Fox News top-ranked again with 11 out of the top 12 shows in Niesen ratings.

[jdmart]

Fox News Channel produces 11 of the top 12 cable/satellite news programs according to the July 2005 Nielsen ratings and has more viewers than CNN & MSNBC combined. Out of all the basic channels they are tied for 4th place with Lifetime and Nick-at-Nite. When did FNC start to dominate and why?

TVnewser

 

[riffjim4069]

Fox News Channel produces 11 of the top 12 cable/satellite news programs according to the July 2005 Nielsen ratings and has more viewers than CNN & MSNBC combined. Out of all the basic channels they are tied for 4th place with Lifetime and Nick-at-Nite. When did FNC start to dominate and why?

TVnewser

Why? I believe the ratings speak for themselves. Whether you consider the Fox New Channel slanted to the right, the clear fact of this matter is the vast number of people in this Country recognize the mainstream media (or former mainstream media) as having a well defined agenda; they clearly intend to present news, with a liberal bias, to the point where news is no longer news...rather, it's editorial filled with misinformation. The people just aren't that stupid.

What really scares me is that the Lifetime Channel is 4th on the list.

 

[korsjs]

fair and balanced is one of their sayings. the above is a very good answer on why they are so popular.

 

[Chado]

Why? I believe the ratings speak for themselves. Whether you consider the Fox New Channel slanted to the right, the clear fact of this matter is the vast number of people in this Country recognize the mainstream media (or former mainstream media) as having a well defined agenda; they clearly intend to present news, with a liberal bias, to the point where news is no longer news...rather, it's editorial filled with misinformation. The people just aren't that stupid.

What really scares me is that the Lifetime Channel is 4th on the list.

So how is Fox News any different? It is just a sign of the times, my friends, Fox is just riding the current cultural slant to the right.

 

[riffjim4069]

So how is Fox News any different? It is just a sign of the times, my friends, Fox is just riding the current cultural slant to the right.

There is no doubt they slant to the right, however the numbers show most people are tired of being spoon fed from the left. Is this the latest trend or does it reflect the values of hometown America? I'll let my wife, the liberal Sociologist, tackle that one. However, I feel that at some point in the not distant future the media, as a whole, will adopt more moderate policies: reporting news events as factual as possible, and clearly distinquishing news from editorial. You can still be lean left or right of center...but don't try to pass it off as news.

 

[Chado]

Are they tired of being spoon fed from the left or are they fooled into thinking they are getting "fair and balanced" information? You and I know that it slants to the right, and I agree I don't mind that as long as you don't pass it off as news, but does the majority of America realize that? That's the problem that I have with Fox News.

And like you said, you can't even get the sports scores without hearing somebody's editorial on it. It sucks. It really does.

 

[R-U-Q-R-U]

Are they tired of being spoon fed from the left or are they fooled into thinking they are getting "fair and balanced" information? You and I know that it slants to the right, and I agree I don't mind that as long as you don't pass it off as news, but does the majority of America realize that? That's the problem that I have with Fox News.

And like you said, you can't even get the sports scores without hearing somebody's editorial on it. It sucks. It really does.

One thing about FOX is that you see more Liberals and lefties on FOX than you see conservatives on the other nets. Just about every opinion segment has a speaker from each side. So in that sense they are more balanced than the other guys...

 

[Purogamer]

While they do offer more "balanced" conversations, they talk over, and interupt, the opposing voice constantly. It's very blatant...

I don't know how ratings are still considered accurate. I really don't. I've never known anyone who was a part of the process, and I know I haven't been asked what I watch. "Everybody Loves Raymond" is the clearest example of that, nobody ever watched that show but it had huge ratings...=)

Until every house has a DVR that reports back info every night, I don't consider ratings to be accurate. Tivo told us how many subscribers rewound to see Janet Jackson's intentional semi-nudity the next day, but CBS is projecting how many people watch their programs...Just seems like ratings are obsolete to me.

 

[BrianMis]

One thing about FOX is that you see more Liberals and lefties on FOX than you see conservatives on the other nets. Just about every opinion segment has a speaker from each side. So in that sense they are more balanced than the other guys...

I agree, and in the off chance you might see a conservative on CNN or MSNBC their always getting slammed. FOX may lean toward the right, but what has failed to be mentioned is that CNN & MSNBC don't lean toward the left, they are the left.

 

[Chado]

I agree, and in the off chance you might see a conservative on CNN or MSNBC their always getting slammed. FOX may lean toward the right, but what has failed to be mentioned is that CNN & MSNBC don't lean toward the left, they are the left.

If you want to get into semantics, Fox is right & CNN/MSNBC are left. Nobody from the opposite side gets a fair shot on either network. I think Fox does do a better side of bringing the opposition on to better prove their own points. Is it fair, I would say so since the people know what they are getting themselves into. Is it right to call it "news"? Definitely not.

 

[R-U-Q-R-U]

If you want to get into semantics, Fox is right & CNN/MSNBC are left. Nobody from the opposite side gets a fair shot on either network. I think Fox does do a better side of bringing the opposition on to better prove their own points. Is it fair, I would say so since the people know what they are getting themselves into. Is it right to call it "news"? Definitely not.

When controversial issues are debated there really is no claim that it is "news." The parties are introduced with information about what side they are defending. Usually they have some "Democratic Stategist" talking against a "Republican Stategist." On the big opinion shows like O'Reilly, he always invites people from both sides. If for example, the ACLU is involved he mentions they were invited and declined to offer a up a talking head. But he substitutes a speaker who represents their views.

