtle and "fair and balanced" propaganda product.
And, as Bill has become a stereotype who was mocked by Stephen Colbert for a decade as Colbert refers to him as "Papa Bear" and uses words like "truthiness"... And, Bill is becoming long in the tooth after 20 years of being the mainstay at Fox.
It seems that his many books may end with "Killing O'Reilly" as all of them don't seem to actually be written by him and just put his name as the author in a brilliant but immoral manner to sell them.
It has been reported that Ailes has been critical of Bill using his name and prominence received via Fox to sell his books.
And, now my prediction: Kelly will become the main Fox honcho and may end O'Reilly's "Factor."
Let's see...
1
The biggest scam perpetrated on FOX "News" aging, shrinking audience of loyalists is the notion that the "we report, you decide' network is dramatically different from "the other' news outlets. They are not.
Not that there's anything wrong with that. What is hypocritical is that Rupert Murdoch and the FOX "News' kit and kaboodle pretend to be otherwise, the network that is somehow different, you know, looking out for the average American, with hosts whom put out cornball literature like "God, Guns, Grits, and Gravy" taking for granted that their followers will eat this ah-shucks shuck and jive up by heaping tablespoons.
As a lifelong denizen of this effete, elite, cozy little liberal burg, allow me to clue in folks "out there". FOX "News" sits on prime Midtown Manhattan real estate on Sixth Avenue, across the street from NBC's 30 Rock; a few blocks north, CBS' Black Rock. Its "Stars" are driven to work in the same black Lincoln Town Cars the liberal elites use.
Give Ted Turner credit. He based CNN in Atlanta, his comfort zone, not New Yawk CITY! Why would Murdoch put his HQ in the belly of the beast? Why not in Middle America, smack dab in "fly-over country", that vaunted region FOX endlessly refers to as the place we liberal elitists detest?
The truth? FOX loves all that Manhattan proffers, especially those wealthy enough to afford living here. Ratings, profits, huge salaries, and being in the Big Apple.
NBC's Brian Williams? He's a Jersey Boy.
D.D.
Manhattan
Not that there's anything wrong with that. What is hypocritical is that Rupert Murdoch and the FOX "News' kit and kaboodle pretend to be otherwise, the network that is somehow different, you know, looking out for the average American, with hosts whom put out cornball literature like "God, Guns, Grits, and Gravy" taking for granted that their followers will eat this ah-shucks shuck and jive up by heaping tablespoons.
As a lifelong denizen of this effete, elite, cozy little liberal burg, allow me to clue in folks "out there". FOX "News" sits on prime Midtown Manhattan real estate on Sixth Avenue, across the street from NBC's 30 Rock; a few blocks north, CBS' Black Rock. Its "Stars" are driven to work in the same black Lincoln Town Cars the liberal elites use.
Give Ted Turner credit. He based CNN in Atlanta, his comfort zone, not New Yawk CITY! Why would Murdoch put his HQ in the belly of the beast? Why not in Middle America, smack dab in "fly-over country", that vaunted region FOX endlessly refers to as the place we liberal elitists detest?
The truth? FOX loves all that Manhattan proffers, especially those wealthy enough to afford living here. Ratings, profits, huge salaries, and being in the Big Apple.
NBC's Brian Williams? He's a Jersey Boy.
D.D.
Manhattan
2
Her unique talent and 'pulled together' presence when her show was first aired, was reflected in a very flattering and short hair style. She continues to distinguish herself even after her hair (sadly) does not. "You want to be taken seriously, you need serious hair" Tess McGill (Working Girl)
This is television programming where producers rummage through the thicket of everyday events and cherry pick what Megan Kelly can serve up on a platter using her individual snarky twist, something she can address using her confrontational style, but only when she can win. This is as scripted as a cereal commercial. Truth is never the issue here. Only what can come across as truth. And Megan Kelly is always many, many raisins shorty of two scoops. This is 'schtick'. What she does is act out and it's being confused with news broadcasting. This is a selfie.
2
"...we’re becoming the place most people go to get the truth.” This is classic propaganda. Keep saying it enough times to ignorant people, and they believe it. The reality is the exact opposite. Fox News is nothing but a republican mouthpiece, acted out by "actors" who have finely honed their craft.
6
Fox News is like country music to me. Journalists who couldn't get a leg in elsewhere gravitate to Fox - same thing with country which is filled with musicians who couldn't make it in other genres. Look how quickly Taylor Swift left country after she was successful in pop music.
I think she is lovely and very beautiful. I wish I had her makeup artists to assist me with my makeup. I enjoy watching her from time to time as I do other Fox programs. They are doing quite well in their ratings and there is a reason for their success. They entertain and inform and that is what many of us tune in.
2
As an independent I do watch and read a wide variety of news outlets. Conservatives love to say that they watch both. I have a great deal of Republican friends and I can always catch them in beliefs that are just wrong because they truly only listen to Fox news or only believe what they hear there. Case in point is the recent " No Go Zones " story out of Fox. Most Independents and Democrats, having some idea on how the French have responded to Islamic traditions over the years, thought the story was bunk. Conservatives, including Bobby Jindall, all believed it was true. I was told to Google it, which I and several others did and were not shocked to see the only news oulets carrying the story were conservative ones. You can't claim to read many different news outlets and believe a story like this. Fox news bends its views like no one else out there. I reserve judgement on Megyn as she is new and has been given some latitude to call out misinformation but my bet is placed on her falling into the fold when push comes to shove.
Rachel Maddow has written a book, published articles widely, won prestigious awards and graduated from a little place called Oxford.
Quite apart from all of above, she can deliver complex arguments, sometimes for 10 minutes at a time, and arrive at forceful but layered conclusions.
That she receives a quarter of the audience that Kelly does is no real surprise given that (i) she doesn't look like Barbie and (ii) we live in an age when acrobatic cats get six figure audiences on YouTube. But for goodness sake, one challenging comment every now and then does not make Kelly the journalist of the moment! "Maddow moments" have been happening every day of the week for the last 10 years.
Quite apart from all of above, she can deliver complex arguments, sometimes for 10 minutes at a time, and arrive at forceful but layered conclusions.
That she receives a quarter of the audience that Kelly does is no real surprise given that (i) she doesn't look like Barbie and (ii) we live in an age when acrobatic cats get six figure audiences on YouTube. But for goodness sake, one challenging comment every now and then does not make Kelly the journalist of the moment! "Maddow moments" have been happening every day of the week for the last 10 years.
12
Megyn Kelley has everything handed to her--her scripts, her opinions and, probably, her scripted ad-libs. To compare the puppet with the resourceful researcher Rachel Maddow, who clearly writes her own commentary, is like comparing Fox News to any legitimate journalistic enterprise; there's no comparison at all.
3
David, I bet her teleprompter includes physical cues like [ roll eyes ], [ stunned disbelief ] and [ exasperated sigh ].
2
Then why is she not #1?
An actress on a pretend news network.....witness the rehearsed "walk to the decision desk" moment that " made her career".....oh please
7
"money makes the world go 'round the world go 'round the world go 'round
a mark a yen a buck or a pound
it makes the world go 'round
money money money
money money money
give a little get a little....."
-"Cabaret"
a mark a yen a buck or a pound
it makes the world go 'round
money money money
money money money
give a little get a little....."
-"Cabaret"
3
It warms the cockles of my heart to see Progressive/Liberal heads explode when bested by a self confident women that does not "stay in line" with their dogma.
Then again when compared to the MSM women, it is not a contest. They are all cheerleaders for The One.
Then again when compared to the MSM women, it is not a contest. They are all cheerleaders for The One.
2
The problem with Fox is not that it is conservative. The problem is that Fox lies. The choice of stories, the cherry-picking of facts and opinions, the regular editing and alteration of graphics and video to avoid any positive news for other opinions, the promotion of myths and outright lies ("no-go zones" "FEMA concentration camps"), the claim to be "fair and balanced" while hiring a raft of conservative talkers along with a platoon of Republican candidates and a sprinkling of token "liberals" who are often weak, faded, or called "liberal" because they once worked for a Democratic candidate despite now holding many conservative opinions, ... well, I could go on.
If only we had a conservative network, one that was honest.
And if only we had a liberal network. The traditional news networks aren't liberal, they're corporate-friendly, status-quo homing, offend-no-one pablum. And MSNBC? Liberal? With hours of Scarborough every morning? Chris "I love George Bush" Matthews? Reporters such as Andrea Mitchell popping up all the time? Blowhard dunces such as Sharpton? Yes Maddow and O'Donnell are predictably liberal, but they do it without the consistent fraud of Fox.
If only we had a conservative network, one that was honest.
And if only we had a liberal network. The traditional news networks aren't liberal, they're corporate-friendly, status-quo homing, offend-no-one pablum. And MSNBC? Liberal? With hours of Scarborough every morning? Chris "I love George Bush" Matthews? Reporters such as Andrea Mitchell popping up all the time? Blowhard dunces such as Sharpton? Yes Maddow and O'Donnell are predictably liberal, but they do it without the consistent fraud of Fox.
6
Never ceases to amaze me the difference between perceptions Leftists have of Conservative thought and Conservatives think of Leftists ideology.
Generally, Conservatives believe Leftists are just plain stupid...Leftist think Conservatives are pure evil. That's why Liberals proudly criticize Megan Kelly without having watched her show simply because it is on "the evil network."
Somewhat shortsighted, wouldn't you say!!!
Generally, Conservatives believe Leftists are just plain stupid...Leftist think Conservatives are pure evil. That's why Liberals proudly criticize Megan Kelly without having watched her show simply because it is on "the evil network."
Somewhat shortsighted, wouldn't you say!!!
3
Good story. Good insights. I like Kelly. I like her directness, if that's what it is. There is a bit of "legend in her own mind" going on. But in today's world this is not rare for celebs. For this moment in time when a bi story breaks I will tune in Kelly to get the details. She is trustworthy. I like that.
3
More people eat McDonald's hamburgers than any other in the world. That doesn't make them the best burgers. It also doesn't mean that McDonald's restaurants are the most nutritious.
4
More people eat McDonald's hamburgers than any other in the world. That fact doesn't make them the best quality. It doesn't make McDonald's restaurants the most nutritious either.
Amazing vitriol towards FNC on here but not surprising as the NYT is a left wing paper read by weak minded libs. I doubt this post will get accepted.
The irony is that I have been a big FNC watcher for at least 12 years now but am NOT a big fan of Ms. Kelly. No doubt she is bright, talented with aging good looks with her best assets being her ambition and hard work. But I have seen her meteoric rise at FNC and have seen her many emotional states and reporting of too many tabloid stories to like or respect her. Just too much "me, me, me" seems to be her credo and the story seems to take 2nd place. Her lead in, Bill O'Reilly, is no day at the beach, either.
Why are so many liberal so arrogant? Why do so many fancy themselves Intellectuals? But most of all, why are so many libs so threatened by FNC and right wing radio? Libs own most of the media so why fear and loathe the few ways conservatives can get their news and hear like minded opinions?
I guess libs feel free speech and a free press sound nice but are only meant for them.
The irony is that I have been a big FNC watcher for at least 12 years now but am NOT a big fan of Ms. Kelly. No doubt she is bright, talented with aging good looks with her best assets being her ambition and hard work. But I have seen her meteoric rise at FNC and have seen her many emotional states and reporting of too many tabloid stories to like or respect her. Just too much "me, me, me" seems to be her credo and the story seems to take 2nd place. Her lead in, Bill O'Reilly, is no day at the beach, either.
Why are so many liberal so arrogant? Why do so many fancy themselves Intellectuals? But most of all, why are so many libs so threatened by FNC and right wing radio? Libs own most of the media so why fear and loathe the few ways conservatives can get their news and hear like minded opinions?
I guess libs feel free speech and a free press sound nice but are only meant for them.
5
Wasn't this Fitness Trainer once a model for Page #3 of another Murdoch property, the Sun?
Megyn Kelly is truly frightening, not because of who she is but because she reflects the attitude of such a large part of the population. Stars are irrelevant as people; what makes them important is how much they resonate with the audience. We should be very concerned that so much of the American public identifies with someone so filled with anger, resentment and hostility, both above and below the surface. Roger Ailes is an authentic genius in having learned how to identify the innate hypocrisy of the American psyche -- we refuse to admit or accept our needs and desires and instead turn our fear of them outward toward others -- "liberals" being the traditional Fox boogeyman -- and Kelly is perfect host: charming and pleasant on the surface, seething with unaware rage just beneath.
5
Megyn Kelly is not a journalist, she is an anchor, she needs to speak front of the television screen, she needs to play an role, because when she reporting or speaking anything on screen, maybe millions of people watching it. No one goes to truth from Fox News, Fox News actually is a entertainment for Americans, but Fox News is becoming a place that many people want to know the truth. "Every once in a while Kelly will replay clips from those early days for viewers, mostly to make fun of herself." Kelly's points usually discussed by people, actually I am not a fan of her, when I saw the story that the article said, and according to many comments, I think she is not an smart woman, but she is an humorous anchor in Fox News. "They used to laugh at us in the mainstream media,” Ailes said, “but we’re becoming the place most people go to get the truth." Many people like this sentence, I also like this sentence, truth need to be shown, we need to know the truth.
1
She is a blond white girl with a short cut dress. Of course they love her.
3
Wow sexist AND racist remarks in in only 14 words. You must be an outstanding progressive liberal.
Fox News is not news. It's entertainment.
Ms. Kelly is not a reporter. She's an entertainer, nothing more.
Everything and Fox News need to be understood in this light.
Ms. Kelly is not a reporter. She's an entertainer, nothing more.
Everything and Fox News need to be understood in this light.
2
Megyn Kelly is definitely a Superstar, and Fox News is the only media outlet you can watch to get all the facts so that you can decide. Fox News always gives both sides, and they are the only TV News outlet you can go to if you want to know what is truly going on with our Government. Fox News is a watchdog for both the left and the right. Just as our Founding Father's intended for a Free Press to be. The rest are to varying degrees nothing more than biased Obama boot licking Poodles who have betrayed the Constitution and the First Amendment to actively assist Obama and the extreme left in our nation. NBC/MSNBC is the worst. They are nothing but an extreme left wing propaganda network up to and including doctoring videotape. A great article. Personally I usually start with Greta, move to Bill, then Megyn, and then Hannity. If you really want to know what is happening in our nation from both sides Fox News and their entire evening line up are the only ones to watch.
2
How can you say that Fox News is the only media you can watch.....are you deaf or blind or both at the same time? The no go zones in Paris they described afew days ago is an insult to journalism and I would feel ashamed to be part of such a news organization....I spend several weeks at my wife's mother house in Arizona, she is 89 years old and watch Fox News all the time and I am just scared that she gets all her information thru this biased network which telling lies most of the time....
By the way I love America but not Fox News which does not represent it fairly...
By the way I love America but not Fox News which does not represent it fairly...
4
She's the political equivalent of Nancy Grace.
The same holier than thou attitude and feigned indignation. Anytime someone starts making some sense to her, she retreats to the same "well if that's the case, then I guess the terrorists have already won" routine that apparently still works for some people.
The same holier than thou attitude and feigned indignation. Anytime someone starts making some sense to her, she retreats to the same "well if that's the case, then I guess the terrorists have already won" routine that apparently still works for some people.
5
She may be a good journalist, but she has absolutely no judgement making her career at FOX. Glenn
5
It would be a real stretch to call her journalist (much less a good one), but she certainly is a talented performer/entertainer. So Faux News seems like a perfect fit for her.
3
She is not a journalist. She is an entertainer.
3
What is funny to me about the liberal perception of Fox is how inaccurate it is.
Yes, there are opinion shows like Hannity, where you get 2004 conservatism delivered straight up. But, there is Bret Baier's straight one-hour news hour; Howard Kurtz's show "On Media," and Shep Smith's show. There is much more to Fox than its opinion shows.
Whereas, MSNBC is all opinion. And - they allow Sharpton to be a "journalist" while reporting on his own protests. What the heck is that?
And, as the NYT points out, Megyn's "opinion" show is pretty unpredictable. I saw her take Mitch McConnell apart about one month before the mid-terms.
I watch Fox, read the WSJ but also read the NYT and listen to NPR. Too many of my liberal friends never hear from the other side of the divide.
Yes, there are opinion shows like Hannity, where you get 2004 conservatism delivered straight up. But, there is Bret Baier's straight one-hour news hour; Howard Kurtz's show "On Media," and Shep Smith's show. There is much more to Fox than its opinion shows.
Whereas, MSNBC is all opinion. And - they allow Sharpton to be a "journalist" while reporting on his own protests. What the heck is that?
And, as the NYT points out, Megyn's "opinion" show is pretty unpredictable. I saw her take Mitch McConnell apart about one month before the mid-terms.
I watch Fox, read the WSJ but also read the NYT and listen to NPR. Too many of my liberal friends never hear from the other side of the divide.
14
Same with MSNBC, where the bias is also overstated. Their entire morning schedule is run by a Newt Gingrich disciple, and Andrea Mitchell makes John McCain look like Ron Paul.
I agree that their evenings are all left leaning opinion, but there is 4 solid hours of Reaganite news and opinion on MSNBC every single day.
I agree that their evenings are all left leaning opinion, but there is 4 solid hours of Reaganite news and opinion on MSNBC every single day.
And where did you come up with your opinions, er, I mean facts, about Bret Baier offering straight news and MSNBC being all opinion? There are likely more facts being presented in one hour of Rachel Maddow than in 24 hours of Fox News.
2
OK, that's 11 hours. What about the other 157?
A conservative voice says a couple liberal things and she's some revolutionary force for journalism? She's still not a "reasonable" person -- i.e. someone who believes the other side actually not be wholly evil or that good policy might require compromise. It might be cynical -- but this network did essentially get the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan it wanted, but leave nothing this place does to "freedom of expression" or "chance". By putting a "3%" reasonable voice out there amidst a network drowning in propaganda (again, did she call out their whole fake "coffee shake" controversy from a couple months ago), she's there to draw in more viewers to their machine. If she really stated what she believed or called them out for each thing they deserved, she be out of there in a minute.
11
I have only one question. Did you believe in the "No Go Zones" story. Most likely you did. It doesn't matter if you seek out other news outlets, if your mind is closed.
If you are confident in your political views, you can watch any news source and not be offended or outraged. I read the NYT at least an hour a day for the excellent writing and rich content. I listen to NPR in the car for the same reason, excellent content. Both are heavily slanted left, as Fox is right. Doesn't bother me a bit.
7
How is NPR "heavily slanted left?" Does intellectually honest reporting = left leaning? Does attempting to avoid editorializing = left leaning? Does not being beholden to rich private interests = left leaning? What exactly is it about npr that you find left leaning?
4
Why are "facts" slanted left? NPR is actually quite down the middle and so is the NY Times. In fact, the NY Times as well as NPR often go out of their way to avoid looking liberal and not offending. Those on the left may listen and read these types of media, but they look for even more insight and deeper cuts with periodicals such as The Nation or programs like Democracy Now. When Al Jazeera America often does deeper work than the mainstream media.
On the other side, research has shown that those who watch Fox News regularly tend to mainly get their information from that source, AND that those who watch Fox News, as a whole, are the most misinformed. That research shows that Fox Viewers are even more misinformed about the world than those who said they don't watch or listen to any news programs.
On the other side, research has shown that those who watch Fox News regularly tend to mainly get their information from that source, AND that those who watch Fox News, as a whole, are the most misinformed. That research shows that Fox Viewers are even more misinformed about the world than those who said they don't watch or listen to any news programs.
3
This newspaper is center right.
Excellent profile! New York Times gets it right.
6
People who bash Fox News and its employees mindlessly are the ones the are ignorant. A whole discussion (and debate) can revolve around the various news outlets and criticisms for their slants on the news as journalists.
However, Megn Kelly articulates and supports her arguments with reason. While O'Reilly uses bombastic phrases and burly, yet reasonable, statements to draw attention to his views, Kelly comes in on the next hour with a structurally sound and valid argument, along with charisma, to drive the point home.
(From a frequent Fox viewer)
However, Megn Kelly articulates and supports her arguments with reason. While O'Reilly uses bombastic phrases and burly, yet reasonable, statements to draw attention to his views, Kelly comes in on the next hour with a structurally sound and valid argument, along with charisma, to drive the point home.
(From a frequent Fox viewer)
9
We don't bash fox "mindlessly". Our "bashing" is well thought out and based on facts.
3
You are confusing entertainment with news. Fox is entertwainment. The NYT is news.
2
We have no uncompromised and thus respectable fourth estate left anywhere on the mainstream scene, do we? (I ask that as a decades-long subscriber to the NYT, which is very often but not always the exception.) So let's not pick on Megyn too much. The slow-motion but still ongoing death of journalism was a story you could actually read about from time to time for a while there, but that was before it up and died some time back. No one brings it up anymore.
A skeptical, independent and fact-based press is absolutely critical to a healthy republic. So too is an informed public. By any objective measure we have neither. Are restoring those even on any politician's agenda? No, because the Congress and even the White House are as revolving-door infected as everywhere else.
There is an elite strata of professionals out there who are choking the life out of America's vital organs, one by one. Why?
A skeptical, independent and fact-based press is absolutely critical to a healthy republic. So too is an informed public. By any objective measure we have neither. Are restoring those even on any politician's agenda? No, because the Congress and even the White House are as revolving-door infected as everywhere else.
There is an elite strata of professionals out there who are choking the life out of America's vital organs, one by one. Why?
8
Really, let's keep things in perspective: Matthews (MSNBC) thinks he's a journalist, but is, in fact, just a political hack beating the drum for his side. At least Kelley seems to be searching for the truth.
2
One can see that this newspaper is starved of the usual drug and energy ads that keep US media outlets in thrall to advertisers.
You hit the nail on the head. Actual journalism is important. You can see from comments that it can devolve into some goofy shouting match off in the weeds between supporters of rival cable channels that basically no one watches anyway. But the fallout of this kind of Reality-Lite is is toxic to any goal of elevating facts in our culture. Some things depend on Reality!
Fox is a business and belief system that protects the goals of Mr. Murdoch and Mr. Ailes. They own it and they decide what furthers their cash flow. They are bald political aggregators. They want to grow an audience attached to TV personalities like Ms. Kelly. It is not about following facts around. As the Paris debacle shows, this is not universally acceptable. When Fox tries to claim journalism status for one of its entertainers because they occasionally ask questions like a journalist, and then want to crow, you have to redraw the line between that and Reality.
Fox is a business and belief system that protects the goals of Mr. Murdoch and Mr. Ailes. They own it and they decide what furthers their cash flow. They are bald political aggregators. They want to grow an audience attached to TV personalities like Ms. Kelly. It is not about following facts around. As the Paris debacle shows, this is not universally acceptable. When Fox tries to claim journalism status for one of its entertainers because they occasionally ask questions like a journalist, and then want to crow, you have to redraw the line between that and Reality.
2
Ms Kelly appears to have real talent (and certainly ambition). But let's put that aside for a moment, and look at the reality of why Fox News gets the numbers it gets.
First, Fox has a very old demographic; the average viewer being 68 years old. CNN and MSNBC's demographics skew much younger (and more ethnically diverse.) Younger people tend to get their news from the internet and digital newspapers sporadically throughout the day. They don't have "Appointment TV", and they certainly don't have it for news. Younger people (20s-40s) spend much more of their prime time hours out socializing with friends, not at home, during the 3 hours between dinner and bedtime, plopped down front of the TV. And if they are in front of the TV, they're watching Hulu or Netflix or HBO Go, not "news opinion."
Second, Fox is genius at tapping into this older, whiter demographic that feels the world is passing it by. To this demographic, America doesn't quite feel like the one they once knew. It's looking browner, and gayer, and less Christian. Like many older people, they desperately want to be understood. And who understands and caters to that older, whiter, (often much crankier), American viewer, who's convinced that America has gone to "hell in a handbasket," better than Fox News?
Lastly, Ailes is right about one thing. The news is personality driven. Entertainment driven. Fox may not care so much about "facts," but it provides a very entertaining product.
First, Fox has a very old demographic; the average viewer being 68 years old. CNN and MSNBC's demographics skew much younger (and more ethnically diverse.) Younger people tend to get their news from the internet and digital newspapers sporadically throughout the day. They don't have "Appointment TV", and they certainly don't have it for news. Younger people (20s-40s) spend much more of their prime time hours out socializing with friends, not at home, during the 3 hours between dinner and bedtime, plopped down front of the TV. And if they are in front of the TV, they're watching Hulu or Netflix or HBO Go, not "news opinion."
Second, Fox is genius at tapping into this older, whiter demographic that feels the world is passing it by. To this demographic, America doesn't quite feel like the one they once knew. It's looking browner, and gayer, and less Christian. Like many older people, they desperately want to be understood. And who understands and caters to that older, whiter, (often much crankier), American viewer, who's convinced that America has gone to "hell in a handbasket," better than Fox News?
Lastly, Ailes is right about one thing. The news is personality driven. Entertainment driven. Fox may not care so much about "facts," but it provides a very entertaining product.
18
This characterization of people who disagree with you as cranky and ignorant exemplifies perfectly what conservatives mean by the term "liberal elitist"
8
... And a news network that regularly fanned the flames of the bogus birther controversy for the last last six years and has featured commentators who characterize the president as a secret islamist and Kenyan socialist deserves no respect whatsoever from any marginally rational or objective person.
3
NO, what so-called conservatives mean by "liberal elitist" is "Somebody, anybody, change the subject!"
Faux-journalist Megyn Kelly and the band of pranksters posing as a news station are precisely what Roger Grimsby (one of the last intelligent TV newsmen) worried about when it came to the future of TV news. He was absolutely right (in the good way).
9
It's funny you call them pranksters. They actually share an anarchistic and nihilistic attitude 60s radicals. In fact without Abbie Hoffman or Jerry Rubin, Fox News would not be possible
Pranksters ....really? On Fox in PM lineup Greta has a JD (from Gtown), O'Reilly has a BA from Harvard, and Kelly also has a JD. Please compare this to the clown shows on MSNBC in the pm.
Reading this i thought there was hoe for journalism on Fox. Switched on the Kelly Show and see the same ole right wing propaganda. Whose been drinking kool aid at the NYT?
10
Moment is the right word............
8
PBS is the only place one can hear an honest, civil, non confrontational, well rounded tone for the day's news.
One caveat: you have to think for yourself, you won't be TOLD what is right or wrong.
It is a very relaxing, refreshing experience. It will grow on you, if you give the withdrawal symptoms from Fox and MSNBC a chance to subside.
One caveat: you have to think for yourself, you won't be TOLD what is right or wrong.
It is a very relaxing, refreshing experience. It will grow on you, if you give the withdrawal symptoms from Fox and MSNBC a chance to subside.
30
...and you see no bias in NPR? How are you any different than FoxNews viewer that sees no bias and never questions what they hear?
7
Show us this bias.
Hence the problem. Most people like to see themselves being at "the reasonable center" no matter how skewed their political POV really is. Cognitive dissonance kicks in and therefore an outlet that mostly agrees with them, MUST be unbiased.
1
So many people are bitter, angry, and jealous of Fox's success. I think their outrage is comical.
13
Watch Fox woth a more critical eye. Dont drink the Kool-aid. Very lopsided coverage.
6
“They used to laugh at us in the mainstream media,” Ailes said, “but we’re becoming the place most people go to get the truth.”
Not true at all. Fox is a lone conservative bastion, while multiple networks are considered liberal, so liberal viewership is spread out among more options while conservatives really have no choice. Don't confuse lack of options with a presence of quality.
Secondly, saying they go there for truth is like saying people watch History Channel the most to get the truth on ghosts, because they have a "reality show" called Ghost Hunters.
