CORRECTED, UPDATED — Cable News Irony Alert: CNN, Fox and The Disappearing General Audience

CORRECTION: Ahh, the pitfalls of technology. In the post below, I wrote about an ad that kept running Sunday morning on CNN, which I watched in the background as I scribbled away at my office. Several times, I heard an ad for Anderson Cooper’s show that included a woman’s voice talking about being a “lifelong Democrat” and watching Cooper because he called out the “right wing.” But that’s not the whole story. I was told Monday by CNN that I only heard half the ad, which was dubbed in stereo. (Apparently my television is mono.) The other half of the ad had a male voice saying he was a Republican who turns to Anderson Cooper because he holds accountable “left wing politicians.” The two voices are recorded to be talking over each other, reaffirming CNN’s place in the center of the cable news spectrum. This makes my subsequent analysis largely wrong. Cooper was not signaling a shift to cater to a left-wing audience. He was signaling that he wanted both a left-wing and a right-wing audiences at the same time. The CNN dream of post-partisanship, in other words, is still alive. This still speaks to the degree to which cable news viewers are polarized–potential viewers are either left wing or right wing–but not in the way I initially described. After the jump, I have posted the transcript of the two versions of the ad, which CNN sent me. My apologies for the mistake.

The original blog post with transcript after the jump.

White House Communications Director Anita Dunn appeared Sunday morning on Howard Kurtz’s CNN show Reliable Sources to discuss her comments in my TIME magazine story this week. She continued her criticism of Fox News:

But let’s be realistic here, Howie.  You know, they are widely viewed as, you know, part of the Republican Party.  Take their talking points, put them on the air.  Take their opposition research, put them on the air and that’s fine. But let’s not pretend they’re a news network the way CNN is.

The ironic part came later, during the commercial break. All morning, CNN has been intermittently running a promo for Anderson Cooper 360, a show that has long billed itself as a classic straight news program with an investigative front man who digs “beyond the headlines” with “many points of view, so you can make up your own mind.” The new promo, by contrast, consists of a woman’s voice, pitching Cooper’s show as, essentially, a liberal alternative to Fox News: “I’m a lifelong Democrat,” she says, “and that’s why I watch Anderson Cooper.” Hmmm. The voice goes on to say that Cooper is the person she can turn to hold “right wing” conservatives accountable. Cooper is not exactly aiming for the political middle ground here.

But then who is? MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz are committed liberals, increasingly focused on the dual project of holding President Obama to a liberal line and attacking his detractors. Fox News, on the other hand, is, well, Fox News. Dunn, on Kurtz’s show, made a point of criticizing Fox News Sunday’s Chris Wallace for “fact checking” an Obama administration official but not its other Republican guests. So it goes.

If anything, the Anderson Cooper promo is just the latest evidence of what Fox News president Roger Ailes seems to have known long ago: Cable news viewers seem to want an ideological slant to their information. The cable audience has fractured beyond general news programming.

The ratings tell the story: In September, according to Nielson, the top thirteen cable news shows were on Fox, led by the network’s conservative pundits: The O’Reilly Factor (2.6 million households), Sean Hannity (2.1 million), Glenn Beck (2.2 million), and the less political Greta Van Susteren (1.8 million). The top non-Fox shows are CNN’s Larry King (921,000), Countdown with Keith Olbermann (881,000) and Rachel Maddow (827,000). Only then, in the 17th spot, does Anderson Cooper make a showing, with 746,000 households in the 10 p.m. hour.

UPDATE: As promised, here is the ad script that CNN released to me Monday:

AC360 Left Right Promo
Length: :30

2 Simultaneous Monologues, in sync, on 2 separate stereo channels

WOMAN:           I’m a lifelong Democrat.
MAN:                 I’m a lifelong Republican.

WOMAN:           The issue that matters most to me is the economy.
MAN:                 The issue that matters most to me is national security.

WOMAN:          Unfortunately, a lot of the politicians running the government are extremely difficult to trust sometimes.
MAN:                Unfortunately, many of the politicians running the government are almost impossible to trust sometimes.

WOMAN:          That’s why I watch Anderson Cooper 360 on CNN.
MAN:                That’s why I watch Anderson Cooper 360 on CNN.

ANNCR:            Every Weeknight at 10, AC360 brings you the news from different perspectives.

WOMAN:           I really like “Keeping Them Honest” –
because whenever one of those Right Wing politicians
plays with the facts… they’re held accountable.

MAN:                 I especially like “Keeping Them Honest” – because whenever one of those Left Wing politicians
plays with the facts… they’re held accountable.

ANNCR:            AC360 Weeknights at 10, only on CNN.

AC360 Left Right Promo
Length: :15
2 Simultaneous Monologues, in sync, on 2 separate stereo channels

WOMAN:           I’m a lifelong Democrat.
MAN:                 I’m a lifelong Republican.

WOMAN:          That’s why I watch Anderson Cooper 360 on CNN.
MAN:                That’s why I watch Anderson Cooper 360 on CNN.

WOMAN:           I really like “Keeping Them Honest” –
because whenever one of those Right Wing politicians
plays with the facts… they’re held accountable.

MAN:                 I especially like “Keeping Them Honest” – because whenever one of those Left Wing politicians
plays with the facts… they’re held accountable.

ANNCR:            AC360 Weeknights at 10, only on CNN.

Related Topics: anderson cooper, anita dunn, Fox news, howard kurtz, roger ailes, Media
  • Latest on Swampland

    Obama to Submit His Budget to Congress on Monday

    President Barack Obama is pressing for investments in infrastructure while relying on familiar tax increases on the wealthy and corporations to claim progress on the federal deficit in his upcoming budget.

    Romney: I Was A 'Severely Conservative' GovernorHuffPost Politics

    Robert F. Bukaty / AP

    With Saturday Victories, Romney Retakes Control of the GOP Narrative

    Mitt Romney, the perpetually questioned front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination, had a rough week. Three embarrassing losses to Rick Santorum in Tuesday’s non-binding contests led to questions about Romney’s conservative bona fides just in time for GOP activists, gathering at their annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, to collectively grumble about it. But in two narrow, largely symbolic victories on Saturday, Romney reclaimed the headlines. Never mind the details. He was winning again.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    If sawing 8 foot logs, into 4 foot lengths, is journalism then I suppose CNN is less ideological than Fox. Cooper has multiple opinions, and no opinions. His only goal is to spot the mid point, and bounce around there, without ever landing. Just because Fox and CNBC have opinions doesn’t automatically make them wrong.

  • http://ktheintz.wordpress.com/ kth

    While all reporters and institutions have their unexamined beliefs and prejudices, PBS and NPR don’t have a noticeable ax to grind or constituency to appeal to, the way MSNBC and Fox do. That’s why the audience for public broadcasting is mainly liberals (though far from exclusively so): we want first to be informed, not to have our buttons pushed.

  • slowp

    Michael -

    Do you actually not understand the difference between CNN and Fox?

  • http://elvisberg.wordpress.com Elvis Elvisberg

    Interesting catch, Michael. Obviously CNN got out of the journalism business years ago, but that promo still does kind of creep me out. I guess we like our stupid fake news, read by know-nothings like Wolf Blitzer, to have an ideological slant… but what about straight news?

  • http://tcoa.wordpress.com tcoa

    I don’t remember anyone in the Bush administration consistently whining about being hammered by ABCCBSNBCCNNPBSMSNBCFOX yes Fox was critical of Bush, This is the biggest bunch of crybabies to ever occupy the White House. Maybe if the weren’t so concerned about pleasing everyone they would have time to govern.

  • Paul-no not that one

    I wonder how these numbers (total viewers not ratings share) compare to two years ago.

    2008 was a presidential election year so the numbers likely were higher, but what about two years ago?

    I haven’t watched more than 30 minutes total of cable “news” over the last 6 months.

  • stuartzechman

    Michael Scherer:

    The ironic part came later…

    Part of the problem with the “objectivity” conventions of modern US reportage is the disproportionately heavy weighting of the importance of “irony” in coverage.
    .
    Of course, the knee-jerk flagging of “irony” by the perpetual Holden Caulfields of the political press corps seems to originate in the dysfunctional confusion of scientific, empirical objectivity with the reporters’ (and editors’) need for advertisement of “objectivity”.
    .
    Very few of these rituals or conventions now help the press corps with its true function, which is to reliably connect with and communicate necessary information to a democratic electorate.
    .
    You parrot that the problem between journalists and their newly empowered audience is that “Cable news viewers seem to want an ideological slant to their information.“, when we want mountains more than the display of truthy biases. It turns out that we “seem to want” a whole lot more in the way of usable information, connection and trustworthiness from our press corps, but if all we can get is ideological slant, then we’ll take that while we set about establishing better, more reliably transparent sources than you and your colleagues, Michael Scherer.
    .
    If the press as a whole can’t even distinguish between reporting methods that fulfill the requirements of their consumers, and those that assuage their own feelings, or satisfy commercial objectives, and can only facilely bemoan the fact that their loathed, condescended-to user-base “fractured beyond the general news programming“, then it’s no wonder that they’re subject to their current downward spiral of failure.
    .
    Don’t you see that the problem is so much greater than your audience not understanding any more just how wonderful your “objectivity” conventions are for them, Michael Scherer?
    .
    Don’t you see that the problem is one of transparency, which contradicts the whole premise of how/why “access journalism” is practiced by the political press corps?
    .
    Don’t you know yet that transparency is the new “objectivity”?
    .
    Honestly?

