« BDS -- Bunny Derangement Syndrome? | Main | Rusty Shackleford Gets Fatwa on His Head »

The new ostriches

Well, the nutroots are at it again. After their stunning victory in Connecticut, when they punished heretic Joe Lieberman for daring to disagree with their dictates, they've found their new cause: punishing Fox News.

They've pretty much taken over John Edwards' campaign, pushing him into boycotting a Fox News co-sponsored debate in Nevada. That started a cascade, and eventually all the major candidates to bow out. Now Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have pulled out of a debate co-sponsored by Fox News and the Congressional Black Caucus.

I'm not going to go into the principles of the issue, but purely the pragmatical aspects.

Fox News is the most popular cable news channel. Period. It routinely outdraws all of its rivals (CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, etc.), often combined, in viewers.

Fox News has sponsored or co-sponsored political debates in the past, and I don't recall any examples of them showing bias or treating any of the candidates unfairly. And I'm certain that had they done so, those calling for the boycott now would be touting those examples at the top of their lungs.

Political debates are a very small portion of Fox's coverage. Being shut out is embarrassing, but it really doesn't affect them too much in the big picture.

Political debates, on the other hand, are far more important to the candidates. They are free publicity for them, and give them the opportunity to make themselves stand out from the pack and, sometimes, devastate their opponents. Ronald Reagan used a primary debate in New Hampshire to show his strength and resolve with his infamous "I'm paying for this microphone" moment. Lloyd Bentsen might not have won the vice-presidency, but his "you're no Jack Kennedy" slam of Dan Quayle was pretty much the end of Quayle's ambitions. In the same election, Michael Dukakis' utterly bland response to the question of how he would react if his wife was raped and murdered is considered a major factor in his defeat. And John Edwards' ham-handed attempt to bring up Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter showed (to some) his callowness and opportunism, versus Cheney's maturity.

So, let's look at who gains from these debates, and how much. Fox gets an hour or so of cheap programming -- but little advertising revenues, as they're usually aired without commercial interruptions. The candidates get to speak directly to the voters, without the restrictions of the 30-second and 60-second commercials. And the people get to see the candidates in as close to an unscripted environment as they're likely to.

By any rational analysis, it seems that the candidates who choose to boycott Fox-sponsored debates are losing more than Fox does, and losing far more than they gain. It simply doesn't make sense, either on a practical or philosophical basis. So why do they do it?

The only answer I can see that makes the slightest sense is that they are so afraid of the Nutroots that they don't dare cross them. They see the Fox boycott as an easy way to keep the nuts off their backs. After all, MoveOn.org claimed that they "bought" the Democratic party, and no one in the party leadership denied their claim.

What just doesn't make sense is that while the Nutroots have had stunning successes in many areas, such as fundraising, organizing, supplying volunteers, and the like, they have had damned few successes in the one area that really counts -- winning elections. Their greatest single success was defeating Joe Lieberman (yeah, him again) in the Connecticut primary, and in the end he won re-election handily -- converting a formerly secure Democratic senate seat into one that is nominally independent, and locking in to office for six years a man who has absolutely no reason to feel obligated to (or even very fond of) the Democratic party.

Oh, well. Napoleon once famously proclaimed that "never interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake." If the nutroots are so wrapped up in winning their little, insignificant battles that they lose sight of the fact that they keep losing the important ones, maybe that'll keep them out of mischief.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The new ostriches:

» The Thunder Run linked with Web Reconnaissance for 04/10/2007

Comments (80)

Perhaps the Dem candidates ... (Below threshold)
Jeff Blogworthy:

Perhaps the Dem candidates are so afraid of being the "devastaties" that any excuse to duck a debate is considered a good one.

Since the object of a debat... (Below threshold)
hermie:

Since the object of a debate is to argue your positions against those of your opponent(s), the only thing these Dems have to fear is that they have to defend their past positions and 'solutions' of current issues.

Hillary would be on the defensive about her votes on the war, from attacks by Obama and Edwards. Edwards would have to defend his 'Two Americas' mantra against Obama and Hillary. Hillary, Obama, and Edwards would have to defend their lackluster Senate careers from Dodd, Kuchinich, etc.

The only thing they have to fear from Fox, is that more people would hear them on the defensive from members of their own party, than the number of people who watch CNN or MSNBC.

There is something missing ... (Below threshold)
marc:

There is something missing from both this display of debate cut and runnin' and Edwards previous edition:

Where the hell is the Congressional Black Caucus?

Granted they are only the "sponsors" and they can just take their "debate ball" to another network/cable outlet it just strikes me as odd they have remained totally silent.