Not true at all. Fox is a lone conservative bastion, while multiple networks are considered liberal, so liberal viewership is spread out among more options while conservatives really have no choice. Don't confuse lack of options with a presence of quality.
Secondly, saying they go there for truth is like saying people watch History Channel the most to get the truth on ghosts, because they have a "reality show" called Ghost Hunters.
9
Ailes has an audience of people whose delusions he feeds with raw meat.
3
Sounds to me like Fox News is going down, and Kelly is hoping to jump ship. Fox has certainly been scrapping the bottom of the barrel looking for headlines (e.g., the infamous no-go claim, and putting on India native and convicted felon D'Souza to say Obama never had the experience of being African American).
11
Look their ratings, dear. Better than all of the other Cable news channels combined.... Fox ain't goin' anywhere for a long time to come.
5
More people watch "Jane the Virgin" on CW than watch Bill the Bully on Fox News. Them's the ratings.
2
I just watched the Gilliam interview. Google it. If there was a "moment," it was pretty tepid. The article states that "Gilliam would never recover." I'm not sure he ever needed to. The article is trying too hard to make something out of nothing to szhuszh up a story where there isn't one. (Is that how you spell "szhuszh"? It is now.) I'm not sure this is a shining example of journalism on either front.
4
For those who want to do the same search for "Ex-Navy SEAL Jonathan Gilliam Criticizes bin Laden" its an interesting interview to say the least. I also didn't get the impression that Kelly lambasted Gilliam beyond recovery.
I really like Fox News, but I wonder why they seem to have only blondes working there, and also wearing very short, tight skirts above their knees and always sitting on aisle side of table when more men are in the middle, a little sexist what! Oh,they never answer my "madashell" critiques.
8
Neither Julie Banderas not Jeanine Pirro has blonde hair. But when are they on? Weekends, when viewers are scarcest.
Well done, NYT! (Don't yet believe I wrote that! But well done!)
And Way-To-Go! Ms Kelly.
What breaths of fresh air you and the only two other really intelligent and capable on-camera folk are, at my favorite-but-fading (well - only, to be Truthful) cable-&/or any-other-kind of news network.
(So when will you have Mr Gutfeld and Ms Tantoros on your show, so I may see Fox's three best brains, together?)
Brian Richard Allen
And Way-To-Go! Ms Kelly.
What breaths of fresh air you and the only two other really intelligent and capable on-camera folk are, at my favorite-but-fading (well - only, to be Truthful) cable-&/or any-other-kind of news network.
(So when will you have Mr Gutfeld and Ms Tantoros on your show, so I may see Fox's three best brains, together?)
Brian Richard Allen
6
Not fully understanding how the cable news and main street network news work, I would like to comment on Fox News anyway.
O'Reilly (to me) is an annoying opportunist. I am sick to the death turning on Fox News and having to listen day in and day out to Obamacare and all of its faults. Maybe they should have Megyn Kelly do a show on this and tell them don't they know this is a dead carcase. Fox News is totally biased just like the main stream media news people except wit the opposite views. We need some form of news outlet that can broadcast the news without the theatrics and political bias. Fox of course is not as bad as mainstream but that is not an excuse for the blatant political bias shown. Megyn might be the one to address that question. I don't know if that will come to pass. It hasn't so far.
O'Reilly (to me) is an annoying opportunist. I am sick to the death turning on Fox News and having to listen day in and day out to Obamacare and all of its faults. Maybe they should have Megyn Kelly do a show on this and tell them don't they know this is a dead carcase. Fox News is totally biased just like the main stream media news people except wit the opposite views. We need some form of news outlet that can broadcast the news without the theatrics and political bias. Fox of course is not as bad as mainstream but that is not an excuse for the blatant political bias shown. Megyn might be the one to address that question. I don't know if that will come to pass. It hasn't so far.
1
This......is.......really......really.......silly.
4
The 'Megyn moments' hardly disprove the fact - proven through numerous questionnaires - that those getting their 'news' from Fox know less about both foreign and domestic policies, history and geography, and numerous other subjects then those watching no TV news at all.
22
I love the photo "Kelly has her hair and makeup done" ... But why is this in the newspaper?
11
I am FoxNews viewer. I am Conservative. I watch these shows for their entertainment and not their news. The Left screams about the bias, misinformation etc exhibited in Kelly's and O'Reilly's shows and condemns their viewers for getting their news from these sources. I agree, these shows are biased and Fox viewers know that, and speaking for myself, nothing I hear is viewed as fact w/o checking. But that's no difference whether I get info from Fox or NYT. or NPR. For those of you Leftists gorging on information from NYT and NPR, do you question the biases in your news sources?
12
No, all Fox viewers don't know that. Ask my mother. She can't tell the difference between a talk show and a news show, and she was sold on the idea that mainstream news was biased and Fox was fair and balanced. She believes whatever they say and doesn't fact check at all. I'm not into stereotyping so I assume that some Fox viewers check and some don't. Same with the gorging Leftists you refer to so kindly.
14
It's always amusing to read summaries of some moment on TV -- they're always slanted toward some viewpoint, and inaccurate. Rove was not humiliated in the supposed big moment you describe, not was he disbelieving polls. He pointed out that certain counties had not come in yet and thought those could be big enough to turn Ohio. The decision room thought differently, and it was all handled without rancor or much emotion. But those on the left so badly wanted it to be some humiliating moment for Rove that they played it up with adjectives and emotions that have nothing to do with reality.
Reminds me, actually, of the famous Tom Cruise moment on Oprah when he declared his love for Katie Holmes. I had not seen that moment, and just read reports claiming that Cruise had basically gone nuts, jumping up and down on the couch. Then one day I happened to see a replay -- he stood up, leaped on the couch for literally a second, then off again and sat down. It was nothing, and certainly not an example of out-of-control actions. But the press misrepresented as such because it was the story it wanted.
Bottom line -- when you read some summary of a televised event, don't believe it.
Reminds me, actually, of the famous Tom Cruise moment on Oprah when he declared his love for Katie Holmes. I had not seen that moment, and just read reports claiming that Cruise had basically gone nuts, jumping up and down on the couch. Then one day I happened to see a replay -- he stood up, leaped on the couch for literally a second, then off again and sat down. It was nothing, and certainly not an example of out-of-control actions. But the press misrepresented as such because it was the story it wanted.
Bottom line -- when you read some summary of a televised event, don't believe it.
7
This is comical. You didn't have to read about Rove, you could watch it in real time. Probably Obama supporters were not spending a lot of election night watching Rove behave like Mr. Magoo.
6
I did see it -- that's the point. The description of the event in this article and other left-wing reports are inaccurate.
Alan- you seem to be the one needing the Rove event to be something. I saw it, thought it was ridiculous, had no need to believe it was about "the decision room" whatever that is, to make it about an episode of humiliation. It had nothing to do with "the left" or anything else. It was Karl Rove, acting like Karl Rove. Some things actually just are what they are.
“They used to laugh at us in the mainstream media,” Ailes said, “but we’re becoming the place most people go to get the truth.”
They still do laugh and I'm sure other comments here will try to eviscerate Fox, but if not for Fox, left to their own devices print and non Fox broadcast media would have us all watching the Obama equivalent of "Triumph of the Will" by now.
They still do laugh and I'm sure other comments here will try to eviscerate Fox, but if not for Fox, left to their own devices print and non Fox broadcast media would have us all watching the Obama equivalent of "Triumph of the Will" by now.
6
It's interesting that the angriest, most negative comments, the ones that dismiss Fox News and Ms. Kelly out of hand, are the most highly recommended. I suspect the vast majority of Times readers have never watched Fox News. Their closed-mindedness is a new form of Puritanism, a devout adherence to the precepts of political correctness.
15
Puritans accusing others of puritanism, now that is indeed Fox Noise worthy.
13
I've never seen war atrocities either. I don't need to. Plenty of reliable witnesses. No need to debase myself watching Fox.
The issue is that the performers on Fox just do not know the facts. Here are some they do not know.
They deny that the rest of the industrialized world gets better health care results at 40% of the cost per person by minimizing the use of private insurance and running their program through the government.
They deny the failure of low tax rates on the Rich in the 1920's and the 2000's which led to great economic inequality which in turn led to vast amount of financial speculation and then to disaster.
They deny the success of high tax rates on the Rich in the 1946-1973 period and try to say that devastation in Europe was responsible. How did that cause CEO's to decide to pay their workers better and to take much less for themselves?
They don't admit that every period of more than 3 years of balanced budgets was followed by a depression and every depression was preceded by such a period.
They claim our corporations pay higher taxes than the rest of the world in spite of figures that show our ratio of corporate taxes actually paid to GDP is the lowest among developed nations.
They claim that the US is the land of equality and opportunity when our equality (no matter how you measure it) and mobility is at the bottom.
They say the more guns we have the safer we are when the number of gun deaths per 100,000 in the US is way above that of other wealthy developed countries.
They deny that the rest of the industrialized world gets better health care results at 40% of the cost per person by minimizing the use of private insurance and running their program through the government.
They deny the failure of low tax rates on the Rich in the 1920's and the 2000's which led to great economic inequality which in turn led to vast amount of financial speculation and then to disaster.
They deny the success of high tax rates on the Rich in the 1946-1973 period and try to say that devastation in Europe was responsible. How did that cause CEO's to decide to pay their workers better and to take much less for themselves?
They don't admit that every period of more than 3 years of balanced budgets was followed by a depression and every depression was preceded by such a period.
They claim our corporations pay higher taxes than the rest of the world in spite of figures that show our ratio of corporate taxes actually paid to GDP is the lowest among developed nations.
They claim that the US is the land of equality and opportunity when our equality (no matter how you measure it) and mobility is at the bottom.
They say the more guns we have the safer we are when the number of gun deaths per 100,000 in the US is way above that of other wealthy developed countries.
29
I'll just pick on one of your points, the first. Only about 37% of US healthcare costs are paid thru private insurance, the rest funded thru Government programs like medicaid, medicare, SSI/disability, workers comp etc. So how can you lay at the feet of private insurance (37% of the funding source), 100% of the blame. Surely Govt funding of 60% of health care expenditures accounts for at least 60% of the problem. So your supposed facts/data are equally politically massaged as any data point heard on Fox. You are disgorging data fed to you by news sources you believe in without question, but your sources have their own politcal agenda, which you refuse to acknowledge or are blind to.
5
That's not what I found after a quick google search: This from USA Today via the Kaiser Health News:
"... households still paid the largest single share of health costs, according to federal actuaries. Part was premiums paid through employers and directly to insurers. Part was out-of-pocket expense.
The household portion of the health spending pie shrank from 37% in 1987 to 28% in 2012. It's still larger than the federal government's 26% share or business's 21%."
So, from what news source did you "disgorge" without question?
"... households still paid the largest single share of health costs, according to federal actuaries. Part was premiums paid through employers and directly to insurers. Part was out-of-pocket expense.
The household portion of the health spending pie shrank from 37% in 1987 to 28% in 2012. It's still larger than the federal government's 26% share or business's 21%."
So, from what news source did you "disgorge" without question?
1
Or as Faux likes to summarize: "We are awesome. USA is awesome. President Obama wants us to believe we are not awesome".
Fox, CNN, MSNBC; saying that television news offers any different news of viewpoints is like saying they run the gamut from soup to soup. Most of what real people think about the world isn't covered at all.
4
Fox is doomed unless they give Judge Jeannine a two hour slot in primetime.
Nobody gets to the truth with humility and compassion better than she does.
Nobody gets to the truth with humility and compassion better than she does.
3
Too bad she couldn't get to page 10 of that campaign speech.
I cant quite come to grips with the dichotomy between a credible newsperson and one that poses in lingerie. The appropriateness of that is lost on me. Just like running Yahoo and posing on a couch. A woman is both but resorting to being objectified for any reason somehow lessens something. I'm not sure what.
I prefer PBS any day of the week.
I prefer PBS any day of the week.
9
I agree, women should not be newscasters.
2
When did balanced come to mean cnn+fox? Neither does anything but sensationalism - and a good chunk of what passes for journalism should be called yellow. For those who rant about how fox brings diversity to news - you are so very sadly mistaken. They both report the same stories - and are mouthpieces for special interests and politicians. A balanced or fair piece on legislation is not reporting what the democrats and repbulicans said.
10
I'm sorry, but I don't get Foxnews in any way, shape, or form. I used to watch Shepard Smith a decade ago because of his interesting, fast paced delivery. But Fox lost me the day they allowed Glenn Beck on air.
12
You do not know what you're loosing.
Close-mindedness is so typical of left-wingers. They believe in the lies and demagoguery of their party-line and don't want to know anything else.
Yeah, you probably still believe that you can keep your doctor although Fox News explained why so many people would loose their doctors many times in 2009-2010.
Close-mindedness is so typical of left-wingers. They believe in the lies and demagoguery of their party-line and don't want to know anything else.
Yeah, you probably still believe that you can keep your doctor although Fox News explained why so many people would loose their doctors many times in 2009-2010.
9
Close mindedness is so typical of right-wingers. They believe in the lies and demagoguery of their tea-party line, and don't want to know anything else. Yeah, you probably still believe that universal healthcare is a socialist - if not even commie - plot, that the earth is the center of the universe, and that climate change is the biggest conspiracy of those ivy-tower 'elite' scientist.
14
But if it's in your channel lineup, you are paying for it. And Ailes can run the network on those "license fees" alone. Presentation of "The O'Reilly Factor" is made possible by a generous grant from Subscribers LIke You."
Unless, of course, you go OTA.
Unless, of course, you go OTA.
Look I'll grant you that Kelly is smart and savvy but her viewer appeal is she is eye candy to the viewer. Nothing more, nothing less.
11
It is indeed interesting, although not surprising, that the majority of comments to this article judge Megyn Kelly solely on the fact that she is on Fox News. I suspect that most of these commenters do not watch Fox News and do not watch the Kelly File. I understand not watching Fox News because of prejudice, but one should not make comments based on pure ignorance. Should moderates and conservatives not read the Times? And, not watch network news? For those negative commenters, watch the Kelly file and then form your conclusions.
14
"white Santa" and "White Jesus" "put a fork into her" from my vantage point.
2
why is the NYT giving this shallow woman (and Fox) any attention at all?
Why not promote people who are actually doing a good job?
Why not promote people who are actually doing a good job?
23
Do you find it odd that most people (see ratings) don't agree with you?
Naw......why let facts interrupt Fox-bashing?
Naw......why let facts interrupt Fox-bashing?
1
It's uncanny how prescient Paddy Chayefsky was when he wrote the screenplay for "Network" in the early 1970's, several years before Fox even became a network. One of the best movies of all time.
17
No one ever learned anything sitting in an echo chamber. Kelly makes it easy to absorb the crux of a point of view that is not my own, because I know she will approach it with an intellectual honesty. Al Sharpton and some of the others at MSNBC could stand to go to school on her approach.
9
I've been saying for months that she is the truly talented propagandist: beautiful, charming and once every few months departing from the party line, which actually passes as "impartial" or "independent" in that world. Paging Mr. Orwell.
17
And Rachel Maddow is a truth teller?
7
Any cultivated mind can distinguish between the quality of the argument made by RM vs. MK. If you can't, that's ok, I don't really care. I can. I've spent my life cultivating my mind. Most who do will ride with me.
5
Sooo... Roger Ailes expands his demographic by occasional embraces of truth... How interesting.
7
More than occasional. So many opinions and facts expressed on Fox News were validated by real-life events that you wonder why? Maybe it is a nature of conservatives to tell the story as it really is not as it should have been?
3
Get a grip, citizen...
You really cannot for one instant think you are getting anything but a carney show hustle from Fox.
Whew, for a moment there I thought they had you joining the self-defeating sleep-walk, that march of the dunderheads looking backward rather than inward and forward!
Careful now, citizen!
You really cannot for one instant think you are getting anything but a carney show hustle from Fox.
Whew, for a moment there I thought they had you joining the self-defeating sleep-walk, that march of the dunderheads looking backward rather than inward and forward!
Careful now, citizen!
3
What amazes me is that FOX always seems to have a bevy of
smart, educated & beautiful women, while the other channels don't.
I am wondering why. There must be more out there.
smart, educated & beautiful women, while the other channels don't.
I am wondering why. There must be more out there.
7
Because not every broadcast journalism outlet is so focused on appearances. They believe woman can be a good reporter or host without looking like she did pageants.
7
You will find the answer to that enigma on Page 3 of The Sun, Rupee the Raisin's remaining tabloid rag in the U;, having shut his other rag because his staff hacked the phone of a murdered child to get a scoop. He is a real Prince.
1
Or in Gretchen Carlson's case, actually did.
1
Kudos to whoever wrote the photo captions.
6
Is it sad that Megyn appears the best "reporter" that "cable" Fox TV has to offer. Another commentator on here reminded me of the "Jesus is surely albino or white" Megyn position that shows she has questionable journalistic character.
It is important to note the "satellite" and cable shows by Fox are OpEd. This in comparison to the local (here in NY - Channel 5) Fox channel which covers local news stories in classic news/journalism fashion without the OpEd "subjective", talking head commentary that spews from non-broadcast Fox stations (e.g. - Hannity, O'Reilly, etc.)
Fox has presumed itself "fair and balanced" erroneously relative to journalistic standards of news reporting for these cable/satellite stations. The shows and anchors rarely retract errors and do not consider review by their peers worthy. Instead they present only "their version" news stories with obvious conservative bias. Journalism presents all sides of a story that may be subjective and lets the reader/listener make a final decision. Fox hands us their opinion presumed as fact.
With news reporting by journalistic standards, opinion and editorial comment has no place. That is a reason why in the newspapers OpEd pieces are kept distinctly and unique section with huge " OpEd" heading.
Someday the cable and satellite Fox shows will openly declare their shows Opinion and Editorial commentary instead of news.
It is important to note the "satellite" and cable shows by Fox are OpEd. This in comparison to the local (here in NY - Channel 5) Fox channel which covers local news stories in classic news/journalism fashion without the OpEd "subjective", talking head commentary that spews from non-broadcast Fox stations (e.g. - Hannity, O'Reilly, etc.)
Fox has presumed itself "fair and balanced" erroneously relative to journalistic standards of news reporting for these cable/satellite stations. The shows and anchors rarely retract errors and do not consider review by their peers worthy. Instead they present only "their version" news stories with obvious conservative bias. Journalism presents all sides of a story that may be subjective and lets the reader/listener make a final decision. Fox hands us their opinion presumed as fact.
With news reporting by journalistic standards, opinion and editorial comment has no place. That is a reason why in the newspapers OpEd pieces are kept distinctly and unique section with huge " OpEd" heading.
Someday the cable and satellite Fox shows will openly declare their shows Opinion and Editorial commentary instead of news.
7
"Someday the cable and satellite Fox shows will openly declare their shows Opinion and Editorial commentary instead of news."
most intelligent sentient beings can tell that the evening lineup on FNC are opinion shows
most intelligent sentient beings can tell that the evening lineup on FNC are opinion shows
7
Will MSNBC do the same?
5
To be "fair and balanced", we don't really know the rate of albinism in immaculately conceived offspring; it could be 100%. I bet Megyn knows, she is smart and pretty.
The show is called The Kelly File and for people who don't like her style, intelligence, opinions or her good looks, there are other shows to watch that do not have a personalied name.
7
As a social moderate and fiscal pragmatist I find Megyn to be quite entertaining and the only show that I watch on Fox. Morning Joe and The Cycle are the only good shows on MSNBC because all of the others seem to talk about the same topics of the day which can get to be quite boring. The best news program on weekdays is CBS This Morning and award for the worst goes to Al Sharpton, explanation not necssary if you are from NYC.
8
Well, then, I guess that settles that...
1
I'd like to tell her, "Easy does it!" "Take a breath, once in a while!" It's the intensity that puts me off, more than anything. And, the seeming need for Fox News to spend countless minutes justifying or explaining what Megyn meant when she said Jesus and Santa Claus were white people. Own it, apologize if necessary, and move on already.
6
All female Fox News Anchors have the same characteristics:
1. See the world in black and white;
2. Be completely unable to put themselves in another person's shoes;
3. Never question their beliefs;
4. No attempt at empathy or understanding;
5. View the world only through your very privileged bubble (almost all major network female anchors are married to very wealth bankers/businessmen, especially in New York.)
1. See the world in black and white;
2. Be completely unable to put themselves in another person's shoes;
3. Never question their beliefs;
4. No attempt at empathy or understanding;
5. View the world only through your very privileged bubble (almost all major network female anchors are married to very wealth bankers/businessmen, especially in New York.)
20
wow sounds like the description for the folks on CNBC and MSNBC
12
I'm thinking that you have never watched Fox news.
5
Megyn's background is interesting. "she was accepted to the school but rejected from the program.... and found herself facing $100,000 in student loans." The exact type of college student excoriated endlessly by conservatives and every one of my conservative neighbors, reading such a biography anonymously, would proclaim she must be a liberal just one step from being a community organizer.
15
You must be living in the Midwest. That's not real money.
Probably not. Isn't she still trying to claim that Jesus--who reported;ly lived his whole life in the Eastern Middle East--was white. Albino?
http://thetruthoncommonsense.com
http://thetruthoncommonsense.com
8
Look, if Santa is white, how can Jesus not be white? It is just Faux common sense.
"When Ted Turner started CNN, he proclaimed that “the news is the star.” Ailes, on the other hand, has always been a vocal believer in the power of personality. " is the issue for Americans who think and can separate fact from opinion. Meghan Kelly and the rest of the Fox network cult of personalities are not reporting news and should not be called news. They are talk shows, nothing more nothing less, and incessantly interject their opinion rather than ask unbiased questions. That leads to any number of water cooler discussions the next day where the statement "I saw it on Fox News (insert name here) starts the conversation claiming it was both news and fact. If one goes back and watches the actual telecast, it was the interviewer's opinion, not reporting and not fact. Appealing to emotion, half truth, innuendo, sly winks and the rest is the hallmark of Fox "News". It works for them and their loyal audience but as PT said you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.
8
You described a perfect description of MSNBC. Fortunately for the country nobody watches MSNBC.
4
Fox has lowered the bar of American News for at least two decades. I doubt any one person can erase Fox's reputation for extremely biased and too often hysterical reporting. That will require a concerted effort from the owner and editor. I doubt we will see any change in the years to come. Murdoch and Ailes created this National Embarrassment only they can fix it.
12
For those two decades, and for decades before that, ABC, CBS, NBC, The NY Times, The Washington Post, PBS and all other major media outlets engaged in biased reporting favoring the liberal view of the world. One network comes out and presents the conservative side, and liberals can't handle it. Because liberals are so open-minded and tolerant.
7
Two decades? Make that five. Because that's when the civil-rights-era violence was on display night after night on the teevee news, and the old guard like Jesse Helms was eager - no, desperate - for a way to explain it all away. And that's what they came up with: "liberal bias."
1
What passes for news on Fox "News" is getting together a bunch of people with similar tea party values, and discussing some current event that they end up agreeing on.
This is the channel's substitute for factual reporting. It has the psychological effect of persuading the conformist viewer what they should believe so that they agree with all these people they see on TV.
Old psych experiments have shown that people tend to agree with the crowd, even when the crowd is a bunch of confederates who pretend to think something that is patently false -- like that a short line is longer than a long line.
This is deliberate subliminal persuasion. Rupert Murdoch evidently doesn't care about his legacy.
This is the channel's substitute for factual reporting. It has the psychological effect of persuading the conformist viewer what they should believe so that they agree with all these people they see on TV.
Old psych experiments have shown that people tend to agree with the crowd, even when the crowd is a bunch of confederates who pretend to think something that is patently false -- like that a short line is longer than a long line.
This is deliberate subliminal persuasion. Rupert Murdoch evidently doesn't care about his legacy.
3
What, pray tell, are "tea party" values?
5
Quote: “They used to laugh at us in the mainstream media,” Ailes said, “but we’re becoming the place most people go to get the truth.”
Quite a revealing quotation. First off, Fox News is part of the mainstream media whether it wants to admit it or not. It is just not part of the liberal mainstream media. Obviously, it leans to the right. Also, Roger Ailes should have said "our version of the truth." It is my contention that few media outlets, and NO mainstream media outlets, tell the truth, only left or right-leaning versions of such. Sorry NY Times, but you fall into this category as well.
That said, Megyn Kelly's persona is a mainstream media creation intended to sell "news" to as wide of an audience as possible while catering to dishing out red meat to the red states. In other words, she tells her audience what it wants to hear largely and almost exclusively. She may have moments when she seems to play devil's advocate, but as Ailes admits, it is all part of her carefully crafted personality which he is trying to sell.
How I wish the mainstream media would simply tell the truth without the shading and outright obfuscations along with leanings to the left and the right. But we the public are not fortunate to live in such times. We live in an age of disinformation, and Fox News is just one pernicious purveyor of such. That is why I seek out news outside of the mainstream media, and I hope an increasing audience will follow suit.
Quite a revealing quotation. First off, Fox News is part of the mainstream media whether it wants to admit it or not. It is just not part of the liberal mainstream media. Obviously, it leans to the right. Also, Roger Ailes should have said "our version of the truth." It is my contention that few media outlets, and NO mainstream media outlets, tell the truth, only left or right-leaning versions of such. Sorry NY Times, but you fall into this category as well.
That said, Megyn Kelly's persona is a mainstream media creation intended to sell "news" to as wide of an audience as possible while catering to dishing out red meat to the red states. In other words, she tells her audience what it wants to hear largely and almost exclusively. She may have moments when she seems to play devil's advocate, but as Ailes admits, it is all part of her carefully crafted personality which he is trying to sell.
How I wish the mainstream media would simply tell the truth without the shading and outright obfuscations along with leanings to the left and the right. But we the public are not fortunate to live in such times. We live in an age of disinformation, and Fox News is just one pernicious purveyor of such. That is why I seek out news outside of the mainstream media, and I hope an increasing audience will follow suit.
8
I will share my story about how I went from considering Fox News fringe to being hooked to it. As the ratings numbers show, I am far from being alone. I call my experience the "gee, Fox News make sense" moment.
I am right to center on most issues. I also happen to be a news junkie. I read/watch every single news source that gets in my way: the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Journal, ABC News, NBC News, CNN and of course, Fox News.
Up until 2008 however, my main source of TV news was CNN. I would leave the TV on with CNN on the background while I was doing other things. Then Obama came and CNN suddenly began to sound more like an extension of the Obama campaign than the objective source of news I had been relying on until that point. In my circles Fox News had a reputation of being fringe, so until then, I had never watched it for more than the time it takes the remote to switch channels. So, in a quest to finding a source without Obama Kool-Aid, I began to watch Fox News. After a few days, I was hooked and I have never looked back. I still watch CNN, but mostly to see what their spin is.
The thing that hooked me to Fox News is that on the controversial issues, they always supplement the conservative view with an equally strong view from a liberal pundit like Alan Colmes' (something that I never saw at CNN, whose conservative pundits were wimps). Fox News makes the work of those interested on both sides of most divisive arguments easier.
I am right to center on most issues. I also happen to be a news junkie. I read/watch every single news source that gets in my way: the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Journal, ABC News, NBC News, CNN and of course, Fox News.
Up until 2008 however, my main source of TV news was CNN. I would leave the TV on with CNN on the background while I was doing other things. Then Obama came and CNN suddenly began to sound more like an extension of the Obama campaign than the objective source of news I had been relying on until that point. In my circles Fox News had a reputation of being fringe, so until then, I had never watched it for more than the time it takes the remote to switch channels. So, in a quest to finding a source without Obama Kool-Aid, I began to watch Fox News. After a few days, I was hooked and I have never looked back. I still watch CNN, but mostly to see what their spin is.