  • destor23

    Hang on here… “I’m a life long Democrat so I watch Anderson Cooper 360″ doesn’t lead necessarily to “because Cooper is a Democrat” or “because the show is overtly supportive of Democrats” or anything like that. It could just mean, “Because Fox and CNBC yell at me, so I’ll be watching something else” or it could mean, “Because Fox and CNBC are so overtly partisan, I’m choosing less partisan programming.”

    Anderson Cooper 360 is not a liberal-minded news program any more than one could call Time a liberal publication. You once worked for Mother Jones so I know you know the difference!

  • sacredh

    If the news isn’t screamed at you and if nobody cries, it couldn’t possibly be true. I gave up on watching news programs after the elections.

  • http://24ahead.com/ kattest123

    Thank you for that hilarious comment.
    .
    On a related note, here’s Howard Kurtz lying. Understanding how he was lying shouldn’t be that difficult for most people, but admitting that he was lying about that topic is exceedingly difficult for many. (Note that a later announcement partially backing his claim doesn’t count: he lied *before* that announcement).

  • http://twitter.com/michaelscherer Michael Scherer

    i am not a media critic and was not trying to judge anderson’s, which i rarely watch, as a liberal show. but there is no doubt that the spot that CNN is running is pitching Cooper as a liberal antidote to the “right wing.” It’s a sales strategy that positions anderson as democrat friendly.

    my post was attempting to explain the business reasons behind that sort of pitch.

  • rose83

    MS, could you name someone with their own show on Fox who is as liberal as Lou Dobbs and Joe Scarborough are conservative?

  • trifecta55

    There also is another number that is important to realize. Fox audience is very old, CNN is in the middle, MSNBC is younger.

    I would like t point out that MSNBC has Joe Scarborough on 3 hours every morning. Can you picture FOX doing that with a liberal all morning? So even there, you can’t really compare what FOX’s schedule is like with MSNBC as a balance.
    .
    It makes great he said/she said copy to pretend that MSNBC is consistently as liberal as FOX is conservative, but it isn’t accurate. You also want to compare Rachel Maddow and Hannity/O”reilly/Beck in terms of seriousness of discussion?
    .
    And finally, you all made your bed when you (as journalists) decided that you were going to include FOX in the big umbrella. When they run around chasing ACORN all day as the most important thing in the world, by the rest of the media pretending it isn’t a joke, you get lumped in with FOX when people think about the state of journalism. If you all had courage Michael, you could dismiss FOX for what it is, and still run stories all day that show that both sides are equally guilty, and both sides have valid opinions as is your want.

  • bitterpill8

    Cable is in the business of getting advertising dollars. The news/commentary/bogus talking heads with predictable talking points/Villagers who breathlessly tell you who is doing what to upset whom is the window dressing.

    CNN realises this so they tell you that the next issue will be raised in 6 minutes and counting or something similar.

    It takes some guts to say the same thing over and over. So hats off to our Villagers who breathlessly report a McCain “exclusive” interview for the umpteenth time this year. Last week it was ABC, today CNN’s State of the Nation. This guy gives us an exclusive each week.

  • davemartin987

    “Fox News, on the other hand, is well, Fox News.”

    Fox News, on the other hand, is well, The Jesus Channel/ GOP TV/ The Glorious Official Republican Government News Network.

    There, fixed it for you.

  • davemartin987

    One more thing… have anyone else notice that when “The Wall Street Journal”, “The Weekly Standard” people are on Fox News there’s never disclosure that ALL these people are Rupert Murdock employees?

    Imagine if MSNBC or CNN did this… I don’t know how Fox News gets way with constantly recycling Rupert Murdock’s employees (sockpuppets) from his various media properties.

    Palin, who is a favorite among the Faux News/ Right-wing crowd is getting Rupert Murdock’s wingnut welfare.

    Palin’s (Rupert Murdock’s ghostwriter) book publisher is HarperCollins… a wholly owned Rupert Murdock subsidiary, you ‘betcha.

  • destor23

    @michaelscherer: Very cool of you to answer me, thank you. No reason for you to feel compelled to say “I’m not a media critic,” though. Everyone is qualified to be a media critic since we’re all consumers of the product and you’re especially qualified because it’s your career!

    I think we might be saying the same thing but from a business standpoint remember that Fox started as a supposed alternative to a media biased towards the left. Isn’t CNN just saying that in the age of Fox and CNBC that the pendulum has swung the other way?

  • hellslittlestangel

    I think the ironic thing is that a guy who writes for a magazine that has been losing readers for years thinks he knows what news viewers want.

  • edwaters

    HAs anyone yet figured out why, if FOX news deserves to be ‘dismissed’, they consistently rate highest in watched programs? Doesn’t that tell us that a wide majority of the cable news watching public leans in a certain direction. People act as this is some sort of aberration, a fly in the ointment during the polling process. It’s not, and major liberal media outlets simply cannot understand why so many people are ‘still’ conservatives because in their pious erudition, believe there is not place for that type of belief. They look so hard at FOX news but fail to understand the people who put FOX news on top. This is part of the arrogance of major media, that somehow the network is generating the viewers, while in fact it is the viewers who keep the networks going.
    I hope to wake up one day when there is no cable news anymore (and no I don;t watch it now [nor TV] but it’s influence is far and wide). The 24-hour news cycle has made a complete joke of journalism. With so much time to fill, networks have to fill it with ‘something’ and that something is largely pith. Also, one that same day, I hope that newspapers and journalists will realize their true job is not to take any side other that the truth, as best they can find it.

    And as far as Anderson Cooper, when he sinks to the level of a moron by stating that ‘it’s hard to talk while you are teabagging’, he has just tainted every word he says after that. What the hell ever happened to the ‘high-road’ and civil discourse? Seems our news coverage is governed by the concept of mutual exclusivity and that’s a shame.

  • trifecta55

    Fox News average viewer is 67 years old. The demographic is not a long term winner. Racism, homophobia, jingoism sell well with that generation better than most. FOX will have to change in order to get the people who turn 67 in 10 years to keep at it.
    .
    I am not dismissing them like advertisers do, but FOX can only attract senior citizens for so long with the same message.

  • bobcn1

    Michael,
    First off, I think you meant to say CNN (not MSNBC) in your reply above.
    .
    Just because CNN claims that a ‘lifelong Democrat’ likes to watch Anderson Cooper doesn’t mean that the CNN broadcast is somehow tainted. Do you really want to imply that any show that appeals to Democrats is necessarily partisan and/or liberal?
    .
    As a Democrat myself, I consider that absurd. Maybe you should get to know a few more of us. You may find that many of us like our news with depth and accuracy — not just partisan pandering, false equivalences, ideological fiction, or political horse race reporting, Many of us prefer to form our own opinions, rather than just accept and parrot what others tell us to think (a reason why efforts to lead Democrats are often compared to ‘herding cats’). We need and appreciate accurate reporting to form our opinions — not just partisan screeds. Also, if events don’t match our opinions, we’re willing to change our opinions rather than deny the facts.
    .
    There’s nothing wrong (or partisan) with CNN suggesting that a Democrat would be pleased with their show. When you state ‘Cooper is not exactly aiming for the political middle ground here’ you’re right in the sense that in that particular commercial they’re inviting Democrats and liberals to watch their show, but you’re wrong to suggest that therefore the show must be slanted and that others are being excluded from it.
    .
    Are you really dismissing the possibility that ‘democrat friendly’ (your term) programming could include straight forward, honest and thorough reporting? If CNN were to broadcast a commercial tomorrow that asserts that a ‘lifelong Republican’ likes Cooper’s show, that commercial and this one would not be in conflict at all. Nor would it mean that just because a Republican might like the show it is no longer acceptable for Democrats.
    .
    BTW – my comments aren’t intended to be taken as an endorsement of Cooper’s show — merely a reaction to the implications of Michael’s post.

  • sevenoaks07

    Rose: Scarborough is a conservative; but Dobbs??? Help me here.

  • davemartin987

    Edwaters, Fox News does have the highest ratings, it’s also the same group of people that make up just 20% of America’s electorate… the far right-wing of the GOP.

    There will always be an audience for the far right and that’s Rupert Murdock’s Fox News demographic.

    They keep them frothing at the mouth with manufactured fear and GOP talking-points, phony outrage.

    Btw, what do you think about Rupert Murdock constantly recycling his employees from his various media properties, “The Wall Street Journal”, “The Weekly Standard” etc. on Fox News without disclosing they are all Murdock’s Newscorp properties?

    Is that fair and balanced?

  • sevenoaks07

    When I see Alex Castellanos and Bill Bennett on CNN I don’t see Democrats in action. Who are their Democratic equivalents on Fox? Bob Beckel?

  • bobcn1

    ‘HAs anyone yet figured out why, if FOX news deserves to be ‘dismissed’, they consistently rate highest in watched programs?’
    .
    Professional wrestling also gets good Nielsen ratings. Does that mean we have to take it seriously?

  • davemartin987

    Sevenoaks07, Please note that Bob Beckel and other faux, Fox approved liberals Juan Williams (and a couple of others) are of course, employed by Rupert Murdock.

  • edwaters

    davemartin,

    So if FOX can capture a large portion of a 20% market, why can’t the other networks capture an equal share (viewer-wise) of a 4x size market?

    Any network is aiming for a very small minority of people overall, the inability of networks other than FOX to connect is interesting in my book as it shows an inability to turn ideologic commons into viewers.

  • davemartin987

    edwaters, because young people are out riding their bikes, playing on the computer, walking their dogs.

    If a young person or liberal (probably better with computers) wants news, there’s a thousand sources on the internet… TV news is slow, and not user selective.

    Fox News plays to the far right-wing of the GOP with (manufactured) fear and Republicans talking points phony outrage.

    Really, there should be an award given to the guy that writes the ominous, scary music for Fox News… he’s obviously a full-time employee.

