|
StrangerThan -> RE: Fox News Boycott responses (2/14/2010 8:31:44 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
quote:
If you are leading in the ratings and advertisers bail it makes the advertiser look stupid.
That's pretty silly analysis. It presumes no other place to advertise, and it ignores that companies don't want to risk offending their target customers.
Fox News will continue on just fine, of course. There's a demographic that likes to stare in the mirror and call it news.
I think there is a demographic to whom it is news. Like I said, I don't watch news programs. At least not voluntarily. I do however, frequent airports, and most of them have CNN running constantly on the monitors where you sit awaiting your flight. Now I know, I don't have to watch it then either, but I can still hear it unless I make an effort to get somewhere in the middle of a concourse. But, I'm not that anti-news. If its put in front of me and I have time to waste, I'm like anyone else, I'll waste it on whatever is close.
CNN has cleaned up its act somewhat, but during the early days of the tea party things, they were quite antagonistic towards them. I watched several clips, again, sitting in one airport or another, where the reporter was clearly either attempting to directly refute comments, or paint a picture of irrelevancy. I know that Chris Matthews (NBC? like I said, I don't watch them) has relegated whatever news network he works for as totally, and completely slanted. CBS suffered with Dan Rather. I watched Rather's coverage of the Kerry-Bush race, and while I voted for Kerry, wanted him to win, it was clearly obvious that Rather did too. He was grasping at every democratic straw he could find or invent during that broadcast. From there he led CBS down a dismal road ripe with slanted opinion masquerading as news.
Again, from the airport perspective, CNN seems fairly light on Obama, and fairly spiteful towards conservative pundits.
I don't think there's any question why Fox leads the ratings when the other main outlets have clearly demonstrated their own bias. My brother started watching fox during Bush's administration.When I asked him why, his response was that it was the only place he could see good things happening over there as well as the bad. News outlets don't have to be pointedly biased to be biased. They can do that simply by the stories they choose to cover. Yahoo for example, kept a running death count of US soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan during most of Bush's years as daily coverage. Coverage that has... disappeared.
That is reporting the news. When that is the only news you report however, you slant the viewer or reader the way you want them to go without uttering one biased word. I used to work as a reporter. I know how it works.
Having watched the early and clearly combative coverage of tea bag events from CNN, the umm.. rant by their editor over we report the news we don't advertise it, just didn't cut much mustard.
There is bias in most outlets. Haven't listened to NPR in a while either, but when I did, it was there too. The telling feature to me in terms of the mindset of the country is where most of them look for their bias.
And it clearly is not with mainstream media.
|
|
|
|