Maybe with Obama dissin' both Fox and the CBC they will pry their usually loud oral cavities open.

hermie:The onl... (Below threshold)
marc:

hermie:

The only thing they have to fear from Fox, is that more people would hear them on the defensive from members of their own party, than the number of people who watch CNN or MSNBC.

You act as if the debate if aired on ANY other network than Fox wouldn't provide clips and Youtube video for every broadcast outlet on the planet.

Dream on. Each and every misstep, "botched joke" and lie would be repeated everywhere and for days, if not weeks!

For most candidates, the fe... (Below threshold)

For most candidates, the fewer people actually finding out what they're all about, the better.

"they don't dare cross them... (Below threshold)
Adrian Browne:

"they don't dare cross them."

Listening to their constituents sounds rather democratic and might be the thing to do if they want to get elected.

The only station the Republican debates belong on is the History Channel.

AB:Listening t... (Below threshold)
marc:

AB:

Listening to their constituents sounds rather democratic and might be the thing to do if they want to get elected.

What constituents would that be?

Are you talking those that identify themselves as democrats and active members of that party?

If so I'd very much like to see what led you to that conclusion.

OR... are you admitting the Nutroots and moveon.org are in fact located smack in the center of the party and NOT to the far, far left of it?

This sets a very serious pr... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

This sets a very serious precedent. The dimmers never think past their present action. Now, it will be okay to blow off debates for whatever reason. It is not democracy to have a private issues related group with money to dictate what they candidates should do. Dimmers hate Halliburton for allegely doing that with Cheney and GW, but when MoveOn does it, it is okay. How about that? So pathetic and predictable. ww

Adrian, that sounds OK. I l... (Below threshold)

Adrian, that sounds OK. I like the History Channel. They occasionally get things right, and their mistakes usually aren't a result of bias, but sensationalism.

By the same token, can we keep the Democrats restricted to Comedy Central?

J.

"moveon.org are in fact loc... (Below threshold)
Adrian Browne:

"moveon.org are in fact located smack in the center of the party and NOT to the far, far left of it?"

YES EXACTLY!!! (It's nothing to "admit to" btw).

Jay,Comedy Central... (Below threshold)
Mark L:

Jay,

Comedy Central for the Democrats' debates?

That is okay, I guess, but wouldn't the Fantasy Channel be a more appropriate venue?

N.B. The Connecticut Senate... (Below threshold)

N.B. The Connecticut Senate seat might have been a "secure" Dem seat as long as Lieberman was in it, but historically, it has swung back and forth from Democrat William Benton to Republican William Purtell to Democrat Thomas Dodd to Republican Lowell Weicker to Democrat Joe Lieberman.

These egomaniacal frauds ... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

These egomaniacal frauds succumb to the very ignorant idiots(move on, kos) they have created. Rather pathetic however it was a necessary evil on behalf of a desparate democrat party sinking further into irrelevance. Now democrats must cower in fear of not only the truth by way of honest reporting , asking real questions that matter (calling them on their lies). They also must bend to the will of their infantile base demanding they not put themselves in the position to called on those lies.

Yet they will conceal these facts by creating or shall I say resurrecting the spin and paranoia of one Hilary Rotten Clinton's "VAST RIGHTWING CONSPIRACY". Blame it on some dreamed up fantasy that some boogey man is out to get them or they can just do what has been working as of late and "BLAME IT ON BUSH". What comic relief it is and they are not even trying.

Adrian,Thank you for... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

Adrian,
Thank you for laying out your position. It is good to know, from a contextual standpoint, that you believe Moveon et al to be "center left".

BTW, listening to their voters is always good, but a dead end strategy. To win elections, AND to grow ther voter base, they must reach outside of the party faithful.

A brilliant move by (appare... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

A brilliant move by (apparently) the Democratic Party leaders. Put the "Fox is a Republican tool" debate before the general public while the the Republican party is unpopular.

Even non-news junkies will be apprised of the controversy as backstory to each debate. And once something is pointed out, it seems to become more noticeable.

Plus boycotting the boycotters at Fox is too irresistable for any political hardballer worth his mitt. The best Fox ang the RW blogs can do is suck it up and not whine.

Adrian Browne, Move on and ... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

Adrian Browne, Move on and the nutroots are not something to be ashamed of????? Only if you are part of the American Communist party could you actually support an organization bought and paid for by a billionaire that has vowed to destroy the government of the United States. I thought even the nutroots (aka democrats) were part of the current government. MY mistake. Voting for your own destruction and the death of their families seems to be a democrat party habit these days. (Ref: 100% support of the enemies that have sworn, to some rock in the east, to kill us all.)

