We’ve all heard it — the screech of the Fox News haters who feel perfectly free to share their low opinion of the cable-news channel with everyone within ear shot. Normally, well-bred and well-mannered people don’t feel compelled to challenge someone’s private choice of viewing and reading material — in fact, they’re usually the first to scream about “the right to privacy” and the sanctity of the First Amendment. But when it comes to Fox News, otherwise rational people — and even some who were irrational to begin with, such as your average progressive — suddenly become deranged and start foaming at the mouth.
Now comes this piece about Fox News chief Roger Ailes in The New York Times on Saturday — the day where interesting news goes to die and get buried – that will make them even crazier:
At a time when the broadcast networks are struggling with diminishing audiences and profits in news, he has built Fox News into the profit engine of the News Corporation. Fox News is believed to make more money than CNN, MSNBC and the evening newscasts of NBC, ABC and CBS combined. The division is on track to achieve $700 million in operating profit this year, according to analyst estimates that Mr. Ailes does not dispute.
This outsize success has placed Mr. Ailes, an aggressive former Republican political strategist, at the pinnacle of power in three corridors of American life: business, media and politics. In addition to being the best-paid person in the News Corporation last year, he is the most successful news executive of the last 10 years, and his network exerts a strong influence on the fractured conservative movement.
Leaving aside for the moment the obligatory Times cheap shot at the “fractured conservative movement’ — except in terms of the political horse race, which is the only thing most political reporters understand, there’s nothing at all “fractured” about the ideals and beliefs of the conservative movement, only a discussion about tactics — let’s ponder that for a moment: Satan’s News Network is making more money that all its rivals combined.
So why do you think that is?
Can it be that Fox has the best newsgathering organization on the air? Can it be that the Fox foxes are the best-looking women on television?
Can it be that the Fox lineup of Beck, O’Reilly and Hannity (the guys who really make the Left twitch at the very thought of their existence) puts strong opinions on the air, pungently expressed, in a way that the other nets do not? Can it be that given a choice to be trapped in a room with Greta van Susteren or Chris Matthews, the question answers itself? (At least you could have a conversation with Greta.)
Or is it simply that a sizable portion of the American viewing audience has had it with the bien-pensant, group-think herd mentality of the Manhattan-Beltway cocktail party set, and is voting with its remote controls, hoping to find a place where its intelligence is not insulted and its core beliefs are respected?
What do you think?
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
528 Comments
"such as your average progressive — suddenly become deranged and start foaming at the mouth."
Based on their similar response to Sarah Palin, I'd say progressives do that just about any time they don't get their way. It's time these two-year olds were taught some respect for others.
Fox News is wildly popular at this moment in American media culture because it satisfies the growing discontent of, yes, "a fractured conservative moment." Even Ailes will tell you that his channel's ballooning success over the past year has nothing to do with pure journalistic merit.
I used to wonder why FNC didn't provide a half-hour newscast on the FOX TV Network….then it occurred to me, one does not build a dream home in a graveyard.
So conservatives' blatant disrepect for our current president — including, but not limited to, repeatedly questioning his citizenship despite clear evidence to the contrary, publicly declaring their hopes that his administrations "fails," and conducting outlandish demonstrations in which gross misconceptions are further reenforced — is just as morally sound? There is seldom reverence on either side of the aisle.
O'Reilly…#1 for ten years.
Hannity…#1 for years
Greta (the NKOB)…#1 for years.
It's not just the last year….it's been growing since Murdoch took the gamble on Fox News in the mid-90's. Unless the LSM sit up and take notice, Fox News will be king of the hill for a loooong time to come.
There are a few kooks out there on the right who question Obama's citizenship, but it's not "conservatives" as a whole as you insinuate.
Rush Limbaugh said he hopes Obama fairs, not "conservatives" as a whole as you insinuate.
And fill me in on these "outlandish demonstrations" you speak of, because I haven't seen the Right beat up a black man as a peaceful anti-tax-and-spend rally like the Left.
I'll just assume that your vague assertions about the channel's ratings are accurate for a moment. The sentiment remains: Fox News is the most bankable cable news network because it is the most proficient cable news network to appeal to its viewers' political preferences. If legitimate journalists measured success by how well an outlet can mirror its viewers' leanings and provide programming that favors those ideologies, then Fox would certainly be the ultimate "leader in news."