Last night O'Reilly, had two military analysts on who presented a very grim picture of what is happening in Iraq. They did not sugar coat how bad things are and that they thought things could go south fast. To say that FOX is a cheerleader for the Right is not at all true. But again, many FOX NEWS critics just read their Move-On talking points and never watch the shows!


People who watch FOX NEWS Network for any time understand that they have straight news shows, like Studio B and opinion shows like O'Reilly. While many attempt to trash FNN, like Howard Dean, I am sure they never watch it. For example Hannity had Bob Beckel the Democrat strategist on his radio show yesterday and then again on the Hannity & Colms show that evening. You cannot say Fox does not give all sides an opportunity to get their talking points out.

At the same time many of the on air info babes, like Megyn Kendall, often sound like they work for CNN! Maybe because Kendall practiced law as a corporate litigator in a past life.:shocked

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Moving this to the Chit Chat Club.

Welcome Home to SatelliteGuys.US!

 

[Chado]

I have watched FNN quite a bit. And I feel everyone should watch what they want to watch, FNN included. I just feel that FNN's slogan of fair and balanced is not true. This is my personal opinion. This goes for the slant on their news as well as their opinion shows. But, again, that's okay as long as you are an intelligent person, like everyone on this forum, and realize that there is a slant, but if you agree with the way it is presented, by all means enjoy.

 

[W_Tracy_Parnell]

I have watched FNN quite a bit. And I feel everyone should watch what they want to watch, FNN included. I just feel that FNN's slogan of fair and balanced is not true. This is my personal opinion. This goes for the slant on their news as well as their opinion shows. But, again, that's okay as long as you are an intelligent person, like everyone on this forum, and realize that there is a slant, but if you agree with the way it is presented, by all means enjoy.

"Fair and balanced" is just an advertsing slogan-that's all. But I will say Fox is closer to being balanced than any other network. As someone else pointed out, opinion shows are just that-opinions of the host and guests no matter what the network. As for the way news is presented, you have to educate yourself as a citizen and then you will not care what the news is or how it is presented or by whom it is presented. You will automatically understand where the presenter is "coming from" and take it for what it is. Knowledge is power as they say.

 

[jollygrunt]

The only news that is shown anywhere that's purely factualy based is regarding car crashes, plane crashes and the like. Anything having even the slightest relation to politics is always someones opinion of the situation and not the straight facts. Anyway, that's how I see it.

 

[mrschwarz]

'Balanced' is a relative term. Depending on your point of view, Fox can seem balanced. If you lean to the left, CNN can seem balanced.

In my opinion, neither network does a good job of reporting the news. The are both more interested in sensationalizing the news.

One of the problems with news these days is that people tend to feel more confortable with news that reflects their preconceived notion of how the world is.

To me this is very dangerous because we are lulled into a false sense of security because we only see what we agree with.

If you really want to see balanced, you need to get your news from as many unrelated sources as possible.

This is why I am concerned when a single corporate entity owns the network, the local affiliate, the local paper, and most of the local radio stations.

 

[R-U-Q-R-U]

This is why I am concerned when a single corporate entity owns the network, the local affiliate, the local paper, and most of the local radio stations.

The market determines ownership -- the state should NOT be involved if that is what you are getting at. In any event, with the internet, blogging, cable, satellite and newspapers available online there is no concentration of informtion. In the pre-internet days there was a concentration of information by the MSM (NBC, CBS and ABC). They set the agenda and TOLD us what to think -- not any more

 

[mrschwarz]

The market determines ownership -- the state should NOT be involved if that is what you are getting at.

Actually, here is where you and I disagree. If left to the market determining ownership, corporate rules apply. Maximize profits. Everything else is secondary. Let's leave the case of newspapers aside. Out of town papers are available almost everywhere.

Let's talk about the case of broadcasters. Supposedly, the airwaves belong to everyone, not corporate entities. In the case of the government, they are acting as our proxies in determining who uses what. The government is supposed to be looking out for its citizens' best interests. From what I see, this actually does happen occasionally in the federal government.

It has been shown that the best engine for promoting improvement and advancement is competition. The best environment to maximize profits is in a monopolistic setting. The people (you and me) are better served in a competitive environment.

I don't see anything wrong with the government encouraging competition by regulating the use of a resource that belongs to everyone. I agree that with so many sources of information, it's almost impossible for a few sources to dominate the news landscape, but for many, they still do.

Most people still get their news from broadcasters (NBC, CBS, radio, cable). Another of my previous statements was that I think people need to get their news from many sources.

If most people get their news from broadcast and all broadcast is owned by the same company, this doesn't happen. I think the FCC failed its constituency when it changed the station ownership rules to allow a greater concentration. That is, if its constituency is the American people, not business.

 

[EEJay]

...the clear fact of this matter is the vast number of people in this Country recognize the mainstream media (or former mainstream media) as having a well defined agenda...

And Fox News doesn't have a well-defined agenda?

 

[EEJay]

One thing about FOX is that you see more Liberals and lefties on FOX than you see conservatives on the other nets. Just about every opinion segment has a speaker from each side. So in that sense they are more balanced than the other guys...

When they have on Independents or Democrats, they're more often than not people you've never heard of. And when they do have someone on who can get the truth out and counter-act Fox's spin, they get shouted over so nobody can hear them.