I thought this involved only the dhimmi males that wanted to treat the women in America the way Islamic animals (men) treat the women in countries they control until Peeeeloshi showed her love for the enemies. Evidently they all have a death wish and want to take everyone with them.

Honest reporting is to Fox ... (Below threshold)
groucho:

Honest reporting is to Fox what humility and wisdom are to GWB. Personally I'd rather the Dem candidates weren't skipping the debate; I think they have more to lose than to gain by doing so. That said, there may be some wisdom in avoiding the "fairness and balance" of the administration's personal PR outlet. There's very little legitimacy to Fox News, they are the People Magazine, infotainment network, drawing their viewership from the National Enquirer/tabloid/30 second sound byte crew who can't get enough of Anna Nicole or the next latest missing white woman.

HT to JT:I believe... (Below threshold)
epador:

HT to JT:

I believe Al Gore might be better on the SciFi channel, but the rest of those clowns would have a permanent set next to Bill Maher and own the Comedy Channel. There's a few professional Republican politicians that might do better there as well. I'm non-partisan on this issue.

"The best Fox ang the RW b... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

"The best Fox ang the RW blogs can do is suck it up and not whine."

Whine? What planet are you on? This is fricken hilarious! What comedy. Democrats are doing stand up comedy and don't even know it. Clueless lot they are. They have tea with terrorists who would like nothing more than to cut their heads off yet are affraid of the most honest NEWS NETWORK in the Country. Maybe it's not FOX they fear but rather them hanging themselves with their own words or lack there of. Simply put, liars fear being called on their lies. That's all they have to say, the American people will understand.

bryanD[elusional]<... (Below threshold)
marc:

bryanD[elusional]

Plus boycotting the boycotters at Fox

So... just what has Fox boycotted?

"Honest reporting is to Fox... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

"Honest reporting is to Fox what humility and wisdom are to GWB."

Don't be so grumpy Groucho, Just because GWB is a "TWO TERM REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT". Look at the two imbecile frauds the democrats picked to lose.

"So... just what has Fox bo... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

"So... just what has Fox boycotted?"

The only thing he could be talking about but will never admit is the democrat perpetual fraud. Why can't FOX just lob some right over the plate like Spittle Face on Softballs.

"By the same token, can ... (Below threshold)

"By the same token, can we keep the Democrats restricted to Comedy Central?"

I was thinking more along the lines of fear.net.

I love to watch these people freak out over one, I repeat one, news channel. And it happens to be the most popular, which tells me they're not so mainstream as they claim to be.

marc, Vermont, France, Disn... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

marc, Vermont, France, Disneyworld on O'Reilly.

Editorially, the British Opposition parties. Anti-PRC news. Security and Prosperity Partnership and the Transnational Highway.


Who? and what?... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

Who? and what?

Oyster. "fear" is the modus... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

Oyster. "fear" is the modus operandi of this whole administration.
Even they realized how pathetic it was to put 300,000,000 people on Orange Alert time and again. File it under "whatever happened to...?"

"I love to watch these peop... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

"I love to watch these people freak out over one, I repeat one, news channel"

"Freak out" is not the correct term. "Damage". The word is "damage".

(You Bushies need to express yourselves in a not so maniacal way. If Rob's arms were wings, he'd be at 30,000 ft, elevation. Scrapiron would have drilled himself to China.)

Hmm.. Fox News is the most ... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

Hmm.. Fox News is the most watched news channel and the Democrats are, apparently, afraid of Fox News.

What possible conclusions can one draw ?

+The mainstream Democrats aren't nearly so mainstream as they'd like to believe ? (as someone previously stated)
+The Democrats are incapable of handling scrutiny from media that isn't in their pocket ?
+The Democrats realize that the less people know about them the better off they are ?
+...

Syndicated radio talk show ... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

Syndicated radio talk show host, Neal Boortz (who urged honestly urged his listeners to support Air America and even donated money himself) had curious little piece about why 'Liberal' talk shows fail when 'Liberals' are overrepresented in the print media outlets...

boortz.com/nuze/200704/04092007.html#liberals

The gist of his point is that they're unable to stand up to scrutiny of the audience (there's always someone smarter than you no matter how smart you may be). Perhaps this is the same reason that they're now "Fleeing Fox News" ?

Fox is the most watched cab... (Below threshold)
groucho:

Fox is the most watched cable news show. American Idol is the most watched TV program. If it's all about numbers, why not have the contestants, er, I mean candidateson AI. Who will be voted off next?