FOX NC is not geared toward "INTELLECTUALS". The content and slant is geared toward people who work, have families, run businesses, care about American Values, and pay taxes. We find the content and slant on the FNC to our liking..
Anyone not agreeing with the above concepts, will find a world of pap to enjoy on ALL the other networks……
We also find .FNC appealing because they agree with US..The leftists like MSNBC because they agree with everything said on that sorry network…
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by HukiBuki: RT @BigJournalism: Now Why Do You Suppose That Is? Fox News Making More Money that All Its Rivals, Combined http://bit.ly/90nKqV...
"Or is it simply that a sizable portion of the American viewing audience has had it with the bien-pensant, group-think herd mentality of the Manhattan-Beltway cocktail party set, and is voting with its remote controls, hoping to find a place where its intelligence is not insulted and its core beliefs are respected?"
Yes
They have FDS.
Fox Derangment Syndrome.
Because liberals exist in a bubble where every single person:
A. Agrees with their dopey, immature, simple-minded opinions
B. Wants to hear those opinions expressed over and over again in slightly different ways
Fox News represents nothing more than a choice to finally get away from that, and people, who on the very broad whole do not agree with liberals' narrow, elitist worldview where we all sing songs of support to Healthcare Takeover Bills and Mmmm, mmmm, mmmm, the President, are making it in droves.
it's called a good business model…
Yes, Virginia, business. That's when someone provides a service that someone else sees value in and reward said purveyor with a profit.
Cheeky- perhaps. But nice to know it still works…
Respect is something earned. Obama's disrespect for the office he holds and the American people has earned him our scorn.
FNC has more liberal pundits than the other networks have non-liberal pundits. FNC does give both sides of the argument, however, libtards would disagree, since they really do not want to hear the facts.
Please pardon my rather simple analysis.
All of you groupthink, echo chamber apologists line up over here and pick between and among the following 4, 784 national, regional and local "news" outlets.
The rest of you line up over here to watch Fox.
Any questions?
There are no legitimate journalists left.
I apologize for collectively attributing those acts of disrespect to conservatives.
But, just as you have argued for the other side, the bashing of Palin and Bush is not characteristic of all liberals or Democrats.
When I speak of "outlandish demonstrations," I am referring to the Tea Party rallies at which wayward partisan hacks have appeared with firearms and other weapons of intimidation. Their actions are a blot on conservatives' unity, mainly because the Tea Party protests are rational and fair-intentioned in nature. Obama's increasingly invasive policies are worthy of vigorous dissent, but these foolish gimmicks do not aid any argument.
FNC is comfort food for conservatives … like Rush always says its not that they are telling us what to think, they are confirming what we think
Why is it that you focus on the few instead of the millions?
So LIBERALS' blatant disrepect for our FORMER president — including, but not limited to, repeatedly questioning his THE LEGITIMACY OF HIS ELECTION despite clear evidence to the contrary, publicly declaring their hopes that his administrations "fails," and conducting outlandish demonstrations in which gross misconceptions are further reenforced — is just as morally sound? There is seldom reverence on either side of the aisle.
Fixed it for you.
It's so simple, it went right over my head….Elaborate..please…
News Flash: Fox has doubled the ratings of the other cable news networks combined for years. Can you tell me which news channel is less biased towards the left that Fox is to the right?
Running a little scared there are we? Firstly, "Birthers" merely want the question put to rest once and for all. Despite your statements, there is no apparent clear evidence, just "evidence" that YOU consider evident… I do hope his oddministration fails miserably, so you and your ilk will crawl back to your fairyland and groom your unicorns and let clear thinking citizens once again take part in setting a proper direction for this country to steer.
You clearly have no true idea of how this country was formed, evolved and has managed to survive for 230+ years by upholding the standards decided upon generations ago. Instead, you swallow the pablum of your party and digest it wholeheartedly. You have no problem with how any legislation has been conducted so far, am I correct? Everything aboveboard, on the up-and-up and made public right? No coercion, no filthy politics, right?
Go re-read your talking points and get back to me after recess, junior.
