bascule Posted October 27, 2009 Author Posted October 27, 2009 I would agree with that, but the fact that Fox is broadcasted on more outlets alone gives it a larger audience. padren is right though, their reach is voluntary, not just because they have a better distribution infrastructure. Fox's key demo is geriatrics sitting around either at home or in nursing homes, with nothing better to watch but Fox News. They don't usually win out among viewers aged 25 to 54, despite the fact that their ratings otherwise are disproportionately huge. Why do they win out if they aren't popular in the 25 to 54 demographic? Because Fox News appeals to old people who have nothing better to do but sit around and watch TV all day, and this gives it disproportionately high ratings. Young people have better things to do with their lives than to sit around and watch TV.
toastywombel Posted October 27, 2009 Posted October 27, 2009 padren is right though, their reach is voluntary, not just because they have a better distribution infrastructure. Fox's key demo is geriatrics sitting around either at home or in nursing homes, with nothing better to watch but Fox News. They don't usually win out among viewers aged 25 to 54, despite the fact that their ratings otherwise are disproportionately huge. Why do they win out if they aren't popular in the 25 to 54 demographic? Because Fox News appeals to old people who have nothing better to do but sit around and watch TV all day, and this gives it disproportionately high ratings. Young people have better things to do with their lives than to sit around and watch TV. Yes, but if the nursing home only carries a cable plan in which Fox News is the only 24 hour news network available, the people in the nursing home only have one choice among the cable news networks. But, I agree both factors apply.
The Bear's Key Posted October 27, 2009 Posted October 27, 2009 Dunno, they seem to have Fox News on at places where there's either a line or waiting involved: banks, doctor offices. Part of a marketing strategy? It's enough time so casual listeners might go "hey, I didn't know that about Obama's (insert Fox distortion) or the healthcare bill is (death panel fabrications)" -- and if they do believe it without investigative mentality, and later at home they pass Fox News on a channel surf and pause for longer glimpses, soon they might become outraged at the unbelievable "revelations" (or "facts") so after a weeks/months of it...voila! a new convert.
jackson33 Posted October 27, 2009 Posted October 27, 2009 General Comments; It's been my understanding, that the 'Obama Problem' with Fox News, is the acceptance of other Networks to pick up stories, that 'Fox Breaks'. While it's neither the right or obligation of a Public entity to dictate, what may or may not be a lagitiment 'News Source', Fox is represented in some way by thousands of News sources around the World. Additionally, Fox, the only major Network that will listen to many stories, others will not, they are going to get shots at breaking stories in advance. The ACORN story, which is nothing new in the News business, has been a major story for Fox, both during the US Presidential Campaign and the after math. The Chicago tie in of this Administration, another that seems to be ignored by others, Van Jones and many of the other so called Czars, have some shady side stories which have come to light or soon will, while the others keep talking about what the Bush/Clinton/Reagan had. While the 'Mainstream Media' continues to glorify the Obama Administration for it's fine work in increasing the employment through the Stimulus program, the desire to increase Medical Coverage for millions and reducing cost to everyone (inconcievable), Fox through pudits continuously brings out the falicies and underlying agenda. Two real thorns for Obama and the future of this Administration are the 'Teabaggers and Sarah Palin' story's which were getting a great deal of attention, while Mr. Obamas approval rating fell'. Cap and Trade, Enviomental Policy or many programs bubbling underground are being worked on and I suspect your going to start hearing more disgruntle with in the Democrat Party (paricularly the liberal agenda) in times to come. I'll predict, Hillary Clinton will be a big news story in a short time (one year), while IMO she has been reduced to a third rate diplomat while holding a better appraval rating than Obama and certainly as quallified to handle foreign affairs as anyone... Fox generally presents both Liberal and Conservative sides, by way of pundits, on both topic discussion and on there panels. They also publicly invite the person or an agency spokesperson involved in any controversial issue to appear and defend their position in advance. One of my favorite Liberal Pundits is Bob Beckel, the campaign manager for Walter Mondale's failed presidential bid and feel part of the breed spawned by the JFK years, which represented IMO the 'Main Stream' media of today. However I disagree with Beckel, I sincerely believe he believes everything he has said, which by the way he feels, this war on Fox, was ill advised. If nothing I say, indicates a legitimate News Agency or Network, it has to be based on individual bias, which is fine but not a sound base for judgment, IMO... By the way CNN has now dropped off the chart, last place; CNN, which invented the cable news network more than two decades ago, will hit a new competitive low with its prime-time programs in October, finishing fourth – and last – among the cable news networks with the audience that all the networks rely on for their advertising.[/Quote] http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/26/cnn-drops-to-last-place-among-cable-news-networks/