  • davemartin987

    No seriously… whenever there’s a special where Rupert Murdock wants to convince Americans that Saddam Hussein has WMD, or that Iran/North Korea is going to attack America tomorrow, or a Hannity or Beck segment where they want to scare their right-wing audience (even more) there’s always that ominous music to go along with the story.

    It’s like a scary GOP music video.

  • jcapan

    MS & KT often throw this meme out there, that cable is more ideological as well as a greater freak show than print; in fact, they’re largely equivalent.

    However, call me elitist, but as a news consumer, I can think of no greater slang than to say he/she gets their information exclusively from cable. Mind you, I’m blessed to have access to none of the above. Lost in the he said/she said b-s that MS is peddling is that the greatest failing of both networks (as well as his own flagship pub.) is their utter/constitutional & borderline treasonous inability to call b-s, b/c calling b-s would threaten their corporate puppeteer-patrons.

    SZ mentions the media’s functions as connection and communication with their consumers, but I think it transcends this. It’s also about conveying lethally truthful information, it’s about holding even the most powerful accountable, and perhaps most of all, IMO, it’s about where their sympathies lie. At present, they lie with the elite institutions that own them, while the rabble is to be merely disdained or cariciatured.

    Examples of reality-based journalism that is nearly unrecognizable in the light of these MSM corp. institutions?

    http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/10092009/watch.html

    http://rethinkafghanistan.com/

  • edwaters

    I don’t think young people are in touch with the news as much as you might think. (first off you have to define young, I say 18-28). Most of the ones I know and run in to (many during my day job) are clueless automatons looking for the next place to spend their money, cell-phone stuck to their ear. YEs, they are idealistic, but God help them for their naivety and lack of ability to critically think.

    And what is the bent with Rupert Murdock… that just sounds like a right-wing conspiracy…

  • yoshiattack

    Fox may attract the older viewers…but even supposing that younger people trend away from Fox at this point doesn’t take into account the possibility of their political views changing as they grow older. It wouldn’t be the first time.

  • davemartin987

    “And what is the bent with Rupert Murdock… that just sounds like a right-wing conspiracy…

    Geoge Soros!

    Seriously, I think that press and especially individual journalists are deathly afraid of Rupert Murdock and what he can do to them professionally.

    There harldy a word on the “MSM” about Murdock’s world wide (far right-wing) media empire.

    Murdock has a lot of influence, example: all of his various sockpuppets, Hannity, Beck, etc, and all of Murdock’s worldwide media holdings trash global warming.

    Rupert Murdock is the new William Randolph Hearst.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Randolph_Hearst

  • Jim, Foolish Literalist

    Schultz, Maddow and Olbermann have three hours of original programming per day. So does Joe Scarborough, who is balanced by Mika “Real Americans LOVE Sarah Palin” Brezinski and Mike pseudo-regularguy Barnicle. To say nothing of Pat Buchanan and the bevy of Republicans who are brought on MSNBC all day long to lie with impunity in the name of “balance”. Funny how Joey Scar is never mentioned when MSNBC is being described as the liberal alternative to Fox. Chris “Sunny Nobility” Matthews warrants a thread of his own.

    I’ll grant that MSNBC seems to have made a conscious editorial decision to give unabashed liberals a voice in primetime (and from a purely dollars-and-cents POV, I’ll bet CNN is wishing they had had the guts to do it first), but their daytime programming is still dominated by the center-right CW that permeates CNN, Time, the Washington Post and probably ninety per cent of major media outlets.

  • davemartin987

    The fact that lying, racist Pat Buchanan, one of the original Nixon dirty-tricksters is still given media legitimacy over the decades shows a “MSM” that skews right-wing big time.

    You see Buchanan’s equivalent John Dean once or twice a year.

    Pat Buchanan and his evil twin sister have been (lying) on TV practicality every day for years and years.

  • Jim, Foolish Literalist

    HAs anyone yet figured out why, if FOX news deserves to be ‘dismissed’, they consistently rate highest in watched programs?

    That show about the people with the eight kids consistently got three times the viewers of O’Reilly, which I believe is Murdoch’s highest rated show. And Katie Couric was in danger of losing her job for better numbers than that.

    There is a tempest in a teapot aspect to all of this. The back up quarterback of you local sports franchise probably has higher name ID in your city than Olbermann or O’Reilly.

  • Ivy_B

    Dobbs has been more conservative than many conservatives on immigration, for example. If you listen to him casually he might seem centrist on other topics, but when you listen closely he is far from liberal or even centrist.
    .
    I always found it telling that if you go to his web page to leave a comment you have to indicate if it is positive or negative. (At least that’s the way it was.) I thought that indicated that any opposition comment would not even be read.

  • jpl9

    You need to do a tad more research. The Bush administration openly praised Fox.

  • xxception

    NPR no axe to grind? Are you serious? Please tell me this is a joke. Otherwise this person is serisously unable to think objectively.

  • xxception

    Hmmm, something tells me if the commercial said, “I am a lifelong Republican, so I listen to Fox News”. The above poster would be much more willing to read something into it.

  • xxception

    That’s a leap Ivy. I know of talk show hosts that I listen to that instanty send people that disagree or have a negative view of them to the front of the line.

  • xxception

    You act as if CNN doesn’t use ridiculous music to intro some of their reports as well.

  • xxception

    I was VERY libeal when in college. Then, I got out in the real world and got a job. When I saw how big a chunk the governmnent took out of my first check, I started asking questions and doing a little research. Now, I identify myself as Libertarian.

  • rose83

    Dobbs has a populist side, but he’s also very right-wing. After all, he is a quasi-birther.
    .
    Dobbs hasn’t made it any easier by using his radio show to fight back at critics, who he called “limp-minded, lily-livered lefty lemmings.” He considered going on CNN tormentor Bill O’Reilly’s Fox News show to thank him (O’Reilly says the birthers are wrong, but he defended Dobbs’ right to talk about it).
    .
    http://news.aol.com/article/lou-dobbs-birther-coverage-is-challenge/599964

  • paddykraska

    The ad is one of three running- the Democrat one, an identical one except for the fact the man identifies himself as a Republican, and then one that meshes the two of them speaking simultaneously.

    That is the purpose of the ads- to claim the middle ground, not the left side of the road with MSNBC.

  • http://ktheintz.wordpress.com/ kth

    Nearly all print media, left, right, and in-between, have been losing readers due to the free content on the World Wide Web. It’s quite unreasonable to single out Time as though they alone had been affected. What people want, mainly, is not to have to pay for things.

  • carpevis

    On the contrary, BOTH news organizations are wrong. News is supposed to be delivered ‘slant free’. In the business, it’s called objectivity. In today’s world, that seems to be a disappearing trait. The ironic thing is that it SHOULD be easier to deliver objective news rather than going in the opposite direction. News is entertainment these days, but there is an underlying journalistic duty to deliver a fair and balanced news report.

    I’m not opposed to slant. After all, these people have to draw in crowds for their advertisers. But with so many different media outlets (blogs, webcasts, websites, TV, radio, etc.) one would think they’d manage to figure out ways of delivering ‘news’ in the proper context.

    An example would be clearly and prominently labeling FOX News, ‘op-ed’ for those segments which hint at or outright express opinions rather than facts. That way, the rumor mongers who thrive on propaganda can watch people telling them the things they should be thinking as part of their news rather than just delivering the facts and letting them make up their own minds. The same goes for CNN, though based on what the article says, it seems that segment is pretty plainly op-ed already.

    A mindless drone can, if they choose, spot op-ed pieces by the use of adjectives. News, straight, unvarnished, untainted by opinion, just delivers the facts.

    __________________________________________
    Op-Ed: A raging inferno caused by suspected arsonists raced through the valley incinerating homes and lives while the local authorities did nothing. With no place in the area left to go, people are fleeing the valley to find relief elsewhere.

    The President, turning a blind eye of indifference to the plight of the people, had no comment on the callouse actions of his political-insider cohorts.
    *******************************************************************
    News: A twelve acre brush fire of undetermined origins in a steep ravine was allowed to burn itself out after one firefighter was injured attempting to reach the flames. He was treated at the scene and did not require hospitalization.

    It was determined that the single structure destroyed – an outhouse – was not worth endangering lives to save. Firefighters prevented the flames from spreading. Firefighters estimated the value of lost property at $1000.00. No other injuries were reported.
    ___________________________________________
    One is far more entertaining to read, but lacks facts while the other tells you what happened and you can make up your own mind. The sad fact is that people, in general, are willing to believe everything their told whether it’s true or not. Chalk it up to laziness, indifference or stupidity, the end result is the same – a large number of people believing fiction when all they should need is fact.

  • Ivy_B

    All you need to do is listen to the second hour of Weekend Edition Saturday from yesterday to hear the bias rather than news. NPR has fallen into the trap of believing that they must have a liberal bias (as opposed to having been objective) and therefore to counter it, they must faithfully report all right wing talking points.
    .
    Another example was the 20 minutes of derision on Morning Edition when the Nobel Peace Prize was announced. Supposedly the news part of the program, it was totally editorial.

  • Ivy_B

    As I said, I somehow didn’t believe I would be sent to the front of the line using this form.
    .
    http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?9
    .
    Other programs may not read your comments, but they don’t ask you to self-sort.

  • freeinpa

    I find it difficult to discern if the liberals here are being serious or completely delusional. For years liberals through all the media outlets whether ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC,, NPR, PBS or NYT, WaPO, LAT or Boston Globe went unchecked and unanswered. Now there is Fox news providing the same type of reporting as the other have for the past 40 years and they are horrified.

    You may not agree with them but their reporting from their point of view is no different than the fare offered up by the other stations.