Calm yourself.
"There is seldom reverence on either side of the aisle."
I wasn't arguing that the dissent is exclusive to conservatives. I was arguing that this type of dissent is characteristic of both schools of thought. Your comment just affirmed this claim. Thank you.
Rush was talking about his leftist policies….But it's really the same thing being that Obama is a hard leftist..
Yes, including the libtards in chief, Douglass Kennedy and Riviera
That is correct.
Brass tacks here…
Were any of those "wayward political hacks" carrying firearms and other weapons of intimidation arrested and prosecuted…?
Let me answer that for you…no.
So you don't like firearms. Fine. But legal carry is a RIGHT, just as it is to peaceably assemble…
You should be much more offended by those statist Congresscritters and the Administration lopping off your rights wholesale…all in the name of "protecting you" from life…
Because the few are sadly the only ones to ever warrant thorough coverage.
Perhaps it is as simple as the fact that Fox News is able to present more interesting news because they report all the news? When you filter negative news about the left, and their harmful policies, then you cut the potential pool of news at least in half. Why watch half the story when Fox News gives you the entire story? Even a liberal can have their news appetite whetted on Fox News.
The birther issue is not going anywhere but there is a kernal of truth in that it points to the debate over john McCain's birth which had to be deliberated and the fact that Mr. Transparent has been the least transparent presidential candidate in our history and, having won the presidency spending millions to keep his background underground, he is now also just about the least transparent president ever as well. That is a big problem. As far as fox is concerned, surveys have shown that, of course, Liberals flock to MSNBC and the networks, but surprisingly, a lot of liberals and especially a lot of independents watch Fox. And why wouldn't they when, in simple point of fact, there are real independents all over Fox like O'reilly as well as others. I doubt there are many political independents anywhere in the state controlled medial…they are all democrat owned leftists. So, even a Liberal has a great reason to watch fox; it is the other side of the story and often the unreported story as well..
Why do you feel so inclined to divert this exchange to address Fox's bias compared to that of other channels?
Thus, the answer to your question is a resounding "no." My original point did not assert that there are cable news outlets that are journalistic superior to Fox News. Please reread.
"hoping to find a place where its intelligence is not insulted and its core beliefs are respected?"
This is really key. The assumption that your viewers are mindless drones, willing to swallow whatever you feed them, only works for mTV. I think that when the rest of the MSM gave only the briefest nod to Climate-Gate, viewers started to really pay attention.
What should have been an earth-rattling scandal was (unsuccessfully) swept under the proverbial rug.
Even for people who find O'Reilly aggravating, and Krauthammer obnoxious, Fox rarely slings mud, and tends to report news that is important, not just what furthers a leftist agenda.
We, the people, are not well represented by Hollywood, or the typical beltway crowd. It is unfortunate that we may be too late in speaking up.
So, you admit that FOX is mirroring the United States better than the leftist pukes in newsrooms mirror the 20-odd percent of self-identified liberals…
Thanks for your honesty…as stumbling as it was…
Here, here!
Of course they were not arrested and prosecuted. They were not breaking the law. Disrespect is not a crime in this country. And it shouldn't be.
But the shameless hostility manifested in their actions confirms the incivility of which they have been accused.
Another thing about FOX…
They have a tendency to actually report news without commentary, at least for the first few cycles a story is on, BEFORE they start up "analysis"…
MSM gives me "analysis" from the beginning, even when they are supposedly covering a story in "real time". They write the copy to reflect certain leftist views, for crying out loud!
HPD, there is absolutely no difference between the coverage you get at ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, …and it will be the same echo chamber stuff coming from the NYTimes, WaPo, Newsweek, etc.
If folks want one flavor…coming in a thousand different cartons…they can choose from the different cartons, but they are still going to get vanilla.
If they want a different flavor…not produced in a hermetically sealed echo chamber…for years, they only had one choice for televised network news.. Fox News. Escaping the echo chamber meant gravitating over to Fox.
Fox built their enormous base…on "everyone else".
HiPlainsDrifter still doesn't understand. Can you perhaps draw a picture for him?
Perhaps if the haters would spend more time actually reporting the news rather than taking pot shots at Fox, they might regain a small portion of lost market share.