bascule Posted October 27, 2009 Author Posted October 27, 2009 It's been my understanding, that the 'Obama Problem' with Fox News, is the acceptance of other Networks to pick up stories, that 'Fox Breaks'. Their public statement on the matter is that they don't think Fox News is a news organization, they think it's a political organization. If nothing I say, indicates a legitimate News Agency or Network, it has to be based on individual bias, which is fine but not a sound base for judgment, IMO... News agencies report the news. They don't make the news. Fox News is a pro-Republican TV channel which has orchestrated multiple anti-Democratic protests. That's not a news channel. It's a political organization. It's no different from MoveOn.org having their own TV channel. If nothing I've said illustrates to you why Fox News isn't a news channel, it's either because of your own bias or because you aren't paying enough attention. Is this something you think a news organization should be behind: http://www.the912project.com/
gre Posted October 27, 2009 Posted October 27, 2009 Fox news is pretty much a GOP(aka the wealth) propaganda machine served as "news", who'll take shots at the white house/dems whenever they get a chance. The white house has the right to fight back.
toastywombel Posted October 27, 2009 Posted October 27, 2009 General Comments; It's been my understanding, that the 'Obama Problem' with Fox News, is the acceptance of other Networks to pick up stories, that 'Fox Breaks'. While it's neither the right or obligation of a Public entity to dictate, what may or may not be a lagitiment 'News Source', Fox is represented in some way by thousands of News sources around the World. Additionally, Fox, the only major Network that will listen to many stories, others will not, they are going to get shots at breaking stories in advance. The ACORN story, which is nothing new in the News business, has been a major story for Fox, both during the US Presidential Campaign and the after math. The Chicago tie in of this Administration, another that seems to be ignored by others, Van Jones and many of the other so called Czars, have some shady side stories which have come to light or soon will, while the others keep talking about what the Bush/Clinton/Reagan had. While the 'Mainstream Media' continues to glorify the Obama Administration for it's fine work in increasing the employment through the Stimulus program, the desire to increase Medical Coverage for millions and reducing cost to everyone (inconcievable), Fox through pudits continuously brings out the falicies and underlying agenda. Two real thorns for Obama and the future of this Administration are the 'Teabaggers and Sarah Palin' story's which were getting a great deal of attention, while Mr. Obamas approval rating fell'. Cap and Trade, Enviomental Policy or many programs bubbling underground are being worked on and I suspect your going to start hearing more disgruntle with in the Democrat Party (paricularly the liberal agenda) in times to come. I'll predict, Hillary Clinton will be a big news story in a short time (one year), while IMO she has been reduced to a third rate diplomat while holding a better appraval rating than Obama and certainly as quallified to handle foreign affairs as anyone... Fox generally presents both Liberal and Conservative sides, by way of pundits, on both topic discussion and on there panels. They also publicly invite the person or an agency spokesperson involved in any controversial issue to appear and defend their position in advance. One of my favorite Liberal Pundits is Bob Beckel, the campaign manager for Walter Mondale's failed presidential bid and feel part of the breed spawned by the JFK years, which represented IMO the 'Main Stream' media of today. However I disagree with Beckel, I sincerely believe he believes everything he has said, which by the way he feels, this war on Fox, was ill advised. If nothing I say, indicates a legitimate News Agency or Network, it has to be based on individual bias, which is fine but not a sound base for judgment, IMO... By the way CNN has now dropped off the chart, last place; http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/26/cnn-drops-to-last-place-among-cable-news-networks/ I feel as if you are ignoring the links that many on this forum have posted (including me) pointing out how Fox is not just biased, they twist, distort, and make up news. That alone discounts it from being a legitimate news organization. Furthermore you cannot say that the mainstream media glorifies obama, when Fox is the most watched news network. Fox is the most watched cable news network, therefore it is the mainstream media. So obviously the mainstream media does not glorify Obama. You cannot have it both ways.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now