The thing that hooked me to Fox News is that on the controversial issues, they always supplement the conservative view with an equally strong view from a liberal pundit like Alan Colmes' (something that I never saw at CNN, whose conservative pundits were wimps). Fox News makes the work of those interested on both sides of most divisive arguments easier.
8
if Colmes is so "equally strong," why isn't he some other media vehicle's leading light?
6
To Ethan: I was "forced" to listen to Fox news for years as I worked in an environment where it was left on all day. Unfortunately, one cannot shut one's ears. The distortions, lies, and blatant recourse to inflammatory "reporting" usually left me depressed and/or outraged at the end of the day. It was all calculated to get viewers pumped with rage. The commentary by the pandering pundits was jaw-dropping. The "talk" shows were really about shouting down the other person, it was the news equivalent of nude mud wrestling.
11
Perhaps because as co-host of Hannity and Colmes he might have made enough money to live in semi retirement as Fox News contributor and as host of his own radio show?
Even if your are a liberal pundit (I am not talking about a host like Rachel Maddow, but just a pundit), I'd bet that Fox News pays better than the competition.
Even if your are a liberal pundit (I am not talking about a host like Rachel Maddow, but just a pundit), I'd bet that Fox News pays better than the competition.
2
Does Ailes honestly believe "most people go to get the truth" at Fox News? Truth is different than political propaganda; which driven by fear, anger and us again them mentality, is merely dividing this country. No matter how hard conservatives belittle people who don't share their political beliefs, we're not going away. I've never seen a marriage (which the Democrats and Republicans are in) succeed when one belittles the other.
6
Well, well, the golden girl of FOX - such fawning is making me retch. I've got a Kelly Moment - remember the Olympics and the Greek athlete who made a tasteless joke about African immigrants in Greece? That woman also professed her admiration for the Golden Dawn, a Greek right-wing nationalist group with a pseudo-Nazi banner. Megyn pooh-poohed this quite trivially; had she been vetted properly, or had displayed any historical knowledge, she might have noted the association with that group's hate words, the athlete's complicity, and the rising tide of xenophobia and antisemitism all in one fell swoop. But Megyn DIDN'T - as far as this reader is concerned, a fatal faux pas on the part of Ms. Kelly, just another FOX faux blond to be disregarded. Sure pulled the wool over you guys. Oh yeah, I watch FOX for entertainment, just to see how outrageous they can be ...
12
Recently when Megyn appeared as a guest on The Factor and got a bit out of line, O'Reilly made it abundantly clear that he was not amused. Megyn, properly chastised, demurely batted her eyelashes and mumbled "See you at 9 folks". No Megyn moment there.
9
Why do female news anchors have to look like runway models or actresses now? I detect a real problem here.
13
Candy Crowley didn't. Judy Woodruff and Gwen Ifill don't. So I guess I don't understand the question.
5
Change the channel and you'll see. Anyway, Ifill and Woodruff (who are wonderfully smart) are not in their 20s and 30s. The new anchors coming up who are female are often the model type. If you don't find that disturbing, that's fine. We just disagree.
1
CNBC leads the nerworks with girls in short skirts and sporting cleavage but is not alone. I wonder if they have any pride. In a way I feel sorry for them. And women don't want to treated as objects.
Unless one has a reasonable grasp of both sides of an issue, it's not possible to make rational decisions about the issue. Otherwise what you have is an unsupported opinion.
Productive discussions/observations based on approaching an issue with an open mind ultimately allow one to feel comfortable with their perspective. Sometimes one actually ends up being convinced of the merit of the other side of the story.
For that reason, I do listen to Fox but not regularly. I find their abrasive style of presenting and "gathering" facts difficult to watch. Their constant inflammatory presentation of what passes for news is also difficult to accept.
Based on what I hear and observe, my low opinion of Fox and their “newscasters” is usually but not always reinforced.
Productive discussions/observations based on approaching an issue with an open mind ultimately allow one to feel comfortable with their perspective. Sometimes one actually ends up being convinced of the merit of the other side of the story.
For that reason, I do listen to Fox but not regularly. I find their abrasive style of presenting and "gathering" facts difficult to watch. Their constant inflammatory presentation of what passes for news is also difficult to accept.
Based on what I hear and observe, my low opinion of Fox and their “newscasters” is usually but not always reinforced.
8
A person lacking historical awareness, economic sophistication, simple courtesy, and sobriety matching her profession -- this fashon show on heels is what the NYTimes wants us to ponder?
EdMurrow, Walter Kronkite, and a score of thegreat news reporters are laughing at this spectacle. Megan may ne a pleasant person.
Who cares?
She is not very articulate, educated, or intelligent, so I do care. Enough not to watch the tv network because she is a star there.
She is not worth watching, and not worth a sentence in the Times. Celebrity newscaster? Gimme a break.
EdMurrow, Walter Kronkite, and a score of thegreat news reporters are laughing at this spectacle. Megan may ne a pleasant person.
Who cares?
She is not very articulate, educated, or intelligent, so I do care. Enough not to watch the tv network because she is a star there.
She is not worth watching, and not worth a sentence in the Times. Celebrity newscaster? Gimme a break.
24
I tune in to Fox occasionally, mostly when something truly embarrassing or shameful or cruel has been done by someone in the GOP, just to see how they'll spin it. Hannity and O'Reilly's folksy, bully neighborhood bar guy style is exasperating, and I see it as a threat to the very idea of civil discourse. However, Kelly's cold, lip-glossed robot assassin demeanor feels like it's broadcast from some insensate futuristic corporate government studio, and I should be viewing it on a flat screen TV larger than the one I own. All three of these "hosts" make mostly the same misrepresentations and slant their coverage in celebration of income inequality. Kelly's just the new way Fox sends a chill up the spines of liberals like me.
26
Ailes was a Nixon operative. Aren't these Megyn moments just another "modified limited hangout" to make "fair and balanced" seem plausible?
8
She pushes lies, and there is no way that she does not know that. Her brand of "news" is a cancer on our Country. Cultivating division is not a noble profession.
34
Megyn Kelly is awesome! Soon, MSNBC will be airing the sham-wow guy. The Rev? Chrissy Mathews? Maddow? Olberman went back to sports.
6
In baseball she would be referred to as a five tool player.
Sad that she, her intelligence, talent, and values are not widely respected in this Country.
Sad that she, her intelligence, talent, and values are not widely respected in this Country.
4
She will earn my respect when she treats the truth with some.
22
Sad to you but not so to most of us who wish for impartial journalism.
6
Megyn earned my respect on Election night 2012 calling out Rove, and Cheney later, icing on the cake.
The other FOX person not drinking the Koolaid is Shepard Smith.
The other FOX person not drinking the Koolaid is Shepard Smith.
6
An article like this makes me glad I don't have access to Fox News.
14
Consider yourself lucky, my friend. See how they highlighted their appalling ignorance recently vis-a-vis all matters "French". Poor America .... with this crown spewing their version of 'truth', and a mindless public drinking the Fox News Kool Aid ?!
4
I found the takedown of Megyn's house husband to be both artful and gratuitous, i.e., I both liked it and I didn't. Kind of how I feel about Megyn.
1
Maybe I'm missing something, but I've seen a lot more misses than hits when Megyn Kelly tries to create a "Megyn moment." She's bright, but not as bright as she's given credit for. I watch her show occasionally, but that's about all I can stand.
2
When I start seeing words left, right, socialist, liberal, conservative tossed about with no further explanation, I begin to wonder why subsidize education? People do not seem to do either what will benefit themselves or help their neighbor. Fox is good for people who hate people who think -- most Americans and who like a lot of noise-- i.e. feel unheard, unacknowledged, unappreciated. It will be interesting to see how the children (now infants) of the Fox News generation turn out!!
4
She claims to be an independent, but after watching her for awhile, I find she jabs liberals for being liberal, but jabs conservatives for not being accurate or consistent. So she clearly dislikes liberal policies but yet dislikes it when conservatives make unforced errors or when they overreach.
She undoubtedly leans right, but still manages to hold both sides accountable. Would love to see more journalists like her.
She undoubtedly leans right, but still manages to hold both sides accountable. Would love to see more journalists like her.
5
I've seen both Megyn Kelly - on Bill O'Reilly and on her own show, and I've seen Rachel Maddow, numerous times. In my opinion Maddow has more brains in her pinky than Kelly has in her entire brain cavity. Most of the time she just simpers and acts out before the camera. Okay fodder for Fox News viewers I guess, but not for anyone looking for the real story.
40
Her moments of honesty are a well-calculated veneer. If she wants a reputation as a journalist she can jump to another network and earn it. Or if she wants to be the richest and hottest infotainment star, she's right where she belongs.
15
I’ve been a student of the media since the 1960s. President Kennedy’s FCC Chairman, Newton Minnow, famously called TV a “vast wasteland.” One of the biggest knocks was the lack of diversity: The three network news shows were essentially clones of one another, differentiated only by the personalities of their anchors. CNN was a bold move and expanded the time for news, but initially used the same format as before. Then along comes Rupert Murdoch, putting his money behind a competitive all news network. I recall the response from many analysts that we did not need another all news network—how could there be a market for it?
But what Fox provided, first in its entertainment programming and then with the news, was in fact diversity. It is not a clone of CNN, although CNN has been moving to clone Fox News, with anchors like Carol Costello, Ashleigh Banfield—the list is long, who voice an overtly liberal slant at least as obviously as any on Fox are conservative.
My friends and relatives—almost all of them—get apoplectic when Fox News is mentioned. Few have watched Fox News, just as I suspect few of Megyn Kelly’s viewers go over to CNN. Both (and MSNBC) are in the tradition of newspapers before radio and TV—news media that cater to a political point of view. We should get over it and accept that this diversity is presumably what is wrought by a TV landscape that has become as diverse as the magazine rack.
But what Fox provided, first in its entertainment programming and then with the news, was in fact diversity. It is not a clone of CNN, although CNN has been moving to clone Fox News, with anchors like Carol Costello, Ashleigh Banfield—the list is long, who voice an overtly liberal slant at least as obviously as any on Fox are conservative.
My friends and relatives—almost all of them—get apoplectic when Fox News is mentioned. Few have watched Fox News, just as I suspect few of Megyn Kelly’s viewers go over to CNN. Both (and MSNBC) are in the tradition of newspapers before radio and TV—news media that cater to a political point of view. We should get over it and accept that this diversity is presumably what is wrought by a TV landscape that has become as diverse as the magazine rack.
1
Interesting that this site actually did a relatively good job on Ms. Kelly. Of course the regular time readers are probably spitting up their lattes all over their screens. Change that based on what I've read in the comments your readers are stomping their widdle feet and crying to their mommies.
9
Only a serious case of narcissism leading to unrelenting ego can explain why anyone would appear on an interview program where the core philosophy and goal are the creation of controversy by public humiliation.
If you do not like the person being interviewed, and sometimes even if you do, it's great entertainment. It will make you laugh even before your squirm or cringe. But, interviewees seem not to comprehend that they are the subject of a controlled experiment: the interviewer, not the person being interviewed, establishes the rules, determines questions and answers, sets the agenda, and decides who gets rudely interrupted and when to ensure the interviewer's consistent presentation of her pre-conceived conclusions.
Terrific intellectual discussion or brilliant repartee is never sought or gained. Public belittlement followed by flogging invariably is. I admit there are some who believe with good reason that it doesn't matter whether they are publicly punished or made to seem small on the air, but those seem to be cases where the fact of the public appearance--satisfaction of the ego--is the success, where the ego determines the strength of the desire to be displayed publicly, overcoming good judgment and favoring public humiliation. Because of the number of these shows, it's clear to me that there are enough narcissists out there that the programming requirements of Ms. Kelley and other interviewer will never go wanting or unsatisfied.
More's the better for them.
If you do not like the person being interviewed, and sometimes even if you do, it's great entertainment. It will make you laugh even before your squirm or cringe. But, interviewees seem not to comprehend that they are the subject of a controlled experiment: the interviewer, not the person being interviewed, establishes the rules, determines questions and answers, sets the agenda, and decides who gets rudely interrupted and when to ensure the interviewer's consistent presentation of her pre-conceived conclusions.
Terrific intellectual discussion or brilliant repartee is never sought or gained. Public belittlement followed by flogging invariably is. I admit there are some who believe with good reason that it doesn't matter whether they are publicly punished or made to seem small on the air, but those seem to be cases where the fact of the public appearance--satisfaction of the ego--is the success, where the ego determines the strength of the desire to be displayed publicly, overcoming good judgment and favoring public humiliation. Because of the number of these shows, it's clear to me that there are enough narcissists out there that the programming requirements of Ms. Kelley and other interviewer will never go wanting or unsatisfied.
More's the better for them.
8
Charlie Rose is an evenhanded interviewer.
Most TV interviewers don't seem to know very much about what their subjects actually do, so they can't ask good questions about it.
Most TV interviewers don't seem to know very much about what their subjects actually do, so they can't ask good questions about it.
7
Evenhanded in the sense that he is incapable of waiting for his subject to respond. He sometimes manages to ask fairly intelligent, pertinent questions. Never has he been the least bit interested in allowing the interviewee to respond. Beyond infuriating.
1
As long as Megyn Kelly's views remain sharp yet unpredictable, her audience will grow. I find her exciting to watch, disagree with her much of the time, but compelling whenever she, a conservative, takes on fond conservative "truths" that have gone unchallenged from a conservative perspective.
3
Fox is a business first, and its business model involves reactionary politics and sensationalist entertainment. Period.
Megyn Kelly is just a female Shepherd Smith, and the wiggle room both have to stray outside that business model is very, very slim. Naturally, speaking to an American market, a little dash of "individualism" and "free thinking" is just good marketing (best exemplified by Bill O'Reilly's constant affirmation, that he is a staunch "independent").
But the Fox business model always is the lode star if you want to work there and be one of their "personalities." Reactionary politics and sensationalism are not negotiable.
Oh, and skirts. I hear Fox women are not allowed to wear pants.
As I said, reactionary.
Megyn Kelly is just a female Shepherd Smith, and the wiggle room both have to stray outside that business model is very, very slim. Naturally, speaking to an American market, a little dash of "individualism" and "free thinking" is just good marketing (best exemplified by Bill O'Reilly's constant affirmation, that he is a staunch "independent").
But the Fox business model always is the lode star if you want to work there and be one of their "personalities." Reactionary politics and sensationalism are not negotiable.
Oh, and skirts. I hear Fox women are not allowed to wear pants.
As I said, reactionary.
12
And the skirts must be hitched up to a certain height!
I sometimes think it's a little funny. In that FOX News has succeeded where PRAVDA, TASS and the entire Cold War Soviet Propaganda machines failed.
Divide the American people. Point out the deficiencies of representative government. Constantly remind people of our failures. Question our system.
Declare it's broken. 24/7.
During the Cold War, conservatives would have had FOX News Broadcasts Jammed!
And Murdoch, Ailes and Kelly would have had been subpoenaed to appear in front of House Un-American Activities Committee.
No more "America! Love it or leave it." Watch FOX News and gripe.
P.S. Why did the fairness doctrine in broadcasting disappear? Hearing both sides of an argument before making up our minds is too confusing? Or boring?
Divide the American people. Point out the deficiencies of representative government. Constantly remind people of our failures. Question our system.
Declare it's broken. 24/7.
During the Cold War, conservatives would have had FOX News Broadcasts Jammed!
And Murdoch, Ailes and Kelly would have had been subpoenaed to appear in front of House Un-American Activities Committee.
No more "America! Love it or leave it." Watch FOX News and gripe.
P.S. Why did the fairness doctrine in broadcasting disappear? Hearing both sides of an argument before making up our minds is too confusing? Or boring?
14
I think Rupert Murdoch's merry crew of psychotics are the McCarthyites of today.
11
Why did the fairness doctrine in broadcasting disappear?
First amendment. Libs hate it.
First amendment. Libs hate it.
4
@stalkinghorse Pot...black. Just dial back the clock to Bush Jr., to see cable Fox News lambast Dixie Chicks or anyone against the Iraqi War, or even questioning it, as unpatriotic treasonous enemies. Then see them hypocritically reverse their positions, arguments, reasoning as soon as the other guy's in the chair. "First amendment" is an incredibly lazy argument for lies veiled as fair and balanced source of news. If I start publishing stories about you being a pedophile, as factual news, is that my first amendment right?
17
Think about the balanced reporting at Fox. For 2012 elections, Karl Rowe was their main analyst sitting next to anchors and able to make Megyn run all the way to the back office to recheck their numbers. Cam you imagine somebody making Mr. Cronkite do that?
Now, did Fox and Megyn consider Karl to be "independent" or did they feel no need to balance it out by bringing in another analyst and providing him the same prominence?
This whole article itself a bit like Fox network - admittedly unbalanced and trying to sell something.
Now, did Fox and Megyn consider Karl to be "independent" or did they feel no need to balance it out by bringing in another analyst and providing him the same prominence?
This whole article itself a bit like Fox network - admittedly unbalanced and trying to sell something.
8
The only place to work is Fox News, look at the carnage at network news stations, how many Sunday morning talk show hosts have come and gone?
I watch MSNBC, it's okay, Rachel Maddow is slurping down DNC-Kool-Aid, and their is no diversity at this news station. They've got, white, black, brown, yellow, etc... but they all think alike.
Diversity is suppose to bring varying experiences/opinions, not at MSNBC - it's a rainbow coalition of group think.
I watch MSNBC, it's okay, Rachel Maddow is slurping down DNC-Kool-Aid, and their is no diversity at this news station. They've got, white, black, brown, yellow, etc... but they all think alike.
Diversity is suppose to bring varying experiences/opinions, not at MSNBC - it's a rainbow coalition of group think.
6
I admire Megan Kelly for being able to find her niche and succeed in television news. This whole story is a little strange, though, because she gets some of her valued impact by going against the grain of her employer, Fox News. It is sort of like finding a rose in a pile of cow manure: oh, what a pleasant surprise. There is still a pile of that stuff all around.
Fox News, however, is not a news channel. It is a propaganda channel that provides comfortable reassurance, and spiky suggestions about what to believe and where to go, to Americans who are uncomfortable with living in a complex, modern society and who long for the easier old days of their grandparents. It is a booster channel for the Republican party and one that cannot claim simple honesty as its guide post. It has made so many gross errors by seeking and believing dishonest information that it skirts from day to day to being an outright embarrassment to itself and to journalism.
I do not envy whatever multi-million dollar paydays Ms. Kelly has coming her way. Indeed, I am sad that such an attractive and hard working, intelligent person has to prowl about in such dirty waters to "make it", but that's America, folks.
Doug Terry
Fox News, however, is not a news channel. It is a propaganda channel that provides comfortable reassurance, and spiky suggestions about what to believe and where to go, to Americans who are uncomfortable with living in a complex, modern society and who long for the easier old days of their grandparents. It is a booster channel for the Republican party and one that cannot claim simple honesty as its guide post. It has made so many gross errors by seeking and believing dishonest information that it skirts from day to day to being an outright embarrassment to itself and to journalism.
I do not envy whatever multi-million dollar paydays Ms. Kelly has coming her way. Indeed, I am sad that such an attractive and hard working, intelligent person has to prowl about in such dirty waters to "make it", but that's America, folks.
Doug Terry
11
It's a score-settling channel, too. That's why Bernard Goldberg's there. Maybe they're coached to smile on camera, but there's a lot of loathing off it.
3
So, Joel Klein says, “I miss being able to turn on a straight newscast,” he said. “And it turns out the only place you can go to get one at 6 o’clock at night is Fox."
He should try PBS, 6 pm central time. Gwen Eiffel and Judy Woodruff do an amazing job, night after night.
He should try PBS, 6 pm central time. Gwen Eiffel and Judy Woodruff do an amazing job, night after night.
23
So watch the government channel to avoid stress?
3
If you want balanced news with an intelligent perspective stay away from cable and watch PBS.
24
PBS, AJAM are informative but you need to know what is on FOX as well as MSNBC.
2
Stay away from television and "watch" NPR.
2
I thought that the article was well balanced and informative. However the readers comments are more revealing. The NYT readership is strongly biased against anything which dares to question the liberal dogma. You wouldn't see any criticism of liberal commentators like Al Sharpton here.
11
It's as if the bitter partisans commenting here, like their fearless leader, didn't get the memo from the 2014 election. The majority of Americans want candor, common sense and progress. Her approach with intelligence, a big smile and assertiveness is absolutely spot on.
No coincidence that viewers are flocking to her show.
No coincidence that viewers are flocking to her show.
3
What is this "liberal dogma" everyone keeps going on about? Is it like pornography: you just know it when you see it?
14
Well you made it here, reading, commenting. Does that make you a bitter partisan, grinding your teeth. Imagine a world where all thoughts don't end up mesmerized by I guess the hypnotic Mr. Sharpton. Not everything is about Al but he does seem to spend a lot of time with Fox viewers, putting snakes in their heads.
If "a Megyn Moment" is telling a guy like Karl Rove to snap out of it, that Mitt lost, and to turn off the lights, then wow, great. That Fox needs to pay someone big bucks to keep partially awake in their Fog Factory is part of the story here.
If "a Megyn Moment" is telling a guy like Karl Rove to snap out of it, that Mitt lost, and to turn off the lights, then wow, great. That Fox needs to pay someone big bucks to keep partially awake in their Fog Factory is part of the story here.
9
Well, Rutenberg is in love, clearly. Little incidents that would pass the
sight of everyone else suddenly become great big proofs that lighteneing
has struck and changed the whole spectre of television. Yet, no one lese
has noticed.
And DID all this praise of Fox come well BEFORE the heads of state
of our best allies put out a complaint about the really stupid and
inaccurate ways of Fox?
BUt never mind, just watch the lineup on Fox nightly, and see the
stupidity of it all.
sight of everyone else suddenly become great big proofs that lighteneing
has struck and changed the whole spectre of television. Yet, no one lese
has noticed.
And DID all this praise of Fox come well BEFORE the heads of state
of our best allies put out a complaint about the really stupid and
inaccurate ways of Fox?
BUt never mind, just watch the lineup on Fox nightly, and see the
stupidity of it all.
3
Rutenberg : Kelly :: Lowry : Palin?
I find it completely unbelievable that Pew says 37% of viewers have "mixed" political views. Come on, that's like saying African Americans have a "mixed" view of what happened in Ferguson. But with that being said, I welcome anyone who can bring any sort of balance to the most hate filled, negative content of any network out there. As it stands now, in any doctors office, if they have FOX playing in the waiting room, I will ask them to change it, or I will leave. And anyone on the right would have the same right if MSNBC were on. But I believe every network should have a wide spectrum of opinions when they are doing commentary. If FOX does this, then I will finally be able to come off my blood pressure medication!!
1
"Attractive-looking blond anchorwomen are not rare," Brit Hume, a Fox News senior political analyst said. "Attractive-looking blond anchorwomen who speak with a fierce authority are rare."
This begs two questions: 1. Would Fox news would employ her as an anchor if she spoke with a fierce authority but didn't have the "attractive blonde anchorwoman" part? ...2. Additionally, if Brit Hume were praising a male anchor, would he start out with how handsome the employee is? If Megyn Kelly really wants to be fierce, she should start out by shooting down sexist descriptions prioritizing good-ol'-boy descriptions of her talents.
This begs two questions: 1. Would Fox news would employ her as an anchor if she spoke with a fierce authority but didn't have the "attractive blonde anchorwoman" part? ...2. Additionally, if Brit Hume were praising a male anchor, would he start out with how handsome the employee is? If Megyn Kelly really wants to be fierce, she should start out by shooting down sexist descriptions prioritizing good-ol'-boy descriptions of her talents.
10
Or she could take it as a complement and move on.
1
It's not the appropriate place for a "complement" about physical attractiveness...that's the whole point.
5
What Kelly, and Fox news have to offer that the others, including the NYT, do not, is ALL the news. They don't ignore stories because they don't fit the liberal narrative. Yes, you get a point of view, but it isn't like the others who just refuse to report stories that make liberals look bad.
Second is that the Fox people have an energy and a candor that's refreshingly human. They're excited by life and engaged, where the other guys are removed and condescending, just like the President.
Second is that the Fox people have an energy and a candor that's refreshingly human. They're excited by life and engaged, where the other guys are removed and condescending, just like the President.
10
We all know reality has a well-known liberal bias.
6
Unbelievable! Fake News is lying most of the time, last example: the so called no go zones in Paris......get out of the Arizona desert and visit thereal world not the one depicted by Faux News....
1
If it weren't for Megyn Kelly I would never have found out that both Jesus and Santa Claus are white.
20
You probably also wouldn't have discovered you lost the midterms. In historic terms.
5
Sure, except that Jesus was basically Arabic and Santa is fictitious. Hopefully you knew that and this was in jest.
7
If by historic you mean low turnout or Republicans gaining even though the Dems got more overall votes, you are correct.
5
I saw the Megyn Moment directed towards Carl Rove's fantasy island on election night. I was surprised and impressed. At that point, I began to take her more seriously than the usual banal talking heads on Fox and watched her show a few times, hoping to see a more 'fair and balanced' approach on at all places, Fox.
Alas, it was not to be. That Megyn Moment was the last one. Otherwise, she another one parroting the old, tired Fox - odd, very conservative. She might be able to think but it isn't all that obvious most of the time. So much for Fox news.
At by the way, Bill O'Reilly in the same breath as Cronkite, Sawyer and Walters? Wow. Megyn, awaken. You have a Moment in front of you. But maybe not a good idea until you become one of those 'truly great television news talents'.
Alas, it was not to be. That Megyn Moment was the last one. Otherwise, she another one parroting the old, tired Fox - odd, very conservative. She might be able to think but it isn't all that obvious most of the time. So much for Fox news.
At by the way, Bill O'Reilly in the same breath as Cronkite, Sawyer and Walters? Wow. Megyn, awaken. You have a Moment in front of you. But maybe not a good idea until you become one of those 'truly great television news talents'.
5
Quite a few posters seem to think there is some obligation to pick between some Fox drone or some MSNBC drone instead of scraping off fake journalism wherever it may be, like something stuck to your shoe.
The statistics show that Fox misleads its willing audience of mostly elderly viewers for god knows what reason more than other outlets. That some portion of the population wants to hear propaganda and zoo stories is their business, but quit trying to stick some "journalism" label on that- just like the merciful choice to not call the Fred Phelps Theater Group real anything but organized malice either. There are other choices, hallelujah.
The statistics show that Fox misleads its willing audience of mostly elderly viewers for god knows what reason more than other outlets. That some portion of the population wants to hear propaganda and zoo stories is their business, but quit trying to stick some "journalism" label on that- just like the merciful choice to not call the Fred Phelps Theater Group real anything but organized malice either. There are other choices, hallelujah.
12
I'm curious why the subject of her "intelligence" seems to garner so much attention and surprise. Is it because she's a woman? Blonde? On TV? On Fox? I mean, isn't intelligence at least the price of entry for a profession like hers? Shouldn't we expect as much?
Talking about her intelligence sounds as imbecilic to me as saying, "Wow, she has a voice we can hear!"
Talking about her intelligence sounds as imbecilic to me as saying, "Wow, she has a voice we can hear!"
10
The surprise about her intelligence is that she works for Fox 'news' and still seems to be fairly bright.
4
Excellent point.
1
Liberati litmus test?
I remember the days when the news was news, not the anchorperson's take on the news. It doesn't matter to me who delivers the a story as much as the integrity of the person and the accuracy of the report. News with an agenda is not news, therefore, I do not consider Fox or Megan Kelly worth watching or believing. I miss Walter Cronkite!
