Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism (2004)

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism is a documentary that lambasts media bias, specifically the conservatively-slanted Fox News, when the documentary itself is biased in the regard that it makes Fox News out to be the only network that is corporate-controlled and guilty of watering down or slanting its stories with a specific partisan agenda. Because of this, director Robert Greenwald seems to be effectively pushing his own agenda that media bias is wrong when it's slanted in the right direction but makes little to no mention of the "liberal bias" in news we've heard all too much about.First off, I speak as a viewer anxious to watch a documentary about an issue that truly effects every American and how we obtain our information and our news. I'm not offended by Outfoxed's otherwise substantial critique of Rupert Murdoch, Fox News, or its practices, many of which rightfully deserved. I'm slightly disturbed, however, by the documentary's lack of peripheral vision. It's so easy to attack Fox News for its conservative bias, on-air flubs, and independent/right-leaning pundits who act as on-air columnists rather than reporters, but to dig deeper and find accusations of media bias all across the grid would be a challenge worth commending. Greenwald segregates his view to Fox News, which, unintentionally, becomes documentarian finger-pointing when you realize that rather than effectively give us equal opportunity critiques of the media's delivery of information, Greenwald is simply trying to give us one side of the issue while greatly suppressing the other side.Grading the film on its own terms - a seventy-two minute critique on Fox News and Murdoch - the film finds ways to be marginally successful. It opens with PowerPoint-style graphics stating when Rupert Murdoch first bought pieces of media equipment, to when he first acquired different TV networks, to what he currently owns, to how many people watch a network he owns. Former Fox News producers and behind-the-scenes technical workers speak to Greenwald, however, with disguised voices for fear of the network's retaliation, which should already tell us something. Other apparently brave souls choose to keep themselves open and identified, all of whom argue Fox's blatant bias and dictative ways.What Greenwald gets access to that will immediately turn heads are Fox News' memos that implore anchors to try and point out something about the Democratic Party that may make them look bad, make some sort of comment on air about some candidate, interrupt coverage of something else to something the political right is involved in, and so forth. All of these cases show how Fox News has cheapened the news element of journalism, as they constantly seem to be searching for a way to attack or blast the Democratic Party while casting the Republican Party in a better light.A segment of the film is also devoted to the rise of "soft news" and journalism devoted to trivial news about celebrities and how Fox News has chosen to cover it. One former graphic designer for Fox News talks about how he designed an "ALERT" logo for the network to play before breaking news, like some type of disaster, some type of political bill going through office, or a developing story that demanded media coverage. He remarks how disgusted he was when he saw the "ALERT" logo - which ostensibly appears to be easy to attach onto a story that deserves front page news and immediate attention - to something like Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez's relationship or something incredibly trite and meaningless that should be nothing more than a blurb, if anything. Outfoxed doesn't wholly criticize Fox for this, but remarks how 24-hour news channels have become more about ratings than accuracy in reporting.When Outfoxed gets observant and analytical is when it hits its stride as a film. It talks about how polls consistently show Fox News viewers as extremely misinformed when asked basic questions (have we found weapons of mass destruction in Irag? Do other countries approve of us entering Iraq?) compared to those who look towards other news outlets for their daily scoop. It also compares in a stretch of time the ratio to Republican commentators to Democratic commentators on Fox News and the result is 83% to 17% percent (5:1), respectively, with the liberal/Democratic politicians falling under the lines of left-leaning centrists who often sided with President George W. Bush on many key issues.Finally, the other point Outfoxed thankfully brings up is the blurred line between news and opinion with its on-air reporters. Between Bill O'Reilly giving his opinion during his "no spin" "Talking Points" element of his program The O'Reilly Factor to Sean Hannity blatantly stating "'x' amount of days till George Bush's reelection" during the Bush/Kerry election season, it's so difficult to determine when the news stops on Fox and the opinion starts or vice-versa. No other news network seems to employ their pundits for their opinion like Fox News in addition to allowing them to say so much to their guests (IE: Bill O'Reilly consistently being allowed to interrupt people and telling them to "shut up" in a highly-unprofessional manner).Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism is an interesting, albeit been-there-done-that critique of a network that will see more criticism in its entire lifetime than perhaps positivity. Despite being the most watched news network in America, it still carries baggage thicker than any other. Moreover, Greenwald has devoted much of his time as a director to shedding light on and criticizing enormous conservative industries, such as the Iraq War and even the billionaire Koch Brothers in his documentary Koch Brothers Exposed. I'd still love to see how Robert Greenwald would paint MSNBC and its blatant Democratic Party bias and see how the similarities match up.