Another conclusion for _Mike_'s list:

The democrats are justifiably leery of a network that has it has its mouth firmly attached to Bush's rectum claiming it is "fair and balanced".

Fox is fair and balanced, b... (Below threshold)
Jo:

Fox is fair and balanced, because it reports not only the negative for republicans BUT the negative things for democrats as well. That's why you guys can't stand it. You are use to the MSM covering your asses for you and Fox won't go along with that.

Anyway, anything that makes the democrats look like the whiny sissy babies they are, is fine with me.

The democrats are justif... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

The democrats are justifiably leery of a network that has it has its mouth firmly attached to Bush's rectum claiming it is "fair and balanced".

What's the basis for the Democrats fear ? It's my understanding that the Democrats are fleeing from live, unedited debates.

"Hmm.. Fox News is the m... (Below threshold)
Lee:

"Hmm.. Fox News is the most watched news channel and the Democrats are, apparently, afraid of Fox News."

"What possible conclusions can one draw ?"

One conclusion is that you're an uninformed partisan joker who probably watches way too much Faux News. Check the ratings, pinhead. News programs on ABC, NBC, CBS, etc. stomp the crap out of Fox News.

The Democratic candidates are doing the absolutely 100% correct thing by boycotting Fox's debates, and the press this story is getting is letting the world know that Fox News is not a legitimate news organization - but is instead just a right-wing propaganda machine.

Yes, it's a popular right-wing propaganda machine -- but let's see what happens to those ratings over the next six months...

reaping what you sow, baby -- reaping what you sow...

If the Nutwitz have ... (Below threshold)
macofromoc:


If the Nutwitz have this much control over a Democrat imagine a Democratic President.

The clear answer the the debate issue is simple --let Al Jazzeera hold the debate.

I have an honest question f... (Below threshold)
Just Asking:

I have an honest question for all of you right of center people posting here

If Air America Radio offered to host the republican presidential debates should republican candidates participate or boycott?

Careful righties this is a trick question.

The dim candidates avoiding... (Below threshold)
cubanbob:

The dim candidates avoiding Fox are fools. But then again they are dims. MoveOn.org and the rest of the the nutroots are simply proving once again tons of money and a good organization can get you media exposure, but if the product is a dog, it won't sell. Playing to the far left almost guarantees a primary victory in a number of states but can only result in a defeat in the general. The CBC has no love for Fox but are sufficiently grounded in reality to know that Fox for all its shortcomings has by far the largest number of viewers in cable TV. Which is also telling of the other cable networks. The CBC has made the simple logical conclusion ( a logic that escapes the sophisticated white commie) that the best way to get the voting public (and cable viewers vote at a much higher rate than non viewers)is to get them exposure on the network with the highest number of viewers.
So if the dim candidates who's lips are firmly planted on MoveOn's and Kos's butts pass on Fox so be it. Next March they will be gone. What will be interesting is if the dims finally weed out the far left trash and select a candidate that is really capable of attracting the average American voter.
So far the only thing the dims really have going for them is absolute ineptnes of the Republican Party.

Everyday I suspect more and... (Below threshold)
The Listkeeper:

Everyday I suspect more and more that BryanD is the author of Bush's previous Iraq policy....

I'd have no problem ... (Below threshold)
macofromoc:


I'd have no problem with AA sponsoring a Republican debate. Would anybody watch it though?? AA doesn't have a great track record for drawing in a audience. Besides the more Stewart Smalley fumbling through questions would be comical.. Would he tackle a candidate who dared to answswer??

Again the dimmers are for b... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Again the dimmers are for boycotting other points of view. Lefty blogs deny access to conservative voices, MSM does not have a fair representation of the convervative voice. For a channel the lefties claim to dispise, they can quote the shows topics more then I can. Well, free speech is fine as long as it falls in line what the lefties determine it should be. Conservatives have Fox News, Talk Radio and the internet. The lefties have the 30 minute news programs/entertainment on the alphabet channels. I will use what I already have. ww

I enjoy all of the cable ne... (Below threshold)

I enjoy all of the cable news stations including FOX myself. Daniel should not fear stepping into the lion's den. The leading Democrats should appear over at FOX like any network.

Check it out loyal bushies.... (Below threshold)
Just Asking:

Check it out loyal bushies.

http://nvupnorth.blogspot.com/2007/03/air-america-nv-republican-debate.html

Another moral dilemma the right wing noise machine has put you in. How can you rip on the Dems for boycotting Fox when your guys are afraid to go on Air America? I'm sure you'll find a way to spin your way out of this one.

