@TEB 33:

"When Fox starts portraying Obama or any other democrat as something other than a 'socialist' then I'll believe they are becoming moderate."

Of course, it could be the case that he IS a socialist and you're unable to see it. I've lived in 4 socialist countries and I'm hard pressed to see the difference between those countries and what Obama's grand design is.

Fox News is at least as tough on the Republican field as the rest of the MSM is toward Democrats. See '60 Minutes' relationship with President Obama.

I have no doubt that Fox favors the Republican Party, but I also have no doubt that the other major news organs favor the Democratic Party. Fox is more obvious to me than most of those. But that doesn't erase the circumstance that the framing and vocabulary of the mainstream media is urban/liberal. I believe Fox goes to extremes to over-compensate for the rest of the journalistic establishment.

@ TEB 33

Careful. By your definition, Fox IS moderate. Watch the Dec. 7th segment here at aprx. 2:15 (and the caption):

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/oreilly_factor/

Seems to me Fox isn't becoming more moderate as suggested in the story, but is simply trying to lead it's viewers to select the candidate favored by Ailes/Murdoch.

When Fox starts portraying Obama or any other democrat as something other than a 'socialist' then I'll believe they are becoming moderate.

It was presumably quite outrageous that Gonzales fired 8 U.S. Prosecutors. But OTM is silent when the current attorney general is likely lying ("the L-word") about whether he knew/allowed guns to walk, that killed real Mexicans and a U.S. law enforcement official, Brian Terry. Not a single story…? I thought guns walking and dead Mexicans would warrant… something…outrage ? Like maybe one interview with your friends at Judicial Watch on their filing FOIA lawsuits the DOJ and the ATF to obtain Fast and Furious?

Yes, perhaps NPR should hire Roger Ailes. Certainly, he too would have said, "Let's cover this Journolist story – THAT'S a media story!" But not OTM…

It would be nice if NPR would actually take a page out of the Fox playbook, and ask some hard questions to those they typically avoid even discussing.

As an example, OTM was all over Alberto Gonzales (though they were rarely media stories:

http://www.onthemedia.org/2007/aug/31/the-l-word/transcript/
http://www.onthemedia.org/2007/mar/16/the-gonzales-85/transcript/

And here:
http://www.onthemedia.org/2007/mar/30/the-email-trail/
http://www.onthemedia.org/2004/dec/03/opaque-justice/

And even expressed concern about how to keep the public interested in the story:
http://www.onthemedia.org/2007/jun/15/gonzales-gate/

And with dripping Garfieldian sarcasm here:
http://www.onthemedia.org/2007/mar/16/mistakes-were-made/transcript/

@MNMoose:

"Oh, yeah, right."

Great rebuttal. Eloquent, concise, factually grounded, demonstrative examples, straightforward logical exposition... Oh, wait. I was thinking of someone else.

@philipBZ

"It's not just GOP credentials that they want the bona fides on, but proof of the ability to lead, good governance, and fiduciary responsibility with taxpayer money."

-Oh, yeah, right.

@mik:

"Yes, the people on Fox are asking (for them) relatively tough questions of the various GOP candidates. So what? A network with a blatant conservative bias will obviously want to delve into the conservative credentials of each candidate."

Have you forgotten that when the rest of the press was fawning over Obama and throwing him softball questions, Fox was asking him challenging but respectful ones?

It's not just GOP credentials that they want the bona fides on, but proof of the ability to lead, good governance, and fiduciary responsibility with taxpayer money.

Yes, the people on Fox are asking (for them) relatively tough questions of the various GOP candidates. So what? A network with a blatant conservative bias will obviously want to delve into the conservative credentials of each candidate. Before concluding that they are becoming impartial, wait until the primaries are over and the campaign proper between the President and the GOP nominee begins. We'll see how impartial Fox is then.

A journalistic concern over a massively expensive and questionable government program is derisively dismissed as a "boogeyman" but is the obsession with FOX News the real "boogeyman" for progressive media?
Will there be a tracking of MSNBC's "drift at least in the direction of the center" when covering the campaign or is their viewpoint considered to be reliably and appropriately inert?

On the media is beginning to sound like MSNBC. Bla, Bla, Bla. Such nonesense, and what a shame.