The Cup of Coffee: White House's David Axelrod Meets With Fox News' Roger Ailes
On a recent visit to New York, White House adviser David Axelrod met over coffee with Roger Ailes, the president of the Fox News network, which President Obama has described as a "television station that is entirely devoted to attacking my administration."
According to accounts from both the White House and Fox News, the meeting was cordial. "I've known Roger for a long time," Axelrod told TIME in an email on Monday. "We chatted from time to time during the campaign. I was going to be in NY, so we got together for a cup of coffee."
Both Axelrod and a spokeswoman for Ailes declined to further discuss the contents of the conversation, which was first reported by Politico on Tuesday.
It was not the first time that Obama aides, who have been highly critical of Ailes' network, have reached out. In mid-2008, Obama himself met with Ailes and Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch in a Waldorf-Astoria hotel suite. "I just wanted to know if I'm going to get a fair shake from Fox News Channel," Ailes recalled Obama saying, in an interview with the Washington Post.
Suffice it to say, the meeting did not cool tensions between the Obama camp and Fox, which has been enjoying a large increase in ratings this year as it has positioned itself as a major source of criticism of Obama and his policies.
"The fact that our numbers are up 30 plus in the news arena on basic cable I'd like to think is a sign that we are just putting what we believe to be the facts out on the table," said Michael Clemente, Fox's senior vice president for news, in an interview on Tuesday. "In terms of the relationship, I think we are doing our job. And they [the White House] are doing their job."
In recent weeks, the White House has stepped up its criticism of the network, posting a blog post last week describing "Fox lies," including a misstatement of fact by Fox host Glenn Beck and another by morning show host Steve Doocy. Clemente said that White House aides, in their increasingly vocal criticism, were failing to distinguish between Fox News's journalism, and its pundits and opinion voices, like Beck, who he likened to the op-ed page of the New York Times. Clemente said that the morning show, Fox and Friends, where Doocy appears, is an "entertainment show that does some news," like NBC's Today Show or ABC's Good Morning America.
As for Fox's journalism, Clemente said the White House criticism was typical of other administrations who have been critical of certain reporters. "It reminds me a little bit about what happened to Sam Donaldson when he was covering the White House," said Clemente. "The Reagan White House thought he was enemy number one. He had the same relationship with the Carter White House. They thought he was enemy number one. He thought he was doing his job."
But attitude towards Fox at the White House has been souring for months. On a recent Sunday, President Obama pointedly declined to appear on Fox News Sunday, prompting host Chris Wallace to call Obama aides, "the biggest bunch of cry babies."
Though White House aides are hesitant to criticize the network on the record, their disdain for the programming--including Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck--is clearly evident. "They are the paid political programming for a party, and occasionally a couple of news stories break out in the midst of 23 hours and 45 minutes of political rantings and opinion," said one senior administration official. "Everything about it is one-sided political opinion directed at a base. Period."
-
1
There is a problem between the WH and Fox news? Really? I thought they loved Obama over there. They spend 24 hours a day talking about him.
-
2
“As for Fox's journalism…”
Michael, you do have a sense of humor after all. Thank you. -
3
I'm not sure this is news to anybody with any intellectual capacity. Fox, Bush's biggest cheerleader, Obama's biggest detractor. In both cases reporting the facts not so important.
-
3.1
Not unlike MSNBC only reversed but I never seem to hear liberals complain about that. Oh right there are only 6 viewers for MSNBC.
-
3.2
^ Haha! So true! Anyone who criticizes Fox for bias but then watches MSNBC is a hypocrite of the highest order, and frankly, full of you-know-what. The reverse is also true, of course.
-
-
4
Which is worse:
.
A) that Fox News is a giant media outlet dedicated to introducing "fairness" into American reportage by "balancing" what it declares to be the "liberal media" biases imbued throughout the coverage of its competitors
.
or
.
B) that Obama aides are "the biggest bunch of cry babies."
.
, for our country?
.
Can journalists besides those that are employed by Roger Ailes say?-
4.1
But what happens to all those applications? If things keep going the way they are Fox maybe the only place to get a job if all you can do is read script.
-
4.2
The answer is "B", Alex, who are the biggest bunch of cry babies of any Administration in the past 30 years?