PTeknology
I am an American – as of right now we have no laws that state I must like or respect the person holding the office of the Presidency. I don't even have to call him President. I like to call him the Scheister in Charge or Commander and Thief. If this man was so great and transparent why are most of his files still locked away? Why does he have closed door Health Care meetings when he said they would be on C-Span?
As far as wanting him to fail. Do some homework. Don't just attempt to be a Master Baiter. Rush Limbaugh said that and he didn't say he wanted the Pres to fail – he said he wanted the Pres's attempt to change our nation to a socialist/communist/fascist nation to fail. I concur and so should you.
Outlandish demonstrations? Once again with these liberals who have no facts or evidence of anything – they just call names. I take back your title of Master Baiter, and dub thee "Inferior Baiter".
I'm past the point of being amazed by how often fringe media talk panels are dominated by leftists. Many times they have nobody representing the conservative take. Or they'll throw up a fake Republican like David Brooke, or a part-time conservative such as George Will.
Fox commentators come from a broad spectrum of ideologies. The guests who appear are also very politically diverse. If you are interested in news which debates the issues like you debate the issues in your own family and community, then Fox News is the place to go. If you want the news presented as if you are at a union meeting, then you have plenty of other news choices where they'll feed you their slop from the leftist trough.
I began watching FNC when it first began broadcasting………….I quickly realized they were reporting and saying many things that I had already been thinking!!! They certainly have their share of both sides on so I don't think of them as totally conservative programming………….of course they could send Shep Smith packing and I would not shed one tear!!!
If FNC ever puts Red Eye on at 12 midnight in the eastern time zone, it would REALLY wallop the other pretenders.
Where they showed up with firearms… that state has open carry laws. I guess you aren't for states rights.
I win. The only way to argue not bringing the gun, is to be against state rights. That state belives there's no harm in bringing your gun where you want as long as you don't shoot anyone, and they didn't.
Three options:
1) Take back your statements, realize your logical failings and become a conservitive
2) Admit you aren't for individual right to do whatever they want as long as it is within the laws governing their state, and thus are against the way America is set up, thus instead of changing the foundation of the country you should move to the tons of other countries already set up the way you want.
3) (This is the option you are going to choose by the way…) Continue to act like an illogical idiot while pretending you are being civil. Ignoring the millions, while paying attention to the few… who didn't do anything against the law, and more or less disagree that you only have the first two options because your are a hypocrite.
How is carrying a gun hostile?
Threatening people is hostile. However, threatening people with a firearm would get you arrested… You are picking and choosing your laws because you don't think carrying a gun is civil. Here is your task, otherwise your idiocy will be shown to all who read what you have writen here: Use logic and reason to explain how carrying a gun isnt civil. You can't use your feelings. Now if I pointed a gun in your face, that wouldnt be civil, that didn't happen though so no bullshitting.
And…. go
(Hint boys and girls… I win because it is impossible to use logic and reason to explain how carrying a gun is hostile… you don't get in anyones way…. you don't get in anyones face…. its just like carrying a soda… its an object. I could carry a soda and if I threw the coke in your face, that would be hostile. I could carry a gun and if I point it in your face, that would be hostile. However, if I just carry either of those items, it is not hostile.
I have used logic and reason to explain why it isn't hostile, balls in your court.
Fox's interest to viewers is most likely in their scrapping of the filters of the "mainstream" media, and addressing news items which are excluded from the others for ideological reasons. Conscious or unconscious, the bien pensant MSM is reluctant – or absolutely refuses – to publish news that might reflect badly on The Narrative and damage The Party.
That's why we got no news at all from the MSM regarding the contributions of Fannie, Freddie and the CRA to the financial collapse of 2008, nor the intimate involvement of all those prominent Democrats who were given sinecures at F&F and made fortunes while they vigorously inflated the bubble. Jamie Gorelick – Rahm Emanuel – Jim Johnson – Franklin Raines etc etc – oh yes, they were executives, they gave Chris Dodd and Barney Frank some meager little campaign contributions, yes yes…
So OF COURSE we follow Fox, which will pierce those shields of silence and address news of some relevance to citizens at large, instead of merely blue-state good ol' boys of the universities, the arts, the news and the government agencies.
