Fox News losing independents
 

Fox News is something of a proxy for the GOP, isn't it?!?

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/...-independents/

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/m...rust-poll.html

I would have thought the election return fiasco (with award winning performances by Karl Rove, et al) would have ended any delusions the average, intelligent viewer might have about the legitimacy of that outfit, but then, that's not Fox's target audience, is it? ;D

One would think. But then you see the comments and beliefs of many right here on this forum and you can see that they're still buying it hook, line, and sinker.

Preaching to the troglodytes.

The Rho and TonyR show ........jerking each other off.

PBS and the Huffington post would not approve of this X rated thread ...........

At the end of each month, cable news ratings are released to the public. And, like clockwork, Fox News dominates the top 13 or so programs, far outstripping its competitors.

January was ... a little different. To be sure, everything is relative in cable news: Fox News still had nine out of the top 10 programs. It has spent 11 consecutive years as the top-rated cable news channel. Its 6 a.m. show drew almost double the ratings of CNN's top-ranking prime time show.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...#slide=2041275

^ Yes, Pony, this is well known. Right leaning viewers are partial to Fox whereas left leaning viewers are spread among several sources. Also, Fox viewership skews old (see below), another bad sign for the GOP along with losing independents as I posted in the OP. Clearly you don't understand the significance of such things, just as it seems the party you support doesn't.

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/...and-msnbc-ctd/

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/...t-year_b164723

Speaking of ignorant troglodytes... :rofl:

Lolz. The guy who can't go 5 posts without linking to Andrew Sullivan, PoliticOBGYN complains about the disappointing well-sourcedness of others. :)

^ The king of ad hominem chimes in! Your well formulated, fact rich rebuttal definitely added to the discussion!

Regarding Dick Morris' split with Fox...

http://prospect.org/article/why-fox-dumped-dick-morris

Bolding mine. :rofl:

For your reference, your willingness to paint Fox viewers with broad brush is textbook ad hominem. Which is what makes your prior response so delightfully ironic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Circumstantial

If by "paint with a broad brush" you mean "cite referenced statistics" then yes, I'm guilty as charged!

Fox news filled a big void in the market and became #1. If their market is changing, so will Fox. They're not stupid.

Cable news is dying. Literally.

The median age of a Fox News viewer is 65 (sixty five!) - and that's from a study in 2008. Fox is the oldest, but all TV viewers are turning into olds. One can assume a similar fate for AM radio listeners (in the age of streaming podcasts in one's car). There go two big conservative strongholds.


Corporations can control old media, but we're posting on a site run by some guy as a hobby, which is awesome. So long as we keep the net neutral, I'm hopeful.

I'm not sure you're aware, but there's quite a logical leap from being more trusted by Republicans and being a mouthpiece "proxy" for the party itself.

It is possible to cite real statistics and then pontificate on top of them with meaningless bull**** as Andrew so skillfully demonstrated earlier.

Do you dispute that Fox News is losing independents?

Do you dispute that Fox News viewers skew old and are getting older?

Do you understand the implications of each of these, and the related implications of demographic challenges the GOP faces in general?

And what do you specifically dispute that Sullivan stated?

I don't dispute any of this. I disputed your "proxy" characterization . And pretty much every editorial conclusion AS read into his 'statistics', ie "Propaganda" etc etc.

How do you leap from the case that "people who disagree with me watch something I disagree with" to "what other people watch is essentially propaganda." Circular Reasoning 101.

And FWIW I don't generally watch FNC or any cable news for that matter. Not a fan of the format I guess.

"Republicans originally thought that Fox worked for us and now we're discovering we work for Fox." - Former George W. Bush speechwriter.

You're always bashing Sullivan. Do you ever read him? Do you really know who he is and what he stands for? Are you aware that he's a Catholic and a conservative? Yes, he supports Obama. But he also criticizes him when and where he feels necessary. Like this just today:

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/...-barack-obama/

You really ought to know who you're bashing, and why, before doing so. Because I think you're bashing him for what you think he is, rather than for what you know he is.

- Former Hillary Clinton Campaign Advisor and Democratic Governor

Anecdotes are easy. :)

Faux news isn't evolving into anything. They're the same over-the-top spinsters that they've always been.

The South Park Elementary TV News program is just as legit as FOX.

An article that just says but Obama still better then Bush who was really bad isn't Obama bashing.

I'm pretty familiar with Sullivan. Used to read him. He's since jumped the shark and is no longer worth reading, IMHO

The one thing I've discovered in Sullivan (and many other professional Opinioneers) is that once an author/editorialist finds profit in his voice, you can no longer assume that what he espouses is grounded in conviction. In fact the timing around Andrew's switch to tailoring to a predominantly liberal audience was conveniently timed. Through a series of issues, private and public, he burned up all credibility among conservatives .

So what do you do when the people you're paid to write for can no longer take you seriously? You switch teams, and take on the mantle of The Converted. People absolutely love to see people they once disagreed with come around to their way of thinking. They lap that **** up. It's basically like catnip for the politics-inflicted. And so it becomes the last refuge for those who can't go back home for whatever reason. And in certain circles, they're given far more credibility for it than they deserve.

Sullivan's dripping condescension is the most glaring symptom of his true condition. Overcompensation for his own uncertainty. Protesting too much. Whatever you want to call it.