Showing posts with label MSNBC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MSNBC. Show all posts
Saturday, December 1, 2012
Awesome Quotes: Glen Greenwald on MSNBC
"If the Democratic National Committee were to own a network and produce news programming designed to promote the party, it would look exactly like what MSNBC has become... MSNBC staffed their shows with not only hosts but regular guests who are the most loyal, reverent admirers of President Obama and who are single-handedly devoted to no real political principle or cause other than glorifying him and defending what he does... It's like watching televised Pravda at the height of the Brezhnev era."
Source:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/21/msnbc-obama-coverage_n_2170065.html
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Cenk Uygur's Departure From MSNBC
Cenk Uygur's Departure From MSNBC Shatters The Popular Myth That Only Ratings Matter
Saman Mohammadi
July 21, 2011
http://disquietreservations.blogspot.com/2011/07/cenk-uygurs-departure-from-msnbc.html
Cenk Uygur, host of the popular show, "The Young Turks," decided to leave the not so popular MSNBC channel after experiencing what can only be called a "Howard Beale moment" with MSNBC's corporate executives. Basically, MSNBC's managers gave Cenk an ultimatum: join our exclusive club and stop raising hell or you won't be on television.
Cenk made the announcement of his departure on his internet/radio show on July 20, explaining that he left MSNBC because of disagreements about how to run the show.
Cenk said that MSNBC offered him a lucrative contract on the condition that he accept a limited role at MSNBC and that he would "tone down" his rhetoric against the criminals who run Washington D.C. He was also told to be less wild on television and present himself to the audience similar to a senator or professional politician (like those fake and manufactured personalities Mitt Romney and Barack Obama).
But Cenk refused to compromise his principles for a large paycheck. He deserves our respect and support. He has honour and backbone. The people who work at MSNBC and the other propaganda channels in the Western world have no honour and no dignity. Anchors at MSNBC, Fox News, CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, CBC, CTV, and BBC are lost souls, telling lies to the public and telling lies to themselves like a pack of cheap whores. They won't ever tell the people the truth about the 9/11 attacks and the great hoax that is the war on terror. If they had it their way, the age of government lies and mass brainwashing will never end.
What is strange about MSNBC not keeping Cenk on the air is that he gave them high ratings, beating both CNN and Fox News in certain demographics. This just shows that corporate propaganda is not all about ratings. Money is not that important to the owners of media companies (they have billions of it already). What they care about most is control and protecting the corrupt political status quo, in which they play an important role.
Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC are first and foremost a political operation, not a for-profit operation. If MSNBC's managers cared about profits they would keep Cenk on the air and promote his show. But they don't care about making money. News corporations and media channels can make a lot of money by telling the people the truth about 9/11 and other government crimes because the people are hungry for the truth and will watch truth-telling shows. Jesse Ventura's show on TruTV "Conspiracy Theory," is a big success and it has big ratings. But the ratings don't matter in the big picture.
There was a great desire for ratings in an earlier time in the television news industry, but not today. What news producers and news managers consider more important is suppressing the truth and protecting the criminal political establishment at all cost, even if it means their ratings will be less. Their job is to keep news anchors in line, manipulate the news, spread government propaganda, and make sure that nobody steps outside the fake "republican-democrat, conservative-liberal" political trap.
Somebody like Cenk is a big threat to the rotten political order because he doesn't hold back. Cenk said that he was told by guys at MSNBC that "people from Washington" didn't like his angry style and brand of politics. He was viewed as an outsider by the executives at MSNBC who consider themselves to be part of the criminal establishment. Corporate news executives and managers care about pleasing the propaganda masters in Washington D.C., not the audience.
II. The Fall of The Propaganda Wall
It is so important that we watch and financially support independent news shows like The Young Turks. The crooks and whores on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, BBC, CBC, NBC, CBS and ABC who are telling the public nothing but government lies are worshippers of power and tyranny. They are abusing the public trust. Of course, not all of them are crooks and whores, but enough of them are to make the whole industry look bad.
Paddy Chayefsky, who wrote the script for the 1976 film, "Network," said in an interview in the 1970s that what is on television "is not true." Chayefsky said:
Television is a great entertainment industry. That's what it is. I think we do entertainment on television better than any place in the world. I mean that's what television is for. You're bored, you want to enjoy yourself, you want to be amused, you turn it on and you have a good time. But, unfortunately, it has a power that transcends anything in the world today. It is a power that deals with the fact that 95% of this country is television saturated. That means 95% of our people get their information from television and television only.
Since Chayefsky made those statements a revolution in media and communication systems has occurred. People in North America and the West no longer get their information from television, but from the internet. The free nature of the internet means that different points of view can be heard, and alternative historical accounts of events like 9/11 can be put forward to counter the false historical narratives put out by the crooked government in Washington and corporate media channels.
Chayefsky was right to be pessimistic about the state of the media in the 1970s, but it is foolish of us to be pessimistic in 2011. Alternative news organizations, radio shows, and web sites are crushing the corporate competition. MSNBC and Fox News are no match for Cenk Uygur's The Young Turks, Amy Goodman's Democracy Now, and Alex Jones's Infowars.
