Why is Foxnews considerd a news Station?

macfan881

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Feb 22, 2006
2,347
0
Since Glen beck has been going more and more Crazy as the day goes by why is foxnews really Considered a news Channel I see the Schedule there is really only a period of time to the day till I think 3EST? that's actually news than they have Radioshow/talkshow host the rest of the day. At least with Cnn/msnbc they actaully report news most of the whole enitre day as well of ther over biased to Im really surprised that they are able to keep the "news title in there name.
 

MacNut

macrumors Core
Jan 4, 2002
21,544
7,802
CT
Beck is not a news man, neither is Olberman. So going by those standards MSNBC is not a news station either.
 

spillproof

macrumors 68020
Jun 4, 2009
2,028
2
USA
I guess if you talk about the news once, you are a news channel. Just like if you say something racist once, you are a racist for life.
 

drewsof07

macrumors 68000
Oct 30, 2006
1,998
415
Ohio
Fox's ratings were tanking, Beck brought those ratings back up. They were less concerned with their "job" reporting the news, and more concerned with getting more viewers. He IS entertaining, you have to give him that much. I just sit and laugh at the ridiculous way he thinks. Kind of like Mad Money on MSNBC... It's not really that informative, but it's REALLY entertaining to watch, from ages 2 - 92, everyone can appreciate a good barnyard sound :)
 

Hmac

macrumors 68020
May 30, 2007
2,128
2
Midwest USA
I'd have to agree...more of an entertainment channel. All those enraged liberal kooks? Who doesn't get a hoot out of that?

I do have to agree about Glenn Beck...he's gone pretty far over the top.
 

NC MacGuy

macrumors 603
Feb 9, 2005
6,225
0
The good side of the grass.
If you ever watch the news part of their programming, it is fair and balanced.;) They are just telling you want you don't want to hear.

Some of the questions they raise should be thought about unless you are one of the sheep.

Brit Hume, Juan Williams and Chris Wallace (registered Dem.) are all well respected in their field. Again, if they're not saying what you want to hear and it's coming from somewhere you've been brainwashed to believe is evil, lying and untrustworthy, baaahhh, baaaahhh follow the man to the slaughterhouse.

Start thinking for yourself and not just parroting "faux news."

Beck and Hannity are different story and I can't handle them. They are purely for entertainment as is Limbaugh. O'Reilly I rather enjoy and he used to rip the previous admin. too but I'm sure you didn't here it. He has stuck up for the liberals in more than a few instances. He can get loud and shout over people sometimes but he does make some good points.

I particularly liked his Barney Frank interview. If you watched that and still think Barney Frank is worthy of his job, well follow blindly sheep. No right or wrong, just D or R. What's the use in debate or even elections, just count how many registered D/R's and that's your rep. Chris Dodd's another that needs to go.
 

Desertrat

macrumors newbie
Jul 4, 2003
2
706
Terlingua, Texas
Fox is just like CNN; Beck/O'Reilly = Larry King or that weird broad. They don't do news; they do opinion. Same for all the others. There is straight news of the who/where/when/what/how style, and then there is the editorializing which attempts to say why or tell us (ala Cokie Roberts), "But what does it mean?"

The Sunday Morning talking heads aren't news. They're editorializing or letting the people who are being interviewed put their own BS spin on events.

I generally skip the editorializing. It's mostly boring or so agenda driven that it's total blarney.

Trouble is, way too many of the straight-news reporters and reporterettes don't know much about the world in which we live. They don't know how things are grown or made or how cars work or have any manual-skill knowledge. Without a teleprompter they're dead meat.

Thee's a reason I coined the word "mediahcrities".

(Please understand that I regard Florence King as a very gentle soul.)

'Rat
 

NC MacGuy

macrumors 603
Feb 9, 2005
6,225
0
The good side of the grass.
There is no source for that claim. "Tanking" is beyond an exaggeration. They increased viewers by 43% from '07-'08. Beck jumped from CNN to Fox on Jan. 19, 2009. Watching too much Olbermann?? Watching is okay, believing is another story. Baaahhh.

Cable News rankings 2007:
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/93247-Fox_News_Channel_Leads_in_2007_Cable_News_Ratings.php

Fox News Channel once again ended the year as cable’s top news network, followed by CNN, with few radical ratings dips or surges for either network. But among the channels with smaller audience totals -- MSNBC, CNBC and CNN Headline News -- 2007 was a year of growth.

For the year in primetime, Fox News was the No. 6-ranked cable channel behind USA Network, TNT, ESPN, TBS and Lifetime Television. That’s two notches higher than its ranking last year. CNN, its closest news competitor, was No. 26, down one.


Cable News rankings 2008:
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/161084-Fox_News_Tops_Banner_Year_for_Cable_News.php

In primetime, Fox News was up 41% in total viewers, averaging just over 2 million viewers. In news’ target demographic of 25- to 54-year-olds, the network averaged 502,000 viewers, a gain of 43%.

