You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
The Fox Juggernaut: Why It's No. 1
2010-01-22
Those who like to bury their heads in the sand won't want to read this.
Some of us, on the other hand, enjoy it...
This is about Fox News and its march over the nation's news media, knocking off and steam-rolling other news channels while cementing its stranglehold at the top.
A lib attempts to understand what's incomprehensible to libs...
Most of us who live in the blessedly enlightened Washington-New York-Boston corridor like to brush off Fox News as the home of the intellectually challenged.
Error number one: dismiss your opponent as a dumbass. That way you'll be surprised when he/she/it makes some pretty intelligent moves...
We mock its slogan, "First, Fair and Balanced," and laugh off its rabble-rousing commentators as neanderthal, bigoted, biased right-wingers.
It's terrible when they don't tell you what you want to hear. More important, when you present news you should be predictive: what you're describing should conform to what's actually happening. If you say, for instance, that the world's getting hotter and hotter until we're all gonna melt, we shouldn't be seeing a hard winter...
Fox's millions of viewers -- those little people in nowhere towns and backwater cities
What are Fox New's rating in the enlightened DC-NYC-B corridor, pray tell?
who don't read books or watch "Mad Men" -- are ridiculed and caricatured as dumb and dumber.
Most of us can count, if only on our fingers. We don't read a lot of trendy books, but we're pretty good with manuals. And Bill O'Reilly and Sarah Palin seem to sell a lot of books to somebody, don't they?
And that stream of adjectives reveals no bigotry whatsoever on the part of the journalist and her crowd.
They are the hollering, red-faced crowds in the rowdy protests at town hall meetings last August. They are the social and political throwbacks of the Tea Party movement. They are the unfashionable, middle-America, small-town folks who queue up for hours to get a glimpse of their action hero, Sarah Palin.
I can remember when it was only libs and commies and anarchists who took to the streets.
I remember when the bien pensent were clever enough not to reveal that they thought the rest of the world merely unfashionable rather than philosophically addled.
So why is Fox News No. 1?
They have a better quality product?... Naw. That can't be it.
Stack its lineup of stars -- Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity -- against the liberal MSNBC's lineup of Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow, and you've got a pretty good picture of why Fox comes out on top.
Matthews is a political hack. Olbermann's demented. Maddow's barely coherent.
It's simple. Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity -- as disagreeable as they might be to someone with my political leanings -- seem in varying degrees more in touch with centrist-to-conservative America, which is, like it or not, the heart of the country. They speak the language -- simple, straightforward. Who can't understand O'Reilly's pinheads and patriots? Who can resist Glenn Beck's boyish persona and oversimplified view of the world? And how about Sean Hannity, who proudly wears his biases on his sleeve?
O'Reilly's more of a libertarian than a conservative. Beck's presentation makes me expect him to be a nut, but what he presents as facts turn out to be verifiable, which suggests his conclusions are valid. Hannity used to be paired with Colmes in a right-left "fair and balanced" show. Colmes is such an unimaginative dullard you ended up feeling sorry for him.
Controversy is their bread and butter. They stoke the fires and stir the ashes and hold court with the low and the high. They don't dine and party with insiders. They are anti-establishment. They are suburbanites (none lives in Washington or Manhattan). They are outliers.
Unlike the trendy folk like the writer...
And now they've got Sarah Palin, the Wasilla beauty queen.
And former governor of Alaska...
Not to mention that Cosmo centerfold Brown of Massachusetts.
When she made her debut on "The O'Reilly Factor" last week as a Fox News political analyst -- however much we enjoy chuckling at that -- the ratings went through the roof. Her appearance drew 3.9 million viewers, more than anything else on other cable news shows combined in the 8 p.m. hour.
People were curious as to whether she could actually produce and defend ideas up close and personal or if she was only good at giving speeches. She did pretty well, I thought. But then, I actually watched it, unlike the writer...
At the same time, MSNBC, which employs brand-name anchors such as Andrea Mitchell and Chris Matthews, has wrapped itself in the liberal flag. It goes back to the 2008 campaign. Who can forget Matthews' revelation on national TV that he felt a tingling up his leg upon hearing Barack Obama speak?
O'Reilly actually had candidate Obama on his show, and was quite polite to him. I thought he got pretty gentle handling. He also had Hillary on and he was actually gallant to her.
During the campaign, MSNBC discovered what Fox News had discovered years ago -- politically biased reporting and analysis are a winning combination. But Matthews and Maddow, with their overwrought liberalism, and Olbermann, with his professorial sarcasm,
Professorial? The writer clearly is not qualified to have an opinion.
can't possibly match Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity in head-to-head competition for the vast center of America. The MSNBC crowd speaks to the Eastern elite; the Fox boys speak to the middle between East and West.
That's the area that's seen its jobs go, that can see its standard of living going with them...
"The public is not only shifting from left to right," the liberals' favorite conservative columnist, David Brooks, wrote recently. "Every single idea associated with the educated class has grown more unpopular over the past year." He went on: "A year ago, the Obama supporters were the passionate ones. Now the Tea Party brigades have all the intensity."
It's that predictive thing I was talking about. It doesn't take an awful lot of brain power to see that despite being told how great it would be if labor was unionized those industries that were most heavily unionized are now in the gutter -- railroads, steel, automobiles, and airlines all used to represent good jobs as well as strong industries. If you tell me that we can spend our way out of debt we don't have to think too long on the subject to come to the conclusion that either you're lying or you're insane. We can form that sort of conclusion regardless of whether we've read anything Oprah's recommended.
While most of us were ignoring the Tea Party crowds as fringe, right-wing crazies, Fox News was there.
They started from the assumption that the Tea Party movement represented valid concerns. The lefties started out calling them "tea baggers" -- Bob Beckel used the term on Fox just the day before Brown beat Marsha Martha Coakley.
Some might say that Fox actually promoted and gave life to the Tea Party movement. That's reaching too far. What Fox did is what Fox does with such success. It found the beginning of a populist wave and now it's riding its crest.
The libs are still snickering like 8-year-olds, visions of sex acts dancing in their heads, having moved well beyond the point where they can make any sort of peace with the movement. The best they can do is send some SEIU goons around to thump some heads.
The SEIU goons could certainly try... but they'd be up against the grandmas, and it wouldn't be a fair fight.
Perhaps if Washington and the liberal media had paid more attention and listened to the rising political winds, the Democrats would not have lost Massachusetts and with it, perhaps health care reform.
If you don't listen to your opponent you'll be surprised every time. I think that's basic Sun Tzu, isn't it?
Posted by:Fred