"Everyday I suspect more an... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

"Everyday I suspect more and more that BryanD is the author of Bush's previous Iraq policy...._The Listkeeper

I'm not Jewish.

Just Asking,All I ... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Just Asking,

All I see is the invitation, not a refusal to participate. Is the refusal somehwere else or have they just not answered yet?

AA is still on?............... (Below threshold)
Ran:

AA is still on?............LMAO!

Heralder,As of this ... (Below threshold)
Just Asking:

Heralder,
As of this date the republican chairmen have refused to reply. The invitation was offered on March 13th. Maybe if they ignore it, it will go away?

Ran,
Read the invite, AA has as large an audience as FNC.

Loyal Bushies,
Don't bring checkers to a chess match.

The Resident Moron (Lee) wh... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

The Resident Moron (Lee) whined pathetically,


One conclusion is that you're an uninformed partisan joker who probably watches way too much Faux News. Check the ratings, pinhead. News programs on ABC, NBC, CBS, etc. stomp the crap out of Fox News.

These rating, you schmuck ?

www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/ratings/the_scoreboard_friday_april_6_56642.asp Total day: FNC: 827 | CNN: 440 | MSNBC: 303 | HLN: 224 | CNBC: 188

Note that FNC, Fox News Channel, had nearly twice the viewers at CNN for this past Friday. Once again, you're proven to be either ignorant of the facts or a liar (or both)... which explains your political leanings, peabrain.

So, again, what is exactly is the Democrats basis for their fear of appearing on the most watched news network ?

isn't Air America that st... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

isn't Air America that station that stole money from kids? Had to be bailed out of Bankruptcy ? Has zero credibility?

My bad about AA -- ... (Below threshold)
macofromoc:


My bad about AA -- forgot they're always adding new stations all the time. By now I'm sure their listeners outnumber their long-term employees.

Loyal Marxixts - stop blogging in crayon

If Air America is going to ... (Below threshold)
Robert the Original:

If Air America is going to host anything they better do it soon. Every day brings a new list of stations dropping their programming and new lows for ratings.

Of course, a principled person might well refuse this invitation on the grounds of the Gloria Wise loan and the subsequent events that conspired to bring down that once revered children's charity.

The finances of that loan, an earlier sale to avoid paying debts, and the bankruptcy buyout, remain mysterious and plagued by counter-suits, new creditors and investigations. Air America stands, like Enron, beneath suspicion.

But thanks for playing, Just Asking.

Just Asking:Do you... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Just Asking:

Do you feel that the recently bankrupt Air America is even in the same ball field as Fox News as far as audience?

Also, are you equating a non-response with a boycott?

Just Asking:Ran,<... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

Just Asking:
Ran,
Read the invite, AA has as large an audience as FNC.

Really ? What are they listening to because it's apparently not AA's top billed show with Al Franken...

www.talkers.com/main/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=34

Franken's only drawing 1.25 million listeners per week. Bill Bennett started his morning show on the same week that Franken did. Bennett is now at 3.0 million per week. For reference, Limbaugh draws 13.5 million. So, to claim that AA has as large an audience as FNC is laughably ridiculous.

AA has as large an audience... (Below threshold)
D-Hoggs:

AA has as large an audience as FOX?! WTF are you smoking man? And lee, nice try but now you are just flat out lying.

Question: If the planned de... (Below threshold)
Rance:

Question: If the planned debate where the Republican candidates, in a forum hosted by Dan Rather, would you all feel the same way?

Note that FNC, Fox News ... (Below threshold)
Taltos:

Note that FNC, Fox News Channel, had nearly twice the viewers at CNN for this past Friday. Once again, you're proven to be either ignorant of the facts or a liar (or both)... which explains your political leanings, peabrain.

Technically Lee wasn't lying, he was just cheating. You can't really compare ratings for cable and broadcast stations to each other. Unless Lee is positing that people who lean to the right have a greater representation amongst cable viewers than amongst broadcast viewers, which I think any statistician would have issues with.

If these democrat wussies a... (Below threshold)
nikkolai:

If these democrat wussies are so scared of Fox News, how the hell are they going stand up to Al Qaeda, Hammas, Muslim Brotherhood, etc.? Oh, never mind....

