Bizarre that this topic should arise today in the news, as we were discussing this very thing on my website, over a week ago, when an Australian friend, Roger, made the following comment:
"[Can Fox News really be considered a 'News' entity?] ... from what I've heard and read (having never actually seen the station on TV), it's a PR company for the Neo-Cons."
Which is pretty much the way I feel about Faux News, also. So, as Loyd Grossman might say - let's look at the clues...
As a 'news' entity, it's certainly a Murdoch-owned opinionated vassal; catering largely for what I refer to as 'The No Passport Fox News Christians': the kind of analysis-starved mindset which eagerly accepts voodoo claims and deliberate dissembling, such as "Obama death panels", in the US Healthcare Reform debate, and "Obama's a Muslim and has no US birth certificate". And this is the same audience who, as default, use the term 'liberal' in the pejorative sense.
It also makes much of the "we can say what we want, regardless of how petulant, puerile or pernicious it might be, and it's protected by the Constitution" mentality, so redolent in the US (in other words, the liberty to be both stupid and offensive, whilst trying to paint your actions as some duty, or noble and cherished rite of passage - it's not called 'Faux' News for nothing!).
Fox would have you believe that it does indeed offer 'news & analysis' - which is an utter and deliberate misnomer; and one to which it obstinately and repeatedly clings in the belief that mere opinionated rants are in some way synonymous with, or a worthy substitute for, proper and impartial analysis.
In short, all Fox does is cater for its 'target market' (the eponymous 'No Passport Fox News Christians') and sees no reason to trouble itself with what (outside the US) is the dictionary definition of 'news' - that means it's just an opinion: and an avowedly, no pretence, right-wing one at that. This is why it is not considered 'news' anywhere else outside its Limbaugh-loving target market.
And what marks it out as a transparent shill for the US Right is its chosen format and approach; as this is one, in Europe at least, which we associate with, and attribute to, the tabloids and habitués of rags like The National Enquirer - hence the reason why most Europeans treat it with a mixture of concomitant contempt and parody.