Answer "Yes," but it is more complicated than that. Let us keep perspective here.
The media at the time the Founders laid out the First Amendment were almost all partisan news sheets. The very idea of an unbiased media would have been laughable.
Moreover, the term "yellow journalism" came out of the 19th century. Indeed, it was media reaction to the sinking of USS Maine that pushed a very reluctant President McKinley to ask Congress for a declaration of war against Spain. Indeed, speaking of "fake media," it was later discovered that the sinking was probably an accident and not a Spanish attack.
The notion of an unbiased media really only came about as an accident of technology. Television had three - four if you count PBS - networks. Radio had two national news networks - CBS and NPR. There were three newsmagazines - Time, Newsweek, U. S. News & World Report. Newspapers were always locally focused and it was only due to their location that The Washington Post, the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal gained national prominence. (Later USA Today did create a national identity.)
Because of the limited outlets, in order to get the broadest possible audience, the news business had to attempt a high degree of balance. Moreover, during much of this period there was a stronger sense of social cohesion, which tended to reinforce the tendency toward balance.
However, beginning in the 80s with cable and the first cost effective lap top computers, it became possible to target a specific audience. Throw in the proliferation of outlets and social media and audience segmentation took off. Then, as night follows day, a more biased journalism followed. It was as much effect as cause.
Indeed, ironically, it was Fox News - under Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes - who first saw the potential for audience segmentation and who really began the tilt in media coverage. In this MSNBC and CNN merely were echoes - reaching the audience that Fox opted to forego. (Foregoing it because, especially in the 80s and 90s, the conservative audience was much larger than its liberal counterpart.)
So what this boils down to is that the viewer, listener or read needs to be discerning. Please note, this does not mean mere skepticism. As Bagehot said, "A diffuse distrust and an indiscriminate suspicion are characteristic of a semi-barbarous people."
Approach any media with an awareness of their perspective and their audience. Understand that no media - from any side - will be able to escape fully the perspective of those who run them and report for them. An awareness of this will allow the viewer, listener or reader to benefit from what the media outlet does well and be careful of what the outlet does not.
In fact, Fox has a pretty good track record. They were right - no doubt - about the infamous dossier in the 2016 election and duly reported on it when other media chose to ignore it. They have similarly, so far, been vindicated on the "Twitter" debate - another issue that other media, due to their biases chose to ignore.
By the same token, Fox tends to be too exculpatory of President Trump. They ignore - or at least downplay - his failings as a President, not least his divisive influence on the culture. So when you view Fox's coverage of Mr. Trump, factor that into account.
By the way, to its' credit, Fox's 6:00 news program with Brett Baier tends on the whole to be pretty "fair and balanced" - to use their words. Some of the tilt in Fox coverage on other programs being relatively absent from their evening news program.
The bottom line is that it can safely be said that Fox - and generally the other media outlets - can be trusted. However, it can never be forgotten that it is the obligation of the viewer/listener/reader to be discriminating and thoughtful, not only about their media, but about his/her own biases.
Like it or not, there is no oracle out there who will come down from the heavens and provide final judgement on the absolute final existential truth. Such truth does exist, by the way, but the limits of human imperfection make it almost impossible to discern always and everywhere.
That said, as noted from the Bagehot quote above, to approach everything with a mere skepticism absent any deeper context conduces to mere nihilism. That outcome conducing to worse outcomes than bias. As someone once said, "The person who believes in nothing does not believe in nothing - they believe in anything."
You know, as the years have gone by journalism has seriously taken a deep ugly turn as far as integrity concerned.
Fox News like all the others, I have seen and watched for a period of time purposely shows and omits certain news or spin it in a way to distort the reality and have guests on their platforms to regurgitate traditional talking points to paint their political opponents seemingly always in a negative light and to me that isn't journalism but propaganda.
You simply can't trust the "News" of the today at all including Fox News.
Real news is who, what, when and where, not having guests spew their biases and call it "news" to influence the audience of opinion and viewpoints.
The left wing news said the summer of riots never happened. FOX showed us nightly videos of it happening. I wonder who I should trust?
Opinion
7Opinion
They are much more trustworthy than CNN or MSNBC, but it depends on who it is. Hannity, Ingram, and Varney are good. Some of the others use clickbait headlines for attention, exaggerate stuff, and don't do as much research sometimes as the ones I mentioned. TimcastIRL and Crowder are good sources for accurate information, as is Project Veritas.
I don't trust any news media. Each reports things that get them the highest number of their targeted viewers. Responsible journalism has disappeared. I gather news items from several sources and then decide, on my own, what the real truth is.
This question is an excellent example of the fallacy of the excluded middle.
I trust them, somewhat, when they say something that goes against their bias. That's the excluded middle.
more than CNN, CBS, MSNBC for sure. even if you distrust Fox it's hard to argue against some of the stuff they bring up.
About as much as I trust any of the other news networks pushing thier narratives.
More than the other ones but No.
u Yes 👍
The only opinion from girls was selected the Most Helpful Opinion, but you can still contribute by sharing an opinion!
You can also add your opinion below!
