Fox News Banishes Karl Rove and Dick Morris

The two pundits wrongly predicted the election

Maybe GOP pundits Karl Rove and Dick Morris actually saw this one coming.

In the wake of the election, Fox News Chief Roger Ailes has decided he wants Rove and Morris, both of whom wrongly touted Mitt Romney as the clear presidential winner, off the air, according to New York Magazine.

The network leaned heavily on wounded GOP kingmaker Rove, and on Morris, a political consultant, for political commentary that turned out to leave viewers out of touch, critics say. Fox producers must now first get permission to book them, the article said.

A Fox spokesperson confirmed the new booking rules to New York Magazine saying, "the election's over."

Rove, in one of the most talked about television moments of the election cycle, disputed in real time the network's calling of the election for President Obama.

Via New York Magazine

Will taking Karl Rove and Dick Morris off the air help Fox improve its credibility?

[MRMacrum]

Kicking them off FOX just reinforces the notion that FOX is anything but "fair and balanced". Yeah, they were wrong, but by making the producers of the various FOX shows ask for permission to book them, FOX continues its policy of molding the news they want their brain dead viewers to see.

[MarkJM]

Their policy is no different than what the other cable news outlets do. Your disdain for FoxNews only shows on this comment. I would bet if MSNBC or even CNN were accused of the same thing, you would be the first to spin it in a favorable light.

[MRMacrum]

@MarkJM - No, I wouldn't spin it any better. I don't think very highly of any of the networks. FOX however is at the bottom of the pile.

[MarkJM]

@MRMacrum Okay fair enough. But for being a the "bottom of the pile," Fox isn't doing too shabby, seeing as they beat all the other cable news networks in the Nielsen ratings combined every night....just saying, nobody is being forced to watch them...

[MRMacrum]

@MarkJM - Again with the ratings. The only ratings I concern myself with are my own.

[Newsdoctor]

Both the guest lists at MSNBC and Fox are also molded by the fact that their ideological opponents shy away from appearing. My impression is that Maddow and many daytime hosts are very hospitable to conservative guests and they know they'll get a fair shake from her. Ed Schultz, Lawrence O'Donnell and Chris Matthews might not be as polite. The Fox hosts across the board are generally more hostile to progressive guests. When they do invite liberals, many don't accept because they know they'll be cannon fodder.

[Speedieg]

Admiting that they are 100% a part of the Republican Party would give them credibility. At least it would be the truth for a change.

[LGRepublican]

Only after BSNBC admits to being 100% a part of the Democratic Party.

[Speedieg]

@LGRepublican it thought Republicans were supposed to be the ones with integrity. I guess not.

[tomincali]

@LGRepublican they are also the gov media.

[LGRepublican]

@Speedieg Not willing to measure the Democrats by the same standards you hold the GOP to huh......

[AceLuby]

@LGRepublican Look, I don't like MSNBC, but they are not the same as Fox when it comes to how close they interact with a party. Fox literally read on air a talking points memo given to them from the GOP. And even if what you say is true, neither would be a good thing which is why I don't watch either (crappy) network and if you don't think it's a good idea that news sites interact so closely to a single party you too should boycott those places.

[jessejaymes]

There is a certain amount of poetic justice here when the far right starts eating their elders.

[MarkJM]

Fox had egg on it's face, they wiped the egg off. Nothing new here, other news outlets had the same thing happen to them in the past. All of a sudden now it's a big deal only because it's FoxNews. Go figure.

[LGRepublican]

Seems like many have forgotten about the whole Dan Rather/CBS incident....

[Sharpshooter]

Fox doesn't need any help to improve credibility among INTELLIGENT people. Their "cred" with the MSNBC/CNN crowd would require them to start serving Grape Kool-Aid and kissing up to the current Cabal.

People confuse Credible with Popular, of the two I would choose Credible.

The author of this article should consider their status... Rove and Morris haven't been banished, they have lost their carte-blanche appearances have been eliminated. There is a large difference.

From a credibility standpoint, compare their errors in prediction to the outright bias exemplified by Candybar Crowley and the MSNBC fanboys; and then to the reaction of the organization......

Credibility..... Fox should hold classes, of course the rest wouldn't attend.... Pearls for Swine

[Denizen_Kate]

"People confuse Credible with Popular ..." Exactly, which explains why Fox News has ratings much higher than MSNBC.

If you want credible news, neither Fox nor MSNBC or any other television news program is the place for it. Even the PBS News Hour has become a bit tabloid of late.

[Sharpshooter]

@Denizen_Kate PBS.... a bit tabloid? Probably Broadcasting Something worthwhile is the MOST Liberally Biased of all.