Glen Beck, that half-retarded whore, copied Alex's shtick when he was on Fox News, except for telling the truth part. He achieved success for a while, but that type of success is always fleeting. Scam artists on television like Beck, Wolf Blitzer, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Chris Matthews and other anchors have no staying power because they have no integrity, no morals, and no honour. The media monarchs like Rupert Murdoch and Ted Turner that hire theses asses to manipulate public perceptions and inject false information into their shows will see their empires fall to pieces because the ground under their feet is slowly crumbling.
It is good that Cenk decided to leave a rotten, corrupt and morally bankrupt industry. Television news is poison for the mind. Modern society is contaminated with state propaganda. Individuals who sell government propaganda to the public as factual news and tell lies for a living have no sense of patriotism or civic duty. They are the villains of our time and of our society, not terrorists, not Bin Laden, not Saddam Hussein, not Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, not Muammar Gaddafi, not Kim Jong-il, not any foreign tyrant.
Until we understand that fact, we won't ever put an end to Western state terrorism, government-media propaganda, and the transnational totalitarian system that is bringing America, Canada, England, Australia and other Western countries down to the level of the Soviet Union.
Saman Mohammadi
July 21, 2011
http://disquietreservations.blogspot.com/2011/07/cenk-uygurs-departure-from-msnbc.html
Cenk Uygur, host of the popular show, "The Young Turks," decided to leave the not so popular MSNBC channel after experiencing what can only be called a "Howard Beale moment" with MSNBC's corporate executives. Basically, MSNBC's managers gave Cenk an ultimatum: join our exclusive club and stop raising hell or you won't be on television.
Cenk made the announcement of his departure on his internet/radio show on July 20, explaining that he left MSNBC because of disagreements about how to run the show.
Cenk said that MSNBC offered him a lucrative contract on the condition that he accept a limited role at MSNBC and that he would "tone down" his rhetoric against the criminals who run Washington D.C. He was also told to be less wild on television and present himself to the audience similar to a senator or professional politician (like those fake and manufactured personalities Mitt Romney and Barack Obama).
But Cenk refused to compromise his principles for a large paycheck. He deserves our respect and support. He has honour and backbone. The people who work at MSNBC and the other propaganda channels in the Western world have no honour and no dignity. Anchors at MSNBC, Fox News, CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, CBC, CTV, and BBC are lost souls, telling lies to the public and telling lies to themselves like a pack of cheap whores. They won't ever tell the people the truth about the 9/11 attacks and the great hoax that is the war on terror. If they had it their way, the age of government lies and mass brainwashing will never end.
What is strange about MSNBC not keeping Cenk on the air is that he gave them high ratings, beating both CNN and Fox News in certain demographics. This just shows that corporate propaganda is not all about ratings. Money is not that important to the owners of media companies (they have billions of it already). What they care about most is control and protecting the corrupt political status quo, in which they play an important role.
Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC are first and foremost a political operation, not a for-profit operation. If MSNBC's managers cared about profits they would keep Cenk on the air and promote his show. But they don't care about making money. News corporations and media channels can make a lot of money by telling the people the truth about 9/11 and other government crimes because the people are hungry for the truth and will watch truth-telling shows. Jesse Ventura's show on TruTV "Conspiracy Theory," is a big success and it has big ratings. But the ratings don't matter in the big picture.
There was a great desire for ratings in an earlier time in the television news industry, but not today. What news producers and news managers consider more important is suppressing the truth and protecting the criminal political establishment at all cost, even if it means their ratings will be less. Their job is to keep news anchors in line, manipulate the news, spread government propaganda, and make sure that nobody steps outside the fake "republican-democrat, conservative-liberal" political trap.
Somebody like Cenk is a big threat to the rotten political order because he doesn't hold back. Cenk said that he was told by guys at MSNBC that "people from Washington" didn't like his angry style and brand of politics. He was viewed as an outsider by the executives at MSNBC who consider themselves to be part of the criminal establishment. Corporate news executives and managers care about pleasing the propaganda masters in Washington D.C., not the audience.
II. The Fall of The Propaganda Wall
It is so important that we watch and financially support independent news shows like The Young Turks. The crooks and whores on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, BBC, CBC, NBC, CBS and ABC who are telling the public nothing but government lies are worshippers of power and tyranny. They are abusing the public trust. Of course, not all of them are crooks and whores, but enough of them are to make the whole industry look bad.
Paddy Chayefsky, who wrote the script for the 1976 film, "Network," said in an interview in the 1970s that what is on television "is not true." Chayefsky said:
Television is a great entertainment industry. That's what it is. I think we do entertainment on television better than any place in the world. I mean that's what television is for. You're bored, you want to enjoy yourself, you want to be amused, you turn it on and you have a good time. But, unfortunately, it has a power that transcends anything in the world today. It is a power that deals with the fact that 95% of this country is television saturated. That means 95% of our people get their information from television and television only.