    Liberals dismiss any representation by Beckel or Williams, 2 affirmed liberals because they “work” for Murdoch. Here is a flash Scarborough, Brooks et al are paid by liberal networks, so they can’t be true conservatives by that impeccable reasoning.

    Fox viewers are always referred to as extreme right wingers while CNN, MSNBC et al are considered what? Moderate? If there is truly an idiotic view it is that one. The basic problem is liberals do not like having their viewpoints examined instead of just assumed as fact. Sorry those days are done. Additionally if the base of Fox viewers is as limited as liberals think, why the fuss and bother? The reality is that the liberal media outlets are now circling the drain while Fox thrives.

    This same trend is even confirmed in book sales. Beck, O’Reilly, Malkin, Kristof and Levin is far outstripping Madeleine Albright or Ted Kennedy’s book. The trend in book sales leads to one of two conclusions: liberals are out of touch and have nothing of note to say or the argument about liberals being more intellectual is a lie as well and do not read.

    Sad and pathetic is the liberal way of life. One channel out of all the media and the whining and screaming from the Administration on down. These same liberals were deafeningly silent when the treatment of Bush from the extreme left media went . Grow up!!

  • http://insidecablenews.wordpress.com/2009/10/11/fractured-audiences/ Fractured Audiences… « Inside Cable News

    [...] Time Magazine’s Michael Scherer blogs about the fractured cable news audience but keenly notes a new AC 360 ad… White House [...]

  • rose83

    Ivy_B, I love the positive/negative binary. No need to accommodate nuance…

  • destor23

    hmmmmm… something tells me xxception has no idea what it’s talking about.

  • http://hotair.com/archives/2009/10/11/video-white-house-communications-chief-whines-about-fox-news-media-for-nine-minutes/ Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: White House communications chief whines about Fox News, media for nine minutes

    [...] taken to fact-checking comedy skits on behalf of His Holiness. In fact, here’s what was airing on the “nonpartisan” cable news channel this morning before and after this miserable [...]

  • http://otisgrace.wordpress.com/ John

    FOX Noise will always beat CNN and MSNBC as long as 1) It’s the only network right-wingers can go to hear their biases echoed back to them and reinforced, and 2) the liberal audience is split by MSNBC, Comedy Central, and now apparently CNN. Plus more liberals are watching the other TV offerings, brought to us by what conservatives derisively dismiss as “Hollyweird.”

    I’d like to combine the political offerings of MSNBC, Comedy Central, Bill Maher, and a few other things. That combo could take on FOX Noise and win. It would be the must-watch destination for liberals. But frankly, there’s no incentive for that. Just because FOX is winning in the ratings doesn’t mean MSNBC is hurting. They’re not, they’re doing fine. Not making as much money as FOX, certainly, but still making money.

  • ctlo34

    Better the transparency of a news network that everyone agrees takes a side, than one that feigns pure objectivity. We had 30+ years of CBS, NBC, ABC, and they tried telling me it was raining as they peed down my leg. Fox News keeps their commentators a safe distance from the anchors. And Baird and Wallace are two very good newsmen. To compare them with the likes of Rather, Couric, and What-ever’s-his-name Williams is a joke.

  • freeinpa

    Plus more liberals are watching the other TV offerings, brought to us by what conservatives derisively dismiss as “Hollyweird.”

    I am sure the liberals are lined up for Dancing with the Stars, Housewives of NY, or any number of a dozen reality shows.

    And it just gets better: “I’d like to combine the political offerings of MSNBC, Comedy Central, Bill Maher..” The fact liberals believe there is any intellectual content in these confirms that liberals being an intellectual lot is another myth.

    The delusions continue!

  • edwaters

    “Murdock has a lot of influence, example: all of his various sockpuppets, Hannity, Beck, etc, and all of Murdock’s worldwide media holdings trash global warming.”

    And all those who oppose Murdock laud the global warming folks. Does that mean they are in some sort of cabal and are of one mind? No.

    I trash global warming not because of whether or not it exists, but because megalomaniacal people such as Gore and to a lesser extent the small extreme environmentalists constantly ask for our sacrifice while they reap the benefits thereof. When people realize one day that they are being led (by many different causes, left and right) down the path of their own destruction for others’ gain, maybe folks will wake up.

    BAck to the channels… Create for me the ‘perfect’ cable news channel… Who owns it, runs it, and hosts it.

  • geoffrey1986

    I was watching Reliable Sources this morning, too, and was also surprised and disappointed when I heard CNN’s promo for AC 360 (I was looking at my computer so I only heard it when it ran). But I just didn’t believe it. So I went back on my DVR and played it again. Turns out that the woman saying “I’m a lifelong Democrat” comes at the same time a man says “I’m a lifelong Republican.” The on-screen graphics try to bring home the point, sort of melding the words that the man and the woman are saying. The point of the ad is that AC 360 is there for both sides because it’s a fair program. Unfortunately, the woman’s voice seems more powerful (at least to me and, apparently, you) and that’s what we picked up if we’re only listening and not watching.

    Interesting idea for a promo but it failed.

  • gysgt213

    Its not news. Its media and its design to exploit you. If you comment here and you not employed by NBC, CNN, Fox, CBS, or Disney corporation you are complete fool to think that you are watching friggin news when you watch any of these shows or networks.
    .
    Think about this folks. For the most part news is news. There is no middle, there is no left or right. Events either happen or they didn’t.
    .
    But, when it comes to the press and politics. Their role is to hold government accountable. Whether it happens to be a liberal or conservative government should not matter. But if you watch the media today, you see that it actually does. And that’s not news.

  • ohiolib

    No wonder lies like the birther conspiracy keep spreading. There’s no one with an ounce of credibility left to counter them.

  • edwaters

    “Think about this folks. For the most part news is news. There is no middle, there is no left or right. Events either happen or they didn’t.
    .
    But, when it comes to the press and politics. Their role is to hold government accountable. Whether it happens to be a liberal or conservative government should not matter. But if you watch the media today, you see that it actually does. And that’s not news.”

    Precisely!

    That’s why having a very good BS detector allows you to watch (or read or listen) to any newscast and decipher what is and what is not news. Good BS detectors (i.e. critical thinking and thinking for ones’ self) seem to be sorely lacking in this day and age. Kids are no longer taught HOW to think, rather only WHAT to think.

  • july41776

    I just feel compelled to defend NPR. I’m a small-government guy…a true conservative although these days you have to say Libertarian because, well, the Republican Party has hijacked conservatism.

    I want government out of my bedroom and out of my business as much as possible. This is only relevant in that I’m not liberal, and don’t like big government solutions to problems. So that being said…

    I think NPR is very very balanced. I listen to To the Point and On Point for a lot of my news and I think they do a fantastic job presenting the news and then takes from both liberal and conservative writers, think tankers, professors…etc. Interestingly, not a lot of Dem or Rep office holders guest.

    And for the record…I don’t like Shultz on MSNBC, but at least he announces he’s liberal which means you know what you’re getting. Scarborough is great that way also. Very responsible in presenting the issue and then highlighting where he’s coming from.

    Fox isn’t conservative…it’s Republican. And mean and irresponsible. MSNBC for the most part has gotten unwatchable…and unfortunately, so has CNN, Cooper especially included in that.

    Just my take on what i think is a very interesting discussion…and a vital one for America.

    Myles

  • stuartzechman

    Thanks so much for responding to commentary, Michael Scherer.

  • stuartzechman

    What people want, mainly, is not to have to pay for things.
    .
    If that were the case, then broadcast news’ numbers would be trending better than cable news’, but the reverse is true.

  • kryptik1

    Don’t forget his doubling down on birtherism and his quick reaction to jump on the bandwagon on the whole ‘right-wing terrorism’ report as well as sympathies with sovereign citizen movements and ‘tenthers’.

  • http://www.thebubbler.com/forums/wisconsin-political-conversation/26310-media-bias.html#post103795 Media Bias? – theBubbler

    [...] (CNN) talking about the irony of the White House complaints. This is Twilight Zone stuff. Cable News Irony Alert: CNN, Fox and The Disappearing General Audience – Swampland – TIME.com Even some liberals are calling the White House a bunch of cry babies. YouTube – Kirsten Powers [...]

  • edwaters

    “I think NPR is very very balanced”

    Renee Montagne is not balanced ( I know RM is NOT all of NPR…). Remember, it’s not just how a reporter portrays opposite sides of a story, it’s WHICH stories they choose to feature. With that in mind, NPR is far from balanced. They are however, the closest thing to a truly professional news organization left. I say that with the use of a good BS detector (as noted above).

  • http://ktheintz.wordpress.com/ kth

    If you really think NewsHour and All Things Considered are liberal, then Fox News is indeed probably best for you.

  • Art Pepper

    Stuart: But most people get their cable news stations as part of a package. I wonder what would happen if cable stations were “ala carte”?
    .
    Comcast recently “upgraded” my service by removing most of my channels, including CNN, MSNBC, and Fox, and I haven’t missed them for a second.

  • stuartzechman

    Commenters:
    .
    Has it occurred to anyone that the press corps that isn’t Fox News (the marketed goal of which is to “balance” “liberal” news outlets) is completely, thoroughly biased, but not toward liberalism or conservatism?
    .
    Can anyone argue that the US press, where it is biased, isn’t supremely biased toward itself, its institutions, its conventional wisdom, its view of the world?
    .
    Isn’t that the real meaning of “objectivity” and its discontents: that the press reflects itself?

  • orionca

    Obviously FoxNews has found a profitable niche in its reporting style: Obama’s people whining about that isn’t going to change it. If they think they can then they don’t understand – or approve of – the First Amendment which is certainly more dangerous to America than FoxNews.

