The AP did a lengthy profile of Fox News White House correspondent Ed Henry. The part I’ve highlighted below will almost certainly get the most attention from the rest of the media:
Benghazi has proven an interesting case study. Henry rejects the notion that he works off Fox marching orders in discussing the issue, but said, “I wouldn’t lie to you. I see that we’re covering Benghazi a lot, and I think that should be something that we’re asking about.”
He said other news outlets have under-covered the story, since four Americans were killed and there’s still some mystery about what the administration knew and when they knew about the attack.
“We’ve had the proper emphasis,” he said. “But I would not be so deluded to say that some of our shows, some of our commentators, have covered it more than it needed to be covered.”
It’s hard to imagine that Henry didn’t understand how this would play out. Namely, that the left-wing media would translate what he said about “some” in the network overplaying Libya turn into a condemnation of Fox News as a whole.
Here’s Taegan Goddard’s dishonest headline:
Fox News White House correspondent says his network overplayed the Benghazi story
Not that Goddard cares, but Henry said the exact opposite — that the network as a whole “had a proper emphasis.”
As far as Henry’s actual complaint, that’s not something I can comment on, because I don’t monitor Fox News. But I was and am grateful they are out there calling attention to Libya. When you consider the noise machine the rest of the media created to snuff out the Libya story, Fox News was a vital counterbalance against all of that.
Maybe within the vacuum of Fox News, at times their coverage of Libya looked like overkill. But within the context of trying to penetrate the truth about Libya though the ObamaMedia, it was exactly what needed and needs to be done.
This story is part of the Big Journalism Live Blog, which you can bookmark here.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.