Since Chayefsky made those statements a revolution in media and communication systems has occurred. People in North America and the West no longer get their information from television, but from the internet. The free nature of the internet means that different points of view can be heard, and alternative historical accounts of events like 9/11 can be put forward to counter the false historical narratives put out by the crooked government in Washington and corporate media channels.
Chayefsky was right to be pessimistic about the state of the media in the 1970s, but it is foolish of us to be pessimistic in 2011. Alternative news organizations, radio shows, and web sites are crushing the corporate competition. MSNBC and Fox News are no match for Cenk Uygur's The Young Turks, Amy Goodman's Democracy Now, and Alex Jones's Infowars.
Glen Beck, that half-retarded whore, copied Alex's shtick when he was on Fox News, except for telling the truth part. He achieved success for a while, but that type of success is always fleeting. Scam artists on television like Beck, Wolf Blitzer, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Chris Matthews and other anchors have no staying power because they have no integrity, no morals, and no honour. The media monarchs like Rupert Murdoch and Ted Turner that hire theses asses to manipulate public perceptions and inject false information into their shows will see their empires fall to pieces because the ground under their feet is slowly crumbling.
It is good that Cenk decided to leave a rotten, corrupt and morally bankrupt industry. Television news is poison for the mind. Modern society is contaminated with state propaganda. Individuals who sell government propaganda to the public as factual news and tell lies for a living have no sense of patriotism or civic duty. They are the villains of our time and of our society, not terrorists, not Bin Laden, not Saddam Hussein, not Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, not Muammar Gaddafi, not Kim Jong-il, not any foreign tyrant.
Until we understand that fact, we won't ever put an end to Western state terrorism, government-media propaganda, and the transnational totalitarian system that is bringing America, Canada, England, Australia and other Western countries down to the level of the Soviet Union.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
MSNBC’s Ratigan: Stock market an ‘obviously corrupt’ fraud
http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0630/ratigan-stock-market-obviously-corrupt/
MSNBC’s Ratigan: Stock market an ‘obviously corrupt’ fraud
Daniel Tencer
Wednesday, June 30th, 2010
On his afternoon show Tuesday, MSNBC host Dylan Ratigan explained why he believes the usual explanations given in the media for why the stock market went up or down on a given day are nonsense.
"Seventy percent of the volume [of trades on the stock market] is computers that are run by the banks playing ping pong with stocks for 10 seconds at at time," Ratigan said.
"The stock market at this point, which used to be a reflection of the future value of actual businesses in this country, has been turned by our government and our banks into little more than a paper shredding facility [about which] we can make up reasons why it goes up and down," Ratigan said. "But when the computers ... at the banks are controlling the action, most everything else is kind of silly."
Ratigan concluded that it's time to create an "alternative investment structure" that would allow people to invest their money without putting it "into the obviously corrupt stock market in this country."
Ratigan was referring to the relatively new phenomenon known as high-frequency trading: High-speed computer programs that are able to "peek" at stock trades less than a second before the trades are made. If the computer sees that a trade about to be made will raise the price of a particular stock, it can purchase the stock in the split-second before that trade is made.
Many market observers say this "games" the entire stock market in favor of the large banks that practice high-frequency trading. Indeed, there is evidence that HFT has made the large investment banks much more profitable. As Ratigan mentioned, HFT is estimated to account for 70 percent of all the trading on the New York Stock Exchange.
Mike Konczal at the Atlantic offers an analogy for high-frequency trading:
Imagine if eBay had a rule where you could cancel your bid within 1 second. I put up some stuff on ebay, and you place a bid for it. Then I place a bid that is higher than the current bid to see if that becomes the new highest bid. If it is, I cancel it within milliseconds. Remember, I don't want to buy the product -- I just want to drive the price higher! This is similar to what critics of HFT think is going on; HFT is able to ping prices with bids that exist for only milliseconds to see how much other buyers are willing to pay to squeeze out the maximum profit.
On May 6, 2010, when the Dow Jones unexpectedly plunged nearly 1,000 points, some observers blamed the sudden collapse -- which saw some companies' shares plummet to nearly zero within seconds -- on high-frequency trading. Among those advocating that theory was Larry Leibowitz, COO of NYSE Euronext. But some other observers argued that the HFT programs had nothing to do with it, because they were shut down when the market panic set in.
Among the leading voices opposing HFT is Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who last year called for restrictions on the practice.
“The hallmark of our markets are that they are open and above board and the little guy has as much of a chance as the big guy,” Schumer told the New York Times. “This takes a dagger to the heart of that concept.”
Earlier this month, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission announced that it's looking into placing restrictions on high-frequency trading.
MSNBC’s Ratigan: Stock market an ‘obviously corrupt’ fraud
Daniel Tencer
Wednesday, June 30th, 2010
On his afternoon show Tuesday, MSNBC host Dylan Ratigan explained why he believes the usual explanations given in the media for why the stock market went up or down on a given day are nonsense.