  • hankvreeland

    As Yogi said “deju vu all over again”. Miss Dunn sounds rather Nixonian. I didn’t realize that these new age people went in for enemies lists.

  • ceryan83

    I don’t think it matters who the publisher is. Palin’s book is a good investment for any publishing company to make, because you know the book is going to sell. HarperCollins is a legitimate publisher. They’ve published books by Shel Silverstein and Martin Luther King as well.

    Rupert Murdoch is a businessman, first and foremost. Who knows what his political beliefs are? I personally doubt he has any strong ones. He just does what’s been working for him.

  • 53_3

    I think this whole thing is pointless, unless the media stops the ridiculous charade of “equivalence”. I’ve been around long enough to know what a propaganda organ is and FOX is it.
    .
    It is a complete failure on the part of all the media for not calling FOX what it is, and this includes everyone at TIME.
    .
    I’ve seen absolutely nothing about how far, relative to other outlets, FOX strays from the facts, nor the smearing of the boundaries between “new anchor” and “entertainer”.
    .
    I liken FOXs’ listenership numbers the same way I do a shrinking pond in the drought-stricken Serengeti plain:
    .
    The animals, normally rarely seen, throng in numbers at the only watering hole left, becoming steadily more feral as the resources shrink.

  • 53_3

    I think that there is also something to be said for the possibility that those shows’ numbers all share a considerable overlap.
    .
    I don’t think a straight total of the numbers will give an accurate count of total FOX viewers. Some people like propaganda, but others, most, I think, don’t.
    .
    It is too bad that many of you don’t remember Pravda, or ITAR TASS, or any of the other propaganda organs operating during the Cold War. A comparison between them and FOX would likely be more productive than one would think…

  • cfukara

    ” .. Cooper is not exactly aiming for the political middle ground here. .. “

    Hold on.
    Is it “not exactly .. middle ground” because a self-avowed ‘liberal’ has praise for him? Shouldn’t an (ideological/cultural) ‘middle ground’ feature ‘liberals’ too?
    Well, maybe you forgot to tell us there is NO “conservative” who has praise for him.

    Conservative talk shows were at their best just before we invaded Iraq. Their art of whipping up the passions of a loud functionally-illiterate populace baying for blood would mesmerize Goebbels.

    I read somewhere (to be researched) that over time, readers and viewers tend to move towards and patronize the media/talk-shows that ‘talks their talk’ – that is, the media they identify with (politically/philosophically) to begin with.

    Assuming that there is a sizable number of ‘liberals’ who watch the news/talk-show programs fairly regularly, it may then be said that ‘liberals’ are not at the moment fired up strongly about any particular issue that is currently captivating the other side. Hence their low participation and the attendant risk that would skew our democratic institutions and discourse.

    [Conversely, the ratings/poll-monitoring politicians may as well be wary - for the loudest criers at the town halls may not be the majority in the electorate..]

  • jcapan

    “Can anyone argue that the US press, where it is biased, isn’t supremely biased toward itself, its institutions, its conventional wisdom, its view of the world?”
    .
    No, but can you argue that those obvious biases are anything other than, at their root, conservative, when you sort the wheat from the chaff? Its CW, its views of the world serve whom? Time, CNN et al are whose institutions exactly?
    .
    IMO, centrism = conservatism, perhaps not quite in the most noxious sense of the word, but the end results are the same. Whose interests does Time represent most passionately? Whose interests are most ignored? Their status-quo reverence, their defense of an entrenched elite establishment that controls them … in fact, I’d argue that they do more to hold progressivism in check than the goons running the GOP today.

  • nonamecablewatcher

    I can best be described as a moderate politically and avidly watch FOX News everyday. The network is very explicit about each broadcast segment and the political affiliation of each person on the broadcast. There is no cloaking.

    Why do I like FOX? Well, I got tired of CNN and MSNBC saying they were giving me the “news”. That’s utter bull****. Gloria Borger on CNN is about as partisan a hack as one could imagine, not to mention, Chris Matthews, “I got a tingle down my leg” on MSNBC. Even Wolf Blitzer falls all over his tongue in subservience to the Demo Party. George Stepanopolous is a paid hack for the Democrats.

    I certainly don’t agree with everything I hear on Fox News by any means. Nor am I a Republican. Frankly I believe that both parties have sold out America, with great help from the news services. I am not a tea bagger, either.

    But our country has been sold out and no one is covering that like Fox and the press corp of other countries. I suspect that may be the reason why Fox is getting the viewers from a lot of different political affiliations.

    For some cutting edge news and analysis of the US, the British press can certainly be counted on. Our own press is afraid to expose what is going on in American politics today, mostly since their corporate “sponsors” may actually take them off the air.

    Our politicians, not matter which party affiliation, want to drive a stake between good and bad, black and white, gay and straight, GOP right-winger and liberal leftie. They have succeeded in doing this. Bush did this, Obama does this. There is no difference. Does this serve our country. NO!
    We are bankrupt, hanging on a tread and a Chinese prayer and all the pols can do, with the help of the news organizations, is divide us.

    Frankly, there is not much practical difference between Bush and Obama. Their records and stances are strangely similiar, in spite of Obama’s protestations against Bush.

  • cfukara

    ” .. the media they identify with (politically/philosophically) to begin with. .. “

    That is, most people don’t generally decide on the news/talk-shows to watch/patronize by deliberately sitting down and coldly analyzing what talking head is more centrist or has the facts straight. [Some of the viewers may not have the skills nor the inclination to carry out the exercise ..]

    —-

    [For instance, the 1960s white hippie may talk all he wants about brotherhood of man, but in real life he instinctively reaches out and hastily snaps that car lock WHENEVER a black man appears ... danger! The pre-teen child in the car watches and internalizes the lesson ... and thus through action and observation - not the lofty talk and public denials - the sins of racism are passed onto the next generation. .. ]

  • textee

    CNN’s so-called “audience” is limited to those sleeping in front of televisions at airport gates.

    MSDNC’s so-called “audience” is limited to a handful of whack job 9/11 Truther conspiracy theorists and Keith Olberwomann freakshow freaks who think that George W. Bush, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Halliburton, Diebold, Blackwater and Fox News carried out the 9/11 attacks.

    BTW, is the unwatched Keith “15th Place” Olberwomann still telling his thoroughly discredited and debunked lie that he graduated from an “Ivy League” school rather than his state ag school with a “degree” in something called “communications”? Is the 15th Place Olberwomann still telling his thoroughly discredited and debunked lie that his freakshow (or what he likes to call, comically, a “newscast”) is the top rated program in “all of cable news”?

  • desertcactus

    First, I would like to thank all who have taken the time to express their thoughts and concerns I have read. I am older, so my views are more conservative than many of you who probably are younger than I. That, by-the-way, isn’t particularly a curse. It is more a fact of life. Which of us have the sagacity at 22 that we do at 52? I think most of you would agree with me that the sententious mind of youth simply don’t have the hooks to hang their experiences on to form knowledge. Life is thrown against the wall and slides to the floor but as time goes by, there are failures, successes, pain, laughter, death of a loved one… and the hooks somehow seem to appear in our life and understanding seems to catch and build a step to the next higher level of cognitive ability. This introduction brings me to my point.
    The state of the decline of today’s media is not their lack of a flexible business model to transition from delivery via airwaves and print to PC’s, I believe it is based on the start of a fracture in our nation that can be viewed in the start of the North against the South feud that left more people dead than all the other wars combined – and remember: brother was fighting against brother. I can attest to that now seeping into my own family.
    We as a nation are like a family that is becoming dysfunctional and both government and the press have abdicated their responsibility in protecting the extremely delicate fabric that our entire nation rest. Instead of looking at the 80% we all might overlap and agree; areas where the confluence of our ideas and beliefs could come together and we could build and make each other stronger, both politicians and the media have acted as wedges. Media long ago gave up reporting the news and started shaping the news. Why? Because news is made, written and presented by humans, each with their own mores, morals, beliefs, hates, psychotic bents – it’s called humankind. No matter how we try to walk the strait and narrow way – yes I meant “hard” and narrow, how much easier it is to take the path to fame, glory, wealth, praise…. Who wants to work in a copy room and never be seen? People want to have an impact who are drawn to media. Many have agendas and it isn’t necessarily to deliver truth – it is to form opinions, shape behavior; it’s power.
    When we look at Fox News, CNN et, el. we are looking superficially at what is happening in America. We are being divided into gang’s. I don’t know anything about gangs in the inner city where to survive you have to possibly join one, but I do see that through politicians and the media we are becoming the “Red” state and the “Blue” states. We are starting to mark out territories and one day in the future my concern is that “Party” will be far more important the local civics, or state civics. I am truly fearful of the power that is being drawn toward Washington, D.C., not for me but regarding the next, and following generations. As the Federal Governent becomes more powerful there will be those that resist and there will be those that abstain and there will be those that will die for the cause of the governennt because the government will be the mother, father, provider – the political class is the fastest growing class in the nation and with union bosses gaining in power through these unions, they must be also factored as big-time players in the future.
    As we become more fractured, more dysfunctional, less educated and ignorant, as the world spends much more time in the classroom for longer periods with substantial consequences if you don’t succeed, our nation will be learning to speak in a dumb-down language so we can continute to communicate with each other. I lay much of this at the very feet of the media in America. They were given an extremely important charage by our Founding Fathers, through freedom of the press and speech – to keep the government honest and to brokers of truth. They have sold out as whores and I find them more and more like gutter trash. They have let you down, me down, my children down. God help us if they don’t get their bearing back because they, with the politicians striving for power over a more and more fractured nation, will be one of the catalyst that throws a lit candle into a nation of dynamite that is just on the edge of exploding.
    Doesn’t anyone understand that our nation is not growing together but is growing apart and that the greatest enemy in the future may not be Chavez with nuclear weapons, but you and I with hatred and anger in our hearts toward each other because we have been manipulated by the wordsmiths, who are failing us, and politicians, who would do almost anything to stay in power – even long after they are washed up. Hmmm, who would fit that description?
    In closing, for those who actually have stayed with me to the end, the press is showing the symptoms of a very ill patient that is deranged in the belief of its problems. It isn’t because the internet is the new medium for transmitting ideas and knowledge that they have fallen from such lofty heights, as have our politicians, it is because they have forsaken the words of truth and facts for the words that mold and shape and we have become aware; become distrustful, and have started turning more and more to those to whom we believe. We are becoming divided and if we continue we will not last another hundred years as a nation. There will be too much blood in the streets for words lead to consequences and actions and there are people in this nation who have been silent for a very long time but have reached the point in their mind of preparing for future war.
    I blame the press, for forsaking truth and becoming dividers by drawing from the ranks to their own; I blame the politicians that once in power would sell their soul to stay there.
    I’m just a simple man on a simple path. I hope we find away to stay on the same one, for our nation and for our children’s sake.