19
All the comments re Fox, MSNBC etc prove why I and my kids turn to BBC America to get actual reporting with some attempt at the objectivity that used to be part of American news programs. Murrow, Cronkite and all would be turning in their graves.
9
Depends on which Murrow you're talking about. The Ed Murrow who invented celebrity infotainment ("Person to Person") would recognize the landscape all too well.
2
- Attractive blonde woman: Check.
- Intelligent: Check. She is a great at cherry picking evidence and quotes to support whatever her point at the time is.
- Speaks with fierce authority: Sure, if you call pure rudeness "fierce authority". If a guest happens to be well versed in spotting iffy logic, she WILL shout at you and shut you down. Try getting another complete sentence in before the show ends.
Sorry, Ms Kelly. Under all that get up, you just come across as a spiteful person. Enjoy your wealth and power.
- Intelligent: Check. She is a great at cherry picking evidence and quotes to support whatever her point at the time is.
- Speaks with fierce authority: Sure, if you call pure rudeness "fierce authority". If a guest happens to be well versed in spotting iffy logic, she WILL shout at you and shut you down. Try getting another complete sentence in before the show ends.
Sorry, Ms Kelly. Under all that get up, you just come across as a spiteful person. Enjoy your wealth and power.
26
“They used to laugh at us in the mainstream media, but we’re becoming the place most people go to get the truth.” No, pretty much they still laugh at you. Not everything is about money.
25
I watch the Daily Show for news and Fox News for laughs.
9
Now even the NYT is showcasing Faux News. Wow. Is everybody going blonde too? I've noticed lately that the TImes covers a lot of Republicans and arch conservatives on its front page, relegating Democrats and progressives to some other cyberspace. Of course, that's an editorial decision. If I want to learn about what people center or left are doing, I have to read elsewhere these days.
11
A bunch of them just left DC without jobs in November.
3
What brings a person of your leisure here?
3
How meaninful is a "Megyn moment" in an entertaniment organization that seems to be on a journalistic par with the National Enquirer.
25
Hey now, the National Enquirer has reporters who break real news. Name the last time a Fox Newser did that.
1
Just tonight. At 9:00 Fox reported that a coalition of Republican and Democrats in Congress are poised to override the President's threatened veto on the Iranian Sanctions bill.
And that's just tonight. I learned from Fox that despite what the administration said, Bowe Bergdahl was not an American hero.
Want more?
And that's just tonight. I learned from Fox that despite what the administration said, Bowe Bergdahl was not an American hero.
Want more?
2
Just because it says "FOX NEWS ALERT" at the bottom of the screen, that doesn't mean Fox broke it. Nice try, though.
I watch NBC News, the rest of this stuff is made up and jazzy journalism that quite frankly you really cannot trust.
4
Beauty coupled with intelligence has always been a force in nature. The only strangeness, as Bacon might have pointed out, is her contrary NYT nature. Even for collectivist network talking heads, she is not easy to trash.
3
Nice Francis Bacon allusion.
While I like Fox News, Megyn Kelly is too cutesy for me.
Regarding other posts on this board - Some are saying they think the best anchor is Rachel Maddow on MSNBC and that Fox is partisan. While I'd acquiesce that Fox may be partisan, I'd also like to point out that MSNBC along with CNN, are also partisan, in the other direction.
So what's the problem? You tune to Fox to hear what they're saying, then you tune to CNN and MSNBC (if you can stomach it) to hear what they're saying.
Someone in the middle is a modicum of truth.
Regarding other posts on this board - Some are saying they think the best anchor is Rachel Maddow on MSNBC and that Fox is partisan. While I'd acquiesce that Fox may be partisan, I'd also like to point out that MSNBC along with CNN, are also partisan, in the other direction.
So what's the problem? You tune to Fox to hear what they're saying, then you tune to CNN and MSNBC (if you can stomach it) to hear what they're saying.
Someone in the middle is a modicum of truth.
6
Well, Megyn is 'entertaining' as a news personality, nothing wrong with that per se, yet let's be honest, in this day of Reality TV (which is an oxymoron), should be be surerised by the rise of Reality News Shows? She has her counterparts on MSNBC and CNN among other programs, I have seen her braodcast a few items of it is more of a Talk Show (nothing wrong with that either), than it is a news show or even a cerebral discussion show. Anyone can be a'ambuhed' on these types of shows and it does make for quick copy and auidence viewing, if you are into these types of show for entertainment vs informatio purposes, you generally learn (if anything) one person's views on something. I am currently, 'off the cable' so I do not see any of these Liberal/Conservative shows and I doubt if I ever learned anything from them, I merely gets existing bias reinforcement. One-liners may make a good sound and video byte, yet these seldom do anything to contribute to a point of discussion, maybe that is why people relish political debates and the reason why elected officials often show a veneer of effectiveness once elected. Once upon a time when I was cable-conected I watched Fox, CNN< MSNBC, etc- yet each show followed their own political viewing auidence template and I soon tired of the predicatable line of discussion which gradually gravitated inevitably to that of the host's TV personality.
BTW- when did the term 'forceful authority' morph into the words 'personal opinion'?
BTW- when did the term 'forceful authority' morph into the words 'personal opinion'?
Most Australians appear to be grateful beyond words that Rupert Murdoch renounced Australian citizenship in 1985 and became a naturalized United States citizen that year at the age of 54--in order to become eligible to buy a TV network in America. Talk to an Australian, refer to Murdoch as being Australian, and that person will likely very explicitly point out to you that Murdoch has been an American now for 30 years.
I'm not sure if Americans are fully aware of how British and Australian people view Murdoch. It has little to do with this political views--which probably possess the stability of a weathervane--and more to do with his unquestioned status as one of the biggest purveyors of sensationalism and prurient T&A masquerading as news.
The Wall Street Journal has been turned into an embarrassment by Murdoch. Better to be bankrolled by Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim (a la The New York Times) than by Murdoch. Kelly is making a lot of money at Fox News and set for life. Good for her. Not sure she was deserving of a Magazine profile, though.
I'm not sure if Americans are fully aware of how British and Australian people view Murdoch. It has little to do with this political views--which probably possess the stability of a weathervane--and more to do with his unquestioned status as one of the biggest purveyors of sensationalism and prurient T&A masquerading as news.
The Wall Street Journal has been turned into an embarrassment by Murdoch. Better to be bankrolled by Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim (a la The New York Times) than by Murdoch. Kelly is making a lot of money at Fox News and set for life. Good for her. Not sure she was deserving of a Magazine profile, though.
25
I've heard Rupert Murdoch called "The Dirty Digger".
My apologies to the Australian mining industries.
My apologies to the Australian mining industries.
4
I love this line from Roger Ailes: “They used to laugh at us in the mainstream media,” Ailes said, “but we’re becoming the place most people go to get the truth.”
Anyone who goes to Fox News for even an approximation of the truth is beyond deluded. Megyn Kelly may be a little different than the average Fox News spinner, but the network still follows the Orwellian idea of repeating the lie again and again hoping to make it true.
Anyone who goes to Fox News for even an approximation of the truth is beyond deluded. Megyn Kelly may be a little different than the average Fox News spinner, but the network still follows the Orwellian idea of repeating the lie again and again hoping to make it true.
32
There was a time in broadcast news, straight reporting or commentary, when studio personnel would not think to appear in front of the camera without a jacket and tie, if not a suit.
But as conservative media has grown we now get the likes of Joe Scarborough looking like he just rolled out of bed in a sweat shirt and loafers with no socks on to host his MSNBC show.
Likewise, there was a time when it was unheard of for a similarly situated women to appear on camera in a sleeveless blouse or dress. Today, these women wear sleeveless, low cut, skin tight dresses that ride up to the lower buttock when they cross their legs, along with 4 inch heels.
Sarah Palin showed how far sex appeal (the "do me pumps," tight skirts, form fitting jackets that enhanced her ample bosom, the flowing mane) can let an airhead rise to a very high level.
This Kelly gal is a total babe; tight, toned, blonde, fiesty. I watch her often. But with the sound turned down.
But as conservative media has grown we now get the likes of Joe Scarborough looking like he just rolled out of bed in a sweat shirt and loafers with no socks on to host his MSNBC show.
Likewise, there was a time when it was unheard of for a similarly situated women to appear on camera in a sleeveless blouse or dress. Today, these women wear sleeveless, low cut, skin tight dresses that ride up to the lower buttock when they cross their legs, along with 4 inch heels.
Sarah Palin showed how far sex appeal (the "do me pumps," tight skirts, form fitting jackets that enhanced her ample bosom, the flowing mane) can let an airhead rise to a very high level.
This Kelly gal is a total babe; tight, toned, blonde, fiesty. I watch her often. But with the sound turned down.
7
Megyn Kelly is one of the very few intellectually honest Journalists - in that lies her appeal.
3
...excuse me,staing that Ms. Kelly is an "intellectually honest" journalist is equivalent to saying that Sarah Palin is an "intellectually honest" politician.
15
Someone said about Gingrich that he sounds to a stupid person like what a smart person should sound like. It's probably just a case of setting a low bar for Megyn Kelly.
5
The someone who applied it to Gingrich is The Times's own Paul Krugman: Nov. 21, 2011, on the ABC News program "This Week."
But the phrase itself probably derives from this line, by Elizabeth Bowen about Aldous Huxley, some 75 years earlier: "He is at once the truly clever person and the stupid person's idea of the clever person."
I was glad for the opportunity to look that up!
But the phrase itself probably derives from this line, by Elizabeth Bowen about Aldous Huxley, some 75 years earlier: "He is at once the truly clever person and the stupid person's idea of the clever person."
I was glad for the opportunity to look that up!
1
I have watched Megyn Kelly several times on Fox News. She is articulate, bright, witty and beautiful. Certainly nothing wrong with any of those attributes. However, to say that her "Megyn Moments" are spontaneous flies in the face of reality of what Fox is all about, which is the script.
Everything that Fox puts out there is part of a larger, scripted message from the right. The supposed balance that they profess to espouse is scripted to the nth degree. It's entertainment, pure and simple, and nothing gets put out there that is not carefully choreographed to fit a purpose.
The "bashing" of Rove had a purpose: to show that Fox was willing to take down one of its own kingmakers. How could they not be balanced and unbiased when they were willing to "eviscerate" one of the stalwarts of their organization. They knew that Stewart and company on the left would pick up the ball and run with it for them.
They are very smart. Look at what they have the NYT doing for them: further legitimizing Fox News.
Everything that Fox puts out there is part of a larger, scripted message from the right. The supposed balance that they profess to espouse is scripted to the nth degree. It's entertainment, pure and simple, and nothing gets put out there that is not carefully choreographed to fit a purpose.
The "bashing" of Rove had a purpose: to show that Fox was willing to take down one of its own kingmakers. How could they not be balanced and unbiased when they were willing to "eviscerate" one of the stalwarts of their organization. They knew that Stewart and company on the left would pick up the ball and run with it for them.
They are very smart. Look at what they have the NYT doing for them: further legitimizing Fox News.
12
Think of all the Fox viewers flocking to read this blog.
5
She is definitely a drop dead beautiful woman. She's also incredibly smart and articulate and confident. As a former TV anchor myself I can totally understand why she is so popular. She doesn't try to act cute or dumb. I love that she covers hard news and in her career trajectory did not get stuck in enterntainment news or that "10 things in your kitchen that can kill you" alleged news that so many intelligent anchors have to do. She also dresses with style and she's sexy. So often female anchors are told they need to look like someone's mom so they are not threatening. I'm a total liberal but I love this woman because she gets to be who she is, is unapologetic, and is smart. I hope many young female journalists look to her as inspiration. Too often they start in these small TV markets and have to transform themselves into these United Way, Baby of the Week, giggling cooking segment newscasts that make women look absurd. I'm a liberal and I watch that one FOX show because of this woman. Go Megyn!!!
6
The first time I saw her she was just a guest on another FoxNews' anchor's show and was doing her lawyerly bit. She had that tough look she gets when she's gotten her teeth into something. I thought, "Who is this?!?" Brash and smart.
She is who she is. I like that too. My guess is that she's not too concerned with what her critics think of her.
I've been in that NYC studio. The energy there is unbelievable. They have a lot of freedom. Seems like an exciting place to work.
She is who she is. I like that too. My guess is that she's not too concerned with what her critics think of her.
I've been in that NYC studio. The energy there is unbelievable. They have a lot of freedom. Seems like an exciting place to work.
2
"I've been in that NYC studio."
I'll bite: What were you delivering?
I'll bite: What were you delivering?
It is intersting, that with an estimated viewership of only about 4 million combined, the three major cable news networks (MSNBC, CNN, and FOX) manage to draw so much attention (and wrath) for what amount to mostly "talk shows" disguised as news providers. With CNN, the most neutral politically, having the lowest viewership, one can only conclude that these networks serve as either a source of entertainment, therapy, or emotional validation to those of the left and right of the political spectrum.
When there isn't any "breaking news", the endless commentary, "rehashing" of the topic ad nauseam, coupled with the parade of so-called paid "experts" (who come on the shows so ill prepared as to have one believe they had either no breifing regarding the questions they would be asked or, simply didn't care) is far too tiresome and time consuming. At times when the already small viewership is really diminished, you'll probably tune in for a reality show, docu-drama, or infomercial. As a result, for most Americans, an hour of news on one of the major networks (30 minutes each local and national) without the angst, hype and melodrama seems just fine. Or, as it was so famously put; "That's the way it is.".
When there isn't any "breaking news", the endless commentary, "rehashing" of the topic ad nauseam, coupled with the parade of so-called paid "experts" (who come on the shows so ill prepared as to have one believe they had either no breifing regarding the questions they would be asked or, simply didn't care) is far too tiresome and time consuming. At times when the already small viewership is really diminished, you'll probably tune in for a reality show, docu-drama, or infomercial. As a result, for most Americans, an hour of news on one of the major networks (30 minutes each local and national) without the angst, hype and melodrama seems just fine. Or, as it was so famously put; "That's the way it is.".
1
Charles - not sure what world you are living in. You said: "With CNN, the most neutral politically,". If you can't see that CNN is left-leaning - even more so than the broadcast networks, you need to broaden your viewing habits.
4
If CNN had its druthers, it would cover nothing but airplane crashes and disease outbreaks on cruise ships.
5
I agree it is undoubtedly left leaning however, I stand by my statement. Of the three cable networks I was referring to in that paragraph, it is the most neutral (i.e. closest to the middle). I go on to describe why I prefer the broadcast networks for just that reason. Cheers.
I find it hard to believe that the “Old Gray Lady” would acquaint Morgan Kelly as anything other than a “professional journalist”. Entertainer, TV personality, or maybe even Political Hack, but she is not worthy to shine the shoes of a Barbara Walters, or for that matter even a Rosie O’Donnell or Whoopi Goldberg; that’s really saying something!
Why do we heed these people, why do we give legitimacy to Fox Propaganda, why do we accept and “put up with” liars, cheats, racists, and alternative historians with agenda of deceiving the American Public into believing against their own political, economic, and social best interest at the advantage of Rupert Murdoch’s and the Koch Brothers’ global vision?
The Times would be more Intune and should be incline to put their money where their mouth is and start a series of investigated reports on the history and effects of Fox and their audience which is fast becoming the only problem this Country is faced with, yup that’s right; in John Lennon’s words “imagine a world” without Fox Noise.
Sorry not buying it NY Times and neither should you the readers.
Why do we heed these people, why do we give legitimacy to Fox Propaganda, why do we accept and “put up with” liars, cheats, racists, and alternative historians with agenda of deceiving the American Public into believing against their own political, economic, and social best interest at the advantage of Rupert Murdoch’s and the Koch Brothers’ global vision?
The Times would be more Intune and should be incline to put their money where their mouth is and start a series of investigated reports on the history and effects of Fox and their audience which is fast becoming the only problem this Country is faced with, yup that’s right; in John Lennon’s words “imagine a world” without Fox Noise.
Sorry not buying it NY Times and neither should you the readers.
8
It could be a "co-marketing" deal on the internet. They could be mocking the New York Times on Fox News right now.
1
You said it. "Follow the money". Items on the MSNBC homepage take you to FOX Sports while, FOX takes you to CNBC business and on it goes. "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss".
1
We should be thankful for Megyn. Without her (and Hannity) the Daily Show would have to be cut from 30 minutes to 10 minutes. That Fox stars (including O'Reily) are all of Irish lineage is enough to stir up old (underserved) stereotypes of the Irish.
4
It's still shout TV, as far as I'm concerned, all about "gotcha", entertainment rather than news.
As for Joe Klein not being able to find news at 6pm that deals with government or politics, one can find a lot more online news that is up to date online than that coming from broadcast news, and with less shouting; in addition, I'm not sure where he's looking but I find plenty of politics and government on PBS, BBC, France 24 and other stations here, but not shouted.
As for Ailes' comment about "they used to laugh at us in the mainstream", Fox seemed more reasonable when it started out but went further and further into the spin zone and untruthiness zone as the Bush years progressed and into the Obama years. As for people going there for "truth", I trust them only as far as noting that something has happened (9/11) but beyond that, only those with a twisted view of the world seek truth at fox.
As for Joe Klein not being able to find news at 6pm that deals with government or politics, one can find a lot more online news that is up to date online than that coming from broadcast news, and with less shouting; in addition, I'm not sure where he's looking but I find plenty of politics and government on PBS, BBC, France 24 and other stations here, but not shouted.
As for Ailes' comment about "they used to laugh at us in the mainstream", Fox seemed more reasonable when it started out but went further and further into the spin zone and untruthiness zone as the Bush years progressed and into the Obama years. As for people going there for "truth", I trust them only as far as noting that something has happened (9/11) but beyond that, only those with a twisted view of the world seek truth at fox.
2
"“They used to laugh at us in the mainstream media,” Ailes said, “but we’re becoming the place most people go to get the truth.”
"We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do." Karl Rove
In conservative speak "truth" = "reality".
"We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do." Karl Rove
In conservative speak "truth" = "reality".
7
Unfortunately Fox news has such a long and well documented history of falsification, obfuscation and right wing partisanship that it doesn't matter who they put on the screen or what they say - it's all suspect and it can't be viewed as real news.
16
Kind of like the NY Times, except with the Times there is actual, documented evidence of falsification (see Blair, Jayson and others), obfuscation, and far leftist partisanship. The lens through which "news" is identified and presented is consistently slanted and full of half-truths. Here too, we see the pot calling the kettle black!
4
Can any part of New York City's mass-media central be trusted? What is news is not what is necessarily "news"--networks decide the "reality" of the "news" that they want to present each night, celebrities included for free. Has this changed in 60 years? Hard to tell--same story, end of story, or so it seems.
2
Brit Hume says, "Attractive blond anchorwomen who speak with a fierce authority are rare". Oh really Brit? This so-called bleach blond "attractive" woman's authority is questionable at best when she makes a distinction between ordinary "terrorists" and "bad terrorists". I didn't know their were "good" terrorists anywhere. As far as i'm concern the NYTimes wasted valuable print and hard drive space when it ran this "story". Fox News logo should be "Biased and Unbalanced News We Invent As We Go Along".
15
While there is a need for differing political views, when one watches Fox News, it is the most negative of propaganda machines. I blame them for the many false ideas that people have about the simplest of facts, e.g. the President is muslim, a socialist. You can never find the truth at Fox News, it has been the most divisive and negative lying machine in our country and has done a great deal of harm by artfully spreading lies...not the work of journalism for sure. Murdoch has severely damaged our political system.
20
"Murdoch has severely damaged our political system".
It bears repeating.
Murdoch has severely damaged our political system.
It bears repeating.
Murdoch has severely damaged our political system.
2
Megyn Kelly's a riot as a 'conservative'--except when she's not--a conservative, that is. Like when she raked a guest over the coals for not supporting family leave, or the famous "math you do as a Republican to make yourself feel better" remark to Karl Rove. My guess is that she's either incredibly venal and will say anything Fox pays her to say, or she's crazy. But I could look at her all day long... with the volume off.
2
she may have done that recently but before she became pregnant , and as i understand it, she was bitterly opposed to gov't mandated maternity leave and she made it clear on one of her broadcasts, so in my eyes, she's a hypocrite big time and changes her mind when it suits her.
16
I believe the money men of the GOP, Rupert the Fox being a main one, were pretty angry that Rove was given vast sums yet he still lost; so Megyn was just the hit woman who humiliated Rove because he lost their money betting on Mittens, a public warning from The Family for it not to happen again..
Her audience is so big because they are all old and white. Those are the only people who watch TV anymore. Other than that, cable TV news shows are a pox on knowledge and our society.
8
much the same reason why Sarah Palin is popular with those old conservative men..
6
Nothing wrong with being old, or white.
3
Ailes said, “but we’re becoming the place most people go to get the truth.”
He's at least half right. More people appear to be following Fox News regularly. I know households in which, when MK is on, no one speaks, as in a religious service.
That the audience "gets the truth", on the other hand, is problematic. No other network misrepresents facts so convincingly. Just one example: Last year, Chris Wallace is interviewing Eric Cantor and Cantor is ranting on about "the exploding national deficit." Both men must have known better but the claim went unchallenged.
The "Kelly Moments" aside, Fox News is consistent in its binary journalism. There is good and there is evil. There is no "left" but "the far left." MK blamed the closing of some government services -- access to National Monuments, White House Tours -- on Obama and called it "childish."
There aren't enough Megyn Moments in the future to make up for all the insinuations and misstatements that Fox News and its traditonal audience thrives on. But instrumentalizing hatred apparently works well.
Ailes is a genius. Fox is full of fanfares, glitze, and pretty legs. He's like the guy selling fake Rolexes on the street corner.
He's at least half right. More people appear to be following Fox News regularly. I know households in which, when MK is on, no one speaks, as in a religious service.
That the audience "gets the truth", on the other hand, is problematic. No other network misrepresents facts so convincingly. Just one example: Last year, Chris Wallace is interviewing Eric Cantor and Cantor is ranting on about "the exploding national deficit." Both men must have known better but the claim went unchallenged.
The "Kelly Moments" aside, Fox News is consistent in its binary journalism. There is good and there is evil. There is no "left" but "the far left." MK blamed the closing of some government services -- access to National Monuments, White House Tours -- on Obama and called it "childish."
There aren't enough Megyn Moments in the future to make up for all the insinuations and misstatements that Fox News and its traditonal audience thrives on. But instrumentalizing hatred apparently works well.
Ailes is a genius. Fox is full of fanfares, glitze, and pretty legs. He's like the guy selling fake Rolexes on the street corner.
11
Ailes said, “but we’re becoming the place most people go to get the truth.” Actually faux-brains go there to watch their own mirror image and hear their own voice. If success followed only truth we wouldn't have crooks repeatedly getting elected, no rich bankers and CEOs, and no terrorists killing innocent people around the world.
1
I am a hard and fast liberal but I do take the time to watch Bret Baier, O'Reilly and occasionally I hold my nose and watch Kelly because I feel it is my responsibility as an informed consumer of news to know what the other guy is thinking.
The best and most intellectually stimulating news on cable comes from MSNBC's Rachel Maddow.
The best and most intellectually stimulating news on cable comes from MSNBC's Rachel Maddow.
6
If you think the best news comes from Rachel Maddow, you are even more liberal than you say you are.
3
For all Jim Rutenberg's painstaking work, this piece's sole takeaway is that Megyn Kelly racks up viewers and rakes in money for Roger Ailes (and herself).
Not one word devoted to the quality and significance of her journalism. No scoops. No exclusive interviews with world leaders or figureheads. No discourse- or national policy altering stories. No whistleblowing. Granted, she unraveled the rape allegations against Duke's lacrosse players. (Good work, I suppose.) Curious irony the high-school aptitude test said she's best suited to news and yet Syracuse rejected her from its communications program.
All that money and resources at FOX, and nothing to equal Edward R. Murrow's showdown with Joseph McCarthy; or Walter Cronkite's work---in print (his first-hand account of D-Day) or television (look up his top 10 broadcasts on Legacy.com); Barbara Walter's 1977 joint interview with Anwar Al Sadat and Menachem Begin; Diane Sawyer's 1990 interview with Saddam Hussein; Mike Wallace's segment "The Hate That Hate Produced", on the Nation of Islam and introducing (white) America to Elijah Muhammed and Malcolm X; Dan Rather's work in VietNam...the list is endless.
Alas, Megyn Kelly is a shining example of how much television broadcast journalism has deteriorated.
Not one word devoted to the quality and significance of her journalism. No scoops. No exclusive interviews with world leaders or figureheads. No discourse- or national policy altering stories. No whistleblowing. Granted, she unraveled the rape allegations against Duke's lacrosse players. (Good work, I suppose.) Curious irony the high-school aptitude test said she's best suited to news and yet Syracuse rejected her from its communications program.
All that money and resources at FOX, and nothing to equal Edward R. Murrow's showdown with Joseph McCarthy; or Walter Cronkite's work---in print (his first-hand account of D-Day) or television (look up his top 10 broadcasts on Legacy.com); Barbara Walter's 1977 joint interview with Anwar Al Sadat and Menachem Begin; Diane Sawyer's 1990 interview with Saddam Hussein; Mike Wallace's segment "The Hate That Hate Produced", on the Nation of Islam and introducing (white) America to Elijah Muhammed and Malcolm X; Dan Rather's work in VietNam...the list is endless.
Alas, Megyn Kelly is a shining example of how much television broadcast journalism has deteriorated.
18
If Cronkite or any other news anchor made a mistake or got a fact wrong, there would be national headlines the next day. Fox News blithely lies or fabricates slanted, fact-free stories every hour on the hour, and that's considered business as usual.
The long run will show Ailes having done more to damage Conservatism than he did to help it. Fox turned its rigor to fun, its thinking to induction, and its moral duty into exploitation.
7
In the rest of the world a 'Megyn Moment' would be a sign that a helping professional (educator, social worker, witch doctor) needs to be engaged to figure out what part of the neural wiring is stuck.
3
It doesn't surprise me that she would have worked for MSNBC many years ago. In 1997 that was the only news station I watched because I thought they were terrific (I absolutely loved [believe it or not] Hardball). After 911 they began to change, and when Keith Olbermann was hired (around 2003, I believe) they completely lost me. Chris Matthews just seemed to have lost his mind, not to mention that Lawrence O'Donnell seems as though he wants to bust somebody with a right cross. There's no one else there whose name I will even mention.
5
I have occasionally watched the Kelly show and find her to be a perfect example of what I call political pornography -- newscasts whose primary purpose is to arouse people but are in fact without value. Her "Megyn moments" are designed precisely to arouse. They are not enlightening, they do not provide analysis and they don't provide useful information for those of us who want to find solutions to what ails us. It is all about arousal.
And Megyn Kelly, with her plastic skin and perfect hair, is the perfect Barbie doll to facilitate the response. And, she is wealthy, a goal she has had since her youth, apparently.
What she is not is a credible contributor to our national debate.
I can't even comprehend what a discuss must be like around the table when she and her staff are deciding on how to fill the time. Would someone please record it and post on YouTube? I am unconvinced anyone at Fox has anything other than arousal and money as their life's purpose.
And Megyn Kelly, with her plastic skin and perfect hair, is the perfect Barbie doll to facilitate the response. And, she is wealthy, a goal she has had since her youth, apparently.
What she is not is a credible contributor to our national debate.
I can't even comprehend what a discuss must be like around the table when she and her staff are deciding on how to fill the time. Would someone please record it and post on YouTube? I am unconvinced anyone at Fox has anything other than arousal and money as their life's purpose.