#37  2379 comments??
Posted by: KBK   2010-01-22 22:51  

#36  She was serious? I thought it was satire.
Posted by: Deacon Blues   2010-01-22 20:13  

#35  In the comment with the pictures, who is the effeminate man in the Pant Suit wearing the Birth Control Glasses®?
Posted by: Ebbese Darling of the Hatfields2588   2010-01-22 19:37  

#34  I read this less literally than some of you seem to have. The author's tongue is firmly planted in her cheek, caricaturing her bi-coastal readers' prejudice with her outlandish characterization of those in flyover country. But she still couldn't get a job at Fox.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2010-01-22 15:23  

#33  Once upon a time, JFM, reporting was considered a skilled trade for those who had an innate grasp of grammar and no business sense, in the same class as plumbing if a tad less damp or financially stable. Dear Mr. Samuel Clemens perfectly epitomized the breed, as he wrote his way round the world to pay off debts resulting from unsuccessful business speculations.

Separately, one has to love the journalist's headshot at the link. She is clearly so intrinsically fashionable she chooses to look like an absolute frump in utterly conventional New York City all-black, little changed since the reign of dear Queen Victoria. If only she had the cheekbones to justify the rusty widow's weeds, but alas!
Posted by: trailing wife   2010-01-22 15:10  

#32  It is instructive to read this

To summarize it the night of the Massachusets thunderclap MSNBC had only liberal guests and one of the anchors (the guy who is suspoosed to be reporting and let us decide) ended sepcualting about how "we" aka the Democrats could bounce again to success.

By contrast Fox news had a balanced plateau with both liberals and conservatives. So this arrogant and stupid lowlife "balanced" is being 100% liberal and have the peasants obey their betters that is not rocketscientists but the people who graduated in a such third trate discuipline as journalism.
Posted by: JFM   2010-01-22 14:52  

#31  AND ANOTHER THING! "They are the unfashionable, middle-America, small-town folks who queue up for hours to get a glimpse of their action hero, Sarah Palin."

Action hero? What they hell is that? Listen: who am I supposed to relate too as a rural American?

Obama: a narcissistic, urbane, anti-Second Amendment yuppie who supports the idea that newborn children with Down's syndrome should be subjected to something called "post-birth abortion."

Palin: a gun-loving rural woman who has a child with Down's syndrome?

(Full Disclosure: I have a child with Down's syndrome.)
Posted by: Secret Master   2010-01-22 14:43  

#30  Our journalist needs to drill down into the statistics a bit. At which point she'll find that not all Fox viewers are unlettered rednecks from Podunk Village, TS (The Swamp). An awful lot of them are like one of my fellow PTA moms: a retired hotshot engineer married to a corporate executive who lectures at Harvard in his spare time. She has two (2!) daughters who are National Merit Scholars as well as being nationally ranked classical musicians and state ranked athletes. My girlfriend watches Fox News precisely because, as Fred writes, their news comports more closely to reality... and of course, she has enough science and statistics background to know when ignorant journalists are purveying partial or total untruths.