  • jv7878

    If you make it to the end of this log, you’ll read why the conservatives are the winners in the polarization of the news media.

    It is the age-old phenomena of the “Haves and the Have-Nots”. The reason why Robert Murdoch’s conservative faux news products, such as Fox and WSJ, have such high ratings is because the conservative audience is largely wealthy enough to have the leisure time to spend on having their fears pandered to. Remember, conservatives are motivated by (PERHAPS DEFINED BY) their desire to conserve what they already have, namely wealth & power. At all costs, they must keep what they have by conserving the status quo, because the status quo is treating them much better than it is treating the Have-Nots. The Have-Nots do not have the luxury time to read or the luxury funds to pay for those best sellers written by Glen Beck, O’Reilly, etc. The Have-Nots do not have the time to watch hour after hour of news stories, biased or not. The Have-Nots are too busy scraping by in a distorted economic system.

    The pundit who taught us the slogan, “Conservatives wish to conserve their money”, also said, “Liberals wish to spend the conservatives’ money”. The second observation is only a half-truth. The wealth & power possessed by conservatives, or anyone else, is only marginally “earned” by them. The majority of the wealth & power that the wealthy possess in our society is due to an imperfection in capitalism. The imperfection is that large amounts of wealth create a disproportionate amount of power. Power generates wealth. The cycle feeds itself. The wealth-power combination empowers its owner to amplify the wealth & power with less and less effort as the wealth & power gets greater and greater. The imperfection is proportional: Those possessing a lesser amount of wealth & power (middle and upper-middle class) have also benefitted from possessing small amounts of wealth & power, but they also equitably earned some of their wealth & power by putting forth a greater degree of work effort compared to the amount of wealth & power they garnered from the imperfection.

    Allow me a one paragraph digression: The majority of power & wealth possessed by the elite is more severely inequitable in other economic systems such as dictatorial, communistic, socialistic, theocratic, monarchic, fascist, etc. IMO, tweaked capitalism is the best system invented, since society first organized, for giving a less unfair share of wealth & power to all of society. All other systems are more disproportionate in wealth-sharing. For example, the leaders of a socialistic regime profess to intend to relinquish their wealth & power; BUT ONLY WHEN the impossible happens, that is, when everybody shares equally. There is no way that those who have enjoyed the comfort of corrupt elite living are ever going to give it up. Unaccountable to anyone, the leaders administer a corrupt government that hoards wealth for the elite. This non-accountability problem occurs in all of the non-capitalistic economies.

    Capitalism works because benign (and un-benign) greed is rewarded. To some extent, the harder you work the more you get paid. Even more importantly, risking of capital is rewarded. The larger the amount of capital that is gathered for an enterprise, the more successful and efficient that enterprise will likely be. Those who accumulate resources (capital) have the power to produce more than those who can’t or don’t accumulate capital. Even single un-wealthy individuals can often participate in the investment opportunities of capitalism. Deferring the spending of some of what we earn becomes capital. If multiple capital holders (bondholders and shareholders and bank depositors) permit their capital to be aggregated to support an enterprise, even the small time capitalist investor is rewarded with dividends, gains and interest. Some capitalists (or ancestors thereof) end up obtaining a disproportionate amount of capital due to the “imperfection” described above. The opportunities that wealth & power gave them in the first place, not because of sweat and intelligence that they have used to “earn” their right to possess more than the Have-Nots.

    A short paragraph about less deserving Have-Nots: Yes, many Have-Nots are lazy, unmotivated freeloaders; but I believe that birth into a strongly biased-towards-the-elite economic system is a significant factor enabling the “un-earners” to remain entrapped in their victim mind-set.

    The wealth & power that wealthy capitalists have, has typically been acquired by the “gushing up” effects of capitalistic economics. Too little wealth & power goes in the reverse direction under the “the trickle down economics” system that conservatives offer to appease the obvious inequities in our society.

    Some of the tweaking that we have done to slightly reduce the “gushing up” bias of pure capitalism is to have a progressive income tax system, to have an estate tax on large estates, and to have social programs benefitting the poor. Most conservatives delusionally think they are being “benevolent” or “good” (and sometimes “holy”) for supporting a system that seems to “redistribute the wealth” of the fortunate wealthy to the less fortunate. I propose that we more accurately term the phenomena as an attempt to, (and only partially) “un-redistribute the wealth” of those who do not “earn” as much as they delude themselves into thinking they do. The unchallenged myth that the wealthy “earn” what they have by taking risks with their wealth is only true to a minuscule degree. Most of what the wealthy risk are the fruits of an inequitable system and of the work effort of others, not the fruits of heir own work effort (fair salary and wages) and not the fruits of risking of savings derived from deferring the spending of their own fair salary or wages.

    Conservatives are also deluded in believing that they and their descendants are inherently morally entitled to the opportunities for education and further wealth-building they enjoy. Who says they are entitled? They say.

    I often hear wealthier persons bemoan the growing sense of entitlement exhibited by the poor and less wealthy, while they, the wealthier, are blind to the true nature of their own wealth, which, IMO, is largely un-entitled from a fairness or equitable viewpoint.

    The idealistic cure for the problem is to educate all of the wealthy of a rarely grasped truth: The greater the reward given to the masses on the lower levels of the economic pyramid (for their work effort), the more willing this mass of people will be to put forth work effort. The increased work effort will increase the wealth created in the overall economy. The combination of the increased spending power of the masses and the increased production of goods and services will generate a hugely greater amount of wealth to flow up the pyramid to those with power over the purse strings. The net gain is more real wealth for the wealthy AND for the less wealthy. Regretfully, short-sided fear and ignorance motivates many wealth-power owners to be stingy with what they permit the lower echelons to have. The adage about not choking to death the goose that lays the golden eggs comes to mind. At this point in time, fear is still stronger than wisdom and most golden-egg-geese are partially choked; some are strangled to death.

    The reason that liberal media is as successful as it is, is because of the few wealthy people and the numerous less wealthy people who recognize the injustices of conservative practices and beliefs. Of those wealthy members of the liberal camp, note how many of them are entertainers or newly rich. It is easier for them to see the inequities of the conservative system, because they are not deluded into thinking that they (or their ancestors) earned (and therefore deserve to keep) their massive amounts of wealth.

    A hallmark of out capitalistic society is that someone starting at the bottom of the pyramid can earn his or her way up to the top, or at least much higher up the pyramid. Although very encouraging and heart warming, note how statistically rare this occurs. It takes a lot of fortunate circumstances and intelligence, and it takes an almost beyond-human amount of effort to climb up a lot of levels of the pyramid. We celebrate these exceptional successes; but they truly are out of reach of most wanna-be’s. I highlight the rarity of these successes to help mitigate the myth that all who live in a capitalistic society have equal opportunity. If this were true, fifty percent of those on top of the pyramid would have come from humble beginnings.

    Sadly, I end with a tie-in to the subject of news extremism. Robert Murdoch has discovered how much money he can make by pandering to the fears and greed of the wealthy. So very sadly, he has also assisted the wealthy conservatives into duping the less wealthy middle class Americans into believing that their (the middle-class’s) small hoard (or status quo) is at risk if they don’t fight against the “un-redistribution of wealth”. Most of these duped middle-classers would be immediately better off under liberal political platforms; but they believe the lies of the fear mongers. IMO, it is true the extreme liberal press also engages in lies and occasional fear mongering, but with insignificant repercussions. The liberal audience is much under-powered than the conservative audience. For example, examine the personal wealth of the Justices of the Supreme Court. Look at the unbroken string of pro-business (anti-liberal) decisions that have been made since the wealthy conservatives gained the majority of positions on the court. The excesses of the economic system sometime disenfranchise enough voters that the liberals gain temporary control of our federal government. Let us hope that some of the pull-back from “un-redistribution of wealth” can be restored this time.

  • michaelfury

    The “general audience” is disappearing because it has become aware that US corporate news media are controlled and censor vital information.

    Example:

    Who among the US corporate news media noticed this story about “swine” flu vaccine producer Baxter International back in February?

    http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2009/10/10/going-viral/

  • michaelfury

    Why does “liberal” CNN participate in the ongoing cover-up of Dr. King’s assassination?

    http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2009/04/03/cnn-vs-mlk/

  • http://reason.com/blog/2009/10/12/anderson-cooper-afflicting-the Anderson Cooper: Afflicting the Minority – Hit & Run : Reason Magazine

    [...] to Time's Michael Scherer, CNN has a new commercial out promoting star anchor Anderson [...]