They have it better than any of the commercial sources.... PBS is supported by Taxpayers who have no choice and God forbid someone suggest defunding them, you would think they accused Elmo of being a child molester.... oh wait, he is.

[Denizen_Kate]

@Sharpshooter - It appears that the only bias you recognize is liberal bias. You see no bias at Fox News? Seriously?

[Sharpshooter]

@Denizen_Kate I see bias everywhere, including in your posts and mine. I take issue with bias when it's intentional to further an individual agenda. I'm old enough to recall real journalists on television news demonstrating their professional skills.

It was known who Cronkite supported in an election, but it was also difficult to find fault in the presentation of news about the people he didn't support.

I grew up (allegedly) in Chicago, we had two newspapers, the Tribune and the Sun Times, the Trib was Republican the Sun Times was Democrat. Still both presented the news and kept commentary to the editorial pages.

Fox is biased.... that's "Dog Bites Man."

What I take issue with it the blatant bias demonstrated by the liberal side of the equation.... things like the Andrea Mitchell MSNBC "Wawa Sandwich" story. It was obvious to EVERYONE, including many "liberal" media sources that the edit was intentionally done to make Romney look foolish. Ultimately MSNBC admitted their error, but Andrea Mitchell never apologized, nor was she punished for her unprofessional behavior.

In the old days she would have been fired instantly....

Blatant bias like the 47% story. A RESPONSIBLE journalist would never have even run the story considering the manner in which the tape was obtained. Off The Record meant OFF THE RECORD and surreptitiously obtained recordings would have been considered off the record considering no reporters were invited. Still the story ran, but only the select part and then only the part of the select part that out of context would make Romney look bad.

The transcript is available online, surprising as Mother Earth News has their own agenda and the recording stops at a Nixonian moment. If you take the time find and then read the entire transcript the comment is NOT what it was said to be,

Now before you bring the "You didn't build it" argument into the fray, I'll tell you, I've heard the entire comment, it was shown on FOX the next day. Frankly, his initial comment, "You didn't build that" was repulsive. As a business man who works in the business I AM BUILDING almost 80 hours every week to hear a guy who never signed the front of anyone's paycheck or even ran so much as a lemon aid stand, it's a grave insult.

When I hear the rest, it hits me as a guy who put his foot in his mouth and then rammed his other leg in the remaining space in effort to get it out. The rest of his comment was worse.... Not only aren't I smart and hard working I also didn't build my business. His name has been on the schedule here ever since and he doesn't even bother to call in.

Bias is unavoidable, outright unfairness and attacking under the guise of journalism is far worse. Fox isn't perfect, but I've not seen anything from them as plainly and intentionally dishonest as I do from the others.

[Denizen_Kate]

@Sharpshooter "Responsible journalism" is an oxymoron. I think you and I can agree on that. Once upon a time (I, too, am old) broadcast news was done as a public service for at least one hour each evening on the three big networks, but now everybody with an opinion and a computer or smart phone can be a "journalist." I miss the old guys like Cronkite and Murrow, too. I miss the days when both broadcast and print news had to be verified before being printed or aired.

[Kajai]

Producers just have to ask permission first. Rove and Morris are not the only reason fox news viewers were out of touch either.

[Thegrif]

Fox is fine, every bit as creditable as msnbc, cnn, nbc, etc.
i mean they don't have lunch with the President lime some other networks do, which to me helps keep the appearence of impartial, which is better than some other do.

[DARSB]

Fox is unabashedly the PR arm of the GOP but even at that it needs to keep up at least the appearance of integrity with its regular viewers, like "your crazy uncle who watches Fox all day". Sadly, it kept these two failed pundits on the payroll well into their dotage.

On the other hand, it is the first news organization I know of that tried to buy its own President. http://goo.gl/k9N0W

[crusader]

No, actually NBC did so successfully in 2008. Although everyone at first laughed at Hillary when she said they are in the tank for Obama it soon became obviously true.

[DARSB]

@crusader Commentators supporting a candidate is quite a far piece from recruiting and financing a candidate, as Mr Murdoch attempted.

[crusader]

@DARSB And you know he did how? Recruiting? Romney ran in 2008 and said tehn he might ran again in 2012, so recruitment was far from necessary. As for the financing all campaing contributions were made public and no such allegations were made nor charges filed. Democrats would have definitely done so if possible.
Him giving money to the campaign as anyone can do would be okay as I am sure the owner of NBC did for Obama. There was no greater contributor to any campaign than George Soros for Obama.

[DARSB]

@crusader "And you know he did how?" Well, I read the WaPo story and listened to the audio recording of the Fox News personality talking it over with General Petraeus. You know, all that stuff at the link I posted.