"Seventy percent of the volume [of trades on the stock market] is computers that are run by the banks playing ping pong with stocks for 10 seconds at at time," Ratigan said.
"The stock market at this point, which used to be a reflection of the future value of actual businesses in this country, has been turned by our government and our banks into little more than a paper shredding facility [about which] we can make up reasons why it goes up and down," Ratigan said. "But when the computers ... at the banks are controlling the action, most everything else is kind of silly."
Ratigan concluded that it's time to create an "alternative investment structure" that would allow people to invest their money without putting it "into the obviously corrupt stock market in this country."
Ratigan was referring to the relatively new phenomenon known as high-frequency trading: High-speed computer programs that are able to "peek" at stock trades less than a second before the trades are made. If the computer sees that a trade about to be made will raise the price of a particular stock, it can purchase the stock in the split-second before that trade is made.
Many market observers say this "games" the entire stock market in favor of the large banks that practice high-frequency trading. Indeed, there is evidence that HFT has made the large investment banks much more profitable. As Ratigan mentioned, HFT is estimated to account for 70 percent of all the trading on the New York Stock Exchange.
Mike Konczal at the Atlantic offers an analogy for high-frequency trading:
Imagine if eBay had a rule where you could cancel your bid within 1 second. I put up some stuff on ebay, and you place a bid for it. Then I place a bid that is higher than the current bid to see if that becomes the new highest bid. If it is, I cancel it within milliseconds. Remember, I don't want to buy the product -- I just want to drive the price higher! This is similar to what critics of HFT think is going on; HFT is able to ping prices with bids that exist for only milliseconds to see how much other buyers are willing to pay to squeeze out the maximum profit.
On May 6, 2010, when the Dow Jones unexpectedly plunged nearly 1,000 points, some observers blamed the sudden collapse -- which saw some companies' shares plummet to nearly zero within seconds -- on high-frequency trading. Among those advocating that theory was Larry Leibowitz, COO of NYSE Euronext. But some other observers argued that the HFT programs had nothing to do with it, because they were shut down when the market panic set in.
Among the leading voices opposing HFT is Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who last year called for restrictions on the practice.
“The hallmark of our markets are that they are open and above board and the little guy has as much of a chance as the big guy,” Schumer told the New York Times. “This takes a dagger to the heart of that concept.”
Earlier this month, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission announced that it's looking into placing restrictions on high-frequency trading.
Friday, December 4, 2009
MSNBC Cancelled Jesse Ventura
http://www.prisonplanet.com/msnbc-cancelled-jesse-ventura-for-his-opposition-to-war-in-iraq.htmlMSNBC Cancelled Jesse Ventura For His Opposition To War In Iraq
Veteran has a bet that his new show will be pulled at the last minute
Steve Watson,
Infowars.net
Monday, Nov 30, 2009
Former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura has revealed that he was effectively silenced for three years by MSNBC when the network cancelled his show in 2003 after learning that Ventura opposed the war in Iraq.
Ventura began the MSNBC show, Jesse Ventura’s America, in October 2003.
The show was originally planned to run five nights a week, but MSNBC executives suddenly changed their minds and it was only broadcast once a week, on Saturdays, before being ditched altogether.
The ex-Navy SEAL has now told the LA Times that he was forced out of the network and prevented from appearing on any other cable TV or news shows.
“It was awful. I was basically silenced.” Ventura comments in the interview.
“When I came out of office, I was the hottest commodity out there. There was a bidding war between CNN, Fox and MSNBC to get my services. MSNBC ultimately won. I was being groomed for a five day-a-week TV show by them. Then, all of a sudden, weird phone calls started happening: ‘Is it true Jesse doesn’t support the war in Iraq?’”
“My contract said I couldn’t do any other cable TV or any news shows, and they honored and paid it for the duration of it. So in essence I had my silence purchased. Why do you think you didn’t hear from me for three years? I was under contract. They wouldn’t even use me as a consultant!” Ventura continues.
“When you live in Mexico, your houses all have names. I almost named my house Casa MSNBC because they bought it. I was paid like a professional athlete, and I got very wealthy. For doing nothing.”
Ventura also states that he has a gentleman’s bet that his new show Conspiracy Theory scheduled to air on Tru TV soon, will never see the light of day, a fact he first revealed on the Alex Jones show last week.
Friday, February 8, 2008
Fox News is in for a very rough 2008
http://mediamatters.org/columns/200801290001
Fox News is in for a very rough 2008
by Eric Boehlert
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
My guess is that Fox News guru Roger Ailes has been reaching for the Tums more often than usual early in the New Year, and there are lots of reasons for the hovering angst.
Let's take an extended multiple choice quiz. Right now, which of the following topics is likely causing the discomfort inside Ailes' Fox News empire?
A) CNN's resurgence as the go-to cable destination for election coverage.
B) The incredible shrinking candidacy of Fox News' favored son, Rudy Giuliani.
C) The still-standing candidacy of Fox News nemesis and well-funded, anti-war GOP candidate Rep. Ron Paul.
