Fox News Ratings Slump In Post Trump Failure. CNN Now Number One...

[PoliTalker]

Hello Cinnabar,

With some exceptions yes, of course. I do tune into NPR but they also need to please their donors to an extent. And if they lean Liberal, it's Neoliberal.

That's an interesting take on it.

They don't use the standard sensationalism, but they do have to appeal to the uninformed, so they have to lead with controversy. They delve more into investigative journalism when they can, but their funding is limited. They do accept 'underwriting' which means they 'thank' their funders on air with shortened 'commercials.' But it's only at the beginning and end of the show. That introduces the dynamic where they don't want to offend their funding sources, so we have to question their altruism.

Ideally, their funding would not be concentrated in any one source, so they would never have to do what any of their funders say. The more funding sources they get, the better and more fair they can be. That slate does continue to grow, so that's a good thing.

 

[Cinnabar]

Hello Cinnabar,



That's an interesting take on it.

They don't use the standard sensationalism, but they do have to appeal to the uninformed, so they have to lead with controversy. They delve more into investigative journalism when they can, but their funding is limited. They do accept 'underwriting' which means they 'thank' their funders on air with shortened 'commercials.' But it's only at the beginning and end of the show. That introduces the dynamic where they don't want to offend their funding sources, so we have to question their altruism.

Ideally, their funding would not be concentrated in any one source, so they would never have to do what any of their funders say. The more funding sources they get, the better and more fair they can be. That slate does continue to grow, so that's a good thing.

The shows that I listen to on NPR are not political shows. I find them lukewarm on actually addressing corruption on either side of the aisle. Frontline might be one of the better productions but all in all they don't do the gritty exposé that I believe is very necessary.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Cinnabar,

The shows that I listen to on NPR are not political shows. I find them lukewarm on actually addressing corruption on either side of the aisle. Frontline might be one of the better productions but all in all they don't do the gritty exposé that I believe is very necessary.

Frontline is excellent.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

Fox News suffers ratings slump while staffers fret about post-Trump future

""We are lost," a Fox News insider remarked to me recently, and there are lots of data points to back up the assertion.

Nielsen numbers for the month of January were released on Tuesday, and Fox ranked third in the three-horse cable news race for the first time since 2001. Furthermore, CNN was the No. 1 channel across all of cable."

I have actually seen various conservatards claim that Fox is getting too far to the left, so they've migrated to Newsmax and OANN. In other words, Fox isn't telling them what they want to hear.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello ThatOwlWoman,

I have actually seen various conservatards claim that Fox is getting too far to the left, so they've migrated to Newsmax and OANN. In other words, Fox isn't telling them what they want to hear.

They appear to be hooked on increasingly outrageous propaganda.

Fox was able to claim for the longest time that it was a news source, and (absurdly enough,) used propaganda to make that claim with their little soundbyte: 'fair and balanced.'

What a crock that was. They were neither.

But that's how it is with lies.

Repeat them often enough and people start to believe it.

But lies have a way of coming back to 'byte' you.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

Hello ThatOwlWoman,



They appear to be hooked on increasingly outrageous propaganda.

Fox was able to claim for the longest time that it was a news source, and (absurdly enough,) used propaganda to make that claim with their little soundbyte: 'fair and balanced.'

What a crock that was. They were neither.

But that's how it is with lies.

Repeat them often enough and people start to believe it.

But lies have a way of coming back to 'byte' you.

The problem with false media information is though that it doesn't just affect the viewer consuming it. It infects the entire discourse, and as we've seen from the anti-maskers, it can even cost lives.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello ThatOwlWoman,

The problem with false media information is though that it doesn't just affect the viewer consuming it. It infects the entire discourse, and as we've seen from the anti-maskers, it can even cost lives.

When lies turn deadly.

 

[PoliTalker]

Fox is as lost as the Republican Party.

Their ruse of credibility is shattered, but they are still trying to cling to it.

 

[Cinnabar]

give it a rest, communist. good god. corporations are made of people, benefit their workers, benefit this country. you judge all business and rich guys by a few bad apples, just as stupid as repubs judging blacks and latinos and muslims by a few bad apples. grow the hell up.

WTF is your problem? Your support of an Oligarch corporate run media is quite evident and maybe you have some skin in the game when you get so freakin' defensive about the truth of it.

These 15 Billionaires Own America's News Media Companies
https://weatherinternal.com/these-15-billionaires-own-americas-news-media-companies/

Not biased at all...huh?