30
Avoid men who watch Fox News. Everyone seems to agree that Fox News lies, but what's even worse is what Fox is doing to society. Fox News has made a whole generation of Republican men not just ill-informed, but shockingly disrespectful. Fox anchors, including Megyn Kelly, interrupt, laugh at and shout down guests who disagree, and a whole generation of Republicans at work and in politics have been taught to act the same way. Fox is why things are getting ugly and polarized. Fox is why Republicans won't compromise with Democrats any more. Even in our own homes Republican men shout down guests, wives, and their own children. Women who care about Democratic values like the environment, health, education, clean air, and women who want to raise their sons to treat others with respect, would be well advised to avoid men who watch Fox News entirely. And if it's too late, at least turn it off at home for the sake of your sons.
67
I think most people (oer I hope) so, that this programming is 'news entertainment' , its counterparts are Chis Matthews and others. Each side has its own ax to grind and auidence to attract, I for one, no longer suffer the affirmation of news-for-profit entertainment to affect my life or sway my opinions. I try and research issues to discern the facts, ugly and unpopular as these may be, but so be it.
I confess to never having seen Megyn Kelly's show owing to the much deserved reputation of bias of the network but judging from this article she appears to have succeeded in her chosen profession by shoving unexpected truths in the face of biased reporting which is the bedrock staple of Faux News. As refreshing as that may seem to some it does little to address the underlying malaise of news reporting in general which is the unrelenting march toward infotainment substituting for news. The occassional flash of light in a den of darkness does not brighten the room. It may grab your attention momentarily but unless it maintains a steady glow it cannot lead to a more informed electorate which is the stated goal of our constitutionally protected free press. Instead it is merely another distraction contributing to a dumbing down of the news avoiding the thoughtful analysis required to make rational decisions about serious issues affecting us all.
If Mr. Ailes goal is really represented by icons like Walter Cronkite, Dianne Sawyer, and Barbera Walters then I think that he has a long way to go.
If Mr. Ailes goal is really represented by icons like Walter Cronkite, Dianne Sawyer, and Barbera Walters then I think that he has a long way to go.
6
"were'e the place where people go to get the truth" "fair and balanced news" How stupid does Fox News think people are?
A little over 2 million people watch Fox News. There are approximately 232 million people over the age of 20 in this country so that equates .008% of this group that watches Fox News.
She was not hired for her brains, she was hired for her looks and glossy lipstick. CNN has always picked brains over beauty from the start. Do you think Candy Crowley could get a job at Fox News?
Remember this is the network that allowed Glen Beck to call Obama a racist, reported an Acorn worker had murdered her husband and gave advice on how to run a brothel, that same sex marriage is the same as incest…….
A little over 2 million people watch Fox News. There are approximately 232 million people over the age of 20 in this country so that equates .008% of this group that watches Fox News.
She was not hired for her brains, she was hired for her looks and glossy lipstick. CNN has always picked brains over beauty from the start. Do you think Candy Crowley could get a job at Fox News?
Remember this is the network that allowed Glen Beck to call Obama a racist, reported an Acorn worker had murdered her husband and gave advice on how to run a brothel, that same sex marriage is the same as incest…….
19
Just a few comments:
First, comparing the number of people who watch Fox (2 million) to the population of people in the US over the age of 20 (232 million) misses the point. You try to minimize the viewership by saying that Fox has only .008% of the potential audience, but the fact is that that figure represents at least 3x the viewership of CNN or MSNBC; that is the comparison that matters.
Second, the ACORN worker actually did give advice on how to run a brothel.
Third, you complain that Fox is "the network that ALLOWED Glen Beck to call Obama a racist..." Let me guess: last week you were saying "Je suis Charlie," and proclaiming the virtues of free speech (at least for those who agree with you).
Fourth, you say "CNN has always picked brains over beauty..." Really? What a wonderful coincidence for most of the women of CNN. Also, apparently you have never listened to Andrew Cuomo or Don Lemon.
Last, 2 million out of 232 million is .8%, not .008%.
First, comparing the number of people who watch Fox (2 million) to the population of people in the US over the age of 20 (232 million) misses the point. You try to minimize the viewership by saying that Fox has only .008% of the potential audience, but the fact is that that figure represents at least 3x the viewership of CNN or MSNBC; that is the comparison that matters.
Second, the ACORN worker actually did give advice on how to run a brothel.
Third, you complain that Fox is "the network that ALLOWED Glen Beck to call Obama a racist..." Let me guess: last week you were saying "Je suis Charlie," and proclaiming the virtues of free speech (at least for those who agree with you).
Fourth, you say "CNN has always picked brains over beauty..." Really? What a wonderful coincidence for most of the women of CNN. Also, apparently you have never listened to Andrew Cuomo or Don Lemon.
Last, 2 million out of 232 million is .8%, not .008%.
8
.8%, sorry
1
The question is not that Fox News is entitled to free speech, my problem is they misrepresent what they do. MSNBC is honest when is says it a liberal station, they do not purport to be fair and balanced, Fox does. You only have to watch it to see that is not true. As far as the numbers of viewers being greater than CNN and MSNBC that is a pretty low number to beat. The total number of people watching CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News is less than 3 million.
Surveys have shown that Fox News watchers are less informed. Distorting the News is not balanced. I would have respect for them of they just admitted they were a a stone promoting conservative views.
Surveys have shown that Fox News watchers are less informed. Distorting the News is not balanced. I would have respect for them of they just admitted they were a a stone promoting conservative views.
She's a great performer and a very bright person. Her shift to 'sorta-true' coverage as opposed to FAUX'S regular 'absolute baloney' is because the coveted younger viewership has other options (Daily Show, Internet, etc) for information and is less willing to gulp down the FAUX kool aid without at least a nod to reality. But a nod is all she's offering. Cult of personality time.
11
As a culture evolves intellectually, conservative dogma is abandoned and inclusive progressive positions are adopted. It has been so since the beginning of recorded history. So why pay attention to this vestigial entity called Fox news and its attempt to glamorize regressive intolerant thought? Does it make people somehow feel protected?
7
Sparkle, spontaneity, energy, and beauty all rolled into one in lucky Megyn. I like watching her delivering news.
5
News is sparkly beauty, and sparkly beauty is news then? Ah, to live in the world of My Little Pony.
7
Both "Network" and "Broadcast News" predicted this moment. Most news, News Hour on PBS being one notable exception, has become about inciting outrage and manipulating the emotions of the audience. Nuance and thoughtful analysis are missing and our democracy is suffering for it.
10
We are a divided country and politics has become a spectator sport, which is why CNN is doing so poorly. And why Ailes who has mastered the art of pushing the audience's buttons to evoke the desired emotional response, reminiscent of Vince McMahon of WWE, is thriving.
6
The depressing thing about these comments is the number of apparently literate people who by inference at least depend upon cable news for the view of the world. Read some magazines, read some books. read some columnists. Cable TV news, with its penchant for breathless "Breaking News," is journalistic junk food.
19
Putting a pretty face on lies and biased news does not negate the lies and biased news. I only wish the other "alternative" news organizations in the U.S. received as much free publicity as FOX does.
15
Well may this female SUNY alum (don't pity us state college types) will have to give up her unhealthy habit of watching CNN and try Megan the 1% of time she is on? I have tried watching Fox occasionally, but the likes of Rove, Ailes, and O'Reilly don't encourage me to hang out there.
2
For the posters who are somehow surprised that Megyn Kelly's famous walk to the decision desk on Election Night 2912 was rehearsed: You clearly didn't watch. Ms Kelly discussed the fact that the walk had been rehearsed DURING THE ACTUAL ON AIR WALK. Go ahead and watch the video. She was totally forthright that they had planned to do this if there were questions about decisions.
I'm no fan of Fox. I'm an MSNBC kind of gal ( but I'll take a look at fox from tine to time) and I agree with Ms Kelly that she would have done just fine at msnbc.
I'm no fan of Fox. I'm an MSNBC kind of gal ( but I'll take a look at fox from tine to time) and I agree with Ms Kelly that she would have done just fine at msnbc.
4
I started watching Fox News after the 2008 election, to understand what went wrong, and since then I watch the O'Reilly Factor every night. MK often appeared on the Factor and still does, but I do not watch her show, as I have had enough news by then, and besides she repeats most of the stories already magnificently told by Bill O'Reilly. I usually watch one of the traditional news shows as well, mainly CBS with Scot Pelley, since he seems to less obviously partisan than ABC and NBC. I also listen to NPR while driving to and from work. Bill O'Reilly, however, reports and provides unparalleled analysis of issues ignored by ABC, CBS, NBC, and NPR. For me, FOX News is icing on the news cake. Go, Fox, go!
11
Then you'll love his next book, "Killing Charlie."
2
Actually I have read each of Bill O'Reilly's books. Each are magnificent, well researched, and well written.
A larger share of a shrinking market is not something to cheer about.
7
How is Fox any different from MSNBC? Aside from which political party they've aligned themselves with, there's no difference. They are two sides of one coin. It's so tiresome endlessly hearing the American political divide being framed as Left = Reason, Educated, Intelligent, Broad-minded and Fair vs. Right = Sensationalistic, Ignorant, Mentally challenged, Racist, and Corrupt. For those of you who will now snarl about the stupid no-go zone story, I would point you to Chris Matthews breaking down in tears over his "duty as an American" to get Barack Obama elected. As long as corporate controlled media conglomerates get away with pedaling this trope, and you find yourselves foaming at the mouth about how awful the "other side" is, you are in their grip. And they will continue to get away with their real agenda which you won't find reported in any news outlet anywhere. Wake. Up.
13
Bill O'Reilly is just about due for a Hannibal Buress/Bill Cosby moment. By that, I mean that Roger Ailes' top "reporter", Mr. O'Reilly, had some sexual predatory problems of his own years ago. Mr Ailes just paid for it to go away. It was cheap in the long run. Try Googling Bill O'Reilly and sexual harassment.
9
Wow! The Megyn Kelly moment! She actually has the temerity to call out guests who spew nonsense, whether it is congruent with a conservative or a liberal worldview! Just think, if everyone in media would learn how to do that, journalism might even become respectable again!
11
The takeaway is "either Fox or MSNBC"
1
Or, obviously: Neither.
6
Megan Kelly is an entertainer at the top of Murdoch's propaganda machine. She also supplanted Hannity who was more suited to Worldwide Wrestling Federation shows.
Kelly is very intelligent and to some, attractive but let's be clear she is constantly pushing Roger Ailes's not-so-cleverly cloaked Republican narrative and agenda. Fox News are masters at it and it is a money making machine.
Almost all of the cable and broadcast news jockeys are simply entertainers.
The only journalistically sound newscast on television is PBS's NewsHour.
Yet if you want to be entertained and informed, there's clearly a lot to choose from including John Stewart and now Larry Wilmore.
Cable news is like eating the worst junk food diet. Broadcast News might make one feel impotent and neurotic with all of the "enhancement" and pharma spots.
Read more, think more and watch less cable tv news. I promise you will be a much happier, informed and more fulfilled person.
Kelly is very intelligent and to some, attractive but let's be clear she is constantly pushing Roger Ailes's not-so-cleverly cloaked Republican narrative and agenda. Fox News are masters at it and it is a money making machine.
Almost all of the cable and broadcast news jockeys are simply entertainers.
The only journalistically sound newscast on television is PBS's NewsHour.
Yet if you want to be entertained and informed, there's clearly a lot to choose from including John Stewart and now Larry Wilmore.
Cable news is like eating the worst junk food diet. Broadcast News might make one feel impotent and neurotic with all of the "enhancement" and pharma spots.
Read more, think more and watch less cable tv news. I promise you will be a much happier, informed and more fulfilled person.
7
As long as she's not getting equal pay for her work, I'm okay with it.
8
"In her senior yearbook, Megyn listed her future hopes in three words: 'College, government, wealth.'" - that is just something someone whose value system was formed in Reagan Administration would say. I wonder if her father hadn't died in late 1985 and money hadn't subsequently been tight, if she'd have grown up leaning left. A side note: Mike Gallagher was also on Albany radio she might have listened to him as I occassionally did when I lived there for 30 years. She's admirable, but Stewart was right calling her out on her hypocrisy regarding family leave... BTW, the Family Medical Leave Act was why Clinton was elected.
4
I purposely turned switched over to FOX News on Election Night in 2012, just to see Rove eat some crow. To learn that Kelly's "live walk to the decision desk" (which appeared awkward at the time - her heels causing difficulty on the set) was rehearsed only reinforces the "entertainment" value of FOX News. She and Shepard Smith are looking for, and will probably gain, greater public profiles beyond FOX.
8
Displaying an occasional moment of candor is not going to make up for the other 99% of biased, scripted news coverage. Kelly may be smart and ambitious, but this isn't beneficial to anything but her own pursuit of power and money in her current job. I do tune into Fox News when I am making the rounds of the news channels, and when I see her, she is almost always communicating the highly biased Fox News viewpoint, not countering it.
14
'I'm a soulless lawyer. Give me any opinion and I can argue it.'
~ Megyn Kelly
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/megyn_kelly.html#ojGqwVbs7Ru...
~ Megyn Kelly
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/megyn_kelly.html#ojGqwVbs7Ru...
6
When can the NYTimes draw a less predictable audience? People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
11
More cliche is the best you can do? and, then talk about a "predictable audience."
2
Enjoyed the story... I knew Megyn was driven by the way she carries herself. (Although I think she should be a little bit more laid back at times.) I knew she was smart by her background and the way she does her show. I knew she was beautiful: I have eyes. I didn't know she have 3 children. Great. And I knew the NYT readers were left leaning and so I enjoyed reading their biased comments. Too bad they don't read both sides of the arguments. Sure Fox leans to the right, but the rest all lean to the left. To be informed you need to read at least a little from all sides. That includes the editors of the NYT. I look at a little bit of Fox, a little of Charlie Rose, a little of NBC, CBS, CNN and PBS. Also a wide selection of Internet news. With all that I have to remind myself that all this is NEWS, not the everyday reality. All news is biased including NYT, Charlie and Fox. Get over it NYT readers. Get over it. Look at FOX a few time a week: it won't kill you!
8
I'm no Fox fan but anyone who shuts down Karl Rove as Megyn did on Election Night 2012 is at least somewhat okay. She then lost me with "Santa and Jesus were white, y'all."
Does Fox hire any women who aren't blond? Well, there was Sarah Palin but that isn't saying much.
Does Fox hire any women who aren't blond? Well, there was Sarah Palin but that isn't saying much.
4
That quote is particularly appalling in a variety of ways really. Santa never existed, Jesus was never white, and there's nothing particularly vital about being white to begin with. So her quote sounds both racist and ignorant.
15
I can not in good conscience watch FOX news. I find the stories, presentation and general attitudes scary, ill informed and wrong. I even had FOX news channel blocked from my Fios tv. My suggestion is dump FOX from your Cable channels.
18
Fox News is a cable propagandist regardless of the messenger; they are chiefly responsible for widening balkanization, since Obama's election, amongst whites and blacks.
They have cynically hired some of the best academic and scholastic minds to influence even those who are most in need of greater equality, but instead because of the 'X' factor rebel against their own interest.
Ms. Megyn Kelly (not unlike a few blacks on their payroll who are periodically) viewed on Fox's sets represents distractions to the editorial mean. It is the old bait and switch, what is up is not really, so listen to what I say it is; thus don't believe your lying eyes.
It is almost scary to even write about this in a period of underlying political chasm and worse to see in this vein Newton's laws at work. However, those running this network should reflect on other times, and its consequences, when powers used media to create 'their' narrative and things got out of hand.
They have cynically hired some of the best academic and scholastic minds to influence even those who are most in need of greater equality, but instead because of the 'X' factor rebel against their own interest.
Ms. Megyn Kelly (not unlike a few blacks on their payroll who are periodically) viewed on Fox's sets represents distractions to the editorial mean. It is the old bait and switch, what is up is not really, so listen to what I say it is; thus don't believe your lying eyes.
It is almost scary to even write about this in a period of underlying political chasm and worse to see in this vein Newton's laws at work. However, those running this network should reflect on other times, and its consequences, when powers used media to create 'their' narrative and things got out of hand.
5
And Al Sharpton is what over at MSNBC???? Get real Parik. Sharpton is a tax dodger, race baiter and clown all wrapped up into one package. Great talent over at MSNBC.
8
We get it, Laura, you don't like Al Sharpton. But it is childish to respond to criticism by saying "he does it, too." Parik is criticizing Fox News, and I don't see any recommendation for MSNBC in his comment. When the news article is about Al Sharpton, your opinion will be welcomed.
12
Thanks for the advice Janet, but I choose to decline it as many have posted here MSNBC has been mentioned and since Sharpton is one of the many talking heads over there I feel the comment is warranted. Ever hear of the First Ammendment?
3
Sorry. Attractive and smart, with just enough leash to appear to be independant, but still a stooge for the most illigitimate "news" organization on the planet. She is the lipstick on the pig.
21
If only Fox News changes its name to 'Faux News', everything will be as it should be. (And yes, Megyn Kelly will remain perfect for the job!)
8
They will give anyone a newscaster position. Sharpton is the worse and he has an hour slot. He doesn't speak for blacks if that's what folks think. Of course there are some but not those who are fully enlightened. He is a "shill" for white establishment, making cash settlements pretending to want "change" . He would be out of business if there was significant change.
This is all said to say, who you know is what gets you a newscaster position not what you know. Hence Megan Kelly, and the crude Sharpton....
This is all said to say, who you know is what gets you a newscaster position not what you know. Hence Megan Kelly, and the crude Sharpton....
4
She seems smart, so surely it must not be too unexpected that people question her choice to work at a trashy propaganda machine, despite her prim contention that such a line of inquiry is "not polite dinner conversation.”
13
It is unexpected that she would be questioned by a likely follower of the NY Times, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC who believe that all news contrary to the single left-wing liberal voice is unacceptable.
One network. Just one network often has an opposing view and brings news and a viewpoint the others NEVER cover or take the democratic party position in defense.
Why are liberals so afraid? It's as if they are emotionally and ideologically attached to certain positions and cannot bear to hear an alternative view. Closed minded in a way that is usually an insult directed at conservatives.
True believers like neither facts or alternatives. Conservatives are shut down on college campuses (never left wingers) and ignored by the liberal media complex. Actually watch FOX news. It is loaded with Liberals stating their positions. On all of the other media you will find the token conservative, and often not a good spokesman for the that side.
Most important, Liberals need the competition to improve the quality of their arguments. For too long they could say almost anything, no matter how silly as long as it fit into the left-wing camp, and they were unchallenged.
The 'non-thinking Liberal' is now much more common than a reflexive conservative
One network. Just one network often has an opposing view and brings news and a viewpoint the others NEVER cover or take the democratic party position in defense.
Why are liberals so afraid? It's as if they are emotionally and ideologically attached to certain positions and cannot bear to hear an alternative view. Closed minded in a way that is usually an insult directed at conservatives.
True believers like neither facts or alternatives. Conservatives are shut down on college campuses (never left wingers) and ignored by the liberal media complex. Actually watch FOX news. It is loaded with Liberals stating their positions. On all of the other media you will find the token conservative, and often not a good spokesman for the that side.
Most important, Liberals need the competition to improve the quality of their arguments. For too long they could say almost anything, no matter how silly as long as it fit into the left-wing camp, and they were unchallenged.
The 'non-thinking Liberal' is now much more common than a reflexive conservative
13
All you folks with the snide comments who have actually watched FNC no more than one hour in the last year run to the port side. But don't forget your life jackets. You'll need them when the boat capsizes.
Now all those who watch MSNBC regularly also run to the same side. The boat will flip faster than an F16.
Sure Fox leans sharp right in their editorial view. What do you think MSNBC does? I watch Rachel Maddow, Ronan Farrow, Chris Mathews and company regularly. The only one I just cannot stomach is Al Sharpton. So I can say with some authority that there is no one on Fox (except maybe Hannity) as rigidly ideological as anyone on MSNBC.
I can draw similar contrasts with CNN, ABC, NBC and CBS.
My point is that, if you actually want to get both sides of the issues, you have to listen to both sides, not sit in one rooting section and snipe constantly at the other. If you steep yourselves in the arguments of a single ideology, you eventually end up in the USSR or the Spanish Inquisition. Can we please get some balance in our search for solutions to social issues?
Now all those who watch MSNBC regularly also run to the same side. The boat will flip faster than an F16.
Sure Fox leans sharp right in their editorial view. What do you think MSNBC does? I watch Rachel Maddow, Ronan Farrow, Chris Mathews and company regularly. The only one I just cannot stomach is Al Sharpton. So I can say with some authority that there is no one on Fox (except maybe Hannity) as rigidly ideological as anyone on MSNBC.
I can draw similar contrasts with CNN, ABC, NBC and CBS.
My point is that, if you actually want to get both sides of the issues, you have to listen to both sides, not sit in one rooting section and snipe constantly at the other. If you steep yourselves in the arguments of a single ideology, you eventually end up in the USSR or the Spanish Inquisition. Can we please get some balance in our search for solutions to social issues?
164
I agree it is wise to listen to both sides but FOX is a very bad example of conservatism. Lying, as FOX does quite often, is not the news. In several studies on broadcasting it was found that people who watch FOX news were the most poorly informed in America so unless you want to be very poorly informed don't watch FOX but if you want entertainment that is very funny Watch FOX. Some of their comedians are hilarious.
10
The fact that Fox is literally run by a guy who was a paid political propagandist for decades, sets Fox apart in a way that really isn't something to brag about. As has been illustrated with the case of the Obama "Madrassas" story, or more recently the case with "No-Go Zones" Fox has a reckless disregard for factual accuracy, which goes beyond a difference of opinion or point of view. Generally cable news stinks, because of economic constraints -- it is cheaper to produce opinion shows than it is to do investigative, original reporting. But the issue with Fox isn't just that it presents a different point of view -- it also plays by a different set of rules when it comes to factual accuracy. It functions less like a news organization, and more like a PR firm.
8
Instead of getting both sides, how about getting the News? I'm not interested in watching political advertising disguised as news.
7
Sour grapes from a lot of NYT readers. Ms. Kelly does an excellent job on her show night after night. Fox is putting a woman front and center, all the while killing it in the ratings, and all the readers here can do is howl.
14
Indeed we howl! What a divine comedy Republicans have made of life.
5
Steve, tragic comedy more like it.
2
Frankly, I've detected an edgy mean spiritedness to her shtick!..While that might fit in, with a supposed large number of middle aged men today, this is one who doesn't buy it! Also this preoccupation with blondes has always puzzled me! Especially, as in the case with this over lipsticked one...Where's the consistently thoughtful political beef here?! Let me tell you, in this atmosphere, it is becoming increasingly difficult to be a classic positive role model, out there today!!!
4
Ms Kelly is not worthy as a journalist to take up space in one of our finest news papers. The NY Times draws readers like me because of its excellent reporting, writers, and features, to mention just a few accolades. I guess what I am trying to say is please spare this reader of the likes of Megyn Kelly. Any so-called journalist with a sense of fairness and honesty, yet alone ethics, would not work, or rather "star", on Fox News. It's theater, feeding on those viewers who choose to remain uninformed and close-minded.
17
“They used to laugh at us in the mainstream media,” Ailes said, “but we’re becoming the place most people go to get the truth.”
Right, truth like there being "no-go zones" in France and England - a completely unbelievable concept. But hey, someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't see clips of Megyn using that term. Not that she did anything to debunk it either though.
Right, truth like there being "no-go zones" in France and England - a completely unbelievable concept. But hey, someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't see clips of Megyn using that term. Not that she did anything to debunk it either though.
8
Actually, didn't that story originate on 60 minutes?
1
What has happened here at the New York Times? Have you accepted Fox news as journalism? Where, in this situation of considering Fox is news, does Kelly's place in the spectrum of quality reporting belong? New York Times, get back to the news.
17
The refusal of conservatives to truly connect the dots via science on a plethora of issues is the existential threat of our generation. Megyn Kelly lending credibility through fleeting moments challenging ideologues makes the problem worse by pandering to squash the seed of doubt in viewers that have some reservations on the "truthiness" of Fox.
Think of it this way: in the past, American homogeneity (i.e. the dominance of the christian white male power structure) allowed the country to keep humming along. Now that oppressive forces like racims and sexism are on the run and true pluralism is on the rise, objectivity MUST reign if we are to meet the technical challenges of the future. Fox News, in this sense, is a great traitor to humanity, not because of the conservative slant of opinions, but via the use of propaganda-like methods to put ideology before truth. The devil is a woman in a blue dress and a man in finely tailored suit.
Think of it this way: in the past, American homogeneity (i.e. the dominance of the christian white male power structure) allowed the country to keep humming along. Now that oppressive forces like racims and sexism are on the run and true pluralism is on the rise, objectivity MUST reign if we are to meet the technical challenges of the future. Fox News, in this sense, is a great traitor to humanity, not because of the conservative slant of opinions, but via the use of propaganda-like methods to put ideology before truth. The devil is a woman in a blue dress and a man in finely tailored suit.
9
"Fox producers had rehearsed a live walk to the “decision desk,” the conference room where Fox’s election analysts did their work, three days earlier."
And we all bought it, hook, line, and sinker.
And we all bought it, hook, line, and sinker.
6
What are you talking about? Ms Kelly stated explicitly DURING HER LIVE ON CAMERA Walk that she had rehearsed it ( she noted that there were audio problem during the rehearsal and the exact point in the walk where she lost her audio feed during rehearsal). Whatever Fox's other issues Ms Kelly was completely open about the fact that she had rehearsed walking to the decision room if there were any questions about a call. Fox may trying to get you to buy " fair and balanced" ( I wonder at times if that's satire). But they were fully honest and open about this.
5
It is pretty amazing that the NYT could not only write this uncritical an article, but also coin a term ("Megyn Kelly moment") for someone like Kelly when Fox News has had a huge and very detrimental effect on politics with lies, inflammatory rhetoric, and fearmongering. If Kelly occasionally strays from the party line into the outskirts of truth and/or real journalism, that is a laudable thing only if it is leading the entire Fox News staff in a better direction. More likely, Kelly is allowed to ask the occasional hard question because it gives people like this author a tiny shred of evidence that can be used to answer or distract from criticism of Fox News. It is interesting that this article is run on a day when my Facebook is full of links about the Paris mayor suing Fox over the "no go" zone lie.
This article is almost entirely lacking context. The power that Fox News has to spread lies and inflame anger is appalling and Megyn Kelly is a part of that. It would be difficult to over-estimate the harm that Fox News has done.
This reminds me of one of my favorite movies of all time: Broadcast News. At the time, the concern - about TV news becoming entertainment rather than news and corrupted by dishonesty - seemed overblown. Reality is far worse (and less funny) than Broadcast News predicted.
This article is almost entirely lacking context. The power that Fox News has to spread lies and inflame anger is appalling and Megyn Kelly is a part of that. It would be difficult to over-estimate the harm that Fox News has done.
This reminds me of one of my favorite movies of all time: Broadcast News. At the time, the concern - about TV news becoming entertainment rather than news and corrupted by dishonesty - seemed overblown. Reality is far worse (and less funny) than Broadcast News predicted.
9
Wow...one could address these same comment to the ranters on MSNBC, but wouldn't of course. You know who they are. So much for independent thought.
4
“They used to laugh at us in the mainstream media,” Ailes said, “but we’re becoming the place most people go to get the truth.”
No Roger, I'm afraid they are probably still laughing, as am I, at your above-quoted statement. The getting of truth is obviously not the mission of Fox News and never was, as even a knucklehead like me can see. Ms. Kelly's shrewdly ambitious occasional departure from the true mission of Fox News, which is the promotion of Republican candidates and values, is a welcome breath of much-needed fresh air within the relentlessly dogmatic daily news coverage and analysis of Ailes's devotees. Let's hope she continues to show more of those moments of intellectual and political independence called "Megyn moments". She seems far too bright and mentally tough to feel obliged to continue toeing the right-wing ideological line Ailes has set down for all of the other talking clowns at Fox News.