D) The Democratic candidates' blanket refusal to debate on Fox News during the primary season.
E) Host Bill O'Reilly being so desperate for an interview from a Democratic contender that he had to schlep all the way to New Hampshire, where he shoved an aide to Sen. Barack Obama and then had to be calmed down by Secret Service agents.
F) Former Fox News architect and Ailes confidante Dan Cooper posting chapters from his a wildly unflattering tell-all book about his old boss. ("The best thing that ever happened to Roger Ailes was 9/11.")
G) The fledgling Fox Business Network, whose anemic ratings are in danger of being surpassed by some large city public access channels.
H) Host John Gibson's recent heartless attacks on actor Heath Ledger, just hours after the young actor was found dead.
I) Fox News reporter Major Garrett botching his "exclusive" that Paul Begala and James Carville were going to join Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign, and then refusing to correct the record.
I'd say it's A, B, C, D, E, F, and G. (I doubt Gibson's grave-dancing or Garrett's whopper caused Ailes a moment's concern.)
Bottom line is that Fox News is in for a very rough 2008. And the umbrella reason for that is quite simple: Eight years ago the all-news cable channel went all-in on the presidency of George Bush and became a broadcast partner with the White House. Proof of that was on display Sunday night, January 27, during Fox News' prime-time, "Fighting to the Finish," an "historic documentary" on the final year of Bush's presidency. Filmed in HD and featuring "unprecedented access," according to the Fox News press release, the show was pure propaganda. (I must have missed Fox News' "Fighting to the Finish" special back in 2000, chronicling the conclusion of President Bill Clinton's second term and his "extraordinarily consequential tenure.")
The point is that Fox News years ago made an obvious decision to appeal almost exclusively to Republican viewers. The good news then for Fox News was that it succeeded. The bad news now for Fox News is that it succeeded.
Meaning, when the GOP catches a cold, everybody at Fox News gets sick. As blogger Logan Murphy put it at Crooks and Liars, "Watching FOXNews getting their comeuppance has been fun to watch. They made their bed, now they're having to lie in it and it's not too comfortable."
The most obvious signs of Fox News' downturn have been the cable ratings for the big primary and caucus votes this year, as well as the high-profile debates. With this election season generating unprecedented voter and viewer interest, Fox News' rating bumps to date have remained underwhelming, to say the least.
For instance, on the night of the big New Hampshire primary, CNN, which habitually trails behind Fox News in the prime-time race, attracted nearly 250,000 more viewers than its top competitor, marking a changing-of-the-guard of sorts.
The turnaround was striking when you consider that in 2004, even with no Republicans running against Bush, Fox News was still able to draw 200,000 more viewers than CNN on the night of the New Hampshire Democratic primary. Yet in 2008, with a very competitive GOP field, CNN was the ratings winner from New Hampshire.
And just look at the ratings for January 19, which featured returns from the Nevada caucus coming in during the late afternoon, and then fresh returns from the South Carolina Republican primary being posted during prime time that night. In the past, Fox News would have absolutely owned that night of coverage, as conservative news junkies flocked to their home team -- Fox News -- to see the results. But no more. CNN grabbed nearly just as many prime-time viewers for the Republican South Carolina returns as did Fox News.
The problem for Fox News is that it's the Democratic race that's creating most of the excitement, yet Fox News has been forced to mostly watch the race from the sidelines. That's because last winter, after Fox News tried to smear Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) for purportedly attending a radical Muslim school as a child, liberal bloggers launched an initiative to get Democratic candidates to boycott a debate co-sponsored by Fox News and the Nevada Democratic Party. (The boycott, powered by Foxattacks.com, was later extended to any and all Fox News debates.)
The point of the online crusade was not to simply embarrass Fox News or rattle Nevada Democrats for being out of touch with the grassroots masses that distrusted and despised Fox News. The point, instead, was to begin chipping away, in a serious, consistent method, at Fox News' reputation. To spell out that Fox News was nothing more than a Republican mouthpiece and that Democrats need not engage with the News Corp. giant.
The lack of Democratic debates for Fox News has meant a huge setback for the news organization from a ratings perspective. Just look at the grand slam CNN hit last week when, on January 21, it broadcast the much-talked-about Democratic debate from South Carolina. The CNN event not only creamed Fox News in the ratings, nearly tripling its audience that night, but the debate set a new cable news mark for the most viewers ever to watch a primary debate.
In fact, of the 10 most-watched debates this election season, Fox has aired just two, compared to CNN's five. Of the 10 most-watched debates, six have featured Democrats; four Republicans.
CNN is virtually guaranteed another monster ratings win this week with a pair of high-profile debates staged in California -- the Republicans on Wednesday night and Democrats on Thursday.
No wonder CNN's so giddy these days. Here's the spin CNN president Jonathan Klein put out following its New Hampshire ratings win: "There's a freshness and exuberance to our coverage that the others just aren't matching. ... Fox almost seems downright despondent in their coverage."
