OUTFOXED: RUPERT MURDOCH’S WAR ON JOURNALISM
[] (One star)
Unbalanced. Running time: 77 minutes. Not rated (nothing objectionable). At the Quad, West 13th Street, between Fifth and Sixth avenues.
‘OUTFOXED: Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism,” may have the man who signs this critic’s paychecks in its crosshairs, but my job requires that I be fair.
Which is more than can be said for Robert Greenwald’s narrowly focused, unapologetically partisan documentary, originally sold online as a DVD, but now riding the wave of “Fahrenheit 9/11” popularity into theaters.
Greenwald’s contention is that Fox News Channel is undermining democracy in America by acting as a cheerleader for the Republican Party, but this furious finger-pointer’s doc is so one-sided, it undermines its own integrity.
If you believe Fox has a conservative bias, you’ll meet pundits who agree with you, including Vanity Fair’s James Wolcott and the ubiquitous Al Franken, some media experts and a number of disgruntled former employees, some too yellow to identify themselves on camera.
Greenwald had an army of volunteers monitoring the channel round the clock to select the cavalcade of clips that break up the monotony of the talking heads.
But there is no revelatory evidence here – surely anyone watching Fox News Channel can draw his own conclusions.
Ultimately, “Outfoxed,” produced with the help of political Web site MoveOn.org, simply offers a procession of people expressing their opinion that Fox is opinionated.
“Outfoxed” – like Greenwald’s “Unprecedented,” which looks at the 2000 presidential election, and “Uncovered,” about the build-up to the Iraq war – is a rush job, and it shows.
There’s none of Michael Moore’s snap and crackle, although we’re occasionally treated to an unintentional laugh, such as the concluding remarks in which the masses are urged to “rise up” – against a TV channel!
Fox News Channel consistently beats CNN and MSNBC, yet Greenwald approaches not a single viewer to probe the reasons for its popularity, nor a single current employee.
And Rupert Murdoch is mentioned only in passing, despite being maligned in the title.
Revealing exposé or unexciting takedown?
You decide.