No Roger, I'm afraid they are probably still laughing, as am I, at your above-quoted statement. The getting of truth is obviously not the mission of Fox News and never was, as even a knucklehead like me can see. Ms. Kelly's shrewdly ambitious occasional departure from the true mission of Fox News, which is the promotion of Republican candidates and values, is a welcome breath of much-needed fresh air within the relentlessly dogmatic daily news coverage and analysis of Ailes's devotees. Let's hope she continues to show more of those moments of intellectual and political independence called "Megyn moments". She seems far too bright and mentally tough to feel obliged to continue toeing the right-wing ideological line Ailes has set down for all of the other talking clowns at Fox News.
2
You've got to look spontaneous while reading a script from a teleprompter to make it in the TV newscasting business.
4
Well it's worked out just dandy for our President. He can thank his lucky stars for that teleprompter.
4
Well, Laura, as if no other president, or for that matter any other politician has ever used a teleprompter. Perhaps you've been watching to much Faux "news"!
5
It would be a curious question to see what would happen to MK if she started to slyly support Obamacare, restructuring the tax code to make it more equitable, recent executive orders on immigration...etc.
2
I don't watch Fox news except when there's a plane crash somewhere and CNN loses all interest in covering anything else. BUT, for those of you who are quick to point out the "hectoring," partisan, inflammatory tone from Fox news - I would like to point out any single Maureen Dowd column on any single day. Further, The Times can hardly claim to be squeaky clean in the political slant department. Are you forgetting the shameful, slanderous and entirely false page one report about John McCain having an illicit affair? Just before the 2008 election?? Oh, that's right... when the NY Times lies and slanders, the means justifies the ends because they have a sacred duty to protect idiotic Americans from themselves.... Typical hypocrisy of the hard left.
8
And I thought the Times was trying to make McCain look virile.
4
If she wasn't blond and pretty, you wouldn't have written this article. Shame on you!
13
Congratulations Megyn Kelly for your successes.
You are just the type of person who the dour sour puss liberal lefties love to hate--self made, smart, attractive, and successful.
You are just the type of person who the dour sour puss liberal lefties love to hate--self made, smart, attractive, and successful.
7
A thousand recommends to you, JJ!!
2
Oh, come on...she's just more fodder for the grist mill that happens to call itself media; another ambitious theatrical creature happily in the entertainment pit, pandering for attention and approval and making money.
3
Most people out here are Republican, and watch Fox. We all mostly Scandinavian out here, so another tall blond isn't a big fuss. Not sure why she had to have an article written about her. Your article attempts to give her legitimacy as a journalist, not sure why you did that. I think the viewers know it's all about entertainment. ratings and money. Her viewers don't consider her a journalist. They know she is an entertainer.
4
I think that you may be overlooking the analysis of the appeal of Megyn taking down Karl Rove. There are many in the Republican Party who completely HATE Karl Rove. He is the exact embodiment of all that is wrong with the Republican Party. He is the poster boy for a bygone Republican Era. He is, as we like to call them, a "Repubic". There is a synonym for this; RINO (Republican In Name Only).
The Party of Abe Lincoln, the party of truth and emancipation, the party of Freedom, the party of "Leave Me The Heck Alone!" is NOT the Modern Republican Party. There are those from within that are trying to take over and make a distinct difference. Until that happens, the socialist wing of the Republican Party will continue to steer us as "Democrat Light".
The Party of Abe Lincoln, the party of truth and emancipation, the party of Freedom, the party of "Leave Me The Heck Alone!" is NOT the Modern Republican Party. There are those from within that are trying to take over and make a distinct difference. Until that happens, the socialist wing of the Republican Party will continue to steer us as "Democrat Light".
There's no analysis just opportunism -- like pounding the drums of war --
VERY profitable
VERY profitable
4
Fox is tabloid and will always be tabloid. It doesn't matter what side they're on
as long as the conversation can be negatively controversial. Sad and difficult to know if FOX has lowered the American public to emotional ignorance , or the American public has been this way all along. In any case FOX fortunes are being made, while the consuming public continues to get burned.
as long as the conversation can be negatively controversial. Sad and difficult to know if FOX has lowered the American public to emotional ignorance , or the American public has been this way all along. In any case FOX fortunes are being made, while the consuming public continues to get burned.
5
She's dangerous.....her good looks and entitled sense of authority make folks actually believe she is giving the news.
6
That this person makes the front page of the NYT as 'news' shows how debased the paper has become. Someone has must have shelled out a pretty penny to have this article placed front and center. Shedding a bright light on an anchor at a network honored with the most misinformed viewership of any network?
Good grief. Someone call Ron Burgundy.
Good grief. Someone call Ron Burgundy.
6
Fox News is not journalism. Journalism is where unbiased anchors and investigators report facts, and editorials are separated from news. Fox News does such a famously poor job of reporting facts that people who watch Fox News are less informed than people who don't watch news at all.
Roger Ailes is a Republican party hack who dreamed up Fox New as a Republican campaign ad to run 24/7. The poll data on Fox News viewers is that 97 percent do not approve of Obama. So "fair and balanced" means somewhere been disapproval and hatred of our Democratic President. Why do Republicans deny the facts on global warming? Because Fox News gives half its airtime to extremist outliers, because the Republican party represents the fossil-fuel industrialists and King Coal McConnell who only care about profits. Fox News is a threat to Democracy, if not survival because without accurate news we will not make prudent policy choices.
But as if lying about facts isn't enough, Fox News models just awful behavior. Fox News anchors like Megyn Kelly interrupt, laugh at and shout down guests who disagree, and now a whole generation of Republicans treat colleagues at work and in politics the same way. Here at home Republicans shout down guests, wives, and children who speak up for Democratic values such as clean air. Women who have Democratic values or who want to raise their sons to treat others with respect might want to avoid men who watch Fox News, and turn it off at home.
Roger Ailes is a Republican party hack who dreamed up Fox New as a Republican campaign ad to run 24/7. The poll data on Fox News viewers is that 97 percent do not approve of Obama. So "fair and balanced" means somewhere been disapproval and hatred of our Democratic President. Why do Republicans deny the facts on global warming? Because Fox News gives half its airtime to extremist outliers, because the Republican party represents the fossil-fuel industrialists and King Coal McConnell who only care about profits. Fox News is a threat to Democracy, if not survival because without accurate news we will not make prudent policy choices.
But as if lying about facts isn't enough, Fox News models just awful behavior. Fox News anchors like Megyn Kelly interrupt, laugh at and shout down guests who disagree, and now a whole generation of Republicans treat colleagues at work and in politics the same way. Here at home Republicans shout down guests, wives, and children who speak up for Democratic values such as clean air. Women who have Democratic values or who want to raise their sons to treat others with respect might want to avoid men who watch Fox News, and turn it off at home.
17
There you go: just drink your cool ade and keep watching CBS (Communuist Broadcasting System) for your news
3
Like Anderson Cooper, Megyn Kelly deserves to be associated with a better news outlet -- in Kelly's case, one with journalistic integrity and attention to the facts (in Cooper's, just one that isn't ridiculous). I can only assume Kelly is paid too well to resign and take her skills elsewhere. The Golden Handcuffs must be too comfortable for her. Too bad, the occasional dead-on pot-shot at a DIck Cheney or a Karl Rove isn't enough to prove she really isn't a FoxNewsBot.
2
"Kelly developed that emotional range by pursuing a series of red-meat stories and allegations driven by the boiling anger of the Tea Party era: that Barack Obama was pursuing a “socialist-like agenda,” that the community-organizing group Acorn would rely on the likes of “child rapists” to help conduct the U.S. Census, that the Department of Justice was refusing to enforce laws against voter intimidation, at least when those doing the intimidating were black and their victims were white."
This is the hate the president kind of fomenting that has gained FOX so many viewers. Megan is smart, she is riding that hatred to the top. She looks out for her career quite nicely at the expense of Americans believing lies. Walter we miss you.
This is the hate the president kind of fomenting that has gained FOX so many viewers. Megan is smart, she is riding that hatred to the top. She looks out for her career quite nicely at the expense of Americans believing lies. Walter we miss you.
8
Wow. The New York Times must be getting desperate for page views and advertising dollars when they post stories about Megyn Kelly. Journalism about sensationalist journalism. Really, NYT -- aren't there more pressing stories of the day?
2
It is going to take a lot more than a "Megyn moment" to get me to watch anything on Fox News (an oxymoron if ever there is one). As long as Fox shills shamelessly for the right wing, as long as their stock in trade are obfuscations and outright lies, as long they engage in character assassinitaion, as long as they deny scientific reality from climate change to evolution then there is every reason to tune them out, probably for the next generation.
7
One thing that looks intentional in the lead photo and throughout the piece is the effort to give Megan some physical stature. I met Kelly when she was in Raleigh for the Duke Lacrosse scandal and stunned how short she is. She is in the neighborhood of 5' 4" Not at all "short" for a female, but from the extensive effort to make her look tall on television and in photos, it was quite a shock.
4
Sure but all women who wear 3" heels are guilty of the same false advertising. And that's a huge number of women.
ONE station presents a Conservative view and you Progressives go crazy.
8
The comments can be summed up as sour grapes. Most NYT readers can not accept that a white heterosexual female can be a success. Yes Fox has a conservative bend, but do you really believe that the mainstream media does not have a liberal slant in its reporting the news. There would be no Fox News if the networks were less biased. Do the readers ever think that the NYT has an agenda in the the stories they report. Best to see both sides of a story or news report.
6
So I guess Faux viewers haven't heard whom the "sour grapes" will likely choose as our presidential candidate will be in 2016. It is rumored a "heterosexual female" we "in our leftist lala land" consider successful as both a Senator and Secretary of State. But of course, that is all just rumor at this point.
I occasionally switch to Kelly while watching Maddow (they're on at the same time in San Francisco). It's mostly to see if Kelly actually believes in what she is doing. believes that the Fox "story" is true or valid. She can't be trusted, yet plenty of viewers do trust her. They believe Ailes when he says people go to Fox for "the truth." Kelly is not about "truth." Colbert said it: People want "truthiness," and Kelly, like the rest of Fox, dishes it out in spadesful.
5
If 2.8 million get their news and opinions from Fox, 700,000 from MSNBC, 466,000 from CNN, where do the other 296 million citizens of this country obtain their information about Navy Seals disparaging the president and one another? Jon Stewart? Yahoo? Huffpost? Drudge? Perhaps that explains why the country is not merely divided evenly, red and blue, but is an amalgamation of individual interpretations of events, sometimes backed by a hyperventilating Fox program, sometimes shredded by a MSNBC show, usually pieced together with a little more custodial effort after the dust has settled.
Each time I tune into Fox or MSNBC, I realize that I am being played for a nail. I can only take that about once a month.
Each time I tune into Fox or MSNBC, I realize that I am being played for a nail. I can only take that about once a month.
2
Hmm...all the women pictured in this article are blondes and pretty young things. Media is the common man's electronic theatre and no one does it better than Roger Ailes and his mob. Rather a waste of time. And time wasted is impossible to recapture.
2
I'm sorry but why is Megyn Kelly given the favored "above the fold" section? She is not worth the read.
11
I am extremely proud to say that I have never once looked at any broadcast of the Fox network that they claim to be a "news" program and just in case I have been compromised with an internet hack I will say up front I have tuned in their network for a couple of football play off games.
1
Jim Ruttenberg mentions multiple times thoughtout the article, with no irony, how beautiful Megyn Kelly is. Then he also points out that she barely ate at their breakfast interview, when he again focuses on her looks and clothing. Can The Times please find someone to write these articles who is not so clearly enamored with the subject's appearance? There would not have been this many mentions of looks or attire has the subject been a man.
6
Slow - clap for someone at fox reverse engineering an argument on the fly. Go get that low hanging fruit Megyn. The format is National Local news - knocking on deaths door.
2
Everything wrong with big news in one small package.
3
I love watching liberals foam at the mouth at the mention of FOX news. They'll scream up and down that it's not news, and then tune in to Jon Stewart to get their daily information.
4
Ailes can take credit for this phenomenon: vindictive, nasty partisans like this who pride themselves on being misinformed true-believers.
The GOP ought to worry about people like this characterizing their rank-and-file. Instead, the likes of MarkRB are cultivated and encouraged.
The GOP ought to worry about people like this characterizing their rank-and-file. Instead, the likes of MarkRB are cultivated and encouraged.
5
I hope you realize that's a lie. Sounds perfect for Fox Nooz to broadcast though, you might write them a letter about it.
2
Let's get some perspective on Fox News's popularity:
It's been #1 for 13 years in a row – but that's in cable news.
Fox: 1.76 million prime-time viewers in 2014
MSNBC: 590,000 viewers
CNN: 515,000
That's cable. Now look at network news:
NBC Nightly News: 8.9 million, up 5%
ABC World News Tonight: 8.1 million, up 6%
CBS Evening News: 6.8 million, up 4%
With all the media focus on Fox News, we forget how many people are immune to that media gabble and still watch only traditional network news, not cable. And when the evening news is over, they watch sitcoms, dramas, sports, and movies. Sports is the only thing they watch more on cable and that's almost entirely ESPN.
The #1 news show on cable is O'Reilly, and he's in 13th place in cable shows, behind sports and NCIS reruns. And less than half the audience of "60 Minutes."
It's been #1 for 13 years in a row – but that's in cable news.
Fox: 1.76 million prime-time viewers in 2014
MSNBC: 590,000 viewers
CNN: 515,000
That's cable. Now look at network news:
NBC Nightly News: 8.9 million, up 5%
ABC World News Tonight: 8.1 million, up 6%
CBS Evening News: 6.8 million, up 4%
With all the media focus on Fox News, we forget how many people are immune to that media gabble and still watch only traditional network news, not cable. And when the evening news is over, they watch sitcoms, dramas, sports, and movies. Sports is the only thing they watch more on cable and that's almost entirely ESPN.
The #1 news show on cable is O'Reilly, and he's in 13th place in cable shows, behind sports and NCIS reruns. And less than half the audience of "60 Minutes."
15
Thank you. I do feel a bit better now. Hopefully the 1,76 million will shrink to insignificance soon.
Ms. Kelly is simply the latest winner in the Pretty Girl Game of TV Talking.
2
We all have learnt to take #FoxNewsFacts with a (large) pinch of salt. Myself, I occasionally watch these people - Hannity, Kelly, O'Reilly - for the entertainment value, to see how brazenly they will twist factual information into its opposite. Unlike the other two, I have to admit Megyn stands out for intelligence, poise and legs. Sometimes.
1
Fox News is less a news organization than a political one and it's tag line, "Fair and Balanced" is delivered with a wink, although the irony is apparently lost on many of its viewers. CNN and MSNBC may lean left but Fox airs blatantly erronious information without a hint of apology. To wit (and these are just a few examples) :
* In an interview with a woman claiming ACA, aka "Obamacare," hurt rather than helped her, it was pointed out to Fox the woman was a paid actress appearing in an ad sponsored by a PAC. A responsible news organization would have first vetted her. In the absence of this, at minimum, the news organization would have clarified the matter and issued an apology. Fox did neither.
* A gentleman was interviewed about ACA and claimed he could not enroll his infant. The conclusion was, of course, ACA was bad for young children. HHS looked into the matter and pointed out the man never attempted to even enroll his infant; he only tried for his spouse and 2 older children. No retraction or apology by Fox ever took place.
* And let's not forget Benghazi, a trajedy that--despite numerous reports--has consistently been framed as a cover up.
* In an interview with a woman claiming ACA, aka "Obamacare," hurt rather than helped her, it was pointed out to Fox the woman was a paid actress appearing in an ad sponsored by a PAC. A responsible news organization would have first vetted her. In the absence of this, at minimum, the news organization would have clarified the matter and issued an apology. Fox did neither.
* A gentleman was interviewed about ACA and claimed he could not enroll his infant. The conclusion was, of course, ACA was bad for young children. HHS looked into the matter and pointed out the man never attempted to even enroll his infant; he only tried for his spouse and 2 older children. No retraction or apology by Fox ever took place.
* And let's not forget Benghazi, a trajedy that--despite numerous reports--has consistently been framed as a cover up.
6
Don't forget recent Fox 'edited version' of the protesting crowd in Washington altering the chant to 'kill a cop' and terrorist 'No Go' zones in Europe and this is the news that great swaths of the American public are watching--just great
6
Here it is folks in all its glory, the amazing spectacle of FOX news and its parade of staggering dullness, every talking-face wearing the same phony ‘taking-itself-seriously’ expression and the unrelenting spewing of stupefying hypocrisy.
2
Anyone heard of the PBS News Hour? Compared with network and cable news, it is the last hold out on true journalism. The anchors and correspondents are not stars or entertainers. They are journalists.
5
Will I be wrong if I state that nobody goes to Fox News for the truth? Honestly, TV news is truly worthless today. It seems to me that Kelly cannot be honest and independent anyways, because she is basically a paid spokesman, and we all know that such people are paid to say stupid things.
2
What am I missing here? The last time I checked, as of 2013, the population of the United States was 316.1 million people. This "show" pulls in around a million people and this is some big deal?
If anything, the fact that Fox, MSNBC and CNN can't pull even three million viewers combined nationally in the time slot shows just how the vast majority of Americans view cable news - it's a vapid wasteland of commentators generally commenting back and forth among themselves looking for some "Megyn moment."
In order to understand all of this - you'd have to regularly tune in, something in "Megyn's" case more than 315 million Americans don't do.
To put it in perspective, if you added up the number of Americans watching hockey on national and regional channels on any given night, it dwarfs her numbers.
Hockey.
If anything, the fact that Fox, MSNBC and CNN can't pull even three million viewers combined nationally in the time slot shows just how the vast majority of Americans view cable news - it's a vapid wasteland of commentators generally commenting back and forth among themselves looking for some "Megyn moment."
In order to understand all of this - you'd have to regularly tune in, something in "Megyn's" case more than 315 million Americans don't do.
To put it in perspective, if you added up the number of Americans watching hockey on national and regional channels on any given night, it dwarfs her numbers.
Hockey.
2
Just watch the first minute and a half - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alikj9WcMrU
Watch the whole thing!
Say what you want, but Fox ratings are through the roof and almost all their journalists are watched. You know why? Because they really do have valid talking points. Sure, there is the occasional (I know NY Times readers will love to contest that "occasional statement) jab at Obama, but for the better part, it's a real news outlet when basically all have gone to the wayside. Furthermore, you take liberal stations like NBC and MSNBC, the former being a complete mess and the latter being a hate filled, racist gossip network that's watched by two people in the entire US. So again, say what you want, love em or hate em, but it's obvious Fox is doing something right. Then again, liberals really never were very keen on facts, so none of this is terribly surprising to me.
9
While she is a very intelligent person, unfortunately, she is just another drama queen as are the vast majority of of "journalists". It would be refreshing if we could just receive the news without all of the editorializing. I do not need the lilting speech and raised eyebrows, nor do I require to have the report explained to me... just tell me what happened. These supposed newscasts are nothing but entertainment. It's not only FOX, but all the national and local news shows.
Some truth is better than none. Even if it's added like a bit of spice to draw a younger crowd in.
1
Face the facts, you are not getting news from Fox, but more entertainment from a low life company employing another, want to be celebrity, Kelly. More overpaid people with no real talent, nothing to contribute to society other than the vacuous climate paved by non entities like Oprah and Phil, Doctor who.
1
I guess dispensing with the whole idea of facts can make things unpredictable. And yes, the audience as well.
1
I’m not an avid Fox viewer, but I have seen Megan Kelly a couple of times and from what I’ve seen she’s cut from the same Obama bashing cloth as the other Fox “news” anchors although somewhat more attractive, which is also part of the Fox News formula.
5
If Ms Kelly really wants to be a journalist i.e. reporting actual & verifiable facts, then she should have her agent find her another outlet for her talents. Fox seems to have little use for the truth (to the delight of comedians and late night TV writers) and is nothing more than a bully pulpit from which Roger Ailes spews his flawed message of conservatism.
Ask yourself, have you ever heard an actual debate on Fox with someone with a differing opinion that didn't end in a shouting match?
Ask yourself, have you ever heard an actual debate on Fox with someone with a differing opinion that didn't end in a shouting match?
6
"It was another win, and another winning night, for Megyn Kelly." I'm sure that's how Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite approached the job of reporter. So her on-air segments will no doubt be just as factual and reliable.
4
I cannot believe how many intelligent people are bashing this woman just because she happens to be employed by FOX news. Maybe they should try watching her one night before they come to a judgment. I'm am not a fan of cable news - period. There are times that I do need to "check-in" and I happen to see her broadcast. From what I've seen of Kelly she happens to be smart, witty, well-versed in topics, and has even challenged her superiors on-air. She also happens to be a beautiful woman. If she were on MSNBC she would be making the rounds on the late-night talk circuit and having lunch with Senator Warren. Kudos to the NYT on this piece. The Kelly Moment is here!
107
Many people who don't like what she does HAVE watched her, including me. I don't like shout news, period. I don't like inaccuracies, period. This isn't journalism, it's pandering, polarization, incitement, misinformation.
6
You sound like that individual that tries to convince people to do stupid things. According to you, it wouldn't be stupid to the beholder, if only they just try it. As an example, let's use leaping into fire. Why prejudge leaping into fire until you only try it first, right? Everyone is being unfair, because the person asking us to leap into this blaze is supposedly beautiful. Thank you for exposing our blatant bias.
3
Well the fisrt thing in idol creation is to build a person up beyond all mere human traits, the second part is the decreation by pulling them down and critizing them over the success story that was just created.
2
She might be smart and she certainly is good looking, but how can anyone think of her as a serious news person when she is working for Fox? The minute she tries to act with genuine independence and integrity she will not only alienate Fox viewers but she will loose her job. There are a few dozen blond babes waiting out there in the wings who can appear somewhat intelligent and will eagerly comply with the Fox prime directive which is only tangentially related to what is generally, although less and less commonly, thought of as "the news".
6
I'm "older", 66 to be precise, so take my comments with a grain of salt - please.I remember when newscasters read news and actually participated and had some say in what the content might be. Nowadays, it's all "show"/
Is that Megyn Kelly in that opening photo pose of the Mary Tyler Moore Show? I remember Lou Dobbs on CNN in his "assertive" male pose (I taught pro photography) leaning into the TV screen.The pose in portraiture makes the subject more assertive- he's coming at you!
I frequently decided to check in on the most recent CBS news anchor. I recognized him before he was anchor and I liked him.So what do I see?
Scott Pelly in a portrait pose with his hands nicely in each other with his glasses. Not only that, but he's wearing what appears to be a knitted vest. I'll let you read into this one.
I've stopped watching the 3 main newscast altogether about 6 years or more ago. NBC and ABC both telecast at the same time in Montreal,Quebec .It appeared, that both networks at the time worked together to present the news items almost identically.
My favourite is "The Situation Room" with Wolf Blitzer. He always has that 3-5 day beard growth (authoritative figure) with selected glass frames, and news on paper in hand.
As I said, I must be showing my age because I used to remember when the news was more important than the news presenter. Now it's been turned around.
Is that Megyn Kelly in that opening photo pose of the Mary Tyler Moore Show? I remember Lou Dobbs on CNN in his "assertive" male pose (I taught pro photography) leaning into the TV screen.The pose in portraiture makes the subject more assertive- he's coming at you!
I frequently decided to check in on the most recent CBS news anchor. I recognized him before he was anchor and I liked him.So what do I see?
Scott Pelly in a portrait pose with his hands nicely in each other with his glasses. Not only that, but he's wearing what appears to be a knitted vest. I'll let you read into this one.
I've stopped watching the 3 main newscast altogether about 6 years or more ago. NBC and ABC both telecast at the same time in Montreal,Quebec .It appeared, that both networks at the time worked together to present the news items almost identically.
My favourite is "The Situation Room" with Wolf Blitzer. He always has that 3-5 day beard growth (authoritative figure) with selected glass frames, and news on paper in hand.
As I said, I must be showing my age because I used to remember when the news was more important than the news presenter. Now it's been turned around.
11
I'd like to see how long she could survive on a real news network like Al Jazeera America.
28
Thanks for a morning chuckle...
1
On the handful of occasions I've watched her she strikes me as very bright and very good at what she does. It's too bad the feature of this article is this "moment" connecting O'Neill and Gilliam. To me that's not particularly poignant.
What is remarkable is all of the sexist and otherwise demeaning comments from so many of the normally "progressive" readers. Most have never seen her show but what the heck. She's on Fox so she must be lying and drunk on Ailes cool aid. I think the blind dogma and inability to engage in any kind of compromise is more core to the democrat followers than the republicans.
What is remarkable is all of the sexist and otherwise demeaning comments from so many of the normally "progressive" readers. Most have never seen her show but what the heck. She's on Fox so she must be lying and drunk on Ailes cool aid. I think the blind dogma and inability to engage in any kind of compromise is more core to the democrat followers than the republicans.
9
"I think the blind dogma and inability to engage in any kind of compromise is more core to the democrat followers than the republicans."
Surely you can see how dogmatic that statement is.
Surely you can see how dogmatic that statement is.
2
Who below age 50 still watches television news? The entire platform will be irrelevant in another decade.
23
News has always "skewed old", which makes it weird that they emphasize younger anchors and reporters on local stations and, especially of late, on ABC News, which clearly has a youth movement, get the old guys out, going on. News appeals to older viewers because they are more inclined to sit down and take the time and they are much more likely to vote.
At present, there is no online reliable source of what network news offers: a compact summary of the days events that, once watched, gives some assurance that you haven't missed something of importance, particularly of a visual nature. Images provide information and they tell a story. Seeing and hearing someone is far different than just reading about it. You really get a chance to experience an event, but newscasts these days do such a "good" job of quick cut editing that they drain the video of emotion and impact (I have NEVER ONCE seen a complete video of either one of the World Trade Towers falling; even that momentous event had to be cut away from to another clip).
We don't really need the network nightly newscasts any more, except there is no other place to get what they offer.
Doug Terry
At present, there is no online reliable source of what network news offers: a compact summary of the days events that, once watched, gives some assurance that you haven't missed something of importance, particularly of a visual nature. Images provide information and they tell a story. Seeing and hearing someone is far different than just reading about it. You really get a chance to experience an event, but newscasts these days do such a "good" job of quick cut editing that they drain the video of emotion and impact (I have NEVER ONCE seen a complete video of either one of the World Trade Towers falling; even that momentous event had to be cut away from to another clip).
We don't really need the network nightly newscasts any more, except there is no other place to get what they offer.
Doug Terry
2
Just because a “Megyn Moment” happens now and then on Fox News, it doesn’t change my view of this network. We all know everything that happens via this 24 “News” cycle is all by design. The Network points to her and claims “fair and balanced.”
8
Just wait until the wrinkles show up and the botox no longer is effective. At the end of the day, her good looks and not her reporting abilities got her in the spotlight at Fox News.
Once her looks begin to fade, let's see how long Fox allows her to stick around.
Once her looks begin to fade, let's see how long Fox allows her to stick around.
22
I can't help thinking that this is frightening on so many levels. Very frightening.
22
After reading this article I thought I would read how other readers felt. I was astonished at first with all of the hate that was spewed at both her and Fox News. Then I realized, this is a New Your Times piece. No wonder there is so much hate. (The contributor of the article was fair to her )
Look people, most of us do not think like you, that's why Fox News is consistently #1. The likes of MSNBC, where it appears most of you prefer to get your "News", is dying a slow death.
