While Americans continue to put global warming aka climate change at the bottom of the list of worries, it seems the electronic media outlets that most often push alarming climate stories are losing favor. This interesting juxtaposition was from my Shoptalk TVSpy business newsletter today:
CNN Fails to Stop Fall in Ratings – from The New York Times
CNN continued what has become a precipitous decline in ratings for its prime-time programs in the first quarter of 2010, with its main hosts losing almost half their viewers in a year.
The trend in news ratings for the first three months of this year is all up for one network, the Fox News Channel, which enjoyed its best quarter ever in ratings, and down for both MSNBC and CNN.
CNN had a slightly worse quarter in the fourth quarter of 2009, but the last three months have included compelling news events, like the earthquake in Haiti and the battle over health care, and CNN, which emphasizes its hard news coverage, was apparently unable to benefit. More…
Fox News Has Best Quarter In Network History – from Mediaite
Fox News had their best year of all time in 2009. Now that we’ve finished the first quarter of 2010, it’s clear FNC is showing no signs of letting up –they just finished their best quarter ever, in total day total viewers.
It was also the second highest rated quarter ever in prime time total viewers.
While Fox News continues to see record ratings, their cable news competitors are dropping off even more year-to-year. In the A25-54 demographic during prime time, FNC was up 16%, while CNN dropped 42%, MSNBC was down 22% and HLN was down 40%. More…
This is a refreshing piece of news to those of us that have become sick of MSM outlets like the BBC or CNN just parroting any nonsense as long as it was alarmist. There are 3 basic reasons for this :
1) I believe the public (like all of us) like to read things which reinforce our paradigm. Althought this doesn’t tell us much about truth, it does support the data that many more of us have becomesceptical.
2) I believe the public has a more discerning view of ‘news’ than they are given credit for. The real news is not that we are all going to fry in 100 years. The real new is that we have been told a load of porkies about it.
3) I believe each of us has a primitive loathing for ‘authority’. And we find it fascinating when a form of this authority os shown up as flawed or even flat out wrong.
Thats why Fox network is so appealing and CNN and the BBC so outdated.
No surprise. People are sick and tired of the sins of omission and commission by MSM outlets. And, the blatant sycophancy that makes them little more than a PR wing for left leaning ideas. If they showed some basic objectivity, their ratings would rise again. But today’s “journalists” would rather ride the ship down than commit real journalism.
I always thought that CNN stood for Continuous No News:-)
The guy who owns the Fox Network tried to buy public support for the War against Iraqis, with this blood-for-oil quid pro quo:
“The greatest thing to come out of this [war in Iraq] for the world economy, if you could put it that way, would be $20 a barrel for oil. That’s bigger than any tax cut in any country.”
-Rupert Murdoch, The Bulletin, Feb 11, 2003
That’s just one reason why I can’t celebrate an increase in Fox News ratings.
I watch Fox all the time.I don’t find it biased.Geraldo is no conservative.Beck is over the top and repeats a lot,so a little bit goes a long way with him,his history lessons are good,and no he doesn’t just give his opinion.I like the O’Reilly factor,although he does tend to cut people off,a pet hate of mine.My favourite is Hannity,he has a variety of guests with different opinions,and the good natured left wing guy,I think his name is Bob.He and Hannity have totally opposing ideas,but they are still good friends,they get a bit heated,but the liking they have for each other comes through.That’s what I like about the show.
Mark Wagner (11:58:52) :
“….you could also argue that we live in a right-center nation and politicians and old media just don’t want to accept it. After coming out of the gate to the left and getting smacked, Clinton accepted it, and he was (and still is) a polpular president….”
Clinton is still popular because the man has charisma and because the media has lead the nation to believe Bush was responsible for the mess Clinton made.
Clinton repealed the Glass-Steagall Act which had prevented the coupling of investment banking and lending by signing into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. It allowed commercial and investment banks to consolidate. Economist Robert Kuttner said the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act contributed to the 2007 subprime mortgage financial crisis. The Community Reinvestment Act, enacted in 1977 under Jimmy Carter, forced banks to downgrade the quality of their mortgage portfolios by making mortgage initiators lower credit standards to less qualified borrowers in poorer communities. The act was expanded further during Bill Clinton’s presidency, creating a higher percentage and a larger pool of subprime mortgages.
The second major mess by Clinton was signing the World Trade Organization Act. Now the WTO writes many of our laws under the guise of “harmonization” with the threat of trade sanctions if we do not comply. It encouraged the export of US jobs overseas while opening our borders to substandard and dangerous food, medicine and other products.