Rance, that is not a fair c... (Below threshold)
D-Hoggs:

Rance, that is not a fair comparison. These democrats aren't saying they have a problem with a specific mediator, which makes it all the more ridiculous. But to answer your question anyway, I would not want the Republicans to boycott any debate, even Rather. The American public deserve to hear these would be elected officials speak and to learn who they are. Apparently the democrats are afraid of what will come out of their own mouths. This whole boycott does not surprise me in the least though, and just further exposes Cliton, Edwards and Obama for what I already know them to be.

No, Lee wasn't lying, but d... (Below threshold)
mantis:

No, Lee wasn't lying, but depending on traditional ratings techniques which distort actual viewership rates. The problem with comparing network news and cable news ratings is not so much that fewer people get cable (penetration is up past 85%), but that the ratings compare national network news (which is only on for 1/2 hour per day) with only primetime cable news. But cable news is on 24 hours per day. If people don't happen to watch at the same time that network news is on, then they aren't counted as cable news consumers in the traditional comparison.

If you want some more interesting numbers, look here. It's a couple years old, but scroll down and look at the Pew polls on what people consider their favored source for national/international news: the numbers have gone from a virtual tie between cable and network news in 1993 to an total blowout for cable in 2003. Quoting:

From 1993 to 2002, the percentage of Americans in the Pew surveys who said they regularly got their news from the networks steadily declined, from 58 to just 32 percent.

Look at television ratings ... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Look at television ratings between 6pm and 7pm.

Compare ABC, NBC, CBS, etc with CNN and Fox and MSNBC. You'll see that the alphabet networks kick Fox's ass.

Find any time segment in the 24 hour clock where Fox News gets anywhere near the ratings numbers of the 6pm-7pm news programs on ABC, or NBC, or CBS etc.

You won't find them. Fox can't come close to reaching the eyeballs the commercial networks reach.

The reporting underscoreMIKEunderscore and others are doing to the contrary might get them a job at Fox misreporting the news, but it ain't reality. That's the funny part - Fox News misreports the news, and conservatives misreport the reach and influence of Fox. It's one big circle-jerk of nonsense. Fox lies to Mike, and Mike lies about Fox in return. It's just bullshit.

Find any time segment in... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Find any time segment in the 24 hour clock where Fox News gets anywhere near the ratings numbers of the 6pm-7pm news programs on ABC, or NBC, or CBS etc.

That was the point of my post above, Lee. Looking at only one hour of 24-hour stations content is just not an accurate way of measuring where people get their news (though the networks would rather we didn't know that).

Lee, The Resident Moron, su... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

Lee, The Resident Moron, summarized his post with:
It's just bullshit.

That was my thought when I was reading your post too.

Look at television ratings between 6pm and 7pm.

Compare ABC, NBC, CBS, etc with CNN and Fox and MSNBC. You'll see that the alphabet networks kick Fox's ass.

First of all, Mr. Clueless, we're talking about news channels. For the exceptionally slow (this means you Lee), that's FNC, CNN, MSBC, CNBC, etc. You'll note that ABC, NBC, CBS, etc aren't in that list which would indicate to most people that they ... aren't news channels.

What's more is that the candidates aren't "Fleeing Fox News" because they're opting for a larger audience with another network. The Obama campaign has indicated that they would prefer the live, unedited debates be appear on CNN, which has half the number of viewers as FNC. So, all you nonsense about the ratings of the alphabet networks is meaningless.

And you're right. It's one big circle-jerk of nonsense... and Lee's in the middle.

another look:<blockqu... (Below threshold)
Lee:

another look:

Cable News Ranker: Week of March 5
For the ninth consecutive week, Fox News has ranked among the top five cable networks in primetime. Last week, for the second week in a row, FNC placed third, behind USA and TNT.

FNC averaged 1,548,000 viewers and 1,246,000 households last week.
(Source link)

For the week, Fox's News programming averaged a little over 1.5 milion viewers in prime time.

ABC tops weekly news ratings
NEW YORK (Hollywood Reporter) - ABC's "World News With Charles Gibson" was the most-watched evening newscast last week, the second time in three weeks that it has beaten traditional leader "NBC Nightly News With Brian Williams."

It was also the fourth week in a row that ABC was No. 1 in the adults 25-54 demographic, according to data released Tuesday by Nielsen Media Research.

"World News" averaged 9.4 million viewers, compared with 9.1 million for "NBC Nightly News" and 6.9 million for "CBS Evening News With Katie Couric." ABC led the demo with a 2.5 rating/9 share in adults 25-54 to NBC's 2.2/8 and CBS's 1.8/7, Nielsen said.

(Source link)

ABC averaged 9.4 million viewers for their prime time "World News" program.