  • 53_3

    Talk about straddling that fence! Don’t those pickets kinda hurt there, man?

  • 53_3

    Micheal:
    .
    I will point out not one, but two very serious flaws:
    .
    1. There may be, since these shows are all on FOX, considerable overlap in numbers.
    .
    2. When there is only one watering hole, all the far right viewers that like it will migrate there. If you like that flavor, since no actual travel is involved, you’ll migrate there from far and wide.
    .
    On the other hand, the viewers of the non-FOX shows is likely to contain much less overlap because first, they are not all on the same news outlet, and second, because they are much more numerous and scattered throughout the media.
    .
    Those liking that flavor won’t show any tendency to congregate at all. They will remain scattered in the field.
    .
    So my advice is to not crow too loudly about how may “viewers” are there are for FOX. You just might find you are a force of none…

  • chrisnbama

    Great post, Myles. I couldn’t agree more.
    .
    I listen to “To the Point” and “On Point” everyday. I also catch Diane Rheem in the mornings on the way to work. NPR, bar none, has the best news shows in the biz. They strive for balance, depth, and objectivity.
    .
    I’m a liberal, and I can’t help but say that I find Fox repugnant. It’s claims about itself–fair and balanced–are laughable. I just wish it were honest. The only anchor on that show who strives for objectivity is Shep Smith.
    .
    I will also say that MSNBC is using the Fox model and using ideological programming in the evening. I don’t have a problem with that. I just ask that networks are honest about the business model they are using. If you want to appeal to conservatives or liberals, great! But let their be truth in advertising.
    .
    What bothers me most about Fox is that they aren’t just catering to conservatives, they are actively promoting their causes. They are an activist network. The constant promotions of the Tea Parties and the like were disorientating. I kept thinking to myself, that we have crossed the Rubicon–this is no longer news network but partisanship masquerading as a news network.
    .
    So, in that sense, Anita Dunn is precisely correct: Fox is the enemy. I recall clearly back during the campaign how Fox was absolutely fixated on ACORN and Bill Ayers and Reverend Wright, and all this other fringe non-sense. Other legitimate networks didn’t touch the stuff because they recognized that it wasn’t news so much as a smear campaign.
    /rant

  • http://www.qando.net/?p=5204 Not Smart … | QandO

    [...] terms of any sort of media strategy, I really don’t get this – the White House has chosen to take on Fox News as some sort of enemy of the administration?  [...]

  • stewartiii

    NewsBusters — Irony Alert: White House Praises ‘Unbiased’ CNN as Network Runs Promo Appealing to Democrats
    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2009/10/12/irony-alert-white-house-praises-unbiased-cnn-network-runs-promo-appeal

  • gysgt213

    Word is that Lou Dobbs will be joining Fox.

  • AL POE

    Great news they’ll be dropping a lot more watchers as the Obama team continues to take over American companies and job losses. Who really wants to watch a one sided news show, not me. Fox rocks and tells it like it is, no goverment control BS stories as seen on Cnn and MSNBC.

  • meanjoegreen59

    The problem with news is that you don’t really get news, you get the bias of the people reporting it. Now is seems that all the major news organizations, except Fox News, refuse to tell it like it is when it comes to the Obama Administration. It seems everything they do is ok. These same news people could not wait to jump on former President Bush for every little thing he did wrong.
    Forget about the Major News media and sometimes even Fox. Look to the Internet for the real news. Think for yourself.
    One last thing, this whole debate about giving everyone health insurance is not about health care at all. The government could care less if you or I die. It’s about government control of health care. They think that if they can control our health care, they can control you and me. They sad fact is that for some fools, that’s true.
    WHEN WE LOOK TO GOVERNMENT TO DO FOR US WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING FOR OURSELVES, WE BECOME WEAKER AND THE GOVERNMENT BECOMES STRONGER. THAN,ONE DAY WE WAKEUP WITH ALL OUR FREEDOMS GOME!

  • http://danielsaltman.alkoottam.com/2009/10/12/britain-has-worst-quality-of-life-in-europe-study-says/ Britain has worst quality of life in Europe, study says « Daniel Saltman

    [...] Cable <b>News</b> Irony Alert: CNN, Fox and The Disappearing General <b>…&lt… [...]

  • http://thewallsoflove.com/join/dansaltman/2009/10/12/britain-has-worst-quality-of-life-in-europe-study-says/ dansaltman

    [...] Cable <b>News</b> Irony Alert: CNN, Fox and The Disappearing General <b>…&lt… [...]

  • iggydwonderllama

    Although I am not yet 52, I was far more sagacious at 22 than I am now. It seems reasonable to expect the trend will continue.

  • iggydwonderllama

    * Meant to be a reply to 48.

  • sacredh

    @53_3: lol. Yeah, my thoughts too.
    .
    “there is not much practical difference between Bush and Obama”
    .
    Unless you take into account little things like intelligence, torture, gay rights, respect from foreign people/leaders, the environment, willingness to talk to people you disagree with, Supreme Court choices, giving bipartisanship a go, working with the UN, a Nobel Peace Prize, 2,000,000 people at your inauguration, a Secretary of State that knows what the hell she’s doing…you know…little things like that.

  • http://www.whitehousecorrespondentsweekendinsider.com/2009/10/12/white-house-and-fox-news-still-sparring/ White House and Fox News — Still Sparring | White House Correspondents Weekend Insider

    [...] Click here for Michael Sherer’s Swampland from Time. [...]

  • sacredh

    MS: That might also explain your support of McCain. You really weren’t paying any attention to what he was saying. You just knew that his wife was worth a fortune and were hoping for sloppy seconds.

  • http://www.defendingthetruth.com/elections-candidates/29218-gop-pins-2010-hopes-pelosi.html#post264972 GOP Pins 2010 Hopes on … Pelosi

    [...] network. He says TV ratings prove the news audience is splintered and cable news viewers choose to watch the network with the ideological slant that matches their own. And if it worked here, why not overseas? Fox's Glenn Beck has debuted in Britain, and The Daily [...]

  • http://theblindspotsofgod.wordpress.com lawyermommy

    In my humble opinion and as a former Republican, I believe O’Reilly epitomizes everything wrong with the Republican party; old, male White Old boy network, crusty and ancient in acts and thinking– desperately clinging to the old order and using screaming and drama to fuel the drivel he spews with impunity on his show. However, I watch his show.

    I watch because O’Reilly is entertaining, simple. His opinions are old, crusty, relentlessly partisan and of course entertaining. He is a card carrying member of the old guard.
    When I watch his show, I frequently imagine him in Confederate Garb which when considered along whatever rant he is throwing out at the time, makes the show all the more entertaining. :)

    When the numbers of Fox News viewers are provided, I am sure it includes a fair number of people like me who think O’Reilly is spewing nonsense, Far Right wing nonsense and strong Anti-Obama rhetoric, but still find him entertaining.
    It is good to know what the Republican Spin machine is working on, and O Rielly is a good index.

    I only wish the Obama folks could send people to his show and other Anti-Obama Frekazoid shows. :)
    It would help the WH provide their own perspective and it would reveal O’Reilly and others for what they really are– old guard, old men–talking heads whose job it is to rail at the “new order” and do everything to make sure it unravels using High level entertainment– painstakingly disguised as fact.

    LM

    http://theblindspotsofgod.wordpress.com/2009/10/11/i-fully-support-gun-ownership/

  • Paul-no not that one

    “Ahh, the pitfalls of technology”

    Uh yeah, that’s where the breakdown happened.

  • bobcn1

    ‘I only wish the Obama folks could send people to his show and other Anti-Obama Frekazoid shows’
    .
    Progressives have learned that there’s seldom any benefit in appearing on O’Reilly’s show. The reason is simple. It doesn’t matter how well you do in presenting your point — in the broadcast you will loose. O’Reilly’s edits his shows.

  • bitterpill8

    When all is said and done, mea culpa included, MS produced shoddy journalism. But why are we surprised. The gang in the Village is more interested in getting it first than getting it right.

    MS thought he had found the Holy Grail of a Liberal slant at CNN and he went for it. It turns out that he is a typical Villager. The meme is more important than facts.

  • 53_3

    “The government could care less if you or I die. It’s about government control of health care. They think that if they can control our health care, they can control you and me. They sad fact is that for some fools, that’s true.”
    .
    Mean Joe:
    .
    So what you are saying is that it’s somehow better to have bean-counters in a corporation whose only interest is the bottom line is somehow better?!?!
    .
    If it were true that government wanted to control us, then at least it can be said that one could at least vote them out of office – which is certainly something we cannot do with the the bean counters who have already shown where they stand on health care!
    .
    I suggest you stick to putting a hat on real opponents, rather than conjuring some up that exists solely in your mind.
    .
    Oh, and btw, don’t you just love Bill O’Reilly? He’s really gonna look out for ya…

  • 53_3

    I might venture a guess that instead of tweaky technology, Micheal Scherer got caught hearing only what he wants to hear.
    .
    Which is usually the case with everyone who listens to FOX…

  • http://danielsaltmanterrence.108gb.com/2009/10/12/next-up-for-paranormal-activity-director-oren-peli-aliens-at-area-51/ Next Up For ‘Paranormal Activity’ Director Oren Peli: Aliens At ‘Area 51′ « danielsaltmanterrence

    [...] CORRECTED, UPDATED — Cable <b>News</b> Irony Alert: CNN, Fox and The <b>&#82… [...]

  • ehnugent

    “This makes my subsequent analysis largely wrong.”

    Oh the irony….

  • stuartzechman

    Thanks so much for the correction, Michael Scherer, that was very professional of you.