The birds Clinton let loose are now coming home to roost. Clinton was President from 1993 to 2001. Statistics showed in 1990, before WTO was ratified by Clinton, Foreign ownership of U.S. assets amounted to 33% of U.S. GDP. By 2002, just after he left office this had increased to over 70% of U.S. GDP. source: http://www.fame.org/HTM/greg%20Pickup%201%2010%2003%20report.htm
Given those statistics one could state that Clinton sold the USA to foreigners….
Note: I am not defending Bush… “no man’s life, liberty, or property are safe while the Legislature is in session.” — Judge Gideon J. Tucker, Final Accounting in the Estate of A.B. (1866)
CNN = Cable Not News.
BBC = Biased Broadcasting Network.
Note: I am not defending Bush…
You can leave that one to me. As a liberation liberal, I defend Bush vehemently.
So far as he is concerned, he’s the winner of the US Presidential Bummest Rap Award. But in this forum (except for the occasional political thread) I generally stick to the weather.
I realized a long time ago that orgs like CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and NBC were created to push an agenda, while FOX was created to make money. As a result, FOX is winning simply because people want NEWS, not propaganda, and the more people watch, the more money FOX makes.
As someone who works for a well known media research company (not allowed to say who but the most widely known) and who does data entry from hand written reports of TV viewing provided by a wide variety of individuals across the Country, I can say that households with low/no income in rural areas tend to watch CNN, NBC and MSNBC. These people also tend to have the most trouble following the instructions of how to fill out the daily viewing forms. The least problematic forms are submitted by those who tend to watch FOX and CBS news shows. These households also tend to have the two main people living there fully employed. No explanation offered by me, just what I observe.
There’s a rumor that will flood the airways and print media in about 72 hours (ok, let’s play it safe, 72 days): “CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, and all their local stations, will no longer broadcast the news, weather, and sports in English”.
Anyone who thinks these people are not making a bundle of money, need only look at the owners’ tax returns and offshore bank accounts. Also remember, there is an illegal for every legal in this country and after the 2010 census is published and the seats in congress are reapportioned we’re all going to be picking grapes, apples, tomatoes, and lint out of our tummy buttons, and living in shanty towns.
I’m beginning to get anxious about Fox being the only good news source too; that’s putting too much in the hands of one outfit, and as soon as old ‘what’s his name’ kicks the bucket, Soros&Co. will probably “buy” it and make them speak French.
I’ve realised that climategate did not change public opinion, instead public opinion had already recognised the climate scam and was ready for a scandal like climategate.
That’s where I think CNN is getting it wrong. They think they control the news agenda, whereas in truth the public control the agenda and will seek the best news outlets that provide them the news that interests them.
And with the internet the ability of the public to switch news provider has been made all the easier, because a growing proportion of our news can come from micro-media outlets bypassing the monolithic mainstream media.
Rarely if ever look to broadcast or cable for news. Too slow and can’t prioritize it to my liking. The Drudge Report is where it’s at. I glance at it several times a day for about a minute each time right clicking to “open in new tab” any headlines that look interesting. Then one at a time I click through the tabs that were opened on the stories to see if there’s more of interest. The exception to the rule is when there’s a big breaking story with cameras on scene. For local news I use google news section set to my zipcode. For weather I use Weather Underground.
Fox News has enough sacred cows to digust me. Just fewer of them any of the other MSM outlets. I’m still waiting for Fox to get serious about digging up all of Obama’s hidden records, or putting pressure on “Mr. Transparency” to remove the burka covering up his original birth certificate, grade school records, college records, university records, law practice clients, passport(s), and things of that nature. We know less about the background of this president than any other in history and all the MSM outlets are afraid to dig into it. What happened to investigative reporting? Something has changed. Prior to this president I could bank on the MSM to dig up the presidential dirt. It actually seemed to intensify from Watergate onward through Bill Clinton and GW Bush but then vanished all of a sudden when Obama came on the scene. Why? WTF?
All media plan together. The owners of ALL of the media are very right wing thinkers. The fact that some are assigned to control the left side and center of the spectrum is very clever, otherwise people might figure out it’s like Pravda was, a mechanism of control.
A secondary purpose is to put good citizens who really share common values, at each others’ throats. So sad because it is clear from the posts it is working quite well.
Dave, the reason FOX doesn’t do as you suggest — it’s not in the script.
evanmjones,
“Do you honestly think that you are better off if all your friends go bust? Think again”
Ah, but isn’t it all about relative wealth, how well off you are compared to your neighbours/peers? The poorest members of modern Western economies are as rich as Cresos compared to the elite of the middle ages, yet for some reason, the elite still felt elite, and todays poor still feel poor.