If you don't care for Fox News then don't watch, but be fair to yourself and watch it a few times instead of drinking the Kool Aid. My guess is that almost all of you who attack Fox News have never watched. They provide views from both political leanings. That can't be said for any other network.
Look people, most of us do not think like you, that's why Fox News is consistently #1. The likes of MSNBC, where it appears most of you prefer to get your "News", is dying a slow death.
If you don't care for Fox News then don't watch, but be fair to yourself and watch it a few times instead of drinking the Kool Aid. My guess is that almost all of you who attack Fox News have never watched. They provide views from both political leanings. That can't be said for any other network.
11
We get stuck with Fox News in waiting rooms everywhere.
38
Well, in fact, Terry, as a progressive and a liberal the last place I would go for news is MSNBC. Those on the right believe, mistakenly, that when Fox News is scorned as "faux news," the best offense is to point out the low viewer ratings for MSNBC, "where it appears most of [us] prefer to get [our] 'News,' is dying a slow death."
Well, of course, since most liberals don't get their news there, your analogy is dead wrong.
We prefer a more honest perspective, which is: Fox News' viewers think they are getting "fair and balanced" "news" there when in fact they are just being entertained. Not informed, but entertained. Entertainment always grabs more viewers than real news, and that's really quite laughable -- and deeply disappointing and troubling.
Well, of course, since most liberals don't get their news there, your analogy is dead wrong.
We prefer a more honest perspective, which is: Fox News' viewers think they are getting "fair and balanced" "news" there when in fact they are just being entertained. Not informed, but entertained. Entertainment always grabs more viewers than real news, and that's really quite laughable -- and deeply disappointing and troubling.
4
First the article, and now a Fox News viewer tells New York Times readers that they're the ones drinking the Kool Aid. Perfect.
5
Disgraceful nonsense. As another commenter said, this is barely worthy of People magazine. At a time when Fox has outdone even itself in spewing nonsense about Muslim no-go areas in Europe, we get this wet kiss to an entertainer who has achieved fame through blatant political propaganda.
Although not as sexy as pantingly blabbing about every mood of Kelly's hair, a real service might be showing the profound effect of Fox News on the course of our nation. Stop by, for instance, any of the thousands of McDonald's across the middle of the nation where Fox News blares a steady diet of corrosive hyperbole that's far more unhealthy than the food on the trays of the viewers. Is it any wonder that voters who actually believe this stuff regularly vote against their own economic self-interests?
I have no problem with coverage of a TV personality that is having ratings success. But I would expect a more balanced and yes, critical, view of why this is happening and what it means. But nothing in this puff piece gets much deeper than the pointy end of Kelly's spiked heels.
Although not as sexy as pantingly blabbing about every mood of Kelly's hair, a real service might be showing the profound effect of Fox News on the course of our nation. Stop by, for instance, any of the thousands of McDonald's across the middle of the nation where Fox News blares a steady diet of corrosive hyperbole that's far more unhealthy than the food on the trays of the viewers. Is it any wonder that voters who actually believe this stuff regularly vote against their own economic self-interests?
I have no problem with coverage of a TV personality that is having ratings success. But I would expect a more balanced and yes, critical, view of why this is happening and what it means. But nothing in this puff piece gets much deeper than the pointy end of Kelly's spiked heels.
54
As a Fox viewer, I also watch CNN and read the New York Times (here I am...) -- then I make up my own mind regarding how I feel about world events and politics. If more people would keep an open mind to alternate viewpoints, we would live in a more peaceful world. Thank you for a great article, New York Times.
17
So your feelings are more important than facts? That makes you a FOX loyalist, perhaps. News Flash: Feelings tell us the world is flat, too. Facts don't.
4
I had no idea who Megyn Kelly was before reading this article (well, part of it). Wow, a viewership of a little over one million out of more than 300 million people in the U.S.; an icon of the "news" media.
15
More than a million, Casey. And did you see she has double the viewers that CNN and MSNBC have....combined.
4
New York Times has a paying circulation of 831,000 and your point is?
5
Beautiful bright and informed anchor women are not in short supply . A couple of hours of watching CBC News Network or Aljazeera will attest to the fact that there is no shortage of attractive journalist news anchors who know how to ask the right questions. I hope Kelly can lead the way to better informed TV viewer in the US. Who knows maybe the US can join the rest of the world in acknowledging that Global man made Climate Change is no longer a matter of opinion.
Here in Canada we have our own right wing media mogul Pierre Karl Peladeau but both his English and French networks cannot take the liberty with the truth that political access (control) in the US allows FOX.
Here in Canada we have our own right wing media mogul Pierre Karl Peladeau but both his English and French networks cannot take the liberty with the truth that political access (control) in the US allows FOX.
13
Conservative talk lacks any substantive debate on points raised but that is also true of MSNBC. If the views of each, one topic at a time were challenged at length, after an exchange, one would get a sobering view of what APPEARS authentic is mostly theatrics.
2
From the article: "...In her own time slot, she is ahead of everyone, not just in news but on all of basic cable: “Duck Dynasty,” “Mob Wives,” everything but sports. For Roger Ailes, Megyn is clearly the message."
What does this say about this society?
One take, it doesn't matter what the content of anything is, just be number one. That old saw about truth is the first casualty of war? What weight does truth have in the midst of Megyn Kelly, Duck Dynasty, Mob Wives?
What does this say about this society?
One take, it doesn't matter what the content of anything is, just be number one. That old saw about truth is the first casualty of war? What weight does truth have in the midst of Megyn Kelly, Duck Dynasty, Mob Wives?
17
The idea of turning to Fox for news is either comical or sad, since the only news to be gained from Fox would be weather or sports and even that might be suspect.
24
"On track to make partner, she was also exhausted, heading toward divorce and wondering about the direction her life had taken."
Side topic-- I worked at the same law firm and this was most people there. I don't agree with Kelly's politics most of the time, but good on her for not only getting out but finding a brilliant career and so much success.
Side topic-- I worked at the same law firm and this was most people there. I don't agree with Kelly's politics most of the time, but good on her for not only getting out but finding a brilliant career and so much success.
66
Truthj be told, everyone hates working for someone else, working people have to 'suck it up....working for the man', as the 1960s expression went. She is wealthy now, so maybe she will one day quit the grind and start doing what she wants as an independent person.
Sabrina,
Your praising her for success at a "news" organization that misleads and outright lies to their viewers all for profit and to push an extreme political ideology?
If that is success to be praised I want none of it, and we as a country should question your definition of success, because the cost of hers and Fox success is truth and a divided country.
Your praising her for success at a "news" organization that misleads and outright lies to their viewers all for profit and to push an extreme political ideology?
If that is success to be praised I want none of it, and we as a country should question your definition of success, because the cost of hers and Fox success is truth and a divided country.
Whatever actual talent Megyn Kelly has as a newswoman is rendered completely irrelevant by the fact that she is on Fox. The network's well-deserved reputation as a shill for Republican politics infects anyone and everyone who works for them. Her willingness to on occasion buck the corporate line and show an inkling of independent thinking is meaningless if 99% of what appears on the network is Republican partisan nonsense.
46
I have never watched Fox News, and I will never lower myself to watching Ms. Kelly. But I hate them both.
13
So Jim, you've NEVER watched FOX News or Megyn Kelly, but you hate them both?!? I used to do that when I was a child, too....you know...I hate broccoli, or spinach, even though I never tasted them. But it seems you never grew up. Typical liberal.
7
Truly, an enlighten approach.
2
Wow - What would your response be to someone who said the same of NPR or PBS? I believe it is healthy to constantly challenge all of your beliefs and views. Anyone who only reads, listens, watches sources that only confirms their own positions is sadly as close minded and obtuse as those they accuse of ignorance.
6
Being unpredictable makes for exciting T.V. Tim Russert could make even the most accomplished politicians squirm. You never know when Kelly will flip the switch on the electric chair.
2
Call me when she "flips the (proverbial) switch" on Cheney, Bush, Boehner, Rubio, Arpaio, McConnell...
4
Diversions like her is the reason I choose to read the news.
News I can use, opinions I can loose.
News I can use, opinions I can loose.
13
Being a blond good looking woman will get you no where.
While I'm not a fan in any way, I've seen her enough to appreciate both her intelligence and skill as a host. That said, the basis of her celebrity (according to this story) appears to be "Megyn Kelly - 1% of the time she's not as awful as everyone else at Fox News."
201
That might be the basis for her celebrity among the ideologues on the left who do not watch her show or Fox News. It would not, however, be the basis for others, including those who watch cable tv's most popular news channel.
The perspective of the story is more even-handed than to suggest otherwise.
The perspective of the story is more even-handed than to suggest otherwise.
Kelly is the best part of Jon Stewart! Keep doing what you do Megyn. I need that laughter at the end of the day.
18
*Swoon* Megyn, I think I love you.
3
Yes Megyn Kelly is bright, articulate, driven and attractive but no thanks - i will get my news and information elsewhere, mostly from any number of online sites (including this one) where the cult of personality is kept to a minimum (sorry Roger).
This article though was surprising on one account: that the "walk to the decision desk " on Election Night 2012 was really not a spontaneous moment after all, but one that had been planned for and rehearsed ahead of time. And here I thought that it was all Megyn's doing, when really, it was Great Wizard of FOZ just doing his thing.
This article though was surprising on one account: that the "walk to the decision desk " on Election Night 2012 was really not a spontaneous moment after all, but one that had been planned for and rehearsed ahead of time. And here I thought that it was all Megyn's doing, when really, it was Great Wizard of FOZ just doing his thing.
219
Makes you wonder, if Ailes knew that the polls were in fact correct, and this was going to happen (and had thus rehearsed the "Megyn moment"), why Fox -- since they report the "facts" -- allowed so many on-air personalities and pundits to state in some cases unequivocally that the polls were wrong, that Romney would win.
Maybe because they are in many cases a "no-go zone" for facts, where actual journalists fear to go?
Maybe because they are in many cases a "no-go zone" for facts, where actual journalists fear to go?
"Everyone knows that Santa like Jesus is white." That's so bright it's blinding. She has left attractive behind and seems headed for an eating disorder treatment center to these eyes.
1
Spontaneity here at Fox you mention , .........., well, um....., I'll get back to you with that, after this commercial break (and we can Google 'spontaneity'.)
A lot of Fox viewers aren't watching Megyn Kelly or Ann Coulter because they agree or disagree with their politics. Fox regularly proves itself not to be dumb, and their proof tends to be blonde.
2
Pity the meteorologists who don't look great in sleeveless cocktail dresses. They have no future on TV.
12
Steve:
By all the evidence, TV has no future either.
By all the evidence, TV has no future either.
5
Richard,
After doing TV for more than 50 years. I've stopped giving it up for dead!
After doing TV for more than 50 years. I've stopped giving it up for dead!
2
Has anyone else noticed that all the pictures are full of blondes? Her staff, her makeup crew ... Discuss -
12
The Stepford news?
13
I would guess that not a single one of them is naturally, genetically blonde. From her eyebrows Ms. Kelly definitely is not, but she's got a very expensive professional dye job there.
5
Supermodel news. Please spare me.
9
The view from Europe - and from a European journalist - is... that Kelly would *never* get a job over here, as her brash, frequently bullying and hectoring style flies completely in the face of impartial, professional broadcasting/journalism.
It's one thing for a host to have some opinions - and a bulldog host isn;t necessarily a bad thing (such as the BBC's legendary admired/feared former Newsnight host, Jeremy Paxman, and his impatient, frequently rude, no-nonsense approach to interviewing/interrogating guests), but quite another to reliably insult, mock and attack guests - guests seemingly brought on for Fox to hold a turkey shoot.
Yes, yes, I know, I know - Fox News is not a credible news channel, by international standards of fairness and accuracy, so one can hardly expect its hosts and figurehead reporters to follow international standards and expectations of accuracy, impartiality and professionalism.
Still, even loosening standards and muttering: "Well, it's Fox, so..." doesn't excuse Kelly's simply dreadful mannerisms. While she's just one of a collective coterie of eyebrow-raising Fox hosts and anchors - and not quite in the same league as the breathtakingly awful Bill O'Reilly, who at least amuses as much as he irritates with his straight-out insincerity and misdirection - it's impossible to think that Kelly and co, in their current form, very much make Fox News a no-go zone for credibility or respect from their peers, at least...
It's one thing for a host to have some opinions - and a bulldog host isn;t necessarily a bad thing (such as the BBC's legendary admired/feared former Newsnight host, Jeremy Paxman, and his impatient, frequently rude, no-nonsense approach to interviewing/interrogating guests), but quite another to reliably insult, mock and attack guests - guests seemingly brought on for Fox to hold a turkey shoot.
Yes, yes, I know, I know - Fox News is not a credible news channel, by international standards of fairness and accuracy, so one can hardly expect its hosts and figurehead reporters to follow international standards and expectations of accuracy, impartiality and professionalism.
Still, even loosening standards and muttering: "Well, it's Fox, so..." doesn't excuse Kelly's simply dreadful mannerisms. While she's just one of a collective coterie of eyebrow-raising Fox hosts and anchors - and not quite in the same league as the breathtakingly awful Bill O'Reilly, who at least amuses as much as he irritates with his straight-out insincerity and misdirection - it's impossible to think that Kelly and co, in their current form, very much make Fox News a no-go zone for credibility or respect from their peers, at least...
487
Calling Fox News a no go zone for news sounds just perfect for what channel really is: Avoid!
13
Calling Fox News a no go zone for news sounds just perfect for what channel really is: Avoid!
2
This leapt out at me: "...Fox News is not a credible news channel, by international standards of fairness and accuracy,..." I suppose it's true. The fact that so many people like Fox News shows that the US has lower standards for the level of fairness and accuracy they expect from their news. Wow.
8
This does not seem New York Times news worthy.
35
A show, and a story, about nothing.
15
At this moment when Fox credibility is so low, why this puff piece?
Is it because their power is so great, despite being a force for evil?
Is it because their power is so great, despite being a force for evil?
18
Megyn Kelly is a dynamic, interesting TV personality, but not even she can be a real news reporter while broadcasting from Fox's ubiquitous angle of distortion and through its imprisoning prism of mendacity. Maybe a few more years of breathing the free air of authentic inquiry that permeates New York's Upper West Side will prepare her for a proper escape from the treacherous lair of that unbalanced red fox.
126
Maybe she can escape to MSNBC? They could use a female presence.
"The free air of authentic inquiry that permeates New York's Upper West side." This is sarcasm, correct!? It's MSNBC 24/7 over there.
3
True and how relevant are 'news readers' these days? No one seems to care or notice one bite that Kattie Couric has departed a major news anchor, they mere get another replacment, cheaper 'part'. Personally, I get most of my news vis the Internet from multiple sources including foreign news agencies.
Megyn, Queen's English is a form of pronunciation. Just had to call it.
I try to watch Fox News as entertainment but even with that mindset it is too frustrating most times.
I try to watch Fox News as entertainment but even with that mindset it is too frustrating most times.
8
Most NYT readers hate her because she's at Fox, period. I can't tell you how many friends I have who say, "i'd never watch Fox," and then admit they never have. Sure, there are some fanatics (Anybody here any spend time watching Al Sharpton?), but, in my experience she's not one of them. Fox is conservative, but, uh, the Network News shows are equally liberal, if not more so, and Brett Baier's 60 minutes covers a lot more news than CBS, NBC, or ABC, who, in 30 minutes, have about 7 minutes of news, and then feel good stuff. Kelly's bright, forceful engaging, attractive, seemingly hard working. A lot to like.
174
Please, her show should be accurately entitled "It's the Anti-Obama Hour with Megyn Kelly." While it's true I'm a democrat, I've watched her show occasionally, and she sings the same old song over and over and over again--Obama did this wrong, that wrong, everything wrong. Give me a break; she's another Fox/Roger Ailes robot.
37
"Fox is conservative, but the Network News shows are equally liberal..." is a comment made by one who never watches any news shows other than Faux, oh sorry, Fox "news". My husband never misses NBC News with Brian Williams and I am always surprised how slated their stories are by repeating the conservative talking points of the day rather reporting in an unbiased way.
All the networks seem to be chasing ratings rather than doing actual reporting of the important news of the day.
All the networks seem to be chasing ratings rather than doing actual reporting of the important news of the day.
8
Any idea that the major networks are as liberal as Fox is conservative is just not the case. If you believe this, you have been totally hoodwinked.
14
Whoever took the picture of Megyn did a masterful job. Stunning is the only word.
2
Because that's important when it comes to good journalism.
13
"Photoshopped" is the only word.
17
Oh dear. This is what is considered achievement in the cable news world? That whole cable-news world is truly lost unto it's self-congratulatory self.
A cursory glance at the independently (freely) available France 24 or the BBC World News (where available) will show the absolute gulf in class and seriousness.
Fox News has not graced my television for years (and neither have the other local cable news channels to be fair). Giving up that nonsense was the best decision I ever made. I learnt nothing from them - other than the fact that it' s possible for human beings to shout all the time. Ridiculous.
A cursory glance at the independently (freely) available France 24 or the BBC World News (where available) will show the absolute gulf in class and seriousness.
Fox News has not graced my television for years (and neither have the other local cable news channels to be fair). Giving up that nonsense was the best decision I ever made. I learnt nothing from them - other than the fact that it' s possible for human beings to shout all the time. Ridiculous.
31
Katty Kay is also Blond and attractive! (BBC)
1
The Pew report is frightening. For Fox News, ideologically Mixed viewers outnumber Consistently Conservative viewers by more than 2-1. Everyone tells me only the tea party watches. Now Pew tells us that the typical Fox viewer holds half-liberal half-conservative ideas!
6
That's why Fox dominates cable news year after year. You should try watching it. You might learn something.
4
All of the screaming on these "news" and opinion programs stresses me out. So I don't watch them.
13
Megyn vs. Rachel?
That game ended years ago in a lopsided victory for unbiased reporting and interviews.
That game ended years ago in a lopsided victory for unbiased reporting and interviews.
8
Is this article really just damning with faint praise the fact that in the cereal bowl of marshmallows and frosted flakes at Fox, there is a single nut to boost nutritional value on the package? Or is this the part where we get to pick Perry Mason as our favorite real prosecutor.
13
I watch her when she's wearing her cheetah outfit and especially when Ann Coulter is on with her (wearing her leather outfit). But still these are two very erudite and intelligent women, who are passionate about conservative politics, who in my opinion, beat anything CNN has on.
10
Walter Cronkite and Ed Murrow are turning in their graves.
252
Yes they are. They're turning around and sitting up and saying "Finally we have a network that isn't afraid to tell both sides of a story"
1
Well, it's clear that you know nothing about them. And isn't that what Fox peddles? Ignorance?
Both of these giants would be appalled at what is called "journalism" over at Fixed News.
Both of these giants would be appalled at what is called "journalism" over at Fixed News.
2
Megyn Kelly is in the business of "Infotainment". Nothing more, nothings less.
She is NOT a journalist, but pretends to play one on TV. Because of her false representation as a "journalist", she is a contributing factor to our nation discourse; offering up a lot of controversy as fact but little in the way of intelligent objective discussion of the complex problems that we face today.
"Infotainment" is her forte, not news.
She is NOT a journalist, but pretends to play one on TV. Because of her false representation as a "journalist", she is a contributing factor to our nation discourse; offering up a lot of controversy as fact but little in the way of intelligent objective discussion of the complex problems that we face today.
"Infotainment" is her forte, not news.
212
Who said she was a journalist? Why can't she be someone who ask questions of those who are 'newsmakers'? Why can't she ask the questions that we would like to ask? Watch CSPAN or Washington Week in Review if you want discussion of complex issues, although WWR can be a little light on subject matter due to time constraints.
And Fox, MSNBC and cable news as a whole admits this. There is no conspiracy. It is opinion journalism and political theater. If that floats your boat, enjoy.
1
"Who said she was a journalist?" but she presents herself as if she is one on TV.
I think that we should hold nationally syndicated tv personalities to higher standards than she executes.
Here is a list of standards all true news professionals should try emulate. Megyn Kelly does not even come close.
1) Do nothing I cannot defend.
2) Cover, write and present every story with the care I would want if the story were about me.
3) Assume there is at least one other side or version to every story.
4) Assume the viewer is as smart and as caring and as good a person as I am.
5) Assume the same about all people on whom I report.
6) Assume personal lives are a private matter, until a legitimate turn in the story absolutely mandates otherwise.
7) Carefully separate opinion and analysis from straight news stories, and clearly label everything.
8) Do not use anonymous sources or blind quotes, except on rare and monumental occasions.
9) No one should ever be allowed to attack another anonymously.
10) And, finally, I am not in the entertainment business.
I think that we should hold nationally syndicated tv personalities to higher standards than she executes.
Here is a list of standards all true news professionals should try emulate. Megyn Kelly does not even come close.
1) Do nothing I cannot defend.
2) Cover, write and present every story with the care I would want if the story were about me.
3) Assume there is at least one other side or version to every story.
4) Assume the viewer is as smart and as caring and as good a person as I am.
5) Assume the same about all people on whom I report.
6) Assume personal lives are a private matter, until a legitimate turn in the story absolutely mandates otherwise.
7) Carefully separate opinion and analysis from straight news stories, and clearly label everything.
8) Do not use anonymous sources or blind quotes, except on rare and monumental occasions.
9) No one should ever be allowed to attack another anonymously.
10) And, finally, I am not in the entertainment business.
1
Surprising to see an establishment that strives for journalistic integrity to have a positive piece about a fox anchor who lacks jounralistic integrity.
80
Did you read the article? The " Megyn moment" is the difference
1
She's blonde. And this is still America, where 2042 is still a ways off.
1
It may be farther away than that. The News Presenters on the national news in Mexico also are Blonds at times.
Kelly is both hot and smart, which is why more people watch her than the little boy and the race channel combined.
8
I generally agree that being hot is a must have quality to have for a serious journalist.
7
The fact is that people who watch Fox News are less informed than people who watch no news at all. FACT. Guess you are one of them, Abe. Ill-informed and proud of it.
6
Definitely that is how Billy O and Rush hit the big times, right?
Megyn Kelly is a dynamic, interesting TV personality, but not even she can be a real news reporter while broadcasting from Fox's inescapable angle of distortion and through its ubiquitous prism of mendacity. Maybe a few more years of breathing the free air of authentic inquiry that permeates New York's Upper West Side will prepare her for a proper escape from the treacherous lair of that unbalanced red fox.
16
....except you,obviously, otherwise how would you know it was "blather"??
4
Megyn Kelly fits perfectly with the Fox news ethos: it's not news, it's entertainment.
796
No,not entertainment.Propaganda. huge difference.
11
It's not only a perception of being entertainment, in the Fox organization, it's part of Fox Entertainment.
As a woman "of a certain age", I do not understand why women in news seem to need to have big fluffy blonde hair and wear tons of eye makeup and stiletto heels. I have a hard time taking them very seriously.
BTW, I AM a Republican and on the moderate/conservative cusp.
As a woman "of a certain age", I do not understand why women in news seem to need to have big fluffy blonde hair and wear tons of eye makeup and stiletto heels. I have a hard time taking them very seriously.
BTW, I AM a Republican and on the moderate/conservative cusp.
7
Isn't that what all the news networks have become? At least she isn't showing yout tube clips of singing donkeys or how big Kim K's A has gotten like every other "News Channel"
I miss Walter Cronkite.
I miss Walter Cronkite.
Love him or loathe him, Ailes is a genius in creating hit news shows. He understand the medium well. Personality, intelligence, boldness, screen presence and let's face it beauty all factor into creating a winning television personality.
My concern though is with MsKelly's independence. Is she truly so, or are occasional deviations from the fox narrative carefully orchestrated?
My concern though is with MsKelly's independence. Is she truly so, or are occasional deviations from the fox narrative carefully orchestrated?
46
Do you really have to even aske that question?
'gebnius' the very word has been debased to death; talented, savy or shrewd are all better words to use and which deflect nothing from the man's ability to judge well and make sound personnel and financial decisions.
Since when is pandering to the lowest common denominator taken to be a sign of genius?
4
Fox news is a brilliant idea. All the news media get little attention when there aren't big news going on. How to change that? Everybody knows sex and violence are the biggest sellers. So you put pretty women, preferably showing some skin. Then you put verbal confrontation (you only can go so far in a news channel), and now you have faithful followers watching all the time! You add some talented people and now you can beat any criticism. Brilliant!
2
What is this? People magazine from the New York Times. The Times should be embarrassed putting out garbage like this. Soon the only place anyone will find the Times is in the waiting rooms of medical and dental offices.
79
Then, free subscriptions for all medical offices! Only month old or better copies with some of the ads cut out.
I was held hostage in a doctor's waiting room today, forced to listen to morning show banter on NBC. I found myself reading my book aloud to drum out the noise, and it wasn't even Fox News. Why anyone would intentionally listen to a network of manufactured facts and outrage is beyond me. I don't even watch MSNBC anymore because of the multimillionaire "journalists" self-righteously leaning forward. Clearly, the conclusion of this story is that blonde extensions go a long way in advancing certain careers.
28
2.8 million viewers out of a nation of 330 million? And this person is somehow newsworthy?
The story about the Navy Seal spat between Gilliam and O'Neill is interesting for what it says about how Fox manipulates its viewers and Ms. Kelly's role in that manipulation. Her "gotcha" moment was designed to further a Fox narrative. She is a magnificent propagandist.
At a time when the French are laughing at Fox's ridiculous assertions about Paris (and with the Mayor of Paris threatening a defamation suit), the NY Times runs a puff piece on a Fox "news" reporter. That's the really hard-hitting investigative reporting we expect ...not. A monumental waste of reporter's and readers' time.
The story about the Navy Seal spat between Gilliam and O'Neill is interesting for what it says about how Fox manipulates its viewers and Ms. Kelly's role in that manipulation. Her "gotcha" moment was designed to further a Fox narrative. She is a magnificent propagandist.
At a time when the French are laughing at Fox's ridiculous assertions about Paris (and with the Mayor of Paris threatening a defamation suit), the NY Times runs a puff piece on a Fox "news" reporter. That's the really hard-hitting investigative reporting we expect ...not. A monumental waste of reporter's and readers' time.
80
Megan Kelly does little more than contribute to the cynicism that already infects American politics. Too much heat and not enough light. I'll say one thing about Fox however, their anchor women and other female talking heads usually have terrific hair.
48
“As for Kelly, Ailes said, she had a long way to go to become one of the truly great television news talents, a distinction he reserves for Walter Cronkite, Diane Sawyer, Barbara Walters and, of course, Bill O’Reilly.”
For Ailes to put Bill O’Reilly on par with Walter Cronkite, Diane Sawyer, Barbara Walters is a bit of a stretch. O’Reilly might be bloviating it out of the water on cable, but cable news channels are still watched by a fraction of the broadcast news channels and, more importantly, by a more ideologically biased audience – i.e., by those who hear what they want to hear.
As for Megyn Kelly, after this exhaustive piece in the liberal New York Times, she might just go from Megyn who to Megyn mainstream? As long as she keeps those Megyn moments coming and real, she might just burst out of what Bill Maher calls the “Fox News bubble.”
For Ailes to put Bill O’Reilly on par with Walter Cronkite, Diane Sawyer, Barbara Walters is a bit of a stretch. O’Reilly might be bloviating it out of the water on cable, but cable news channels are still watched by a fraction of the broadcast news channels and, more importantly, by a more ideologically biased audience – i.e., by those who hear what they want to hear.
As for Megyn Kelly, after this exhaustive piece in the liberal New York Times, she might just go from Megyn who to Megyn mainstream? As long as she keeps those Megyn moments coming and real, she might just burst out of what Bill Maher calls the “Fox News bubble.”