These 6 Corporations Own Most Of The Media

The ownership of the news media in the U.S. has been concentrated in the hands of just 6 incredibly powerful media corporations which control most of what we watch, hear and read every day.

https://www.exposingtruth.com/6-media-corporations-everything-watch-hear-read/

Just how much of a lemming are you really that you are so afraid of doing the math?

And we can thank Bill Clinton for that fucked-up legacy....

Democracy in Peril: Twenty Years of Media Consolidation Under the Telecommunications Act

Wall Street’s sinister influence on the political process has, rightly, been a major topic during this presidential campaign. But, history has taught us that the role that the media industry plays in Washington poses a comparable threat to our democracy. Yet, this is a topic rarely discussed by the dominant media, or on the campaign trail.

But now is a good time to discuss our growing media crises. Twenty years ago this week, President Bill Clinton signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The act, signed into law on February 8, 1996, was “essentially bought and paid for by corporate media lobbies,” as Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) described it, and radically “opened the floodgates on mergers.”

https://truthout.org/articles/democ...nsolidation-under-the-telecommunications-act/

 

[Hoosier Daddy]

I watch Tucker most nights, and man he has been on fire, but I dont watch anything else on FoxNews, or anywhere else.

I think you meant his lying shit has been judged "Pants on Fire" by politifact so often.

True
0%


Mostly True
8%


Half True
8%


Mostly False
33%


False
16%


Pants on Fire
33%




https://www.politifact.com/personalities/tucker-carlson/

 

[Hoosier Daddy]

WTF is your problem? Your support of an Oligarch corporate run media is quite evident and maybe you have some skin in the game when you get so freakin' defensive about the truth of it.



Not biased at all...huh?



Just how much of a lemming are you really that you are so afraid of doing the math?

And we can thank Bill Clinton for that fucked-up legacy....

fuck you. CNN and MSNBC do a good job of reporting, regardless of who owns them. and bill clinton has nothing to do with it, stupid fuck. you are so silly and stupid it should be against the law for you to even have his name come out of your lying ass, communist ass mouth.

 

[Cinnabar]

Hello Cinnabar,



Frontline is excellent.

I will give you an example of the kind of annoying softball interview that was broadcasted on WNYC. I didn't get the interviewer's name but the person being interviewed was William Barclay, a republican assemblyman from NY. When he was asked about Marjorie Taylor Greene, his canned response was that the Dems have AOC . The interviewer never asked the obvious follow-up questions, which should have been...when has AOC espoused conspiracy theories or incited violence? But he accepted that answer and moved on to the next question without confronting this Barclay guy about the lack of substance and integrity of his answer. I changed the station and actually emailed this assemblyman myself to ask him what should have been asked of him at the interview.

This is the kind of tripe that NPR and public radio will often sponsor and put on the airwaves which makes them non-exempt from deserved criticism.

 

[Hawkeye10]

I think you meant his lying shit has been judged "Pants on Fire" by politifact so often.

True
0%


Mostly True
8%


Half True
8%


Mostly False
33%


False
16%


Pants on Fire
33%




https://www.politifact.com/personalities/tucker-carlson/

Unlike you Modern Morons I dont subcontract out my thinking.

 

[Hoosier Daddy]

Unlike you Modern Morons I dont subcontract out my thinking.

a moron is someone who believes they can "divine" the truth about what people say without having other sources to back up THEIR opinions. like you just wake up in the morning and know what is what in the world without reading a paper, watching a newscast, a news video, and realize your grasping of the truth about the realities of that day are dependent upon how accurate and reliable your sources are- so you never believe the crazy shit fox spews, or newsmax or rush or infowars or breitbart.

 

[Darth Omar]

Fox News suffers ratings slump while staffers fret about post-Trump future

""We are lost," a Fox News insider remarked to me recently, and there are lots of data points to back up the assertion.

Nielsen numbers for the month of January were released on Tuesday, and Fox ranked third in the three-horse cable news race for the first time since 2001. Furthermore, CNN was the No. 1 channel across all of cable."

CNN can only get to first place if the rest of the pack crashes into the wall lol?

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Cinnabar,

I will give you an example of the kind of annoying softball interview that was broadcasted on WNYC. I didn't get the interviewer's name but the person being interviewed was William Barclay, a republican assemblyman from NY. When he was asked about Marjorie Taylor Greene, his canned response was that the Dems have AOC . The interviewer never asked the obvious follow-up questions, which should have been...when has AOC espoused conspiracy theories or incited violence? But he accepted that answer and moved on to the next question without confronting this Barclay guy about the lack of substance and integrity of his answer. I changed the channel and actually emailed this assemblyman myself to ask him what should have been asked of him at the interview.