Having the same 1.5 million viewers watching Fox News for the four hour time slot from 6pm - 10pm does mean that Fox News has 6 million (1.5 x 4) viewers, although the Cable News guys would like you to believe that it does....

I may well have snarked my foot right into my mouth, Mantis, but that's the way I see it.

Lee,It's interesti... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

Lee,

It's interesting that you consider telling the whole story, in context, to be "misreporting". Can you give us one single specific example of something that was misreported on FOX News?

Or are you just a little p'd off that some segement of the population is not being fed steaming piles of far leftist propaganda disguised as "news" - which is pretty much all you get from the broadcast networks?

Ignorance is bliss and many of the lefty posters on this site are full of bliss.

Mike snarked: "First of ... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Mike snarked: "First of all, Mr. Clueless, we're talking about news channels. "

Well, that's what you want to talk about Mike, because only talking about cable news channels supports your contention that Fox is King -- but they are King of cable only - they are a big fish in the small pond.

The commercial networks kick Fox's ass, and you can choose to say "but don't compare Fox to the commercial networks" - but I'm choosing to do exactly that with my statement.

I'm talking about television viewers in general - all sources - gross numbers - you know -- the American people, not just those that watch cable channels --all of them - the populace - not just the cable viewers.

Compare the television news sources and the ratings - not just the cable portion of the television news sources.... and you'll find that the commercial network news programming receives far more viewers than Fox.

P Bunyan - Watch this docum... (Below threshold)
Lee:

P Bunyan - Watch this documentary - it'll curl your toes the way that Fox lies to the American People. link

Lee,I'm not gonna ... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

Lee,

I'm not gonna pay $10 (plus shipping) for a lie-u-mentary that would make Micheal Moore or Al Gore proud.

Can you give 1 example of FOX's misreporting as you alledge?

Lee, The Resident Moron, wh... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

Lee, The Resident Moron, whined:
Well, that's what you want to talk about Mike, because only talking about cable news channels supports your contention that Fox is King -- but they are King of cable only - they are a big fish in the small pond.

No, Mr. Clueless, we're talking about news channels because that's what's up for debate.

As I stated above, the Obama campaign has stated that they'd prefer CNN air the live, unedited debate. So, it's between FNC and CNN - both of which are news channels. The Democrats aren't "Fleeing Fox News" in order to seek a larger audience because if they were they wouldn't consider CNN since it has half the number of viewers as FNC.

Personally, I'm fine with them running away as I think most people will find it a little odd that they're so afraid of FNC that they flee from having a live, unedited debate aired there.

bryannD[elusional]... (Below threshold)
marc:

bryannD[elusional]

marc, Vermont, France, Disneyworld on O'Reilly.

Vermont - no, France - yes, Disneyworld - not sure.

so at best your 2 out of 3.

However "Fox" didn't boycott anything a single personality on Fox did.

P. Bunyun, Good gr... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

P. Bunyun,

Good gravy!"Mark Foley (D-FL)"

This has been posted before but it's classic.

http://welcome-to-pottersville.blogspot.com/2007/03/fox-news-at-its-finest.html

"I'm not gonna pay $10 (... (Below threshold)
Lee:

"I'm not gonna pay $10 (plus shipping) for a lie-u-mentary that would make Micheal Moore or Al Gore proud."

You can rent it at the local video store or Netflix. The website link I gave you also has a link to the transcript, PB. You're welcome to become informed, or choose instead to pretend Fox really is a legitimate news source - the choice is yours.

marc, I am sure. A... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

marc, I am sure.

And did I miss the "The views expressed..." disclaimer at the beginning of O'Reilly's show?

Not one of your stronger efforts, but Come Again!

Can you give us one sing... (Below threshold)
sean nyc/aa:

Can you give us one single specific example of something that was misreported on FOX News?
P. Bunyan

I can: the story about Obama going to a madrassa in Indonesia and that someone from the Clinton campaign leaked it.

But now you'll claim, that wasn't Fox News, but Insight Magazine (I think that's the name, I don't want to check).

However, I call bullshit on this. Fox News went with it because it fits their agenda and didn't bother to fact check, unlike that damn liberal-loving CNN, so they must face the repercussions of this action, one of them being Dems are liely to boycott appearances on their network.

Plus, I've noticed this practice of having lackeys provide cover is SOP for Republicans.

bad apples at Abu Ghraib
Michael Brown at FEMA
CIA for WMDs
Libby in the Plame Case
Kyle Sampson/Monica Goodling in the USA story
etc. etc.

