CEO of New York Times calls for social media to subsidize the mainstream media
Comments
-
tl;dr.
-
What's your take on fake news?
-
Apparently its not profitable and needs to be subsidized by social media.2001400ex said:What's your take on fake news?
-
"Real" news needs to do a better job, and stop writing articles about stupid shit like how Trump said something that could be considered racist. Seriously, it's stupid shit like that that's costing them. Knock it off, and start reporting shit that is actually important and informative.
-
So what you are saying, is that when Trump says racist shit, the media shouldn't report it? What about when Trump says stupid shit like 3 million illegals voted? Should the media ignore that too?Fenderbender123 said:"Real" news needs to do a better job, and stop writing articles about stupid shit like how Trump said something that could be considered racist. Seriously, it's stupid shit like that that's costing them. Knock it off, and start reporting shit that is actually important and informative.
-
Yes2001400ex said:
So what you are saying, is that when Trump says racist shit, the media shouldn't report it? What about when Trump says stupid shit like 3 million illegals voted? Should the media ignore that too?Fenderbender123 said:"Real" news needs to do a better job, and stop writing articles about stupid shit like how Trump said something that could be considered racist. Seriously, it's stupid shit like that that's costing them. Knock it off, and start reporting shit that is actually important and informative.
-
What about when Obama talks about black lives matter, should the media call him out as being a racist?Fenderbender123 said:
Yes2001400ex said:
So what you are saying, is that when Trump says racist shit, the media shouldn't report it? What about when Trump says stupid shit like 3 million illegals voted? Should the media ignore that too?Fenderbender123 said:"Real" news needs to do a better job, and stop writing articles about stupid shit like how Trump said something that could be considered racist. Seriously, it's stupid shit like that that's costing them. Knock it off, and start reporting shit that is actually important and informative.
-
The point being, like cable, the media has segmented itself into specific demographics based on their agendas. Conservative outlets like Fox News do better because there are fewer of them fighting for half the national viewership, while CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc, have to fight for the other half. The same goes for print media as well, as there is more competition with liberal leaning than conservative leaning print media. Pretty simple.
The game isn't rigged, media businesses need to align themselves where there's less competition, or provide value that the others don't.
For the record, this dumb fuck isn't going to convince people to buy the news. Surviving on subscription revenue has been a dying trend for a couple decades. It's all about advertisement revenue. Don't get me wrong, circulation is important, but the circulation revenue shouldn't be. -
Again, I'd prefer they didn't.2001400ex said:
What about when Obama talks about black lives matter, should the media call him out as being a racist?Fenderbender123 said:
Yes2001400ex said:
So what you are saying, is that when Trump says racist shit, the media shouldn't report it? What about when Trump says stupid shit like 3 million illegals voted? Should the media ignore that too?Fenderbender123 said:"Real" news needs to do a better job, and stop writing articles about stupid shit like how Trump said something that could be considered racist. Seriously, it's stupid shit like that that's costing them. Knock it off, and start reporting shit that is actually important and informative.
-
It's not "Fox is conservative and the rest of the media outlets are liberal." And there's print media, etc. The media is like the public, about 35% conservative, 35% liberal and 30% in the middle. I do chuckle at simple minded people that listen to Fox, rush, etc. And believe they are fair and balanced and all other media is liberal.greenblood said:The point being, like cable, the media has segmented itself into specific demographics based on their agendas. Conservative outlets like Fox News do better because there are fewer of them fighting for half the national viewership, while CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc, have to fight for the other half. The same goes for print media as well, as there is more competition with liberal leaning than conservative leaning print media. Pretty simple.
The game isn't rigged, media businesses need to align themselves where there's less competition, or provide value that the others don't.
For the record, this dumb fuck isn't going to convince people to buy the news. Surviving on subscription revenue has been a dying trend for a couple decades. It's all about advertisement revenue. Don't get me wrong, circulation is important, but the circulation revenue shouldn't be.