In fact, it would be interesting to look into the strength of the correlation between science/statistics/history knowledge and choice of news source... not to mention political identification. It wouldn't surprise me if the Democratic Party had morphed from the party of the labour unions to the Know Nothing Party while we weren't looking.
Posted by: trailing wife   2010-01-22 14:41  

#29  And ANOTHER thing, as long as I'm just starting to get really angry: why do city dwellers always act like their particular urban abyss is the center of the Universe? It's not the center of my universe! I don't even like going to Reno to resupply my ranch!

"Blessedly enlightened Washington-New York-Boston corridor?" Lady, I don't even lock the doors when I go on vacation. How about you?
Posted by: Secret Master   2010-01-22 14:36  

#28  those little people in nowhere towns and backwater cities who don't read books

Why do city people always talk like this? I live in one of the most rural places in Nevada and let me tell you: many of us don't do anything but read. What are we supposed to do - go to the opera?:
Posted by: Secret Master   2010-01-22 14:32  

#27  I'd like to hear her smart set opinion on Savage but chances are she'd have an aneurysm in the middle of it and die...
Posted by: tu3031   2010-01-22 13:47  

#26  Most of us who live in the blessedly enlightened Washington-New York-Boston corridor.....

No, not biased, not one little bit, why do you ask?
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2010-01-22 13:36  

#25  Thanks Fred. The posting gave me a good laugh. The lefts' view of Fox is too funny. They really don't get it.
Posted by: JohnQC   2010-01-22 13:30  

#24  I read the Burg everyday for extra points and credit.
Posted by: Besoeker   2010-01-22 13:13  

#23  Don't worry, God grades on a curve as long as you ask for forgiveness genuinely.
Posted by: Beldar Threreling9726   2010-01-22 13:11  

#22  If life is a "test", I hope God remembers I'm only a "C" student at best.
Posted by: WolfDog   2010-01-22 11:45  

#21  ... the blessedly enlightened Washington-New York-Boston corridor ...

Ah yes. So "blessedly enlightened" that two of my kids (both extremely bright), have vowed to get as far away from Mass as they can as soon as they can. They simply can't stand the smug, patronizing, smarter-and-holier-than-thou attitude of so many of the people here. I can't blame them one bit, though I'll miss them (and their votes).
Posted by: xbalanke   2010-01-22 11:43  

#20  Ok thenÂ…lets sum it up shall we? The reason Fox has better ratings is not because it provides a higher quality product. No Sir! ItÂ’s because, compared to the limited population of the “blessedly enlightened educated class” there are simply more dimwitted rubes to be manipulated. This all makes perfect sense – in a pompous Progressive elitist sort of way.
Posted by: DepotGuy   2010-01-22 11:23  

#19  Yes, all of the above and a 'test' as well. Some days I gets an C- some days an F.
Posted by: Besoeker   2010-01-22 10:24  

#18  Since I do not want to drag this thread too far from the original topic, I will confine myself to three sentences:

RjSchwarz, Christians do not believe that life is one big test to see if we qualify. Christians know that everyone sins and nobody qualifies, so the sinless Son of God, Jesus Christ, accepted the punishment for sin on our behalf. Our response to his gift is to accept it, live lives of gratitude to God and to share God's grace and mercy with others as it has been extended to us.
Posted by: mom   2010-01-22 10:16  

#17  Bright Pebbles, I suspect most Christians believe life is a test to determine if you are qualified to go to heaven. An easy test would be worthless. A test of faith that had to overcome war, death, disease, authoritarian dictators, Marxists and filthy hippies might be a bit too hard for most but it certainly is a test.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2010-01-22 09:58  

#16  Go to the link and you'll find out why Luisita works for the NYT and not Fox.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2010-01-22 09:43  

#15  Further proof that the journo-class should use foreign correspondents when reporting on locations outside of "the blessedly enlightened Washington-New York-Boston corridor".
Posted by: eLarson   2010-01-22 09:08  

#14  When all the other authoritarian politicians suddenly die of natural causes on the same day I'll believe in God. Posted by Bright Pebbles

You've establishes some tight parameters. Just make certain you don't die first and miss the happy event.
Posted by: Besoeker   2010-01-22 09:01  

#13  This really is a serious article? What a elitist, condescending piece of crap.

This is what passes for Journalism these days? No wonder the NYT is circling the drain.