Sorry HiPlainsDrifter, facts and logic only have basis in reality. PTeknology is an idiot who feels his views that carrying a gun = hostile means everyone shouldnt carry a gun even though its legal because its obviously rude because he feels that way.
I feel him talking is rude. By his own logic if he ever speaks again he is as guilty as the people he condeemed, and thus a hypocrite. So either he is a hypocrite or he his logic doesn't hold up.
(Hint: It is the second one… however I'm willing to bet he is a hypocrite too.)
Meghan Kelly has more charisma, wit and beauty than the entire Hollywood A-list.
He gave you points to talk about. You ignored them. How stupid do you think the people around you are? That you can act offended by his agressiveness, justified by your stupidity I might add, to avoid the talking points he brought up?
Bottom line. Put up or shut up. Go away forever, or address the point.
The older I get, the more I realize that intellectualism is highly overrated. I am starting to realize more and more that intellectualism = pompous, spoiled, overpaid person who was taught in college to feel superior to everyone else. I've got my degree, but look at my in-laws and other Americans who came from nothing and are self-made, and I realize my fancy college education has only fooled me into thinking I know more and taught me to be a corporate slave. The school of hard knocks made them smarter than I could ever hope to be.
I would be a lot happier with FOX if there were less fluff stories (including stories that should be covered only on local news) and if they would try to phase out the rep/dem talking head duke it out fests. Not only is that boring and overdone, I am not getting any information. How about reporting what is happening and then do separate interviews of the Dem and Republican. It may take more time, but it would mean better quality and less time devoted to stupid shark in the water stories.
Also – I see here some complaints about Shep Smith. How I used to loathe him with his "I should say…" jargonny, I am youthful BS and always injecting his view into the nightly straight news cast. I stopped watching. BUT maybe in the last 6 months he has cleaned up his act. No more silly talk – still some lazy talk… but he seems to try to shoot the news to us straight with a minimum of opinion. I appreciate that.
Ah. Does the "child" card ever get old? I suppose not.
Keep bashing your nose against the period key. Your ellipses are charming.
Please provide the direct quote in which I stated this.
There seems to be some confusion about the meaning of my prior comment, please allow me to clear it up.
I apologize for any confusion.
For years, when I was a boy…you could a phone in any color you wanted, as long as it was black. It had an annoying rotary dial, and weighed about the equivalent of a small child, only it was more temperamental.
Very shortly thereafter, slimmer, lighter, more colorful phones began to appear on the marketplace. Eventually, the old, clunky, black rotary phones were no longer even a part of any logical, reasonable, sane selection process.
For the past forty years, alphabet newsrooms have been the clunky, monochromatic, mono-polemic, mono-faux-theistic, document forging, information burying, distortion factories designed to feed, breed and succeed the leftists that came before them.
For those with a leftist bent, the distortion is mother's milk.
For those who choose not to have their "facts" be pre-distorted and their opinions pre-masticated for them…there were no national "news" outlet choices.
Then came Fox.
The leftists had and have…an array of choices to fill their very heart's content with distorted news, filtered facts, forged documents, photoshopped pictures, "staged" events, and all manner of fake "news" to fulfill their need to be force fed leftist pap.
Fox…is for "everyone else"….who doesn't. They make money and attract viewers based upon being the alternative for all those "everyone else" viewers. Conservatives, moderates, independents, …every non-leftist with a couple of firing synapses…wants and needs an information stream that isn't out to turn our culture into a one-polemic, mindless screed.
The question isn't why are all those people watching Fox, the question is why are those other guys clinging to the old, clunky, black rotary phone?
I wish FOX would stop using Sharpton as their go-to black opinion. There is nobody better? I know that to be untrue.
And most of the people hear like to wrap themselves in the flag, parading as 'just and moral patriots' when they're just as apt and quick to promote agendas that oppose the agendas of those they disagree with. Stop pretending you're a concerned American fighting the good fight against those filthy liberals, independents and moderate conservatives. Guess what? If people like you had your way this wouldn't be America. A country dominated by a single ideology isn't a democracy, it's a totalitarian regime. America is a balance of opposing views, where people can be heard even if they say things some people don't want to hear. What most of these supposed "patriots" want is to only allow people whose messages they agree with to get a chance to speak. There's nothing more un-American than that.