.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/09/19/chris-wallace-obama-administration-biggest-bunch-crybabies -
4.3
I thought Glenn Beck was the biggest cry baby?
-
-
5
I don't understand why the WH doesn't simply de-credential Fox, yank all their press passes. There must be plenty of legitimate journalists who'd love the chance to ask a question at a briefing or a press conference. Let Fox's reporters hang with their brethren, wherever National Enquirer reporters hang.
-
5.1
Better yet, let them stay but let them stew in non-recognition. I wouldn't call on the Fox reporter in news conferences, but given the concern-trolling and gotcha approach of the network guys I'd pass over them as well. Get the word out that informative reporting will be supported; controversy for the sake of ratings, not so much.
-
-
6
Fox News's journalism
Is he talking about the tea bag publicity tour? Or maybe the weather forecasts on the local affiliate stations? Otherwise, I'm not sure to what Clemente is referring.
-
7
Excellent!! It's about time Dems stop legitimizing Fox's Crackpot News Network.
-
8
Both Axelrod and a spokeswoman for Ailes declined to further discuss the contents of the conversation.
I can imagine.
AILES: So, why won't your guy come on out network again?
AXELROD: Why should he? You're bleeding money, you're losing advertisers every day, and your audience is mostly old and lives in trailer parks. What's Obama got to gain?
-
8.1
I am sorry but are you confused? Fox News bleeding money and losing advertisers everyday?? WOW, what planet are you from? Fox News ratings have drastically increased this year therefore, advertisers WANT TO ADVERTISE with an organization with viewers. Are you getting confused with MSNBC??
Yes, Van Jones organized a boycott against Glenn Beck - but the advertisers who pulled out of Beck's show moved to another Fox show. Beck picked up new advertisers - it was a win/win for Fox.
If I want to sell a product do I advertise on MSNBC with no viewers or do I sell my product on a station with viewers?? Hmmmm..
Oh and people who live in trailers are the only Fox viewers - yep, those are the only people watching Fox. I guess America has more people living in trailers than I realized. I know soon that will be the case under this White House.
Put the kool aid down - perhaps at that point you can deal with reality. I am embarrassed you actually wrote such an ignorant comment. Maybe you should research before you write.
Also, the reason Fox is successful is because they report ALL the news - not just pro-Obama news. Thank God for Fox - they tell the truth - they do not leave America in the dark. My MSNBC loving sister does not have a clue about half the information going on in the World. So sad! And she votes (like you!).
I am STUNNED by your ignorance.
-
8.2
"I am STUNNED by your ignorance."
.
What we are seeing here is a new phenomena where people can choose what they want to hear, and adapt it as truth.
.
The truth is, when one looks at the rest of America's media, as well as that of the rest of the word*, the consensus is clearly against FOX.
.
*I except propaganda organs, which I am pretty sure, FOX qualifies as -
8.3
Glenn Beck is bleeding advertisers, but those advertisers are still forking over cash to Fox.
.
Also the Fox financial channel is bleeding money, but I think Fox itself is doing just fine.
.
Unfortunately. -
8.4
You can say what you want about Fox News (I do not like or watch any cable news) but clearly one problem they do not have is with money and advertisers. Anyone who says otherwise is either ignorant or lying.
-
8.5
Yes, lynnie2012, newscorp is losing money. So is the New York Post, and the Weekly Standard recently sold for a measly million.
.
FOX does well in overall numbers, but not as well in "the demo" that advertisers actually care about, which is why FOX has to run so much more advertising than their competitors: they can't command the same rates.
.
If you weren't yet another disposable, ignorant FOX News victim, you'd know that. -
8.6
Speaking of "the demo" viewers, just found this little gem: http://www.mediaite.com/online/red-eye-resurgence-more-demo-viewers-watch-fox-at-3am-than-cnn-at-8pm/
.
To quote the great Larry David, "prett-ay, prett-ay, prett-ay good".
-
-
9
Fox News is dangerous. They stoke the embers of right-wing extremism to make a buck. How long will it be before we have another McVeigh blowing up a federal building in the name of "patriotism"?