RE: Khwarizmi (01:23:57)
“That’s just one reason why I can’t celebrate an increase in Fox News ratings.”
What is? Is Murdoch too factual for you?
tj (10:29:53) :
All media plan together. The owners of ALL of the media are very right wing thinkers>>
Clearly you haven’t met any of them.
davidmhoffer (12:31:17) :
“Clearly you haven’t met any of them.”
Ted Turner is right wing? Clearly you’re not on planet Earth.
sartec (12:54:21) :
davidmhoffer (12:31:17) :
“Clearly you haven’t met any of them.”
Ted Turner is right wing? Clearly you’re not on planet Earth>>
Uhm… that was my point. But then “tj” also accused Obama of being a conservative earlier, so what ever his definition of “liberal” “conservative” and “right wing” is, I don’t think it reflects the consensus definition.
Aww gee. I backed up one of my own arguments with the word “consensus”. I have to go wash myself. I may never be clean again.
OK. If you believe what they say , some are not right wing. However, if you follow their actions and their associates and who they “go to meeting” with then you will understand who they really are. If you follow the money you will understand.
Also right wing and left wing as most average people think of it, are contrived positions to keep good people arguing and not paying attention to the actions that are going on around themselves. Obama said he would end the Iraq War? (Talk) Did he? (Action)
I haven’t met any of them, DMH, but the information is available if you choose to access it.
davidmhoffer
Sorry Dave, I’m royally confused now.
tj
Obama said he would end the Iraq War? (Talk) Did he? (Action)
I haven’t met any of them, DMH, but the information is available if you choose to access it.>>
Uhm… he said he would start pulling troops out, and he has… which makes him neither right wing nor left. If you say he didn’t do what he said he was going to do you are just calling him a liar.
I don’t have to “access” it, I’ve met and done business with several. You are talking through your hat.
Ah, but isn’t it all about relative wealth, how well off you are compared to your neighbours/peers? The poorest members of modern Western economies are as rich as Cresos compared to the elite of the middle ages, yet for some reason, the elite still felt elite, and today’s poor still feel poor.
I hear you. It’s amazing how folks with all of their needs met (and then some) must insist on making themselves feel badly off.
And it’s worse than a blunder. It’s a crime. Well, a sin, anyway.
The sin of Class Envy, which has got to be the winner of the Stupidest Sin award. (But indulged in religiously by rubes, boobs, flatheads, suckers, and idiots the world over. Particularly if they hold advanced degrees.)
I, for one, refuse to cheat myself out of contentment and happiness, and I encourage others to do the same.
evanmjones (20:18:52) : “The sin of Class Envy, which has got to be the winner of the Stupidest Sin award. (But indulged in religiously by rubes, boobs, flatheads, suckers, and idiots the world over…”
You left out politicians ….. oh no you didn’t, I see you did mention rubes, boobs, flatheads and idiots (but you did leave out theives).
evanmjones (20:18:52): ” It’s amazing how folks with all of their needs met (and then some) must insist on making themselves feel badly off.”
During a discussion with my neighbor regarding the unjust nature of the progressive income tax system in the US, I stumbled upon the real reason for your statement above. I was arguing that it was unethical to tax one person at 35% of income and another at 15% just because one had more money than the other. My neighbor said it shouldn’t matter because the person with the higher income and higher tax rate still had much more money left over after taxes. So there was the source of the envy, not how much one made but how much one had left over. As you said, even when these folks have all of their needs met, they still envy those that have more left over. So my point of agrument is now “why should you be jealous of how much someone else has left over if your leftovers are adequate for you”. I have never been presented with a good rebuttal to that.
Tom,
You have found a lynch pin indeed. Envy, jealousy, the green monster is at the heart of your query. The answer may lie in the nature of competition. And a political prejudice against hierarchy. The socialist/communist mindset desires fiscal and material equality. Every person has only what is needed. No person is seen as “winning” any more than another. Yet this is a mindset that relies on party and military hierarchy to sustain itself. Thus the military chain of command, and layers of party bosses. All are equal except those who are not.
But when it comes to athletics, all sense of equality is thrown out. Obviously only one athlete can win a singles competition. One is found “better” or to have excelled more than the rest. This one is praised and given a trophy and perqs – thus having more “leftovers” than the rest. These leftovers are acceptable apparently because they are won by brawn and not brain. It’s okay for party members, military, and athletes to dwell in hierarchies stuffed with leftovers. If your leftovers come from a place other than the approved list, you are a thief or con artist and thus subject to envy.
On the spiritual level here’s a problem. If matter does not matter, then why rail against those who have it? One’s deeds define the soul – not the lack or accumulation of matter.