Why Fox News Isn't

Greg: you should change your name to Canute.

http://tvbythenumbers.com/category/ratings/cable-news

Cable News Ratings for Friday, October 23, 2009
Posted on 26 October 2009 by Bill Gorman
Live + Same Day Cable News Daily Ratings for October 23, 2009
P2+ Total Day
FNC â 1,442,000 viewers
CNN â 494,000 viewers
MSNBC â383,000 viewers
CNBC â 166,000 viewers
HLN â347,000 viewers

P2+ Prime Time
FNC â 2,542,000 viewers
CNNâ 802,000 viewers
MSNBC â846,000 viewers
CNBC â a scratch w/103,000 viewers
HLN â 672,000 viewers

Looks to me like FNC>(CNN+MSNBC+CNBC+HLN), both total day and prime time. Some tide!

Now that's why she's good. Hats off to Rachel Maddow.

Gerard, are you seriously talking about ratings within cable news? What would be the point of that? The vast, vast, vast majority of Americans do not watch ANY of these stations! The numbers you cite here are not from a sample. That is total viewership. Half the cable viewership watches Fox for their "news", the other half watches actual news stations. That's three million viewers. The other 25 million people watching the news watched NBC, ABC and CBS.

MSNBC doesn't even run a real news broadcast in the 5 - 11 p.m. period, so it's difficult for me to see how they can be called an 'actual news station'. The two one-hour news slots Fox runs certainly have fewer viewers than the alphabets, but the latter barely get 20 million viewers these days, way down from, say, 20 years ago.

I just came back from a trip, and staying in hotels I noticed that the only US news channels that were offered in these hotels (in Seattle and Vancouver) were Fox and CNN. No option for something else. Just an observation.

MSNBC never organized a political rally against the Bush administration. Much less, three!

FOX is a political organization posing as a News organization. Nothing more, nothing less. This isn't even controversial.

Umlud: This is true. A LOT of fox's "viewrship" comes from the inflated figures you get when you buy yourself into all the hotels and gyms in the world. Almost nobody is actually watching fox.

mk: word.

@mk - Can I steal that?? :-)

In this case I think the next Republican president should treat MSLSD the same way as Fox has been treated. After all, MSLSD is not a news organization. Neither is PBS (emphasis on BS), CNN. ABC, CBS (another BS), and NBC.

After all, didn't these networks criticize Bush for the last eight years? Oh well, Fox is still number one. I can;t help it is marxist globalists hate it so much for telling the truth. It would hurt other networks to do some real news stories once in a while either. maybe get off the global warming swine flu evolution mars rover bandwagon long enough to pay attention to important things like Iran wanting to KILL us ... Have I made my point?

Fox is the only network I halfway trust. I cetainly don't trust MSLSD and thar loudmouth socialist marxist Keith Olberman. As a matter of fact why don;t the president go to war with fake media outlets like the communist Media Matters or with the Daily Kos? These are political terrorist websites. They hate freedom and individualality and love the collective uniformity (communism).

How many times have we heard the word "collective good" from Hussein Obama? That word is dangerous to freedom. I am not inside the collective good. i consider myself a Sovereign Citizen just like my founding fathers and I will remain a sovereign citizen until my last dying breath. There is no way I am giving in to communism, socialism, marxism or any other evil empire that states anything about "collective" good. That word is a evil.

Go ahead and make war with Fox. When you're all in chains in FEMA camp eating dog food once a week becuase it's for the "collective good", don't look to me for help (even though I'll have all the guns and the rebel army). Just remember I told you so.

Be careful what you wish for. Wishing for socialism will bring about a military police state with a dictator to run it. And don't ask us rebels for help. We already view you as traitors no better than the fascist socialist professors who created you. You are on your own.

Don;t go down the road that the UK went down. They went from being a free nation to a fascist police state ruled by tyranny. The UK is no longer a free state, but a slave state. i refuse to be a slave. As a matter of fact death is better than enslavement from a bitter criminal government like the UK system. Socialism is evil. Defy it's evil even until death.

Wow, ASC dude. I know it's not the shortest video, but watching it for even a minute or two could have saved you so much rant time. Or it might at least have kept you from showing you don't know what you're talking about for another couple of sentences.

Enjoy your faux militaristic training. It will at least give you something to do until this failure of the free market shakes out and you can apply for jobs again.

ASC = Poe FTW!

If he's a Poe, he (assuming it's a he)'s an exceedingly well-versed one. I have to speculate (based mostly on misused semicolons instead of apostrophes, similar grammar, and the theme of the tropes he uses), that he also posted as Tiny Tim over here. I strongly suspect he's a legitimate dittohead.