-
9.1
Wow, do you see silent black helicpoters in the sky as well? What game do you believe the MSM is playing when they highlight stories that are positive about BO,but either refuse to report or barely mention those that are negative? I didn't believe in the bias of the MSM until this past election. After watching Gibson's interviews with BO and SP, it was pretty obvious. Gibson went after SP HARD after lobbing nothing but softballs at BO. If you can look at the list of questions from both interviews and claim each was as tough as the other, I have one question......what color is the sky in your world?
-
-
10
[...] Axelrod tells Time: "I’ve known Roger for a long time. We chatted from time to time during the [...]
-
11
I absolutely love when the liberal whacko's go crazy over Fox news. The one station that isn't blatantly in the tank for Obama. God forbid there is one station that doesn't have an extreme liberal Bias like NBC CBS ABC..maybe Bush should've thrown all those reporters out. No wonder why Fox News gets more viewers than CNN and MSNBC combined..I just love watching loony libs cry about Fox
-
12
Both sides need an enemy to point fingers at, status quo continues.
-
13
White House cry babies? Clearly Ailes has missed Glen Beck's public on air sobbing. A bigger cry baby I have never seen on t.v.
-
14
Michael, do you know who suggested this coffee?
You seem to intimate that it was Axelrod, or was he the only one that answered your emails? Knowing this fact would put more light on this meeting.-
14.1
I'd say given that Axlerod WENT to New York is a pretty clear assuption that the White House asked for the meeting.
.
Oreilly has been saying for months now that the only thing a feud between Fox and Obama will do is drive up Fox New's ratings. For Obama it is a no win situation.
.
Now Obama looks like he will pander to Fox, simply to garner enough Independent support for his future plans, health care being his top priority.
.
And, the whole thing started because Fox decided to run one of their shows on the regular Fox outlets instead of one of Obama's 145 speeches since taking office. They did however, run it on their cable site.
.
Boo hoo hoo. Boo hoo indeed.
-
-
15
When I read things like this it makes me see Swamp debate as largely an approximation of this.
Taibbi and this Belarusian guy offer some interesting ideas about the emptiness of our public discourse.
-
15.1
Excellent commentary, Oregon JC.
-
-
16
The thing about wingnuts is that they require absolutely no logical explanation for ANYTHING.
Why would the media have a liberal bias? This is asserted and repeated ad nauseum. But never is there an effort to explain this curious phenomenon. Is there some hidden financial incentive to hire liberal reporters? Or covering stories with a liberal angle? Are conservatives too stupid to get reporting jobs? Or simply too uninterested in the profession (in which case, whose fault would it be for any bias)?
In contrast, look at the typical liberal criticism of the media: Money makes the world go round, including the media. Because large corporations own most media outlets the news coverage is skewed against stories that would undermine the profits of the corporate owners. This doesn't mean that every story fits that dynamic. Or that any time a story is buried it is because of pressure from corporate ownership. But, overall, liberals believe that the dynamic of media ownership significantly affects reporting.
-
16.1
As Steven Colbert said, "reality has a WELL KNOWN liberal bias".
-
16.2
Why would the media have a liberal bias? Why does the left think Fox news has a conservative bias? No one talked about bias for years until Fox came on the scene and the cover was blown. You never see the words extreme liberal in any MSM report. For the MSM media its a concept that does not exist because they believe their view is normal. SURPRISE, it's not and now liberals can whine about Fox who continues to grow while the NYT, Boston Globe et al circle the drain.
lysheen: Love the fact you quote a hack comedian to try and elevate the liberal point of view . And yet libs make fun of Fox
-
16.3
I'm glad you like that, that's why I posted it.
Why does the left think Fox has a conservative biased? Is this a rhetorical question? Forgive me not understanding this question.
You want to talk liberal bias? Talk about MSNBC. You want to talk conservative bias, then you're talking about Fox. It so obvious that it's pointless to try and explain this people. If they don't get it, then it's because they don't want to believe it.
Seriously, it's great when conservatives rant about MSNBC being liberally biased (which btw, it absolutely is), but then can't understand why people think Fox is biased.
I, like all moderates, am glad the fringes seem to be a shrinking minority in this country.
-
16.4
I think the baseline isn't the size of the crowd, or the "bias", or anything else but the completely aberrant lack of facts. If FOX were to stick to facts, and convey a viewpoint consistent with whatever it is right now that conservatives see as important, I don't think I could complain.