So I'm not the only one who feels like Fox News coverage, especially of the Republican field, often feels like a televised wake. Or maybe that's just been Fox News' collective, subconscious mourning of the Giuliani campaign.
After all, Sean Hannity serves as Fox News' official ambassador to the Giuliani campaign; a campaign that Ailes and Fox News were hoping to ride back into the White House. Yet despite showering Giuliani with all kinds of laudatory coverage, both Hannity and Ailes have been powerless, as they've watched Giuliani's rudderless campaign go nowhere for months.
Even an all-out Fox News marketing blitz to label Giuliani "America's Mayor" never got traction. In fact, it ranked right up there with the launch of New Coke, in terms of branding success. (Watch this clip to see the Fox News absurdity up-close.)
In the meantime, the rise of Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and especially Mike Huckabee, with his populist streak, has caused all sorts of consternation at Fox News. Even the conservative Weekly Standard took notice. The magazine recently wrote that "A lot of conservatives have problems with both Huckabee and McCain. Last night on Fox, for example, Sean Hannity could barely conceal his distaste for both pols."
And don't even mention Ron Paul's name to the folks at Fox News, who have stepped outside their role as journalists to try to kneecap the anti-war GOP candidate. The most blatant slap came right before the New Hampshire primary, when Fox News refused to include Paul in a televised GOP debate, despite the fact that just days earlier Paul grabbed 10 percent of the vote in the Iowa caucus, nearly doubling the tally Giuliani posted.
Paul's Republican supporters became so incensed by the snub that they literally chased Sean Hannity through the New Hampshire night chanting "Fox News sucks!" and captured the scene in a homemade clip that really has to be seen to be believed. (To recap New Hampshire for Fox News: Hannity was pursued by a Republican mob, O'Reilly got into a shoving match with an Obama aide, and CNN grabbed more viewers. Now that's a week to remember!)
Oh, and we can't forget the wildly hyped launch of the Fox Business Network, which, News Corp. execs bragged, would dethrone longtime cable business news champ CNBC. Of course, that might happen one day. But the early ratings for Fox Business Network have been unbelievably weak.
After two months on the air, Fox Business Network, available in 30 million homes, was attracting, on average, just 6,300 viewers on any given weekday, according to Nielsen Media Research. That was good for a nearly invisible .05 rating. (By comparison, CNBC during that period was attracting 265,000 viewers.)
Making matters worse for Ailes was the fact that on January 22, as fears mounted about a possible global financial crisis, CNBC posted its best ratings in seven years, attracting 401,000 viewers that day.
The hurdle for Fox Business Network has always been simple: Why would investors and day traders in search of reliable business information turn from CNBC over to the Fox brand, which is so well-known for passing along one-sided information? News Corp. always assumed Fox News would help launch the business channel. But Fox News is taken seriously by so few people, it may be hurting the business launch.
After all, Fox News continues to embarrass itself with a type of journalism that nobody else in the industry would dare call professional. And for proof of that look no further than Major Garrett, who is supposed to be one of the channel's nonpartisan, serious journalists. He landed a recent scoop about how former advisers to Bill Clinton, Paul Begala and James Carville, were getting set to join Hillary Clinton's campaign.
Carville immediately shot the story down, telling Talking Points Memo's Greg Sargent that very same day, "Fox was, is and will continue to be an asinine and ignorant network. I have not spoken to anyone in the Clinton campaign about this. I'm not getting back into domestic political consulting."
Begala did Carville one better and directly emailed Garrett to deny the story -- a story Garrett never bothered trying to check with Begala or Carville before it was broadcast. Garrett's response to Begala's blanket denial? Garrett told the Democratic operative that he would take his denial "under advisement." [Emphasis added.]
Garrett then went back on the air and repeated the same story, and added the fact that Begala had been on a conference call the day before with Clinton advisers, which was also false. And no, despite his earlier email exchange with Begala, Garrett never bothered to try to confirm the conference call story with him before reporting it on Fox News.
On his Fox News blog, Garrett did acknowledge the Begala email and claimed he'd be updating the fast-moving story soon -- which, he told readers, would likely be confirmed the next day when the Clinton campaign made the Begala/Carville announcement. But the next day when the story imploded, Garrett simply ignored the embarrassing gaffe.
Recounting the whole Kafka-esque charade at the Huffington Post, Begala wrote, "I've never had a more surrealistic day. If this is what one of Fox's best and most respected reporters is doing, what are the hacks up to?"
They're watching CNN capture the campaign ratings crown.
UPDATE: Fresh Nielsen numbers show Fox News' ratings woes continued over the weekend. During Saturday night's 8-10 p.m. ET coverage of the Democrats' South Carolina primary results, Fox News not only got trounced by CNN among viewers 25-54, but lost to MSNBC as well.
Fox News is in for a very rough 2008
by Eric Boehlert
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
My guess is that Fox News guru Roger Ailes has been reaching for the Tums more often than usual early in the New Year, and there are lots of reasons for the hovering angst.
Let's take an extended multiple choice quiz. Right now, which of the following topics is likely causing the discomfort inside Ailes' Fox News empire?
