Hello:

Fox has made some headway over the years. By SOME polls, it IS the most trusted name in news. The conservative message IS getting out. I wonder if it has to do with QUANTITY over QUALITY. If the counter to Fox is MSNBC, the libs brought a knife to a gunfight.. If you count nothing more than VOLUME, Fox uses it's airways 30% MORE than MSNBC. That's got to do something..

Yes, I'm talking about the weekends.. Fox POUNDS its message 7 days a week, while the libs take 2 days off to tell us about "Lockup". Yeah... That's EXACTLY what liberals want to watch - cops being d*cks. On the weekends, liberal news junkies have only one place to go. That's Fox.. They probably snag a few middle of the roaders.

My question is, does the right wing mindset result from MORE Fox News than MSNBC? I think so.

excon

I am curious as to why there needs to be 'a counter'. It as though the media must take a stand in terms of which political party it is going to support. One would have though the job of the media is NOT to support any particular party. Well, at least make some pretence in that direction.


Tut

Hello TUT:

Once upon a time, there was broadcast news. It was news. It was what happened. It wasn't spun.. The right wing thought it was, so they started radio and TV stations to broadcast THEIR views... So, either the left counters it, or it becomes the status quo.

I wish we didn't NEED to do it either... But, that's the way it is.

excon

Hi Ex,

Does that mean that Fox employs better sales people to 'sell' their version of the news? Does the other side need a lesson in marketing ?


Tut

Hello again, TUT:

Believing that the message Fox broadcasts is INCORRECT, I HAVE to believe they employ better salesmen. They sure do have prettier women. All the left has is fat mean guys and lesbians. Plus, as I mentioned in my OP, the right wing certainly takes advantage of weekends, and the left doesn't.

excon

Lol - clever phrase.

I doubt FOX has the power or the influence you give it. It appeals to the lowest common denominator in the society, most/some of whom couldn't find their way to a voting booth.

Murdoch is far more interested in the ratings (and the money) than any serious interest in politics - see the commentators with the short skirts.

Hi Athos,

I am not so sure. Right from the beginning Murdock was quick to show his hand. Murdock actually began his empire by starting as the head of a newspaper in South Australia.

Murdock disagreement with the then Premier Sir Thomas Playford was well documented at the time. PLayford had been Premier for some twenty years when Murdock made the decision that his newspaper should draw a line in the sand and support the conservative federal government of the time.

The idea of a media group 'picking sides' seems to be one of MUrdock's main modus oprandi. Something that didn't and still doesn't go down well in Australia.

Tut

Once upon a time there was a myth that news anchors were the most trusted people on the planet and that the network news was the gate-keepers of truth . Turns out the myth was much more myth than reality .

Turns out that the reason there was no controversy in the news was because the government censored the news . How did they do it ? They had this thingy called 'the Fairness Doctrine'. That meant that if you went deep into a news story and had anything resembing an opinion ,the network was mandated by law to have someone make a counter point . That meant the networks couldn't blatently and openly promote the progressive views they held without having a conservative voice getting equal time.

The way around the Fairness Doctrine was to tamp down controversy, which all three networks did. The rare exceptions was Cronkite's Vietnam op-ed and the Watergate coverage. Cronkite was deemed so trustworthy that he was believed when he proclaimed the Vietnam war lost after one of the greatests victories for the US in the war... the Tet offensive.

Since that time the news industry has expanded greatly with the advent of cable broadcasts and the net. News consumers have a multitude of choices . The Fairness Doctrine has also been abolished which freed up the networks from the obligation to disguise their predispositions .

It has also subject the news to forces it should always have been under... market forces. Now you would think that if the news consumer wanted the old model of restraint (at least in tone ) and a progressive bias as in the past;then they'd flock to networks like PBS and NPR for their news.

Here's my theory as to why Fox dominates. The people who want to hear lefty spin on the newscasts have a multitude of options . They can go to the taxpayer funded nets I've already mentioned. They can still get their news from the 3 major networks ,and they can also get it from the flame throwers like MSNBC and CNN .
Fox is the only game in town that has news that counters the views of the networks just stated . So presuming that the country has a 50-50 divide ,the "progressives dilute the numbers by spreading themselves over the various other news outlets.
Conservative leaning consumers do not have the same choices so they watch FOX.

Athos ;glad you consider me among the "lowest common denominator " of society. That's OK ;I'm used to such condescension from the superior intellect of the left.
I find it interesting that it is again the left that is pushing in the halls of government to reinstate the 'Fairness Doctrine' .One would think that with such superior views ,the progressives would have a clear advantage in the market place and they wouldn't need government intervention in supporting and propping up those superior opinions. One would think that through the power of persuasion alone ,the liberal networks would succeed in convincing us theirs is the correct view .

Hi Tom,

Sounds like it might be a reasonable theory. I have no doubt that a majority of Australians would find that presenting the news in this type of way somewhat Bazaar (reference to both strange and market place).I can see why Murdock found a niche over there.

Tut

COME ON TUT the ABC with Kerrie Obrien, etc have been doing it for years in Australia. We expect the commentator to be adverserial and not a lackey of the current government but it no surprise they lean to the left, Murdock and the Australian balance that out. Murdock exploits the gutter well and he can do it far better in the US and the UK than he can do it here

So the right is both "the lowest common denominator "and "the gutter ".

I find this attitude quite instructive. It reaffirms my worse concerns about the left. Such beliefs in the halls of government are dangerous.I am more convinced than ever that it must be opposed.

This were speaking of Fox News viewers, not the "right".
Of course it does, you have a pre-conceived view of "the left" that will never change. If you can find some damaging info about them then you will believe it no matter what the actual facts are. This is what fanatics do.

NK ,I don't have to look far. In one page of commetary here I found two examples . Obviously they know better than me . When they govern ,their benevolence dictates that they act on what they perceive my are my best interests .

Oh you mean like FreeRepublic?

So Tom you like to do exactly what the commentators do take something that is said, stretch it to infinity and throw it back. No one said the right is the lowest common denominator or the gutter, I said that Murdoch exploits these well, he is noted in both Australia and Britain for his tabloid approach to the press. Now you have revealed your position as standing on the right of Murdoch, you'll be telling me next you think Palin is a good candidate because Murdoch supports her. Murdoch is a fair weather friend and he likes to be on the winning side and make the news. In fact if you recall a certain Bond movie it was Murdoch who was a thinly veiled depiction as the villain in that movie

The left has proven itself as the lowest common denominator

LOL, you just did what you derided in your previous paragraph! Hehe.

Reality karma, they support abortion, homosexuality, bludgers, loafers, and a number of other policies which pander to the masses, so by their actions you shall know them

Hello again, clete:

Yeah, freedom is tough.. LOTS of people enjoy liberty here... Not just the white straight Christians masses...

But, I do not support bludgers. I don't know what they are, but we don't have any of those here.

excon

I think it's a Harry Potter thing.

I Ex,

I think you call them 'deadbeats' over there.

Tut