.
However, these "conservatives"* complain of bias the same way someone who hates the Big Bang theory complain of bias. They are mistaking what actually is consensus among the rest of the world that is contrary to their point of view.
.
The size of the crowd is only the effect of trawling a very wide ocean for a very sparse population of fish...
.
*there are real conservatives, and then there are hateful, amoral, and unpatriotic Americans. Like Timothy McVeigh, these individuals care nothing for democracy. -
16.5
Do you really believe you can have even-handed reporting with no bias when 80-90% of journalists identify themselves as Dems? Where is the Dems beloved mantra of diversity when it comes to political affiliation? You'll find it hard to get anyone to disagree with you and challenge you if everyone in the room believes the same as you do.
-
-
17
There is a pathetic quality to this piece of reportage by MS. If Axelrod and Ailes don't want to be upfront about their discussions then they are both wrong. This WH seems to have a desire to make a breakthrough at Fox. This is a delusion. But Axelrod "knows" Ailes and that is supposed to satisfy us simpletons.
If this WH does not play hardball with the Fox crowd (and I exempt Shepard Smith) then they will reap the appropriate "reward". The one thing one needs to know about Murdoch is that he ihas no interest in journalism. He is a muckraker and the bottom line is the only thing that counts.
-
18
How long will Shep last on Fox News?
.
-
18.1
This is the most intelligent and passionately argued defense of the Public Option I've seen from anyone other than Bernie Sanders.
I hope Shep has his resume updated.
-
18.2
Yes, we should keep in mind moments like this from S. Smith when we lambast Fox. As Chris says, this is probably the most passionate (and coherent) voice we've heard in favor of a public option from within the village. Irony of all ironies, it's being broadcast not from 1600 PA Ave, not by our supposed "liberal media" but by a Fox iconoclast. Pigs will literally fly out of Joe Klein's generous backside before he ever speaks up for the populist rabble.
.
Dems who see through the kabuki can feel nothing short of despair. On one hand we have the likes Barrasso and on the other we have Max Baucus. We can condemn Barrasso's inarticulate denials of reality and hypocrisy (i.e. "doublethink'), but what are we left with? B/C we're against them does that mean we're for Baucus and Reid and Snowe? Again, what's victory here? -
18.3
"Again, what's victory here?"
.
There is none. Because 99.99 percent of the rest of the media will not do this sort of thing on any issue and it does matter if the pol is a democrat or a republican as long as they have some type of power that is what matters. -
18.4
Yeah, Gunny, it's hard to find a pair of rose-coloured spectacles at this pt.
Digby (link) said the other day: "It's extremely disheartening to see the administration and so many Democrats in congress completely ignore the political and policy ramifications of failing to engage in fundamental financial reform and fiery populist rhetoric at a time like this. This teabagger movement is happening in a vacuum created by a lack of interest in this topic by liberals who are so enamored of being members of the new "creative class" and the like that they aren't paying attention to the cynicism and anger that's reaching critical mass among average working stiffs out there. It's easy to dismiss it, but very, very foolish. The issues Moore raises in this film will be answered on the right with authoritarianism, militarism, immigrant bashing and violence. It's a recipe for disaster unless the left takes this on in direct, political terms."
.
And though I'd like to think Gore Vidal's (link) off his rocker, when I read things like this (making that article by Hedges back in June look rather prescient--link) I wonder. But, hey, there's always dancing with rightist goons to entertain us, right KT? -
18.5
Yeah, Gunny, it's hard to find a pair of rose-coloured spectacles at this pt.
.
But that's what we need.
.
Grass and Net-roots Democrats are going to wake the f*ck up, and take a hard look at what we elected. -
18.6
I daresay he'll last as long as it takes the cult of Hannity to realize the's the only thing "fair and balanced" about their networ,.
-
-
19
[...] known Roger for a long time,” Mr. Axelrod told Time magazine in an e-mail message. “We chatted from time to time during the campaign. I was going to be in [...]
