Obama's decision to not appear on Fox News was the beneficial decision to his presidency.

Obama's decision to not appear on Fox News was a beneficial decision to his presidency. Let us first point out that the reason Obama was making rounds of television networks was to represent his health care plan. All networks showed his health care speech prior to his appearances on the shows to clarify parts of it, except for Fox News. Yes, there is no doubt about it -- Fox News is an incredibly biased, right-wing network that devotes itself almost entirely to discrediting liberals. Fox News is a business, like every other News broadcasting network, and it shovels it's money in only by appealing to its viewers. So, this is exactly what Fox News does. The viewers of Fox News are a majority conservative who eat up everything Fox has to offer. Fox News went so far even as to NOT show President Obama's health care plan speech because it was of "no priority." It was much more important to show Dancing With The Stars, instead. And it wasn't even Tom Delay's debut. The president's speech wasn't deemed "newsworthy." Every other News Network covered President Obama's speech. Fox News constantly slanders, miss-interprets, and down right negatively represents the President constantly. As Pr. Obama said himself, "I've got one television station that is entirely devoted to attacking my administration... That's a pretty big megaphone. You'd be hard pressed if you watched the entire day to find a positive story about me on that front." It is by far more respectable that the president display his own right to free speech and decide not to speak to the "news network" instead of having it slander his words or even cut off his mic (my opponent even stated: "they're known to take things out of context, and cut people's microphones when guests make them look silly"). It is also obvious that any speech, as my opponent suggest should be given afterword, would just not be shown to the viewers if even his important health care speech wasn't. The "unwavering" viewers of the Fox News network would be left just as blind. My opponent claims that the president should be taking steps to bridge the gap of bipartisanship. President Obama has been very GOP friendly: hosted them at the white house, visiting them on capital hill (paying more respect than their fellow republican George W. Bush), going back on his promises to the gay community on issues such as marriage and Don't Ask Don't Tell, nominating Republican Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Secretary of Treasury Timothy Geithner (both positions important to the republican party; economics and defense) and nominated Republican Sen. Gregg for a Cabinet position (who unfortunately turned down the offer) - these nominations of three counter party members for cabinet is unmatched - amongst many, many things. So, no, Obama is not giving the message that he will only address liberals and their needs. He has consistently proven so far in his presidency that he is very bipartisan and takes conservatives seriously. The only thing he is doing by not participating in Fox's slander is pointing out that the truth must be told in America, not false garbage that misinforms the masses (especially the conservatives. Now wouldn't that be an aid toward conservative America; the truth?) My opponent states, "It also provided a great disservice to the American people who rely on Fox (unfortunately) for their news and information, and made other networks subsequently look bad." Obama became the first president to appear on five Sunday network shows in the same morning; an extraordinary effort to build public support for his top domestic priority. He was not trying to "exclude" anyone it quite obviously seems (he would even get late night viewers by appearing on late night talk show #1 by David Letterman). My opponent brings up that President Obama not appearing on Fox but appearing on Hispanic Univision sends the wrong message. Hispanics were a swing vote in 2008, and as a majority are very conservative voters (as they are on average very religious. It must also be noted that they were one of the George Bush sided demographics.) An appearance on Univision shows that Obama cares for this new rising majority in America, who will be one of main groups affected by his new health care plan. My opponent brings up that, "Now Fox is free to interpret his decision any way they see fit (beneficial to them and negative against him)" But Fox would have anyway, if he appeared on Fox or not. My own opponent even said, "they're known to take things out of context, and cut people's microphones when guests make them look silly." If even they did show Obama's public announcement, a public announcement that he was "misquoted" would cause just as much of an uprising. They would have said it was showing that Obama doesn't like "criticism" and has had time to be coached before he "re-answered" Fox News. That their questions were too "tough" and "different" for him. That he was being a "cry baby," as my opponent said. My opponent said that, "This makes it seem as if Obama is punishing the network for bad behavior, but really he's punishing the viewers (American voters)." No, Obama is not punishing the viewers. Obama, as I have noted, has been consistently good to conservatives. He is, in fact, punishing a network that has gone overboard with their hate for liberal politics and hate for him. What Obama has done is the moral thing to do; to reduce slander and misinformation in the media. Even if he isn't praised for it now, he will be praised for it in the future. He will not be tolerant of lies being circulated throughout the United States of America. It is to the same caliber as American News' bias against middle eastern nations in their news broadcasting. My opponent brings up that Bush appeared on news networks even though they attacked him. I'd like to ask my opponent only one question; wasn't the attacking of Bush's greatest enemy, the media, one of the big reasons his presidency failed? That would not be beneficial for a presidency. My opponent finally states, "As a result, a devaluing of these channels also decreases the likelihood that Obama will be favorably or fairly represented by Fox - with its massive audience - in the future." Fox never favorably represents President Obama; not even playing his health care plan speech on their network and always, as is the main issue, portraying Obama negatively. The Conservative powerhouse (as even my opponent has clarified) wouldn't start anytime soon. My opponent remarks that by not appearing on Fox News, Obama is essentially shunning the conservatives of America. This is not the case. By not appearing on Fox News, Obama is making the statement that a corrupt network should not have their way. Obama is making a very moral stand, and as such, should be respected - and HIS right to free speech should be respected if he didn't want to show up on a News Network that would clearly misrepresent him, and twist that misrepresentation in the future - even if a clarification speech was given (if it was even at all shown on Fox). In the future, Obama will be seen as a voice against slander, a voice against misinformation, and a just decision maker. If Fox News could not give as much respect as to show his very important health care speech (which, in turn, blinds their audience to the issues), then Obama can show just as much respect back at the organization and be the bigger man instead of bickering with a news organization that would never back down; like a rabid dog. References: http://www.foxnews.com... http://www.nydailynews.com... http://www.politifact.com...