Nothing he's said is anything outside the realm of someone that uses Fox as their primary news source, so divested from reality are his comments.

Becca: My first thought but no, he's not. You know the General from other discussions, but under a couple of different names.

Calling out Fox for not being a "news" network because of Glen Beck is ludicrous. Beck himself has never claimed to be a journalist; he's a commentator. There is a difference.

As for Rachel Maddow, she hasn't got a leg to stand on either. She's a political analyst and not a journalist. Her show is as much "news" as Beck's.

I suspect she's just mad at Fox because they beat her like a rented mule in the ratings.

"Calling out Fox for not being a "news" network because of Glen Beck is ludicrous."

Did you really listen to what she said?

Of course Ray didn't watch it. If he had, he would not have written something that stupid.

From the clip:

(1:36) "Is Fox a news station? The answer to that is unrelated to the question of wether and which Fox hosts and correspondents express their opinion about the news. It is possible to express your opinion about the news and still cover the news responsibly."

(4:00) "The expression of opinion about the news is not the difference between Fox and rest of the media. The difference between Fox and news is that Fox is now actively organizing and promoting a protest movement against the US government."

I think Rachel Maddow makes a great point. But in addition to her point, this whole 'anything goes on opinion shows' b.s. has to be called out. Is reporting fake news the same as expressing an opinion? Glenn Beck is not an opinion show, it is a fake news show. This whole opinion show b.s. is a smoke screen.

Good segment but Maddow could have gotten her point across in half the time.

The media: always changing yet, in many ways the canary in the coal mine of trends in popular culture. Rachel Maddow is absolutely correct, but why is Rachel Maddow apparently the only one actively saying anything at all?

Let's call a "spade" a "spade" period. FNC as a business doesn't give a hoot n' hell about the White House, or Barack Obama, or anything outside its growing market share. They are out to make a buck, pure and simple and ethics be damned.

Yet, I wonder: what do the rest of you guys in the media do when one of your own goes so far off the range they begin to believe in their own hype, or worse yet, short of winning at all costs, that there are no rules at all?

And don't kid yourself Wolf, Anderson and the many more who shall remain nameless. The sisters and brothers at FNC are more your sisters and brothers than they are mine for instance.

FNC's "win" at all costs ravings and lack of professional pride and sportmanship, reminds me of all those baseball, football and basketball stars who used steroids to "win" at all costs. Does anyone remember them?

The materialist philosophy is identical, and so is the jacked up testosterone. FNC is hooked on the ratings drug. They are junkies and only Rachel Maddow notices?

What is even more disturbing, FNC is proving that men such B.F. Skinner were and are absolutely correct about the scientific and statistical assessment that both large and small groups of people can be effectively "conditioned," while swearing up and down that their "mind" is their own.

FNC's behavior and most of your complicity, is particularly
chilling when you stop to consider, the same buttons FNC presses in people for the sake of "money" are the same buttons Hitler activated in 1930's Germany for the sake of power.

The profession of Broadcast Journalism needs to seriously clean its house, because from the reality I'm sitting in, day in, day out: from this side of the fence, y'all stink.

And yeah: one bad apple really does ruin the barrel.

Just a simple Thought from,
Tom

@Tom,

"Let's call a "spade" a "spade" period. FNC as a business doesn't give a hoot n' hell about the White House, or Barack Obama, or anything outside its growing market share. They are out to make a buck, pure and simple and ethics be damned."

So FNC is out to make a buck? And CNN, MSNBC, et al aren't?

Ray: I think the implication is reasonable: Fox is more mercenary than other stations.

You need to get over this need for equivalence. There isn't an equivalence. The right wing, the conservatives, the Republicans, are morally bankrupt. The rest of the world is not as bankrupt. Liberals and progressives are especially not morally bankrupt.

There are good guys and bad guys, Rupert Murdock is one of the bad guys and Fox is his bad guy thing.

A comment appeared at my blog yesterday apparently by a totally new commenter (one I'd never had before, I mean), and it showed up on the wrong post. It lauded Fox's ratings and suggested that the ratings were so high because their "themes" resonate with the populace. Given that I'm not, to my knowledge, linked on any dittoheads' sites, I'm suspecting a concerted effort by people paid by Fox to astroturf. Would you care to compare notes, Greg?

