William Raspberry is concerned about the “Foxidation” of the news:

Part of the FNC approach, on the other hand, is to promote itself as “fair and balanced.” I suppose it does so with a wink and a nod to its far-right audience, who must know it isn’t balanced. Certainly those near the center of the political spectrum know it.

So why would I consider Fox such a generalized threat? Because I think the plan is not so much to convince the public that its particular view is correct but rather to sell the notion that what FNC presents is just another set of biases, no worse (and for some, a good deal better) than the biases that routinely drive the presentation of the news on ABC, CBS or NBC — and, by extension, the major newspapers.

For the Foxidation process to work, it isn’t necessary to convince Americans that the verbal ruffians who give FNC its crackle have a corner on the truth — only that all of us in the news business are grinding our partisan axes all the time and that none of us deserves to be taken seriously as seekers of truth.

This will lead, he thinks, to less public confidence in the media writ large.

However, as with most critics of FNC, it seems that he is comparing apples to oranges (although it unclear as to what he is comparing, as he gives no specifics) insofar as much of Fox’s programs are commentary programs, not straight news (which is also true of MSNBC, for that matter–and it isn’t as if CNN is pure news).

If one compares Brit Hume’s show v. Aaron Brown’s, what’s the big difference? Even the Fox Report, while hyperactive, is straight news.

And how is Hannity and Colmes any different than Crossfire (which is defunct now, right?)

One can’t compare The Factor with the CBS Evening News which is what it sounds like Raspberry (and many other critics of FNC) are trying to do.