Read the invite, AA has... (Below threshold)
marc:

Read the invite, AA has as large an audience as FNC.
Loyal Bushies, Don't bring checkers to a chess match.
Posted by: Just Asking

As already noted a non response to the offer isn't a boycott and considering AA is a bankrupt RADIO outlet there are a couple points to be made.

1. Why respond to an offer that lies in the offer? (claiming a vast listenership)

2. It IS a radio outlet. There hasn't been a radio only presidential debate since Kennedy/Nixon debate 40 plus years ago. And we ALL KNOW how important the images from that debate were.

Fox News has liberal politi... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Fox News has liberal politicians and stategists on all the time. The difference is the liberals are asked to defend their positions. On the MSM the liberals are asked to explain republican positions. Recently, Terry McCaullif, Kirsten Powers, Bob Bechal, John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Carl Levin, etc. Wow! Sure is biased. ww

The Democrats aren't "Fl... (Below threshold)
Lee:

The Democrats aren't "Fleeing Fox News" in order to seek a larger audience because if they were they wouldn't consider CNN since it has half the number of viewers as FNC."

The number of regular viewers a channel has is pretty much irrelevant. For example, I don't regularly watch Fox News, but I would watch that channel to see the debate.

People will tune in for the debate as long as they can find the channel.

To tell you the truth, I ca... (Below threshold)
mantis:

To tell you the truth, I can't stand any of the news programs, cable or network. I'll watch debates on PBS, and that's it (except the McLaughlin Group). Otherwise I get my news by (gasp!) reading.

Who actually enjoys a) the subject matter, b) the presentation, and c) the personalities of cable or network news shows? It's a bunch of flashy, annoying, sensationalist bullshit with pompous actors reading off teleprompters when they aren't pontificating on topics they don't know shit about, interspersed with graphics and tickers which seem designed to be as irritating as possible. And the commercials! Don't get me started on commercials.

I'll stick to print and web media, thank you.

Many people agree with you ... (Below threshold)
Robert the original:

Many people agree with you Mantis, at least former CNN viewers.

Ratings bump up and down, but over the long run, FNC has been growing, CNN dropping. It seems that each week CNN drops another employee.

I wonder why.

My favorite Fox News lie wa... (Below threshold)
jp2:

My favorite Fox News lie was Carl Cameron's completely fabricated story about Kerry getting a manicure.

Normally a reporter who knowingly made up events and provided fake quotes would be fired.

Cameron was promoted to Chief White House Correspondent.

So, the Democratic candidat... (Below threshold)
Herman:

So, the Democratic candidates have given up on Fox News. No surprise there. The chance of Fox News running an impartial debate is about the same as the chance that Mark Foley is a Democrat (which, by the way, is what Fox News reported).

After Cheney and Rove became displeased with Scott McClellan, they turned to Fox News for a replacement, and selected Tony Snowjob. Cheney and Rove knew there were plenty of people at Fox with notable experience being mouthpieces for the Bush Administration, and thought Snowjob would work out best. So now, Tony does the same thing as he did for Fox News, just with a different employer.

This can't be the kind of news station put in charge of running a debate among Democrats. Can't allow it.

BryanD,Your link s... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

BryanD,

Your link showed some typos and many examples of bias, or at best the rest of the story, but I don't think those examples rise to the level of misreporting.

Sean nyc/aa,

What exactly about the Obama story was misreported? I don't believe that FOX reported that it was a medrassa, and in fact pointed out that it wasn't. Are you suggesting that the whole story was fabricated like TANG or exploding SUV's? & I don't really get the point of the rest of your post.

I can give you a good example of misreporting. I was unfortunate enough to be in a room with the CBS Evening news on last Friday. Their lead story of course was the new Encyclical released by the United Nations on global warming. Bla, bla, bla, CO2 emmisions, greenhouse, bla, bla, bla, and then then the conclusion was "THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED!"

Next was a story about forest fires increasing because of global warming. True enough, if taken in context.

Then a story on solar activity and how it can mess with GPS and other forms of satalite communications. The story accurately reported that solar flares have increased quite a bit in recent years. Never once, not even remotely, was it mentioned that a whole bunch of scientists believe that the increased solar activity may have a lot to do with the current spat of "global warming" we're experiencing. Never mentioned "global warming" on other planets in the solar system...

(That darn Viking lander must burn coal, and I'll bet that dag-nabbed rover thingy must have a V-8.)

THAT is misreporting.

o really like ostriches the... (Below threshold)
michelle:

o really like ostriches they can run fast and when i was in elementary school i always was called ostrich




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

tips@wizbangblog.com

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy