While taking the lazy route (i.e. Google) to looking up the election results on Fox News, I came across a blog on the LA Times website that just encapsulated everything that's gone wrong in the rest of the "mainstream media".
"Fox News Strangely Subdued" at the GOP triumph, reads the headline. Tell me, Mr. LA Times blogger, has it occurred to you that maybe -- just maybe -- they're acting the way a news organization is supposed to act? That, whatever their personal leanings might be, they're able to set those aside and actually report news in a straight, even-handed tone that actually lets the viewer (in the words of its much-maligned slogan) decide?
I admit I didn't watch any other networks for reference, although I would have checked out ABC News had they not folded under pressure and cancelled Andrew Breitbart (and then implausibly denied ever planning to have him on in the first place). Nevertheless, from what I heard second-hand, the coverage was, well, not quite so even-handed. Admittedly, I heard a lot more about the train wreck that was MSNBC than I did about the broadcast networks, but since until recently they were branding themselves "the place for politics" I don't know that it's totally unfair to cast them as representative of the non-Fox News major media.
But this diary isn't really about them anyway. This was about the LA Times expecting Fox News to be breaking out the confetti while reporting last night's election results, because, one presumes, that's what they would do (and in many cases did, in 2008).
All of which I think says as much as anything about the bad rap Fox News routinely gets. Just like some will continue to believe Sarah Palin was responsible for things Tina Fey said, Fox News will, to some, never be anything other than what its enemies want it to be, actual evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.