I buy O'Reilly mugs, jackets and doormats for my family members with FDS. Sometimes they pull them out of storage when we come to visit.
You want to know who has FDS? Go to a coffeehouse and read an Ann Coulter book. In my part of the country they take their derangement seriously.
For sure. The rhetoric from libtards on the other networks is much more acid and personal against non-libtards, than visa versa. Libtards ALWAYS get into the name-calling, i.e., "racist", "homophobe" when they are losing the debate.
Isn't all news programming no matter the channel geared toward regular intellect?
I try to watch a variety of news programming, but have simply stopped trying to watch MSNBC. They are downright hateful. Who needs that?
Fox is so popular because their stories are backed up with actual facts and research.
questioning his citizenship despite clear evidence to the contrary
Ok where is the evidence? How come Obama will not release his records from college? It is either he is hiding the fact that he received grants as a foreign student or his grades show he is not the "Genius" his worshipers think he is. Like the tree Al Gore who had lower grades in college then Bush. Anyway grow up you Marxists are still going on about Bush the elder flying to Iran to arrange the hostage release for Reagan and still saying Bush arranged 9/11, If any people are totaly insane it is you and your ilk.
Liberals like the echo chamber. Pay them no mind.
The school of "Hard Knocks" can be quite charismatic teacher…
By "Intellectuals", I'm referring to the people who support and elected Obama… along with the "Urbanites"…
A earlier comment "There's more conservatives in the US than liberals or independents", so why does the minority extreme left feel that they should dictate the rules for the majority? Next, cruise the net at Beltway Blips or other such sources and you will get some insight into upcoming news. You can also bet on who will cover a story and who will not. Unfortunately MSM reporters will look to their masters first, while Fox can be trusted to report on it. If the American public can predict which media will report and which will not, ratings will reflect accordingly.
You mean the few that you have focused on are the only ones that the lamestream media believes warrant thorough coverage. And just why is it that the lamestream media doesn't believe that the average decent law-abiding tea party protester doesn't deserve thorough coverage of his political beliefs? Maybe because their agenda is to discredit anyone they disagree with rather than actually report the news?
FOX NC is not geared toward "INTELLECTUALS" as you seem to be. The content and slant are geared toward people who work, have families, run businesses, care about American Values, and pay taxes. We find the content and slant on the FNC to our liking..
Anyone not agreeing with the above concepts, will find a world of pap to enjoy on ALL the other networks……Please grow TFU….
I would suggest that The Daily Show does at least have on opposing viewpoints, if only to vilify them. But that's not much different than Fox personalities such as Hannity, et al, pummeling their occasional Liberal guests.
Outside of Jon Stewart, though, the majority of the legacy liberal channels interview only those wohse viewpoints echo their liberal dogma.
I just have to say that ever since Nielsen installed their meter boxes at my house, I make sure I watch Fox News and Fox News only! (I also DVR Red Eye and watch it every morning.) I just love knowing that I can actually vote with my tv for Fox News and against the liberal spin at MSNBC and the alphabet networks
True,
Let me see and review what a person or politician said on tape or wrote in the past and compare it to what they are preaching about now. This tells me if that politician is being truthful or is a lying sack. Now I can relate and pinpoint if they have Ethics (what is really missing in our society, all levels) or not.
If I catch a politician lying ONCE, they are TOAST. WE as Americans deserve better and are tired of getting Scammed.
With the Internet technology and a few clicks, a person can verify what in the news is true or not. This is why the Townhall meetings didn't go over big with the Democrats and Republicans, because the public has seen who the thieves and crooks really are.
No I think it's because people offering well-reasoned, thought-out responses is…. well, boring TV [at least that's how I think the MSM sees it]. Much better to take a black guy with guns, crop off his head, and make it seem like they're all crazy white people.
Rush actually said he hopes he fails in IMPLEMENTING SOCIALIST POLICIES. You'd know this if you actually listened to the whole monologue he delivered on the subject, and you'd have heard his reasoing that those policies are anathema to the Constitution (which POTUS might not like too much, but is sworn to defend).