6
It's really pathetic that asking a few hard questions as a newsperson makes someone a star. That speaks volumes for the sorry state of what passes as news on television these days.
1147
It/she is apparently the news, not a newsperson.
28
She is not a news reporter, the only thing she has in common with Rachel Maddow.
4
It's hilarious that she is *not* supposed to be a "New York/Hollywood elitist" ... how much $ does she spend on her nails and wardrobe? Lolz
11
As a person who cannot afford cable television, I wonder what will happen to Fox news when no one else can afford it either. If the Republicans in Congress and their too big to fail friends on Wall Street have their way, that day will soon be here.
27
We can afford it but we ditched it some time ago and don't regret it. We're not the only people to do this.
17
Didn't Obama promise free cable in his SOTU speech last night?
2
Fox is just dressing up the same old propaganda in a prettier package. I guess you can't blame them. Who would you rather have whisper sweet lies in your ear, Meagan Kelly or Bill O'Reilly?
25
Or Megan Kelly or Rachel Maddow? MSNBC fails spectacularly in this regard.
3
Rachel. Peroxide does not make your brain any prettier.
5
Rachel is FAB. I love her.
9
The messenger might be different but the message still the same Fox News rhetoric; lies and fear.
61
Why are you pretending that Fox news is news, or that anything that happens on that channel is anything other than cynical pandering to a highly partisan constituency? It's not news. C'mon, NY Times.
89
The NYT is just acknowledging a fellow professional.
2
As long as she remains of Flair and Flumoxed, she will never be a great news caster. Her best day was telling Karl to stick his republican statistics.
4
Fox "News" has done incalculable damage to America. It has appealed to the worst in people, legitimizing their envy and anger, in order to make a buck.
335
Not to excuse their at many times equally sensational counterweights such as MSNBC or CNN but Faux News is the worst of the bunch.
2
Hmmmm... and who told his constituents to go out and get angry, vote for revenge?
Yea, let's demonize the rich and redistribute that wealth. Because that's NOT the politics of envy.
Jenius!
Yea, let's demonize the rich and redistribute that wealth. Because that's NOT the politics of envy.
Jenius!
1
Fitting that in the second photo "meeting with colleagues" she has a blank notepad and capped pen.
27
There are almost 250 million Americans who are over the age of 18. Kelly and O'Reilly are triumphantly reaching... 1 percent of them? And Roger Ailes gets the final word by describing that as "most people?" Oh please.
I appreciate that the author has tried to give a more multidimensional portrayal of Fox News through Megyn Kelly. However, the fact is that the real winner here is Ailes, for first realizing just how much money could be made by telling 1 percent of Americans exactly what they want to hear and branding it "News."
I appreciate that the author has tried to give a more multidimensional portrayal of Fox News through Megyn Kelly. However, the fact is that the real winner here is Ailes, for first realizing just how much money could be made by telling 1 percent of Americans exactly what they want to hear and branding it "News."
74
I almost feel like this article is praising Kelly for doing what any good journalist does. This is not newsworthy, particularly since she is repeatedly falling 'victim' to fact checking.
23
Reading stories like this re-affirms my decision to cut-out cable tv from my life. Not only do I save $150.00 a month, I get the peace of mind knowing that I do not support this circus show. Another satisfied cord-cutter.
56
"Consider the Source" is the operative concept here and should be incorporated with the Fox News logo as a warning label. Lousy and/or false reporting is just not funny or entertaining anymore.
22
This fluff piece is sad on so many levels. Rachel Maddow is both intelligent and a real journalist, but because she doesn't have so many viewers watching Affirnmation Hour on Fox News, she never gets the attention she deserves.
16
I know roughly 100 people. I'm fairly certain that not one of them knows who Megan Kelly is. The Megan Kelly Moment? Only in some alternate universe than the one I live in.
35
So true. It's not like she's Beyonce, or Katy Perry, or someone really important whose opinion matters ... like Sean Penn or George Clooney.
Then again, I don't live in California.
Then again, I don't live in California.
6
What I find really unpredictable about her is whether she knows what she is talking about or not.
19
An article on an attractive successful woman who does not toe the liberal line. Cue the hate.
16
What's funny is that Fox is so happy to be number #1 or #2 in the cable news market. That's like being number #2 in the telegraph news market. While the rest of the world get their news from the Internet, the tv audience is going to get 1) older, 2) more conservative, 3) more delusional. TV is dead as a source of news.
18
The Fox News channel made a profit of over $1 billion in 2013. That's hardly close to being dead. In the meantime all network (ABC, CBS and NBC) news departments have been laying off staff and closing offices. Ditto for newspapers and magazines.
9
That's what they say about talk radio and wrongly too.
Her schtick is contrived and all about ambition. She would take any side to advance her cause. Despite her beauty and brains she is a willing shill in a national passion play invented and directed by people like Ailes for one reason only. Money. A bit icky I think.
33
This is the NY Times writing a straight story on Fox News and Megyn Kelly?
Megyn Kelly is an incredibly talented individual. I would prefer her to be in the 8:00pm time slot, but for now that belongs to O'Reilly. One of her best performances was her interview with Wade Rathke, founder of ACORN five years ago. It was a 60 Minutes type of interview in which she caused Rathke to lose his temper. This is a typical 60 Minutes tactic, but unexpected from a neophyte Fox hire. It was an indication of what was to come.
Excellent article!
Megyn Kelly is an incredibly talented individual. I would prefer her to be in the 8:00pm time slot, but for now that belongs to O'Reilly. One of her best performances was her interview with Wade Rathke, founder of ACORN five years ago. It was a 60 Minutes type of interview in which she caused Rathke to lose his temper. This is a typical 60 Minutes tactic, but unexpected from a neophyte Fox hire. It was an indication of what was to come.
Excellent article!
13
It WAS a 60 Minutes tactic. From the Washington Post:
1) CBS News and “60 Minutes” might as well be on different planets. For CBS News, Benghazi represents the folly of firewalls. Right after the Benghazi attack itself, “60 Minutes” correspondent Steve Kroft asked President Obama how he viewed the tragedy. “Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?” asked Kroft.
President Obama pretty well dodged the question, refusing to label it terrorism. Here’s how he responded:
OBAMA: Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.
Trouble was, the public didn’t find out about the president’s response for weeks, until just two days before Election Day — long after it might have affected the course of the campaign.
1) CBS News and “60 Minutes” might as well be on different planets. For CBS News, Benghazi represents the folly of firewalls. Right after the Benghazi attack itself, “60 Minutes” correspondent Steve Kroft asked President Obama how he viewed the tragedy. “Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?” asked Kroft.
President Obama pretty well dodged the question, refusing to label it terrorism. Here’s how he responded:
OBAMA: Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.
Trouble was, the public didn’t find out about the president’s response for weeks, until just two days before Election Day — long after it might have affected the course of the campaign.
2
Who thought that what Fox lacks is a perky blond? That's really thinking outside the infotainment box. All of a piece together....
15
She exists to keep viewers ignorant and mislead. All else is puffery.
36
I have seen MK do news like the greats in fleeting moments. Looks like she could be great but is choosing to be popular for now.
32
Great? How so? she personifies a slickly presented hate filled mantra. The article is more about her looks, i.e. showing her being 'made up'versus her having any great intellect or understanding. I suspect that she is aggressive at self promotion nut that she lacks any journalistic credibility. This is the woman who said that 'Santa is a white man'. What is next? I expect her to spout off about Muslims.
I find her, along with the other Fox robotic women (what's with all of the blonde women in short skirts and heavy makeup) more like Stepford wives than actual living women. To me they are personally off putting. They personify stupid misconceptions of women. Getting one's news from Fox is like getting one's news from the National Inquirer.
I find her, along with the other Fox robotic women (what's with all of the blonde women in short skirts and heavy makeup) more like Stepford wives than actual living women. To me they are personally off putting. They personify stupid misconceptions of women. Getting one's news from Fox is like getting one's news from the National Inquirer.
2
Popular and rich. She's got the instincts of a cat looking for a warm bed.
1
I can't for get her " Everyone knows Santa Claus is white" comment.
1
Fox News is becoming the Hooters of TV news.
389
Amen, Bro. Beats looking at the sour pusses on MSNBC. The studied geek-ness of Maddow and Hayes, the corpse Sharpton, etc.
4
That's an unfair comparison. Hooters purports to be a restaurant, and in fact serves food. The analogous statement can not be made of Fox "News".
13
Only "is becoming" ? Where ya been?
Fox went from tabloid to news. When did that happen?
11
Roger Ailes thinks Bill O'R is in the same group as Walter Cronkite? This is not unexpected from someone who likely compares Bush II with Churchill.
244
“They used to laugh at us in the mainstream media,” Ailes said, “but we’re becoming the place most people go to get the truth.” Americans should be smarter; Even the French don't think so.
48
Kelly tells the truth, which is a major shock to the system for most Fox viewers landing "firmly on the side of journalism, the facts and a narrative based on reality as opposed to partisan fantasy.”
Truth, facts and reality are revolutionary concepts for FOX news.
Kelly is a life-altering event for those who have been stupified with Hannity-Limbaugh-FOX propaganda syrup for a decade or two.
Truth, facts and reality are revolutionary concepts for FOX news.
Kelly is a life-altering event for those who have been stupified with Hannity-Limbaugh-FOX propaganda syrup for a decade or two.
22
The whole media wants to protect the status quo from the terrible swift sword of reason. It is the only explanation for the uniform dullness of pundits.
4
Wow! We finally agree on something! (Megan Kelly)
4
Truth, facts and reality are EXACTLY why Fox News has the viewers and the CNNs and evening network news shows are dying off. ''Liberal news converage?'' An oxymororn any more.
"We’re becoming the place most people go to get the truth.” - Roger Ailes
"What is the truth?" - Jesus to Pontius Pilate
"What is the truth?" - Jesus to Pontius Pilate
25
"Her audience of 2.8 million was four times as large as Rachel Maddow’s on MSNBC"
Remember that folks, when you speak in your bubble assuming that everyone agrees with you. They don't.
Remember that folks, when you speak in your bubble assuming that everyone agrees with you. They don't.
17
I don't think those numbers account for the way the population is split. Kelly's viewers are just plain old. They watch TV. Those of us who agree with Maddow and are younger, would not necessarily watch her show in the traditional way-maybe in a social media news feed, or on the the show's website, or what have you, but most likely not just sitting in front of a television.
14
So what? There will always be a hard core of true believers watching Fox no matter what they say or do do.
4
"Her audience of 2.8 million" is less than a third of the CBS Evening News audience. And that's a real newscast.
1
The real tragedy is that she is the face of the future of "news."
36
When has it never been the case, since color TV, that better looking talking heads have not been preferred?
The words Fox and Truth in the same sentence, that's a laugh.
104
What this tells me is that a) FOX News will do anything for ratings--even occasionally tell the semi-truth, if that looks like it'll help their business expand financially, and that b) it's hilarious to see these wealthy elite types pass themselves off as tribunes of the people.
34
Dont "the Megyn Moments" happen entirely in the absurd alternate reality universe called Fox News? May her Prada boots and crystal necklace protect her from its mindlessness while she simulates truth-seeking while on Ailes' payroll.
Let her speak to the crazy dumbness that the Mayor of Paris is trying to address: their fabrication and total lack of regard for facts on a consistent basis. It causes real harm to keep pumping the Fox formula into the public well.
Sorry, but "Even a stopped clock" is the metaphor for Ms. Kelly.
Let her speak to the crazy dumbness that the Mayor of Paris is trying to address: their fabrication and total lack of regard for facts on a consistent basis. It causes real harm to keep pumping the Fox formula into the public well.
Sorry, but "Even a stopped clock" is the metaphor for Ms. Kelly.
677
I agree with you. This phrase described it perfectly: "simulates truth-seeking". That's not just Megyn Kelly, it applies to maybe all of Fox News and, some portion of other news outlets as well.
4
Fox is the only real news network - the rest are propaganda arms for Libs. 93% of media is liberal. When I feel mindless and ready for a laugh I watch MSNBC. Sorry to break the newsflash but more viewers watch Fox News than all the rest combined. Good news is there is hope for you - I voted for McGovern and Carter then finally realized I had a brain and worked for Reagan in 1980 and voted Republican ever since. I agree the Repubs are bad but the Dems are criminally bad.
1
The envy here is palpable. She is on TV, is smart and beautiful and rich. Life is not fair so get over it.
A journalist 1% of the time, as a "Megyn moment" appears to be, is hardly a cause to celebrate.
793
Obviously you have not watched her show...
1
You should try watching the show.
2
Who do you "celebrate"?
Kelly is an invention of Roger Ailes. I'd say scripted to the narrative with sex appeal. That's always been with Ailes. The meeting you might want to cover is the one Ailes has everyday where the entertainers get their marching orders of the day. From The God's (Rupert-Roger-Rove) mouth to your ears.
42
Ailes truly is the puppet master. I was in awe to read that he had ordered a practice run of the Rove humiliation walk. How could he have known? The man is an evil genius.
5
Really Mr. Rutenberg and the NYT?
First puff pieces on Govs. Jeb Bush and Romney and now this?
The only reason Ms. Kelly is seen as a "hard news" source who is "ready to challenge the prevailing view" is because she is on a network where fabulists rule. I do watch her show at least a couple of times a week and while it is not as opinion driven as O'Reilly and Hannity, it still does present a certain world view. All the "fair and balanced" slogans in the world are not going to change that.
"Kelly, in black spiky heels and a bright red dress, her blond hair now blown out,"
The quote above displays why this lady is as famous and popular as she is. There are plenty of other reporters who might not "look the part" but are just as good if not better.
Yes, it is a fact that in television appearances do matter, especially for women. I find her horribly condescending. I suppose I should try and understand that given much of her audience.
Bottom line: I simply cannot take seriously a person who actually insists that St. Nicholas (aka Santa Claus) "is white" as part of her network's annual "war on Christmas" hysteria. Btw, fwiw, St. Nicholas was born in what is now Southern Turkey.
First puff pieces on Govs. Jeb Bush and Romney and now this?
The only reason Ms. Kelly is seen as a "hard news" source who is "ready to challenge the prevailing view" is because she is on a network where fabulists rule. I do watch her show at least a couple of times a week and while it is not as opinion driven as O'Reilly and Hannity, it still does present a certain world view. All the "fair and balanced" slogans in the world are not going to change that.
"Kelly, in black spiky heels and a bright red dress, her blond hair now blown out,"
The quote above displays why this lady is as famous and popular as she is. There are plenty of other reporters who might not "look the part" but are just as good if not better.
Yes, it is a fact that in television appearances do matter, especially for women. I find her horribly condescending. I suppose I should try and understand that given much of her audience.
Bottom line: I simply cannot take seriously a person who actually insists that St. Nicholas (aka Santa Claus) "is white" as part of her network's annual "war on Christmas" hysteria. Btw, fwiw, St. Nicholas was born in what is now Southern Turkey.
220
I can see why such a smart, down to earth, gorgeous woman is a threat to liberals.
They can't compete.
They can't compete.
21
Oh, please. Do better than that.
29
Who said she was a threat? It's pretty clear who and what she is, and I don't know a single liberal who finds that threatening.
9
We have smart, down to earth, gorgeous women on the left too: Joy Reid, Melissa Harris-Perry, Karen Finney. But none of them have blonde extensions, so it's pretty clear why Megyn is right up your alley.
10
Brit Hume identified her qualifications: ""Attractive-looking blond anchorwomen are not rare,’ Brit Hume said. ‘Attractive-looking blond anchorwomen who speak with a fierce authority are rare."" What he failed to mention, however, that speaking with authority on Fox News means repeating the anti-Obama, tea party line frequently and loudly, belittling other opinions, and paying more attention to shock value than news value.
154
Is Brit Hume actually alive? he seems mummified. I guess he is now setting us straight with his trademark measured verbiage and sad eyes about fierce blonds and the scarcity of their authority. Where but Fox would this even be a topic? We used to have the San Antonio Light for topics this gruesome.
1
Ms. Kelly reported on a situation that occurred in Appleton, Wisconsin. A high school student, a young male, alleged that one of his teachers bullied him about his conservative political beliefs. Ms. Kelly interviewed the young man on TV and stated something to the effect of "give us the names of any kids who you say bullied you and we will ruin them".
Sounds more like an adult bottle blonde bullying students to me.
Sounds more like an adult bottle blonde bullying students to me.
68
Ms. Kelly is an interesting person, for sure, and I like it when she's analytical rather than spouting the party line unthinkingly, like most Fox Nooz people do. However, I can't help but feel that she's near the end of her Fox anchor career, because of who they are as a Rupert Murdoch conglomerate.
She's about 44, roughly my age, and while she's striven to appear younger, that can't last much longer. I doubt she'll make it to 50 on Fox, because if you notice, they have not a single anchor or journalist woman who looks as old as 50. CNN and plenty of other moderate TV news outlets are fine with having older women, even overweight women, working on-screen. Fox is not fine with it and as soon as Ms. Kelly's wrinkles become evident on HD-TV, or as soon as she gains 25 pounds, they'll find an excuse to get rid of her.
Which really is fine by me. People who choose to work for the evil Empire, with full understanding of their choice, deserve to have Darth Vader force-choke them at some point.
She's about 44, roughly my age, and while she's striven to appear younger, that can't last much longer. I doubt she'll make it to 50 on Fox, because if you notice, they have not a single anchor or journalist woman who looks as old as 50. CNN and plenty of other moderate TV news outlets are fine with having older women, even overweight women, working on-screen. Fox is not fine with it and as soon as Ms. Kelly's wrinkles become evident on HD-TV, or as soon as she gains 25 pounds, they'll find an excuse to get rid of her.
Which really is fine by me. People who choose to work for the evil Empire, with full understanding of their choice, deserve to have Darth Vader force-choke them at some point.
71
As a fellow New York state resident, I remind you that the ex-prosecutor/politician Jeanine Pirro hosts one of their lesser watched programs. I only know this because of the absurdity of the event on that program leading to the City of Paris lawsuit. So yes, they have at least one older woman and then there is that Greta person, who once, long ago was a liberal on MSNBC in its early days until she married a conservative or had some religious conversion, depending upon whom you read. As to Kelly, I think she has these moments of turning away from the Tea Party line only to give her career viability should she ever need to jump ship elsewhere.
5
Thanks for the update sir, I confess I don't watch Fox enough to recognize all of their personnel. Still, they've got no older women front-and-center, unlike CNN, MSNBC, the NYT, or most other news sources.
2
We could watch Fox and wait for a Kelly moment that happens about once or twice a year. This would take great endurance: hours and hours of pain, watching her guests say what she wants to hear, and watching her not reacting at all to their same old mindless talking points.
Or, we could watch Rachel Maddow or Jon Stewart and enjoy their razor sharp intellect and have a few good laughs.
What would be more satisfying?
Or, we could watch Rachel Maddow or Jon Stewart and enjoy their razor sharp intellect and have a few good laughs.
What would be more satisfying?
337
I see you've never watched Kelly. The guests don't say what she wants to hear. Often see vigorous debate on her show.
Rachel Maddow and John Stewart as "razor sharp intellects"? Please. I do think John Stewart is funny and often watch, but I wouldn't class him as having a razor sharp intellect, and lets not forget he relies on comedy writers, his skill is delivery.
Rachel Maddow and John Stewart as "razor sharp intellects"? Please. I do think John Stewart is funny and often watch, but I wouldn't class him as having a razor sharp intellect, and lets not forget he relies on comedy writers, his skill is delivery.
5
If you don't see Maddow (a Rhodes scholar) and Stewart (almost always on the mark and a writer himself) as sharp intellects, I think it says more about you, Dave, than them.
36
Bill O'Reilly proved that performing shouting matches for an undemanding electorate is big business. But Megyn Kelly is a breath of fresh air at Fox News. I can never resist her. She always seems to deliver the partisan network's dubious message with a smirk and a twinkle in her eye. The way she toyed with Karl Rove on election night 2012 was priceless. Perhaps she can help kneekjerk viewers understand that there's more to politics than a rigid black & white ideology.
107
Yes, that election night: I will never forget her getting out from behind her desk and heading down the hallway to the Fox research area, the camera following her, where she conversed with the research folks and then returned to announce that the election had to be called for Obama.
The reality is, regardless of her alleged personality, brilliance and "breath of fresh air" on Fox, if she was 4'11" and weighed 300 pounds she would never have the chance to get on the air.
7
The other stations aren't 'partisan'?
4
Apparently, a Fox News anchorwoman who makes a not-completely-false statement from time to time is worth celebrating as a sensation. So much to contemporary journalistic standards.
Btw the Jon Stewart clip mocking Kelly's sudden enthusiasm for government-mandated benefits if and only if they suit her personally is spot on and essential watching.
Btw the Jon Stewart clip mocking Kelly's sudden enthusiasm for government-mandated benefits if and only if they suit her personally is spot on and essential watching.
468
I think this is the link you are looking for:
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/08acdo/lactate-intolerance
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/08acdo/lactate-intolerance
1
You just keep getting your 'news' from Comedy Central... and we'll keep electing guys who get their message out through Glozell!
Good work.
Good work.
1
I'm the demo they are trying to reach with her and no thanks. She was the "santa was white" person right?
378
A) You're *part* of the demo they're trying to reach.
B) They go into the whole Santa thing in the actual article. Poor reading comprehension or ADD? I don't think you even had to announce what demo you're part of. It's obvious.
B) They go into the whole Santa thing in the actual article. Poor reading comprehension or ADD? I don't think you even had to announce what demo you're part of. It's obvious.
4
Yep. Her "Santa was white" rant pretty much disqualified her from any claims of professionalism or knowledge/intelligence forever.
Apparently, law school didn't teach her the difference between history and fairy tales. But then again, her audience doesn't know the difference either.
Apparently, law school didn't teach her the difference between history and fairy tales. But then again, her audience doesn't know the difference either.
2
I don't agree with a lot of things she says, but I agree with a lot of things she says. She sometimes however gets things really wrong then I have to remind myself who her employer is and what it expects from her in order to keep this pretty, smart woman around.
10
She is not particularly smart, but since blond hair and white skin is all it takes for the kind of men who watch Fox News (and, sadly, many of the men who comment here) to think a woman is 'smart', she will do well in her career.
48
Telling that Ailes refers to her as his "breakthrough artist" and not "journalist".
260
Brit Hume is right. No, blonde anchorwomen indeed are not rare, especially on her channel.
Not rare at all.
Not rare at all.
79
Why? Are they supposed to be?
2
You mean attractive blond women. Unattractive, overweight, or older blonde women are never to be seen. Certainly never ever any woman that appears as ancient as Rupert Murdoch.
18
No, not rare, well-done.
1
Firstly, the article states Kelly was "heading toward divorce and wondering about the direction her life had taken." Life doesn't "take" any directions by itself -- people get into the situations they do because of choices they make. Kelly wanted to make big money, and was doing that at a large law firm by her choice and clear goals.
Secondly, the article never really addresses how/why she chose to be a prominent face on the right-wing propaganda channel known as Fox News. This is not reporting -- it's not fact-based. Her job is to entertain right wing "news" watchers, mostly middle-aged white men, while spouting conservative dogma.
Oh yeah, she's solidly 1%. It's all about the money.
Secondly, the article never really addresses how/why she chose to be a prominent face on the right-wing propaganda channel known as Fox News. This is not reporting -- it's not fact-based. Her job is to entertain right wing "news" watchers, mostly middle-aged white men, while spouting conservative dogma.
Oh yeah, she's solidly 1%. It's all about the money.
481
"Life doesn't "take" any directions by itself -- people get into the situations they do because of choices they make."
So the unemployed, those making minimum wage, teenage mothers, those in jail .... did they get into the situations they do because of choices they make?
So the unemployed, those making minimum wage, teenage mothers, those in jail .... did they get into the situations they do because of choices they make?
5
Megyn asks questions that are not on the AP/REUTERS news feed, and she is definitely not on a teleprompter, she is thinking on her feet wherever it goes.
3
Dear Cyclist:
Please give us all list of the TV anchors who are NOT in the 1%. TV jobs pay millions of dollars a year.
BTW: the 1% starts at $365,000 a year and up.
Please give us all list of the TV anchors who are NOT in the 1%. TV jobs pay millions of dollars a year.
BTW: the 1% starts at $365,000 a year and up.
1
An amazingly unbiased piece about Kelly. I'm shocked that it came from the New York Times.
27
Sorry, if Megyn Kelly has what passes for intelligence these days, TV news is truly worthless.
569
I thought Fox was an entertainment network. Did they go to court to prove just that point?
90
Based on the photo alone, it would appear that Megyn Kelly really likes and see great things in the future for Megyn Kelly. I guess being taken seriously isn't part of the image.
68
Just another Fox pretty face married to an empty head. If letting a dyed hair grow out was meant to make her smarter, it failed. Better to watch an empty head then the babble from CNN and MSNBC. Where have the real journalist gone?
32
Anyone who works for Murdoch, Ailes & co cannot be honest and independent. PERIOD. She looks good to the elderly Fox viewers and her salary is very good, I am sure. A high income covers a multitude of sins.
293
what exactly is wrong with being elderly?
3
Most elderly do not have the expendable income younger people do and are not as likely to try new products so they're not attractive to most advertisers.
2
April,
They may be less gullible as well!
They may be less gullible as well!
2
Kelly is one of the many talking heads who have a role they play. If she were to take a non-Fox position on air she would be gone. In the end she is one of our media millionaires who are basically paid spokesmen. To put it more simply these people are paid to say stupid things.
284
Megyn is awesome!!!
19
This isn't an article, it's a book! Can I get an executive summary please?
15
“They used to laugh at us in the mainstream media,” Ailes said, “but we’re becoming the place most people go to get the truth.”
Really Roger, really? NOBODY goes to Fox News for the truth. At best you get the 70 year old white males looking for someone to parrot back their anger as in the "Get off my grass" crowd. If the parrot is a blonde bombshell excheerleader, so much the better for them. As the tired old saw goes, "Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but they are not entitled to make up their own facts".
Really Roger, really? NOBODY goes to Fox News for the truth. At best you get the 70 year old white males looking for someone to parrot back their anger as in the "Get off my grass" crowd. If the parrot is a blonde bombshell excheerleader, so much the better for them. As the tired old saw goes, "Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but they are not entitled to make up their own facts".
890
It's great how people who do not watch Fox News have all the opinions about Fox News.
9
Really? Last night the President "made up his own facts", that he was responsable for and in favor of lower energy prices. Neither of wich is true if you review why energy prices have fallen over the last 6-7 months as well as the President's own statements on the subject.
"facts", often are in the eye of the beholder and presented as such even here!
"facts", often are in the eye of the beholder and presented as such even here!
7
And Richard shows us exactly the problem. The statement "I am in favor of lower energy prices" regards an opinion, not a fact. Facts are never in the eye of the beholder; look up the definition. A fact requires agreement, just like a word is meaningless if we do not agree on the definition. Unfortunately that means groups of people are entitled to their own facts...like Fox New Viewers.
21
You know what's funny?
When Megyn Kelly asks hard questions, it's called a, "Megyn Kelly Moment."
When Soledad O'brien, did it, it was called, "Fired."
What's wrong with THIS picture?
When Megyn Kelly asks hard questions, it's called a, "Megyn Kelly Moment."
When Soledad O'brien, did it, it was called, "Fired."
What's wrong with THIS picture?
557
For which company did Soledad O'Brien work? Maybe that's your answer.
4
Didn't Ashleigh Banfield get fired for it, too?
3
Soledad has a Left wing political agenda and nothing more could have everything to do with it?
7