FOX or DMN - who's got the facts?

Dallas Morning News is a better news source than Fox News because (1) their content has been fact checked (2) conflicts of interest are avoided by not reporting on topics influenced by owner bias. Fox may have a cleaner layout and quicker user interface, but their content is often incorrect and deliberately misleading according to researchers and court transcripts.

My news consumption evolves every year, but I always fact-check suspicious memes, news articles, and even take time to read the fine print. I consider it a public service to do this and report what I find for my grandmother (or any other reader who is vulnerable because they don't). As the media changes, we really owe it to ourselves to seek out unbiased sources or at least take the time to filter out the biases that we are inundated with. Otherwise, we become gullible prey to any charlatan with a website and an agenda. On social media, I add news sites that I respect to my feed, who have a background of serious journalism that takes risks to tell unpopular truths and takes the time to check their facts before presenting them to the public as truth. To me, real news is the stuff that ends up in history books.

Online I tend to google information topically and choose a few to compare from the offered links, based on the credibility of the source (i.e. Is this an opinion piece or fact telling? Is this a native ad or does the publisher have a conflict of interest related to the topic?). I listen to NPR in my car for international news. I tend to pick up local papers like the Dallas Observer if I am in a waiting room. The only time I get a printed newspaper such as DMN is when traveling or if I am visiting a connectivity dead-zone like a hospital (so I can do crossword puzzles and read the Metropolitan section). I also love picking up a little small town newspapers, when I am passing through on the road to read about life in their slow lane.

 

vs.

When people say “news” I do not think of gossip or entertainment. To me, news is something created by journalists and war correspondents that put their lives on the line to make the world a little more honest and perhaps a better place. Anderson Cooper > Perez Hilton. TMZ is the yellow journalism of our era. So, given my perspective and preference for hard news, let’s now compare and contrast the FOX News with the Dallas Morning News.

PROs–

FOX has a well-organized home page that offers a simplified user experience. The category navigation tools line the masthead, with links to text based stories on the left hand, and the right hand column offers video options of articles. An easy to navigate webpage is a pro for this site. The weather section on the site is customizable; this is a benefit for the user who adds their location to get regional weather information. 

DMN also offers an readable home page that, like FOX, has easy to use categorical navigation tools across the top. Both sites offer dark text on a light background for increased readability. However, they differ in their lower layout in that DMN has three columns instead of two. The left most column offers a “front page” worthy photograph from a top story. The center column constantly updates and looks different each time the page is refreshed to show the most recently posted “Top Stories.” The right hand column shows features like a weather summary and other popular topics. Another major contrast between the site’s is the font size used for the stories. DMN uses lots of different sizes, leading to huge headlines dominating screen space. FOX has more homogeneous sizes to its fonts. This gives FOX’s stories more uniformity in presentation and also allows more information to be seen on the screen (with more links visible per view).

CONs -

FOX News seems hyper-focused on middle eastern wars and pro-fossil fuel, climate change denier topics. This can be seen as a conflict of interest by the news organization who is partially owned by a Saudi prince oil baron (e.g. dismissive of global warming science that discourages oil use, actively encourages American support of Saudi political interests) with nary a word about the country’s list of human rights violations.

Less controversial than FOX's problems, but still an ugly design sin to me is DMN’s odd use of font sizes. Randomly huge fonts are distracting and limit the number of story options seen on the monitor at one time. The other problem is that after being bought out, there are less staff reporters since the layoffs. This shrinking staff is a con and limits the amount of original content about local topics being generated by this branch location, worse it limits the number of proofreaders on staff.

I do find it likable that FOX offers a dissenting opinion. I like that the organization’s daring legal teams that keeps challenging the legal status quo and blurring the line between non-fictional news and fictional entertainment. 

Just like TheOnion.com can make up stories legally, so can any other media outlet. In a case where FOX News was sued by one of its ex-reporters, Jane Akre. "The Florida Appeals court claimed that the FCC policy against falsification of the news does not rise to the level of a “law, rule, or regulation,” it was simply a “policy.” Therefore, it is up to the station whether or not it wants to report honestly. During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so."

Luckily, my local newspaper has not been sued for making things up. Dallas has that going for it. I also like that DMN still prints the neighborhood crime blotters in the Metropolitan section in a completely factual, non-biased way without editorial comment.  Plus, since being bought out, they now allowing you to read their articles for free without a subscription.

The two things I most dislike about FOX is the heavy owner bias, and frequency of stories that turn out not to be factual. To be fair, any journalist might sometimes get a fact mixed up. But the number of retractions when they do make mistakes is glossed over.  I feel that its conservative owners (Rupert Murdoch’s News Media Corps and a Saudi oil tycoon named Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal) encourage bias, and frequently offers un-factchecked information. The prince has even appeared on the news channel as a pundit. This makes claims that the prince doesn't influence the material being broadcast on the channel pretty unbelievable. A reputable new organization would have thrown a red flag on that play as an obvious conflict of interest and not used one of their owners on camera.

On the other hand, I really don’t like that DMN is no longer privately owned (I guess it depends on who the owners are). DallasNews.com is now part of Gannett Corporation and has slowly gotten away from the mission of the original founder. Dallas newsman, Belo believed in unbiased reporting and his inspiring quote can be seen pictured below carved in huge justified text). DMN has become preoccupied with advertising to the point that entire sections are devoted to what basically translates as native advertising. Most concerning, DMN just fired over half of their long time reporters, which means there are now less paid watchdogs in my city.

Bottom line, Dallas Morning News is a “better” news site for three reasons. It offers local news that is more relative to me as a resident, has staff that fact checks national stories for credibility, and actively avoids stories with conflicts of interest.

In a news age where Starlets can buy twitter followers for $59 per 100 accounts to artificially influence “trending” algorithms and influence their popularity. This oil monarch is using the same business model to influence public opinions by holding partial ownership in a “news” organization that encourages American involvement in wars in their region to benefit their interests.

Dallas may have slowly become more conservative in its reporting, but it still offers both sides a voice in local and national stories. This is in stark contrast to the partisan politics heralded on FOX News. All Managing Editors must choose carefully when deciding what stories are "fit to print"  because it reflects on the integrity of them as a respectable source.