And I don't know what constitutes "blatant disrespect" to PTek (though I'm guessing it's all relative), but both he and the President would be well-advised to note respect is earned. The arrogant, condescending tone the president takes when speaking to us shows he deserves nothing.
I'm back! It's satisfying to see that my original comments have sparked such reasonable debate. Let me reiterate my initial comments for all those lost in the dauntingly intelligent flurry of replies:
"So conservatives' blatant disrepect for our current president — including, but not limited to, repeatedly questioning his citizenship despite clear evidence to the contrary, publicly declaring their hopes that his administrations "fails," and conducting outlandish demonstrations in which gross misconceptions are further reenforced — is just as morally sound? There is seldom reverence on either side of the aisle."
This comment was written to argue that disrespect for a leader not of one's political party is not exclusive to Democrats or Republicans. It's simply how this nation functions. If it makes you more comfortable, just read the last 10 words of my comment and cross out the rest on your screen with a thick, red Sharpie.
Now. As for my description of "outlandish demonstrations," let's turn to an old friend that has probably gathered dust on your shelves: The Dictionary. The word "outlandish" is defined as "looking or sounding bizarre or unfamiliar." When a protester carries a loaded or unloaded weapon at a Tea Party event, they are certainly looking bizarre on unfamiliar, because, despite what happens in your ill-perceived vision of America, armed demonstrators are not a normality in this nation.
I already conceded that carrying a firearm is not against the law under proper conditions. Refresh your page before gnashing your fingernails on the keyboard. This is a legal debate, so don't mutilate it into one. Did I ever say that the demonstrators are necessarily in the wrong for bringing guns to the protests? No. Did I ever say that doing so evokes a perception of hostility and draws attention to what a demonstration tactic of little consequence? Yes.
Congratulations. You have officially forced me to resort to condescension. I suppose we are both very similar now.
Scott,
Your ignorance is astounding.
It's because FOX personalities are not SMARMY like, say, those at MSNBC. Also, whether or not it is POLITICALLY CORRECT, people don't like to be constantly harangued by METROSEXUALS. What IS interesting, is CNN is following along now…
You are skimming my comments. I said that the "shameless hostility" was "manifested in their actions." This is not synonymous with their actions being hostile. Once again, please reread my comments, thoroughly comprehend the words in my sentences, and then craft your comeback.
These are undeniably fair questions. I am by no means of the opinion that the Tea Party movement is radicalist as a collective body. I even admitted that a few comments back ("… the Tea Party protests are rational and fair-intentioned in nature.").
I am sure the success of fox news is expanded by the other networks attacking them. It reminds me of quit a few years ago I was listening to some liberal commentator who just about had me throwing things at the radio when he snidely mentioned another station who gave another opinion. Well guess what? I found that station and never went back.
As you have already stated, respect is relative to a variety of factors. The same argument that you made for Obama in your closing statement could be made for Bush. You would obviously not understand that reversal, naturally because Bush is someone you respect by default due to your political preferences. It's a natural impulse. There's nothing inhuman about gathering a false sense of respect for someone who you associate with your political beliefs.
Just saying something over and over will not make it so, no matter how much you believe it will. The consertives are not fractured. The conservative movement is born out of beliefs and values that have their foundation in reality. We know why we believe what we believe, where we came from, who sacrificed themselves for us and we cannot be confused or diverted from that by your nonsensical statements. "Divide" and conquer the conservatives by speaking our destruction into existence is futile, but by all means continue to produce CO2 we need the heat.
When dissatisfied people are presented with a choice, they choose. We choose not to be force fed by the red media. Who has the highest ratings among talk show hosts, Al Franken, why he had to find his votes in the back of someone's car.
The child card was first pulled by you. Some intelligent comments would better disguise your purpose here.
You guys make it so easy – and I know you're just trying to rile us up – but seriously, attempt to have some content or facts in your arguments Scott:
Yes, I promote conservative agendas – ones that do not attempt to fundamentally change the US of A and line the pockets of Dems and their liberal cronies while steering the country to socialism or communism, not sure which one Obama's going for this week.
I'm not pretending – I am a concerned American fighting the good fight against <your words> those filthy liberals, independents, and moderate <supposed> conservatives.