This is the kind of tripe that NPR and public radio will often sponsor and put on the airwaves which makes them non-exempt from deserved criticism.

I hear ya.

It's very frustrating, isn't it?

I have been quite troubled with the softball questions of professional journalists for a long time.

I tried to put myself in their position. I sit there watching the screen and I want to scream. Why don't they press for an actual answer?

It is so frustrating to see a good question being asked, and then hear the politician essentially reject the question out of hand, then go on to talk for 5 minutes about whatever they wanted to talk about anyway, and never actually answer the question. Even when the question is posed so simply that it only required a yes or no answer.

And they never get the yes or no answer, do they?

Very frustrating.

Why don't they follow up?

Here is what is really going on. The politician is not going to answer those questions, ever. So they are going to use all their little tricks to get out of it. They could just come right out and bluntly say: "I am not going to answer that," but they don't want that appearance. So they play the all-too-familiar game. Kellyanne Conway was one of the worst. She would never shut up. If allowed, she would talk for 15-20 minutes, just go on and on, rambling from one thing to another, nothing to do with the question asked. An interviewer would have to interrupt her to regain control of the program. Conway would gladly eat up all your on-air time just talking about whatever she had prepared to say.

If the interviewer is too aggressive, they would get a reputation as a hardball and they would not even get any interviews in the first place. No politician would agree to be on their show. That's why they have to let the politicians have plenty of latitude on their answers. They can press the issue up to a point, but if they go too far they should know they are putting themselves out of business and losing their position.

So they have to have some guidelines to preserve the status quo.

It's pretty annoying for we the viewers, isn't it?

I hope you get a response from that assemblyman.

I wouldn't count on it.

They can't be honest and candid. They have to assume that anything they say to anybody can be used against them. That's why they learn to be very careful about what they say. It's all 'on the record.'

 

[Trumpet]

Hello Trumpet,



Maybe we can now begin to reduce the bitter political polarization which has for so long prevented meaningful dialog.

More American unity!

That's my sincere hope.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Darth,

CNN can only get to first place if the rest of the pack crashes into the wall lol?

CNN was the original 24 hour cable news network. They captured the number 1 spot a long time ago, before Fox.

Fox got the number one spot because they were they only major source of right wing news. The left was spread all over the place, watching all the other channels, using the internet. Liberals were not so united about having just one source of information. If you added up all those other sources it equaled the viewership of Fox.

Basically, the more diverse left watched / used many sources and the right mostly only watched one source, watched Fox. That's the only reason Fox was #1.

So now the right is torn apart. It wasn't a very cohesive group anyway. Traditional Republicans had to either accept Trump radicalism or leave the party. That put them in the very uncomfortable position of supporting the hate vote. It's one thing to prefer smaller government, but it is quite another to hate all government. Well, that all blew up in their faces on 1-6. Now, there is no clear path on how to deal with it. If they support hate, they are supporting a violent overthrow of the US government. That's not what the traditional Republicans ever stood for. That's too much for them to get behind. They prefer working within the system, not blowing it up. Blowing things up is radical extremism, not the mainstream right.

They went along with the hate vote as long as they could use it to work within the system, but on 1-6 that came to a crossroads. Now they have to decide which way to go.

Fox supported all that nonsense which led up to 1-6.

People on the right are distancing themselves from that, distancing themselves from Trump, from the Republican Party for allowing him, and distancing themselves from Fox.

It suddenly became all too apparent for them that it was not heading in a good direction.

Took 'em long enough!

I always wondered what it would take for the right to begin seeing that Trump was full of crock.

I thought after he took office and began to do and say stupid stuff they would wake up and move away from him. It made no sense when they didn't. It was bizarre how much Trump could get away with and the right bought in and supported it. But then I never watched Fox. Musta been some big bad juju propaganda to keep the ruse going that long.

I'm glad so many on the right finally figured out the king has no clothes.

I forgive those who have been taken in and feel like their sensibilities have been taken advantage of. I welcome my fellow Americans back from the long darkness. I welcome you all back to American unity. No, we do not have to agree on issues. It would be wrong if we did. What we do need to agree on is that America was great before Trump, we already share a great country, with great differences, problems and issues we would like to solve, but hatred is not the way forward.

 

[BartenderElite]

We need to get our news networks back to being actual news networks.

There really isn't one left that reports without bias. I do think Fox was at a different level as far as that goes: they were strictly a campaign arm of Trump over the past 4 years.

 

[evince]

Everything trump touches dies