Fox News will finish the year as the most-watched cable news network—for the seventh consecutive year. The network is the No. 3 ranked basic-cable network in primetime, behind USA and ESPN. CNN is ranked 10th and MSNBC is ranked 22nd.


Cable News rankings 2009 through August '09:
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/277946-Cable_News_Ratings_Fox_News_Channel_Still_On_Top.php

Sep 2, 2009
In August, FOXNews was again in the top three for primetime in all of
cable, which is seven of eight months this year.
FOXNews was also in the top five in total day.
=============================
Net / Daytime / Primetime
-------------------------------
FOXNews / 5th / 3rd
CNN / 20th / 22nd
MSNBC / 28th / 25th
=============================
FOXNews had the top 11 programs in cable news for Total Viewers in
August and 9 of the top 10 in the A25-54 demo ("The O'Reilly Factor,"
"Hannity," and "Glenn Beck" leading the way in both, respectively).
MSNBC's "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" came in #12 in Total Viewers
(#9 in demo) and "Rachel Maddow" came in #16 (#11 demo).
CNN's "Larry King Live" ranked #13 in Total Viewers and #13 in the
demo.
FOXNews' strong showing in the demo helped make August their best
month in primetime demo for 2009.
 

callmemike20

macrumors 6502a
Aug 21, 2007
855
3
USA
There is no source for that claim. "Tanking" is beyond an exaggeration. They increased viewers by 43% from '07-'08. Beck jumped from CNN to Fox on Jan. 19, 2009. Watching too much Olbermann?? Watching is okay, believing is another story. Baaahhh.

Cable News rankings 2007:
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/93247-Fox_News_Channel_Leads_in_2007_Cable_News_Ratings.php





Cable News rankings 2008:
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/161084-Fox_News_Tops_Banner_Year_for_Cable_News.php





Cable News rankings 2009 through August '09:
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/277946-Cable_News_Ratings_Fox_News_Channel_Still_On_Top.php
Lol. I was looking up these stats but then I scrolled down and saw that you posted them already. Thanks for saving me time. But anyway, Fox News was never tanking. I didn't understand where that guy got it from either.
 

sushi

Moderator emeritus
Jul 19, 2002
15,630
3
キャンプスワ&#
It amazes me how the liberals on this board seem to hate Fox and bash it every time they can.

Hey, we live in a free society. If you don't like it, then don't watch it. :)
 

.Andy

macrumors 68030
Jul 18, 2004
2,946
583
The Mergui Archipelago
It amazes me how the liberals on this board seem to hate Fox and bash it every time they can.
You don't have to be a liberal to dislike the low quality, culture wars, race to the bottom infotainment that passes as fox news. Nor are you obliged to support the channel because you self-identify with the right.
 

Eraserhead

macrumors G4
Nov 3, 2005
10,300
10,382
UK
Since Glen beck has been going more and more Crazy as the day goes by why is foxnews really Considered a news Channel I see the Schedule there is really only a period of time to the day till I think 3EST? that's actually news than they have Radioshow/talkshow host the rest of the day. At least with Cnn/msnbc they actaully report news most of the whole enitre day as well of ther over biased to Im really surprised that they are able to keep the "news title in there name.
Agree completely, Fox News is fine - if everyone who watched it didn't consider it a news channel.

If you ever watch the news part of their programming, it is fair and balanced.
Well except for Democrat == bad and Republican == good for the people they are reporting on for a start...
 

Thomas Veil

macrumors 68020
Feb 14, 2004
2,435
5,528
OBJECTIVE reality
If an enemy of the United States wanted to conquer us by subversion rather than violence, they couldn't do a much better job than Fox "News" is doing now.

Fox lies and distorts and calls it "news"; uninformed Americans take that political propaganda as gospel; and pretty soon we're no longer having conversations about real issues, we're having screaming matches about insanity like death panels, birth certificates and "socialism".

Much-maligned as both Congress and the voters are, it's a wonder either of them can still function at all with Fox continually brainwashing the public.

That's why Fox enjoying good ratings should scare the hell out of any rational American. If the Soviet-era Pravda were the leading news source in the United States, the right wing kooks would be livid. They would be up in arms. But the right wing version of Pravda, they've got no problem with that.
 

sushi

Moderator emeritus
Jul 19, 2002
15,630
3
キャンプスワ&#
If an enemy of the United States wanted to conquer us by subversion rather than violence, they couldn't do a much better job than Fox "News" is doing now. <snip>
Snort. :D

No one requires you or anybody else to watch Fox news, or any other channel for that matter. Let's see, propaganda through choice. Now I've heard everything.

Every news channel has its own slant. We all have a choice in what we watch. Pick a channel that you like an ignore the rest. Simple. :)
 

Eraserhead

macrumors G4
Nov 3, 2005
10,300
10,382
UK
Thomas' damn right. That Fox News defines the debate on things like healthcare to completely crazy positions is hurting the US hugely. Look at the crazy town hall meetings for a start.