What is this single ideology that you imply is the only one we have. Again with the facts in your arguments – if you're going to say that we only do one thing – please tell us what that is supposed to be. I'm pro Captialism and believe it is one of the factors that has made this country great – I don't want our government stifling the Entrepreneurial Spirit of our people.
If you think you need to tell the viewers of Big Journalism what America is you might want to wait to post again until after you graduate High School.
I will tell you what is Un-American and actually give you a list:
Hiring Van Jones – a communist to work in the white house
Hiring Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings (no need to add anything here – we all know this loser)
Reaching out to Hugo Chavez – this guy took companies owned by Americans and put them under government control
Saying you will put Health Care debate on C-Span 8 times during your campaign and then giving in and supposedly allowing 1 hour to be shown.
I could go on but I think I've proven my point – WITH FACTS.
Fractured conservative movement you say?
Brace yourself PT, there is a change coming and you won't like it.
[...] Read More: by Frank Ross, BIG Journalism [...]
Then you should say liberal right? There is not one all news TV program – besides perhaps… no not even PBS. Not one that presents their news in such a way that it would exclude the common man from understanding or interest. Those interests may be tweaked, but the level is still the same. Business news is a different matter (generally speaking).
Now that is not to say that a good deal of the news presenters and commentators are not pseudo intellectuals.
Yes. I do admit that.
But "mirroring the United States" does not qualify as ethical journalism. The only thing news outlets should be "mirroring" is the facts in the stories on which they report.
Oh, my. I do think you've gotten to the heart of the matter.
There are so many reasons why I am a Fox junkie, but I suppose if I had to pick one it would be because they seem like real people, people that I might happen to talk with at the deli.
But I can't stop at one reason. They seem to respect their audience, and they dare to ask questions. The other media mostly just fawns over the administration trying to convince us how wonderful they are, and using whatever– truth, half/truth, or outright lies to do so.
Beck has privided a real education, and O'reilly tackles tough issues, and neither is afraid to ask the tough questions. Hannity, and the rest round out a wonderful lineup of newscasters that are diverse and offer real food for thought.
I am so glad Fox is making money, maybe they will use the profit to offer even more great journalism!
I would not totally dis your college education. If nothing else, graduating proves that you have tenacity (if nothing else) and you probably did not glide through in a dream state without learning things that people who did not go to college will never learn.
That said, college is no substitute for having common sense. You cannot learn that. Plenty of folks who graduate college have common sense. Those are easy to spot. They are the ones that know they are not better than the next guy by simply graduating from college.
I do not know what to say about college teaching you to be a corporate slave. That seems to be more of a personal choice or maybe laziness (not a personal attack – I have been there).
But Janice – Everyone goes thru the school of hard knocks. It will be up to you if you choose to learn the lessons and apply them.
Good one!
Invest in tissues. There's going to be a lot of foam coming from their mouths.
Excellent comment. This is absolutely accurate. I watch Fox because they don't tell me how I should think. I don't watch the others because they do. They mold the news until it's a filtered bunch of crap, hoping you will think the way they do. But they are taking our intelligence for granted.
Great work. Thanks.
Could you please define "facts" and "research" for the other networks…
They are already gearing up for the change, their vitriol and blind rage is showing from behind their mask of benevolence.
You're streching and flailing big boy, keep trying though, it's kinda funny.
PTek, you have made 4 assertions. Three stated and a fourth implied. One; Fox is popular for only a moment in time – you better check your facts! Two; the conservatives of the US are fractured – I assert that your view of conservatives is fractured, but genuine conservatives know exactly what is important, a strong national defense, fiscal conservatism, and state sovereignty. Three; Ailes would say "FNC success is not due to pure journalistic merit" – I doubt it! Four; Your statements are built on an assumption that the other networks do have pure journalistic merit – that is the most laughable of all.
Cheep shot pt,respond to Monty P if you can, this time document your statements with facts instead of posting your opinion as being the indisputable truth.
Lemmee see heah.
FoxNews has real reporters, presents facts as they believe them to be after sourcing, provides for opposition and hires very bright reporters who just happen to be (in the words of Charles Krauthammer) "presentable?"
Oh, very yes!
You must be logged in to post a comment.