You're a bit misinformed about the size of campaign donations as well. Mr Soros donated $1 million to the President's campaign. Mr Sheldon Adelson, on the other hand, gave Mr Romney $10 million.

[crusader]

@DARSB I was unaware about the offer to Petraus.
But you are wrong about the donations and I did not see anything about his donation to Romeny, was it before or after clinching the nomination, as much of his time and resources went to securing the nomination, which always give the incumbent a financial advantage. You neglected to include the amounts that George Soros gave to super pacs and the DNC. The full amount may not even be published but I know some that were one and two million each not including to the DNC.

[RobertJHarsh]

YES! Neocons and right wing psycho xitian fundies need to be ejected from the party. Tea Partiers, too.

[PNWest]

Then who would be left?

[RobertJHarsh]

@PNWest The moderate, which would reflect the majority of the electorate. Of course there are the RINO leftists in the party but those are a very small group.

[PNWest]

@RobertJHarsh The GOP has already kicked out most of the moderates. Arlen Specter, Lincoln Chafee, Dick Lugar, Colin Powell - you called them RINOs.

[RobertJHarsh]

@PNWest Colin Powell is a neocon.

[PNWest]

@RobertJHarsh It's hard to keep track of the reasons the GOP kicks out the smart ones.

[DerivePI]

Without Fox news, you'd never get a sense of what its like to "negotiate" with Obama:

http://patdollard.com/2012/12/white-house-boe...

[Dan_Tien]

I don't think that Fox News is jettisoning those two men from their broadcasts in order to improve their credibility, they are dumping them because of bad publicity.

[PoliticalSpice]

Hat Fox. Happy Rove and Morris lost the job. But does it occur to anyone: they were hored as election analyst the election is over the job is done. And Rove and Morris are hardly the reason Fox veiwers are out of touch.

[Thunderchicken]

Rove and Morris have been out of touch for a while now. Fox should have done this a few years ago.

[KyleMFb]

Fox News has zero credibility....any one who watches Fox News has zero credibility....there's no hope for Fox News I just hope it's replaced by another station who can be Credible instead of pushing BS malarkey

[mimi57]

Now when will the Leftists MSNBC start cutting Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz and Rachel Maddows for starters.
At least Fox admits there was a problem..the Left will never admit to any 'mistakes' made by their party, I guess
if it's all blather, why bother?...

[MRMacrum]

Maybe if FOX booted out Hannity, O'Reiley, then maybe you would some credible argument here. But the question is about guests who are brought on, not the hosts. in addition this question and the information provided only allows us to consider FOX. It ain't about MSNBC. It's about FOX. Maybe the folks who run this forum should balance things out with an insiders view of how MSNBC monitors and/or controls what the producers of their shows are allowed to do. Until then, any conversation calling MSNBC into question has no validity. In no way do I infer that MSNBC is better. We just do not have any information one way or the other.

[mimi57]

@MRMacrum They will never boot O'Reilly or Hannity...where would people get accurate reporting ...MSNBC ?!
Pulease!!! LOL

[MRMacrum]

@mimi57 - Accuracy is not the goal of either network. That you think one is more accurate than the other indicates a strain a laziness in the efforts you use to form your opinions. Good luck with that.

[mimi57]

@MRMacrum I know for certain that Fox News has far more representation from both sides than all the Leftist News shows combined... the rest just want to hear more of the same Liberal spiel, God forbid someone may have a different opinion, they can't take it.

[MRMacrum]

@mimi57 - Like I said. Good luck with that.

[ctc]

And I won't eat anything...............until dinner time.

[ST_Louie_Sue]

I would love to know the "real" reason for the Fox decision and not some wild guess. Maybe Rove and Morris had contract issues that expired after the election. And maybe it was nothing more than a right wing conspiracy to get the left all hot and bothered. LOL, worked.

[Zazziness]

I really appreciate an article that uses "banish" and "Karl Rove" in the same sentence.

[mimi57]

Fox News Channel...10 yrs. as the # 1 News Channel...Ten years! Oh the jealousy on the left !!! LOL

[Zazziness]

Honey BooBoo gets better ratings. It's not a new program, either. And believe me, no one is or ever has been jealous that you listen to Karl Rove. Pity is a little closer.

[mimi57]

@Zazziness LOL...and I bet you watch every show...any relation?

[mimi57]

@Zazziness True...O'Reilly got better ratings btw... Thinking..It's a good thing.

[Zazziness]

@mimi57 Honey Boo Boo has more news in it, though.

[thejimbo]

This is a trick question, right Politix?