A) CNN's resurgence as the go-to cable destination for election coverage.
B) The incredible shrinking candidacy of Fox News' favored son, Rudy Giuliani.
C) The still-standing candidacy of Fox News nemesis and well-funded, anti-war GOP candidate Rep. Ron Paul.
D) The Democratic candidates' blanket refusal to debate on Fox News during the primary season.
E) Host Bill O'Reilly being so desperate for an interview from a Democratic contender that he had to schlep all the way to New Hampshire, where he shoved an aide to Sen. Barack Obama and then had to be calmed down by Secret Service agents.
F) Former Fox News architect and Ailes confidante Dan Cooper posting chapters from his a wildly unflattering tell-all book about his old boss. ("The best thing that ever happened to Roger Ailes was 9/11.")
G) The fledgling Fox Business Network, whose anemic ratings are in danger of being surpassed by some large city public access channels.
H) Host John Gibson's recent heartless attacks on actor Heath Ledger, just hours after the young actor was found dead.
I) Fox News reporter Major Garrett botching his "exclusive" that Paul Begala and James Carville were going to join Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign, and then refusing to correct the record.
I'd say it's A, B, C, D, E, F, and G. (I doubt Gibson's grave-dancing or Garrett's whopper caused Ailes a moment's concern.)
Bottom line is that Fox News is in for a very rough 2008. And the umbrella reason for that is quite simple: Eight years ago the all-news cable channel went all-in on the presidency of George Bush and became a broadcast partner with the White House. Proof of that was on display Sunday night, January 27, during Fox News' prime-time, "Fighting to the Finish," an "historic documentary" on the final year of Bush's presidency. Filmed in HD and featuring "unprecedented access," according to the Fox News press release, the show was pure propaganda. (I must have missed Fox News' "Fighting to the Finish" special back in 2000, chronicling the conclusion of President Bill Clinton's second term and his "extraordinarily consequential tenure.")
The point is that Fox News years ago made an obvious decision to appeal almost exclusively to Republican viewers. The good news then for Fox News was that it succeeded. The bad news now for Fox News is that it succeeded.
Meaning, when the GOP catches a cold, everybody at Fox News gets sick. As blogger Logan Murphy put it at Crooks and Liars, "Watching FOXNews getting their comeuppance has been fun to watch. They made their bed, now they're having to lie in it and it's not too comfortable."
The most obvious signs of Fox News' downturn have been the cable ratings for the big primary and caucus votes this year, as well as the high-profile debates. With this election season generating unprecedented voter and viewer interest, Fox News' rating bumps to date have remained underwhelming, to say the least.
For instance, on the night of the big New Hampshire primary, CNN, which habitually trails behind Fox News in the prime-time race, attracted nearly 250,000 more viewers than its top competitor, marking a changing-of-the-guard of sorts.
The turnaround was striking when you consider that in 2004, even with no Republicans running against Bush, Fox News was still able to draw 200,000 more viewers than CNN on the night of the New Hampshire Democratic primary. Yet in 2008, with a very competitive GOP field, CNN was the ratings winner from New Hampshire.
And just look at the ratings for January 19, which featured returns from the Nevada caucus coming in during the late afternoon, and then fresh returns from the South Carolina Republican primary being posted during prime time that night. In the past, Fox News would have absolutely owned that night of coverage, as conservative news junkies flocked to their home team -- Fox News -- to see the results. But no more. CNN grabbed nearly just as many prime-time viewers for the Republican South Carolina returns as did Fox News.
The problem for Fox News is that it's the Democratic race that's creating most of the excitement, yet Fox News has been forced to mostly watch the race from the sidelines. That's because last winter, after Fox News tried to smear Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) for purportedly attending a radical Muslim school as a child, liberal bloggers launched an initiative to get Democratic candidates to boycott a debate co-sponsored by Fox News and the Nevada Democratic Party. (The boycott, powered by Foxattacks.com, was later extended to any and all Fox News debates.)
The point of the online crusade was not to simply embarrass Fox News or rattle Nevada Democrats for being out of touch with the grassroots masses that distrusted and despised Fox News. The point, instead, was to begin chipping away, in a serious, consistent method, at Fox News' reputation. To spell out that Fox News was nothing more than a Republican mouthpiece and that Democrats need not engage with the News Corp. giant.
The lack of Democratic debates for Fox News has meant a huge setback for the news organization from a ratings perspective. Just look at the grand slam CNN hit last week when, on January 21, it broadcast the much-talked-about Democratic debate from South Carolina. The CNN event not only creamed Fox News in the ratings, nearly tripling its audience that night, but the debate set a new cable news mark for the most viewers ever to watch a primary debate.
In fact, of the 10 most-watched debates this election season, Fox has aired just two, compared to CNN's five. Of the 10 most-watched debates, six have featured Democrats; four Republicans.
CNN is virtually guaranteed another monster ratings win this week with a pair of high-profile debates staged in California -- the Republicans on Wednesday night and Democrats on Thursday.