And she still doesn't get it. Fox News is top because they report opposing views.

And they actually report the news (such as ACORN) while the others hide the news in reams of opinion - if they report it at all. Beck and Hannity don't try to wrap themselves up as 'journalists' while Chris and Olberman do.

And the reason the MSNBC/CNN/etc... 'anchors' are doing so bad is that, lacking any logical argument, they resort to name calling (Teabaggers). People find that dishonest and, frankly, disgusting.
Posted by: CrazyFool   2010-01-22 08:49  

#12  Besoeker ,

When all the other authoritarian politicians suddenly die of natural causes on the same day I'll believe in God.
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2010-01-22 08:46  

#11  The writer is a former assistant national editor at the NY Times. That means she's heard of flyover country, may even be able to find it on a map, but certainly wouldn't be caught dead there (because, after all, there may be only one store in the whole state that sells Manolo Blahniks.)

BTW, Luisita, more Democrats watch Fox than watch MSNBC. Really. Kinda like more liberals listen to Rush than listened to your beloved late Air America.
Posted by: Cornsilk Blondie   2010-01-22 07:31  

#10  ...seem in varying degrees more in touch with centrist-to-conservative America, which is, like it or not, the heart of the country.

Which is the key admission that the liberal-left does not represent the heart of the country. That their goal is not the classical definition of a democracy or republic. Rather, their goal is to rule through a facade of one while disenfranchising the real majority. All, of course, in the name of 'social justice' [ie the socialist peoples' democratic form of government - Marxism].
Posted by: Procopius2k   2010-01-22 07:27  

#9  For those who do not believe in God, yes, it was just a coincidence that an evil, drunken, SOB happened to die and provide an opportunity for right to prevail.
Posted by: Besoeker   2010-01-22 07:04  

#8  Perhaps if Washington and the liberal media had paid more attention and listened to the rising political winds, the Democrats would not have lost Massachusetts and with it, perhaps health care reform.

That's as close as she comes to 'getting it'. If only they'd listened, they could've trampled the 65% of Americans who don't want their health care modified.

Fortunately for "us", "they" will never get it.
Posted by: Bobby   2010-01-22 06:26  

#7  BrerRabbit

He's on again at 2am EST
Posted by: GolfBravoUSMC   2010-01-22 06:22  

#6  News Babes

"Fox" News









They even have a DGS



MSLSD

If she moved in next door your lawn would die!


Honorable Mention from the Bankrupt Print Media

Could make a buzzard puke
Posted by: GolfBravoUSMC   2010-01-22 06:18  

#5  viewers=advertisers=money

Why hasn't anyone else tried to become more like Fox?

I really enjoy watching Beck. I just wish he was on later than 5pm.
Posted by: BrerRabbit   2010-01-22 06:03  

#4  "Fox's millions of viewers -- those little people in nowhere towns and backwater cities who don't read books or watch "Mad Men" -- are ridiculed and caricatured as dumb and dumber. They are the hollering, red-faced crowds in the rowdy protests at town hall meetings last August. They are the social and political throwbacks of the Tea Party movement. They are the unfashionable, middle-America, small-town folks who queue up for hours to get a glimpse of their action hero, Sarah Palin."

That would describe perhaps 5% of Fox News viewers. The other 95% are people who've grown tired of the low-quality "news" offered by the other broadcast and cable networks and prefer reporting that doesn't read like propaganda churned out by the Democratic National Committee or some liberal, Nanny State think-tank funded by George Soros.

If this dimwitted bint really wants to understand why Fox News is #1, she only has to look at why Air America just went Tango Uniform, and notice the strong ideological and stylistic resemblance between AA and the rest of her favored, "progressive" news outfits.

Americans are getting fed up with that shit.

Posted by: Dave D.   2010-01-22 05:59  

#3  "tea baggers" -- Bob Beckel used the term on Fox just the day before Brown beat Marsha Martha Coakley.

Bob Beckel....? Who is Bob Beckel. Never heard of him. Never wish to hear of him again.
Posted by: Besoeker   2010-01-22 05:03  

#2  The lefties still don't get it. Fox kills the competition because it is the sole cable news occupant of any position on the political spectrum to the right of center-left in a country whose population self-identifies as conservative at double the rate it self-identifies as liberal. While Fox's competitors compete with each other for the same viewers, Fox stands alone as the sole choice for those right of center.

The only thing surprising about the success of Fox News is that they don't (yet) total double the combined viewership of all of their competitors.
Posted by: AzCat   2010-01-22 01:36  

#1  And don't forget the Fox News Babes are hot!
Posted by: Glenmore   2010-01-22 00:56  

00:00