You expected anything else from Rupert Murdoch?

It's remarkable how little of this name-calling matters when one doesn't own a television. Fact is, the myth of non-biased news reportage is and has alway been just that - myth, promulgated for the most part (I presume) by journalism schools looking to elevate their vocation to the level of Profession, like doctors and lawyers (and, in ancient times, architects and engineers).

Before TV, radio news was 'infotainment' - and still is; I will even allow that NPR, my sole source of current events other than Dan Spires, indulges in 'tainment mixed with info. Long before that, and continuing through tomorrow, newspapers and magazines were and always will be 'infotainment'. Before the multi-page newspaper was the broadsheet and the town crier, the popular ditty, the satire of the Irish bards and the Homeric sagas. All entertainment: an interpretation based, somewhere/when, on fact.

News doesn't draw readers or viewers - opinions and interpretations do. Viewership/readership means larger market share, means higher ad prices per second or column inch. Other than NPR [and state-sponsored broadcasting in other countries], there is no such thing as not-for-profit professional journalism - and that is not an evil thing.

Don't like Fox? Change the channel. Better yet, turn off the TV and turn on your local public radio. Best of all - go for a walk and think for yourself.

E' (rather fond of foxes, myself...)