No wonder CNN's so giddy these days. Here's the spin CNN president Jonathan Klein put out following its New Hampshire ratings win: "There's a freshness and exuberance to our coverage that the others just aren't matching. ... Fox almost seems downright despondent in their coverage."
So I'm not the only one who feels like Fox News coverage, especially of the Republican field, often feels like a televised wake. Or maybe that's just been Fox News' collective, subconscious mourning of the Giuliani campaign.
After all, Sean Hannity serves as Fox News' official ambassador to the Giuliani campaign; a campaign that Ailes and Fox News were hoping to ride back into the White House. Yet despite showering Giuliani with all kinds of laudatory coverage, both Hannity and Ailes have been powerless, as they've watched Giuliani's rudderless campaign go nowhere for months.
Even an all-out Fox News marketing blitz to label Giuliani "America's Mayor" never got traction. In fact, it ranked right up there with the launch of New Coke, in terms of branding success. (Watch this clip to see the Fox News absurdity up-close.)
In the meantime, the rise of Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and especially Mike Huckabee, with his populist streak, has caused all sorts of consternation at Fox News. Even the conservative Weekly Standard took notice. The magazine recently wrote that "A lot of conservatives have problems with both Huckabee and McCain. Last night on Fox, for example, Sean Hannity could barely conceal his distaste for both pols."
And don't even mention Ron Paul's name to the folks at Fox News, who have stepped outside their role as journalists to try to kneecap the anti-war GOP candidate. The most blatant slap came right before the New Hampshire primary, when Fox News refused to include Paul in a televised GOP debate, despite the fact that just days earlier Paul grabbed 10 percent of the vote in the Iowa caucus, nearly doubling the tally Giuliani posted.
Paul's Republican supporters became so incensed by the snub that they literally chased Sean Hannity through the New Hampshire night chanting "Fox News sucks!" and captured the scene in a homemade clip that really has to be seen to be believed. (To recap New Hampshire for Fox News: Hannity was pursued by a Republican mob, O'Reilly got into a shoving match with an Obama aide, and CNN grabbed more viewers. Now that's a week to remember!)
Oh, and we can't forget the wildly hyped launch of the Fox Business Network, which, News Corp. execs bragged, would dethrone longtime cable business news champ CNBC. Of course, that might happen one day. But the early ratings for Fox Business Network have been unbelievably weak.
After two months on the air, Fox Business Network, available in 30 million homes, was attracting, on average, just 6,300 viewers on any given weekday, according to Nielsen Media Research. That was good for a nearly invisible .05 rating. (By comparison, CNBC during that period was attracting 265,000 viewers.)
Making matters worse for Ailes was the fact that on January 22, as fears mounted about a possible global financial crisis, CNBC posted its best ratings in seven years, attracting 401,000 viewers that day.
The hurdle for Fox Business Network has always been simple: Why would investors and day traders in search of reliable business information turn from CNBC over to the Fox brand, which is so well-known for passing along one-sided information? News Corp. always assumed Fox News would help launch the business channel. But Fox News is taken seriously by so few people, it may be hurting the business launch.
After all, Fox News continues to embarrass itself with a type of journalism that nobody else in the industry would dare call professional. And for proof of that look no further than Major Garrett, who is supposed to be one of the channel's nonpartisan, serious journalists. He landed a recent scoop about how former advisers to Bill Clinton, Paul Begala and James Carville, were getting set to join Hillary Clinton's campaign.
Carville immediately shot the story down, telling Talking Points Memo's Greg Sargent that very same day, "Fox was, is and will continue to be an asinine and ignorant network. I have not spoken to anyone in the Clinton campaign about this. I'm not getting back into domestic political consulting."
Begala did Carville one better and directly emailed Garrett to deny the story -- a story Garrett never bothered trying to check with Begala or Carville before it was broadcast. Garrett's response to Begala's blanket denial? Garrett told the Democratic operative that he would take his denial "under advisement." [Emphasis added.]
Garrett then went back on the air and repeated the same story, and added the fact that Begala had been on a conference call the day before with Clinton advisers, which was also false. And no, despite his earlier email exchange with Begala, Garrett never bothered to try to confirm the conference call story with him before reporting it on Fox News.
On his Fox News blog, Garrett did acknowledge the Begala email and claimed he'd be updating the fast-moving story soon -- which, he told readers, would likely be confirmed the next day when the Clinton campaign made the Begala/Carville announcement. But the next day when the story imploded, Garrett simply ignored the embarrassing gaffe.
Recounting the whole Kafka-esque charade at the Huffington Post, Begala wrote, "I've never had a more surrealistic day. If this is what one of Fox's best and most respected reporters is doing, what are the hacks up to?"
They're watching CNN capture the campaign ratings crown.
UPDATE: Fresh Nielsen numbers show Fox News' ratings woes continued over the weekend. During Saturday night's 8-10 p.m. ET coverage of the Democrats' South Carolina primary results, Fox News not only got trounced by CNN among viewers 25-54, but lost to MSNBC as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