@ Greg
"You need to get over this need for equivalence. There isn't an equivalence. The right wing, the conservatives, the Republicans, are morally bankrupt. The rest of the world is not as bankrupt. Liberals and progressives are especially not morally bankrupt. "

Oh, I get it now. Conservatives are morally bankrupt and Liberals are perfect. Interesting argument. How then, do you explain the current ethics investigations of Charlie Rangel? And please explain the moral perfection of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/62281-house-ethics-committee-will-ann…

The reality is that for every complaint about Fox News being opinionated/wrong/mercenary there is a similar complaint about CNN, MSNBC et al. Ever listen to Keith Olbermann on MSNBC? Complete hack.

The problem is that you are being intellectually dishonest when you claim that only Conservatives are at fault.

Everyone who plays in the pool gets wet.

Ray,
for reference I suggest you watch Rachel Maddow's video, if you haven't done so yet.

The difference between a news station and Fox is that real news stations report news, while Fox comment on news, and comment on news with a right wing bias, and ask their viewers to and organise protest against the government.

@ Rorschach

"The difference between a news station and Fox is that real news stations report news, while Fox comment on news, and comment on news with a right wing bias, and ask their viewers to and organise protest against the government."

Your definition fits CNN, MSNBC et al to a tee. Thank you.

And exactly what is wrong with protesting against the government? Read the Constitution lately?

Ray, find an example of CNN or MSNBC organizing a protest, please, or take back your statement about Rorschach's description.

No one is saying there's anything wrong with protest (at least since the election, the country is unified on that topic). We're saying that organizing them makes an organization a political entity, not a news channel. Political entities comment on the news, as do news channels. However, news channels don't organize political movements.

Conservatives are morally bankrupt and Liberals are perfect. Interesting argument.

Well, actually, conservatives like you are MORONS because you keep saying shit like this. Of course Liberals are not perfect. I do not claim perfection thus I don't have to explain Charlie Rangel. I don't know what you are talking about in reference to Reverend Jackson and Al Sharpton. They're black guys. I know that's a problem for you but they can't hep it.

The reality is that for every complaint about Fox News being opinionated/wrong/mercenary there is a similar complaint about CNN, MSNBC et al. Ever listen to Keith Olbermann on MSNBC? Complete hack.

If you count actual, valid complaints with meaning other than the shit that is flying out of that hole you laughingly call a mouth, and that of other paid (or volunteer) web trollers like yourself, no.

The problem is that you are being intellectually dishonest when you claim that only Conservatives are at fault.

No again. Right now, the Republicans/Conservatives are walking in perfect lockstep, so as far as I can see, whatever describes Rush Limbaugh or Richard Nixon or G. Gordon Liddy or Michel Bachmann describes every single other republican without exception. I see no dissent, I see no one complaining about that. Thus, you and your fellow conservatives/repubicans/etc simply have to live with that reality. Your fault, your problem, your shit, lie in it. Stop complaining, stop telling lies, stop trying to pretend that you are not an unmitigated useless ass that haw no right whatsoever to breath my air.

As you might have noticed, I've had enough of your shit.

No one is saying there's anything wrong with protest (at least since the election, the country is unified on that topic).

There is nothing wrong with the principle but there are countless things wrong with the execution, the message, and many details. I object to the lies, to the toting around of guns, and, once again, to the fact that they are breathing my air.

I like the "air" angle. That's new. Let's go with that one.

@27 is epic.

Anyone else notice there's absolutely no evidence that any of the trolls in this thread have watched the embedded movie? One click and seven minutes of their time is all it would cost them, and in exchange they'd know what's ACTUALLY SAID in the video and would know how to comment on the contents.

There's absolutely nothing said by any of these trolls that relates to the content of the video, cluing me in that they are here through a Google search for "fox news" or some permutation of that, and posting on every post that seems hostile.

You're paid shills. And assholes.

@ Greg,

I would note that you said

"Liberals and progressives are especially not morally bankrupt."

You clearly implied they are morally perfect, and I called you on it. You then proceeded to get angry that your icons were questioned. Interesting that you seem to know nothing of Charlie Rangels tax problems and corruption allegations, as well as knowing nothing about liberals like Jesse Jackson (morally pure but has children out of wedlock as well as numerous corruption allegations) and Al Sharpton (corruption and Tawana Brawley come to mind).

The hard reality that you seem to be so unwilling to accept is that corruption and politics go together and BOTH sides are responsbible. You cannot have a yin without a yang.

"They're black guys. I know that's a problem for you but they can't hep it."

So black people can't help being black? How racist of you.

You should point out any circumstance at all, any, where I have expressed a negative opinion about black people. Since you can't, you should come off your high horse.

"No again. Right now, the Republicans/Conservatives are walking in perfect lockstep, so as far as I can see,. . . I see no dissent, I see no one complaining about that."