-
20
The White House has every other News outlet in their pocket, except FoxNews. They really need to get a life, and/or get over it! Numbers don't lie, ratings don't lie, so they must be doing something right. FoxNews can't be intimidated by an Obama thug like Axelrod, and so I think it probably grates his nerves. That's why I absolutely love the fact, that people like Glenn Beck gets under their skin over at the White House. And, if they don't like,...then here's a big Boo-Hoo for ya. Because, WFC what they think? I know I don't!!!
-
20.1
So you really love that slut?
.
Oh, well. Fact-free and flying high...
-
-
21
[...] post: White House’s Axelrod Meets With Fox News’ Ailes (Time Magazine) Share and [...]
-
22
Oh, please...Axlerod meeting with Ailes for what? Probably to kneel and beg him to stop the lies.
What an ill advised meeting. Met for coffee?? Axelrod should have sent him hot coals instead of meeting for coffee.There is no deterrent to Fox News at all to stop the drama especially with their increased ratings. The Obama camp has to realize that the only thing they can do about the dissemination of lies by the Fox attack machine is to respond in like manner. Attack their lies, period.
I have to agree with the cry baby part- the Obama folks appear to cry and do nothing more. Fox is doing their job, Obama and his team should do theirs as well.
No one is saying they should not complain but they should do more than just complain. Fox is frontal and unrelenting in its attacks and Obama should respond by reasonably anticipating these moves and preparing a strong and continued response to same.For example, I watch Bill O'Reilly sometimes and his show is beyond funny... all he does is look aggressive and scream loudly when someone opposes him. For someone like O'Reilly, the Obama folks should send someone with the same kind of personality to that show--they should send a screamer that can also "play to the galley" like O'Reilly does.
I am honestly tired of Fox being allowed to spread lies with impunity while the Obama WH is perennially involved in damage control. They need a different tack. Unless Axlerod's begging is part of their plan--- I think the meeting with Ailes (at least on the face of it) was a big mistake.
LM
-
23
For the record, I don't care what bias my news has, none of the news outlets give ALL of the news. When I see a piece done on the genocide in Darfur, or perhaps a piece on a part of the world that doesn't have massive monetary value for us, then I will believe that I'm getting all of the news.
Further more, any channel that allows for their personalities to cheer the various failures of the President needs a reality check. The Office of the President demands respect. I don't care if you agree with him or not, you respect whoever is in that office.
-
24
[...] too, leading to a meeting between Murdoch and Obama (which Ailes also attended). UPDATE: Axelrod tells Time: "I’ve known Roger for a long time. We chatted from time to time during the [...]
-
25
[...] Hillary for an interview with Pinch, the New York Times marionette, than with Campbell Brown. More whining: Though White House aides are hesitant to criticize the network on the record, their disdain for [...]
- michaelscherer Gibbs says Desiree Rogers will not testify tomorrow before House on WH gatecrashers. - 28 minutes ago
- michaelscherer Always a bad sign when you (NBC) have to preface every news report (Salahi) with big disclaimers that the parent company is not a factor. - 4 hours ago
- michaelscherer Ah.... Richard Wolffe. - 17 hours ago
Most Popular »
- "Personal Sins Should Not Require Press Releases"
- Congress's Tepid Reaction to Obama's Afghanistan Plan
- Tiger Speaks
- State Dinner, Uh, Fashion
- The 'Alice' Interview: A Very Different Brand of Wonderland
- Gleeks and Shrieks: Fox Unveils Midseason, Glee Gone Until April
- White House Hypocritical Attack on Politico
- The Dreaded X
- First Look: 'Lovely Bones' and Peter Jackson's Virtuoso Vistas
- False Economy: Think You're Saving Money? Think Again
- Helicopter Parents: The Backlash Against Overparenting
- Italian Town Dreams of a White (No Foreigners) Christmas
- Rachel Uchitel: Tiger Woods' Alleged Affair Connection
- Europe's Secret Nuclear Weapons: What Should NATO Do?
- Ireland: Lack of New Catholic Priests Spurs Campaign
- Why Fritz Henderson Resigned as GM's CEO
- Study: Loneliness Can Be Contagious
- Could White House Party Crashers the Salahis Go to Jail?
- HIV/AIDS: Is Obama Scaling Back Bush's Health Push?
- The End of the 2000s: Goodbye to a Decade from Hell
Quotes of the Day »
RSS