Robert Greenwald had been directing movies for twenty years when he released the Abbie Hoffman biopic "Steal This Movie!", but it was when he started directing documentaries that he really hit his stride. An example is "Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism", looking at how the supposedly fair and balanced Fox News is really nothing more than the right wing's mouthpiece. The channel owned by Rupert Murdoch was the first to call the 2000 election for George W. Bush, and that channel did everything to make John Kerry look like a flip-flopping, France-loving wimp in 2004.I of course only see clips from Fox Noise (as Keith Olbermann calls it) when Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, and Rachel Maddow rerun it and mock it. Unfortunately, its viewers are 100% convinced that it gives you both sides of the story, when in reality it gives you the far right wing and mild right wing. Indeed, it's drug many other news stations down with it, turning them into entertainment venues masquerading as journalism.The continuing News of the World scandal should serve as a warning about what any Murdoch-owned media outlet is likely to devolve into. To be certain, since we've got another presidential election coming up this year, you can be sure that Fixed News will be running all sorts of nasty things. But the point that the documentary makes is that a democracy requires a diverse media culture, one not owned by a few companies, and that people always need to question what any media outlet is telling them. Definitely see it.

How can a man who is left wing, who has affiliation with moveon.org and other far-left Hollywood types make an objective movie about Fox News.Now yes i am a fan of Fox and yes i have noticed the leanings to the right on numerous occasions. But being a UK citizen i have no leanings left or right when it comes to US politics. But lets get this in perspective. This guy like Michael Moore has made a movie aimed at a pro George Bush outlet in an attempt to change an election (which we now know he won) similar to what Moore did with Fahrenheit 9/11. It just smacks of desperation and makes the Democratic party and those who take campaign help from these people look bad. But credit where it's due this is some great propaganda by the left wing. I mean Osama Bin Laden and Kim Jong Il would be proud of this guy. I mean after all, Kerry lost the election, but the mud thrown from these movies being made has stuck and Bush continues to struggle in his second term. But the more stuff like this is produced the wider the wedge driving the Democrats from the centre gets and that could make them unelectable for years to come.Snoogans177

First of all, let me just say I can't stand Fox News. I think it's nothing but right-wing propaganda and a shameful excuse for journalism. I also think a documentary exposing Fox's hypocrisy is much needed, but this one is an extremely poor effort.Frankly, I am SHOCKED at the amount of people rating this movie a 9 or 10. People, these ratings are supposed to be based on the QUALITY of the movie, not the ideas it stands for. And quality is one thing this movie lacks. For starters, the interviews are the worst I've ever seen. They are poorly lit, and consist of nothing but the same talking heads over and over again, which becomes really tiresome. The graphics and music are painfully cheesy. The sound quality is horrible, the dialogue is usually out of synch, and even the clips from Fox News look extremely poor, like they've been taken straight from the Internet. The entire movie looks and feels a high school film project at best, and (as another user pointed out) a Powerpoint presentation at worst. I understand it's on a low budget, but the fact that the director has a career going back decades makes the lack of style or creativity especially outrageous. You'd think in all that time he'd have learned a thing or two about, say, lighting a shot.Technical stuff aside, even the movie's basic argument (Fox is biased and unfair in its reporting) is weak. I never thought the day would come when I'd be defending Fox News, but it has to be said that many of the clips are taken out of context or otherwise distorted. For example, most of the scenes of anchors spouting wild opinions are taken from Fox's political talk shows. Fox has NEVER claimed these shows are to be seen as news, but that's what the movie keeps implying. It's as unfair as anything Fox has ever reported.An even better example of the blatant distortion is when they show Bill O'Reilly responding to criticism that he always tells his guests to "shut up." O'Reilly says this only happened once, and this is followed by a montage of him yelling "shut up!" at different times. Well, that's very clever, except that in almost all of these instances he's not actually talking to a guest. We even see the infamous moment where he yelled at Al Franken on a book tour, which had NOTHING to do with Fox News AT ALL. Do all these clips indicate that O'Reilly is an obnoxious moron? Sure. Does it indicate that he's lying about only telling a guest to shut up once? Nope. Just the opposite, in fact.The movie has some good points to make, and occasionally does so effectively, but the overall distortion, low quality, lack of narration, and complete lack of a sense of humor bring this one down. I suspect that the people rating this so highly were either directly involved with the making of the movie, or are just flakes who will jump at the chance to support anything remotely anti-right. Ignore the hype; this is simply a bad movie. 4/10 stars.