Then you don't see very well. Even now, there is a Congressional race in New York where the party is clearly divided between two candidates. One supported by Palin and several others and the others supported by Gingrich and others. The fact is that the GOP is not a monolithic organization, just as the Demorats aren't either. You've let your biases take over for critical thought.

"Stop complaining, stop telling lies, stop trying to pretend that you are not an unmitigated useless ass that haw no right whatsoever to breath my air."

My my, how tolerant of you. Are all lieberals so tolerant of differing opinions?

I note that I haven't called anyone names nor wished them dead. Yet you go there as a matter of course. Interesting.

"I object to the lies, to the toting around of guns, and, once again, to the fact that they are breathing my air. "

I would note that the "toting" of guns was and is legal in the jursdictions where it ocurred. Not saying it was the right thing to do. It is a right, just like the right of free speech that you seem to want to limit in others. Again, a rather interesting stance for a liberal to take.

Overall, I'd say you're viciously intolerant of dissent. For a scientist I would expect better. Do you attack your peers when they disagree with you too?

"

You clearly implied they are morally perfect

He actually clearly said:

The right wing, the conservatives, the Republicans, are morally bankrupt. The rest of the world is not as bankrupt. Liberals and progressives are especially not morally bankrupt.

Let me draw you an ASCII diagram.

Morally Bankrupt *1-c--------2-----3------* Morally Pure

Point 1 is the Republicans. Well, actually, they're more around the first "o" or "r", they've actually gone off the scale. 2 is the "rest of the world" -- roughly center, tending toward selfish, but capable of making a distinction between good and evil. Point 3 is the progressives/liberals that want civil liberties and not to be subjugated by an oppressive propaganda regime as the current Republican party has devolved into supporting, as evidenced by the last administration (which, despite your protestations, is a far cry closer to fascism than Obama is to socialism).

(For reference, point "c" is the Catholic church. They only fuck up Africa, repress peoples' sexuality, and bugger little boys. Republicans go so far as to rape the entire planet indiscriminately.)

Ray, I'm not sure whether you're aware of this, but everyone else can see that you're very carefully avoiding having to document your claims of equivalence. If you like science so much, produce a little evidence. That's how it works.

Pointing to the differences in the Republican party as being between Newt Gingrich (corrupt on the concept of family values--required for everyone but him) and Sarah Palin (corrupt on the question of government support--bad except where it makes her popular in Alaska--and abortion--nobody but Bristol should have one) isn't cutting it.

@jason
"You're paid shills."

Please provide evidence of this.

That should read, "nobody but Bristol should have the choice of having one".

@Stephanie

"Pointing to the differences in the Republican party as being between Newt Gingrich (corrupt on the concept of family values--required for everyone but him) and Sarah Palin (corrupt on the question of government support--bad except where it makes her popular in Alaska--and abortion--nobody but Bristol should have one) isn't cutting it."

Umm, that is evidence.

The "Newt" wing of the Party and the "Palin" wing of the party are at odds over the perceived "moderateness" of the primary candidate in New York's 23rd district.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-gop-identity-crisi…

The fact is that the GOP is not the monolithic organization that lieberals say it is. Just as the Demorat party isn't either. There is a spectrum of belief within the GOP and if you pay attention it becomes obvious.

Ray: I said the trolls are paid shills. Are you admitting you're a troll?

I'd rather you provide evidence as Stephanie suggests. You tip your hand, and maybe I'll tip mine.

Ray, where is your evidence that MSNBC and CNN organize political protests?

Where is your evidence that everyone in politics is equally corrupt? That's a mighty strong claim that requires serious evidence.

Where is your evidence that the Republican Party is split on any question of policy? Where are the issues in actual politics in which they are not acting in concert? Pointing out that there a multiple candidates and hurt feelings over who is on the ballot is not evidence of a split over anything except who should be in charge. Noting differences in campaign strategy means nothing in regard to political policy.

Where is your evidence that Greg doesn't tolerate dissent? You're here and commenting. Being told to stop whining is not the same thing as being shut up.

ASC Rebel General wrote
"Don;t go down the road that the UK went down. They went from being a free nation to a fascist police state ruled by tyranny. The UK is no longer a free state, but a slave state. i refuse to be a slave. As a matter of fact death is better than enslavement from a bitter criminal government like the UK system. Socialism is evil. Defy it's evil even until death."

If it wasn't serious statements like this would be funny. I didn't vote for our current government, but I am certainly free and not a slave. How can someone who comes from a country that had a President for eight years who was totally manipulated by big corporations and who was so lacking in intellect that he embarrassed every thinking American have the temerity to write such rubbish about a country that still could teach the USA a great deal about democracy and equality?