  • http://obamabidenwhitehouse.net/?p=6095 Remainders: In stereo | Obama Biden White House

    [...] editor starts over. Limbaugh on tweaking the media. Cooper ad mentioned left wing and right wing — in stereo, not [...]

  • http://2thirdsrocks.wordpress.com 2thirdsrocks

    Describe the far right wing to me davemartin, I’m one of ‘em I think. Give me a checklist.

  • http://insidecablenews.wordpress.com/2009/10/12/cnn-alters-360-ad/ CNN Alters 360 Ad… « Inside Cable News

    [...] Alters 360 Ad… Mediaite’s Steve Krakauer noticed that the AC 360 ad which caused something of a commotion over the weekend has been altered… CNN tells us the promo had audio dubbed in stereo, rather [...]

  • http://2thirdsrocks.wordpress.com 2thirdsrocks

    lawermommy, as a major fan of fox news, us rightwingers frequently call O’reilly out for being too easy on liberals. If you really watched him like you say, you would know this. Therefore I suspect you are plain and simply a liar.

  • http://dcsmellreport.com/featured/hotair-video-white-house-communications-chief-whines-about-fox-news-media-for-nine-minutes/ HOTAiR: Video: White House communications chief whines about Fox News, media for nine minutes | DC SMELL REPORT

    [...] recently taken to fact-checking comedy skits on behalf of His Holiness. In fact, here’s what was airing on the “nonpartisan” cable news channel this morning before and after this miserable hack’s [...]

  • http://blogs.mochiba.com/supaheruhraleigh/2009/10/13/left-for-dead-2-has-told-reporters-their-company-plans-to-a-giant-l4d2-release/ Left for Dead 2 has told reporters their company plans to a giant L4D2 release – Supaheruh Raleigh

    [...] CORRECTED, UPDATED — Cable <b>News</b> Irony Alert: CNN, Fox and The <b>&#82… [...]

  • http://social.directoryoftoronto.com/dansaltman/2009/10/13/left-for-dead-2-has-said-the-company-plans-to-a-giant-left-for-dead-2-release/ Dan Saltman » Left for Dead 2 has said the company plans to a giant Left For Dead 2 release

    [...] CORRECTED, UPDATED — Cable <b>News</b> Irony Alert: CNN, Fox and The <b>&#82… [...]

  • cfukara

    ” .. us rightwingers frequently call O’reilly out for being too easy on liberals…”
    Yeah! That Bill O’Reily, you may say, looks at Pres Obama’s half-full cup and merely says, “His cup is half-empty.”
    Hey! Just come up and say “His cup is ALMOST empty! Call it EMPTY even!
    Gosh. Who watered-down the red-hot American rightwing-nutism!

  • http://mcsellis.wordpress.com mcsellis

    I am 26 yrs old, and I cannot stand watching cable news on any channel. Everything is so one sided and they try so hard to show people they are “right” instead of just laying out the facts and letting the viewer decide for themselves. While its not much better on the internet, at least I have the option to browse several different sites for specific information so I can draw my own conclusions and not just getting the information the media moguls want me to know.

  • http://2thirdsrocks.wordpress.com 2thirdsrocks

    I don’t watch the fox news channel continually, I surf during commercials. Well, gotta go. Commercials over.

  • http://botd.wordpress.com/2009/10/13/top-posts-1264/ Top Posts « WordPress.com

    [...] CORRECTED, UPDATED — Cable News Irony Alert: CNN, Fox and The Disappearing General Audience CORRECTION: Ahh, the pitfalls of technology. In the post below, I wrote about an ad that kept running Sunday morning on [...] [...]

  • http://4cacons.wordpress.com 4cacons

    I find it somewhat silly that you think that 2 million people listening to a number of different “news” casts means those “news casters” are speaking the gospel of the people. Two million? wow! How many people watched football this weekend? Now that’s a number I’m impressed by. Incidentally, the same two million people listen to all the shows mentioned. Oops, did I call them shows? Did I call them newscasters?

  • meanjoegreen59

    I consider myself an indeprendent Conservative Libertarian. I usually don’t watch the news on TV except sometimes Fox news. I given up on the other news outlets being fair and honest. They all(except Fox news) have a left-wing liberal slant.
    I always thought being a news reporter was to give the news objectively.
    I get most of my news from the internet and talk radio(which the left-wing liberals want to shut down.)

  • sickofhollywood

    If I want to be mindless person “skipping down gumdrop lane” I will watch ABC,NBC,CBS, CNN, MSNBC and listen to NPR. Because I am a person who wants to know what is going on in the country I love I must watch Fox New and listen to talk radio. I will not just blindly watch the “News we want you know only” news programs we have have today, all I have is Fox, talk radio and I listen to the BBC America to find out that is going in my country because of the filtered news programs. What happened to journalism? When did become like state controlled media only telling us what they think we should know? I saw a video clip of Dan Rather a couple of weeks ago saying he thinks the Obama White House should take control over the media? What?? I also a video of one of the “czars” in the White House saying our government should follow the lead of Chavez and take over the media. Sadly it looks like they have already, the media I grew up with would have been all over these “czars” and many other things going on now. It would have been a field day of investigative reporters on this health care plan on how much it would cost now and in the future. The sharks would have been circling Acorn and many things going on now. Journalists to me have gone from shark to minnows in few short years. Networks refusing to air any ads with opposing views to the democrtic party or this White House. The lack of investigative reporting, the telling of both sides neutrally and the pandering being done today scares me more than 9/11 at least then we knew our enemy, now we are kept in the dark. I ask all so called journalist do you care about our country at all? Do you have children and care what their future is? I have lost trust in the TV news, most print news and I only have Fox because at least I get something besides a reporter looking at me on their knees singing how perfect Obama is while singing “everything is coming up roses”. I was told to watch the BBC Amercia by others, just sad that I have to watch a British news show to get news about my own country. Beat up Fox all you want, You created the need for Fox news, I am sure as the young generation grows up and sees what the real world is they will watch to after seeing most of their paycheck go to taxes and have health care that will cut years off their life. I miss the goodold days of reporting the news as it is not as you want me to think it is. Sad, sad and more sad.

  • sickofhollywood

    Funny how we sat back for years watching fair left liberals burn our flag and we could do nothing because it was “their freedom of speech”. Now these same people want to stop anyone from speaking any views other than theirs. The attacks against Fox and Talk Radio should scare everyone who cherishes the freedoms we have. It does look like Obama, Pelosi and the liberal left do want to take our freedom of speech away along with all the money we earn. Many so called jouralist make a lot of money as does the “hollywood left” do they not realize they too will be taxed. I do not see any of them paying extra taxes because we are allowed to give extra to pay down the national debt. Which do you think we will have a funeral for first the death of jouralism or our country?

  • mutherteresa

    Gloria’s little darlin must get shivers up his leg by saying “teabaggers” with a twinkle in his eye. I loved explaining Andy’s cutsie “inside joke” to my sweet old cookie baking, teaparty attending aunt. His personal life is his business, but those smug little double entendres he reserves pointed directly at the growing group of people who do not share his elitist Obama enthusiasm is one of the reasons for his lack of popularity. He should have left that snarky attitude back in highschool. The whole CNN crew peppers in personal remarks at thinly veiled news reports. Wolfie & that naasssty Jack whatshisname have it down to an art, but unless your an idiot or on the same rah-rah Obama page, FOX is just a click away.

  • mutherteresa

    Anderson Cooper & his chortling, snide, side remarks about anything conservative is straight news? CNN has no idea the difference between editorial & news. Not a clue. Same with Time. Spin it, pat yourselves on the back & pretend it is news, you wont convince anyone who is less that left of left or even borderline intelligent. Both are becoming dinosaurs & good riddance to you.

  • carpevis

    It’s not about ideology. It never was and never will be. It’s about markets and money.

    Cater to a specific ideology and you have a captive market. You can sell products, advertising space, attract national names (even if they’re controversial) and your ideologically inclined viewers will eat it up. It’s not that the people out there WANT slanted news. It’s that there are enough sheeple who refuse to do their own thinking to make airing news slanted to cater to their special needs profitable.

    Yellow Journalism got us into the Spanish American war by hawkishly blaming Spanish infiltrators for the destruction of the USS Maine in Havana. The Maine was not destroyed by outside agents, but rather by internal forces (probably from a coal bunker fire adjacent to the powder magazine). The point is the yellow journalism catered to a vocal minority who blamed Spain for the disaster.

    And in the process, they sold a hell of a lot of newspapers.

    When you see a news show done right, it’s not terribly exciting. But it’s informative. It’s not supposed to be overtly entertaining. It’s supposed to add to you knowledge of world and local events. It can be presented in entertaining ways, such as the now seemingly traditional wacky weather news in half of the markets these days and the local ‘light’ pieces which are often meant to be inspirational or heartwarming.

    But in the grand tradition of yellow journalism, some media markets recognize that if they cater to a vocal minority’s view point, they can capture a market which is already convinced mainstream news is too slanted. They do it not to be reasonable or indeed responsible. They do it strictly because it generates revenue for them.

    ANY other reason is pure BS.

  • meanjoegreen59

    You are right both the Dem. and Rep. have sold this country down the river. We are bankrupt and these fools, in Washington, want to spend another 2-3 trillion on health care.
    I get more real news from the overseas press than I do here in the US.
    Fox news is just like the other news organizations, they have a point of view, which most of the time I find correct, not all the time. I quit watching CNN,HLN,CNBC,MSNBC,CBS,NBC and ABC a long time ago.
    At least with talk radio, you can voice your opinion. You can’t most of the time on TV.
    We have freedom of speech and if you don’t like what some says, just don’t watch or listen. I would never take anyone off the air, just because I disagree with them. I’m not a Rep. or Dem. I a Libertian.

blog comments powered by Disqus