Every news channel has its own slant. We all have a choice in what we watch. Pick a channel that you like an ignore the rest. Simple. :)
And then if you pick Fox News, then you're being lied to constantly about the world so you won't understand how it really works.

No one requires you or anybody else to watch Fox news, or any other channel for that matter. Let's see, propaganda through choice. Now I've heard everything.
Noone forced people to watch Hitler's speeches or almost any other dictator, they still had an effect.
 

rdowns

macrumors Penryn
Jul 11, 2003
27,345
12,409
Thomas' damn right. That Fox News defines the debate on things like healthcare to completely crazy positions is hurting the US hugely. Look at the crazy town hall meetings for a start.

CNN and MSNBC could frame an intelligent debate but they don't. They give ever increasing airtime to the crazies.

It's about ratings, not the news.
 

NC MacGuy

macrumors 603
Feb 9, 2005
6,225
0
The good side of the grass.
Is any "news" organization unbiased these days? They're shows. They need ratings. I balance my all day at work NPR and my CNN with a little Fox. It's interesting to hear another point of view.

Since the promise of transparency vanished among others, I like someone rooting around digging up dirt that the others turn a blind eye to.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-4qEz1vea0
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/rulings/promise-broken/

Why do the others not ask any questions and follow blindly? If they reported anything substantial instead of what's metered out and handed to them, Fox wouldn't be where it is and all scary. I think that Acorn, Van Jones, Humana hushing, Rev. Wright among others are stories I'd love to hear from others but Fox news. They are stories and newsworthy but others won't mention them. Frankly I find any "news" organization not wanting to dig and question everything not a news organization. Just get rid of them and I'll watch Gibbs' blurb everyday and read the statements, since it's all they parrot.

If the govt. had it's way, I'd be getting my news from the Letterman show.:rolleyes: Oh, isn't that how our current president got elected? He certainly was one of the least qualified but the mainstream media loved him.

Transparency my ass:
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/07/yet_more_obama_secrecy_wont_release_info_on_visits.php
 

NC MacGuy

macrumors 603
Feb 9, 2005
6,225
0
The good side of the grass.
Of course not, the only certainty is that no source is ever unbiased.

Just some sources, are better than others.
And there's the rub. If more sources don't start balancing their output, Fox will continue to capitalize.

Any sane person should know enough to take a sampling from multiple sources from both sides of the spectrum before forming an opinion - I hope.:rolleyes:

You also must realize that our last presidential election was a media job. The left motivated the idiots walking around now with "My Presidents Black" shirts who don't know who our Secretary of State is let alone their states capital. Bush didn't help matters either but IMO Clinton & Romney were the two best main party candidates.

Fox is a tool to motivate the narrow minded right wingers to try and regain control from the left. Hannity & Beck whip people up and stay successful by mixing in enough truth to be plausible to the feeble. The lefts tools worked last election and we'll see what happens next year.
 

Thomas Veil

macrumors 68020
Feb 14, 2004
2,435
5,528
OBJECTIVE reality
I've said it before and I'll say it again: CNN was best in its early days, when it was little more than a "rip and read" organization. It was pretty much simply rewriting AP stories and reading them on air, but we got real news. Now too much of it is frivolous junk. "Headline News" in the evenings is a joke.

MSNBC is a curious entity. Their TV network has obviously has taken a liberal tack, but unlike Fox, it's an economic, not a political, decision. They know they can make money being the anti-Fox. Their website, OTOH, is more news oriented (though they don't hesitate to promote their own shows).

And yeah, whether people are forced to watch Fox or they just choose to, it has a seriously detrimental effect. How many times do we need to see those polls showing that Fox viewers are far more ignorant and misinformed than CNN & MSNBC viewers? Rupert must be so proud.
 

Eraserhead

macrumors G4
Nov 3, 2005
10,300
10,382
UK
Any sane person should know enough to take a sampling from multiple sources from both sides of the spectrum before forming an opinion - I hope.:rolleyes:
So something right wing like the Economist*, something centrist like the BBC, and something left wing like the Guardian? Sounds good.

You also must realize that our last presidential election was a media job.
What, just like the previous one?

I've said it before and I'll say it again: CNN was best in its early days, when it was little more than a "rip and read" organization. It was pretty much simply rewriting AP stories and reading them on air, but we got real news. Now too much of it is frivolous junk. "Headline News" in the evenings is a joke.
True, often the same can be said for the BBC.

And yeah, whether people are forced to watch Fox or they just choose to, it has a seriously detrimental effect. How many times do we need to see those polls showing that Fox viewers are far more ignorant and misinformed than CNN & MSNBC viewers? Rupert must be so proud.
+1

Wrt to Fox, where's their coverage of climate change? What's that like? Because that seems like a damn big issue, probably the most important one we face right now.

For example, take the speech by the Chinese President (CNN, BBC, Economist), I can't see anything on Foxes website about that...

EDIT: * = I should point out that on social issue the Economist is pretty damn liberal.