The reality is, media on both sides chase the shiny object. They go after whatever they think sells and gets people's attention. Not what reality is. -
Don't know if this was intended for me, but if so, did I say Fox was was fair and balanced?2001400ex said:
It's not "Fox is conservative and the rest of the media outlets are liberal." And there's print media, etc. The media is like the public, about 35% conservative, 35% liberal and 30% in the middle. I do chuckle at simple minded people that listen to Fox, rush, etc. And believe they are fair and balanced and all other media is liberal.greenblood said:The point being, like cable, the media has segmented itself into specific demographics based on their agendas. Conservative outlets like Fox News do better because there are fewer of them fighting for half the national viewership, while CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc, have to fight for the other half. The same goes for print media as well, as there is more competition with liberal leaning than conservative leaning print media. Pretty simple.
The game isn't rigged, media businesses need to align themselves where there's less competition, or provide value that the others don't.
For the record, this dumb fuck isn't going to convince people to buy the news. Surviving on subscription revenue has been a dying trend for a couple decades. It's all about advertisement revenue. Don't get me wrong, circulation is important, but the circulation revenue shouldn't be.
The reality is, media on both sides chase the shiny object. They go after whatever they think sells and gets people's attention. Not what reality is.
ABC and CBS slant left.
CNN and MSNBC have fallen off the liberal cliff
Fox News fell off the conservative cliff the moment it was created.
Fox News has less competition for their viewing audience. Which is why they get 2-3 times the viewership. It isn't that hard.
-
CNN has fallen off the liberal cliff? That's funny.greenblood said:
Don't know if this was intended for me, but if so, did I say Fox was was fair and balanced?2001400ex said:
It's not "Fox is conservative and the rest of the media outlets are liberal." And there's print media, etc. The media is like the public, about 35% conservative, 35% liberal and 30% in the middle. I do chuckle at simple minded people that listen to Fox, rush, etc. And believe they are fair and balanced and all other media is liberal.greenblood said:The point being, like cable, the media has segmented itself into specific demographics based on their agendas. Conservative outlets like Fox News do better because there are fewer of them fighting for half the national viewership, while CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc, have to fight for the other half. The same goes for print media as well, as there is more competition with liberal leaning than conservative leaning print media. Pretty simple.
The game isn't rigged, media businesses need to align themselves where there's less competition, or provide value that the others don't.
For the record, this dumb fuck isn't going to convince people to buy the news. Surviving on subscription revenue has been a dying trend for a couple decades. It's all about advertisement revenue. Don't get me wrong, circulation is important, but the circulation revenue shouldn't be.
The reality is, media on both sides chase the shiny object. They go after whatever they think sells and gets people's attention. Not what reality is.
ABC and CBS slant left.
CNN and MSNBC have fallen off the liberal cliff
Fox News fell off the conservative cliff the moment it was created.
Fox News has less competition for their viewing audience. Which is why they get 2-3 times the viewership. It isn't that hard.
Also this myth of msnbc being a liberal network. It's a democratic partisan network. Is morning Joe liberal? Mark Halperin? Michael Steele? Fuck even Chris Matthews was bashing bernie sanders during the primary.
-
The problem with the media isn't that they are liberal. It's they are establishment. A lot of the conspiring and the leaking of questions was done during the PRIMARY to hurt the liberal candidate bernie sanders and help the establishment candidate hillary clinton.
-
No, Fox news doesn't have 2-3 times the viewership cause they have less competition. If that were true, and it were true that CNN and the rest are liberal, then Fox would have like 10 times the viewership. (MSNBC is liberal and they promote that).greenblood said:
Don't know if this was intended for me, but if so, did I say Fox was was fair and balanced?2001400ex said:
It's not "Fox is conservative and the rest of the media outlets are liberal." And there's print media, etc. The media is like the public, about 35% conservative, 35% liberal and 30% in the middle. I do chuckle at simple minded people that listen to Fox, rush, etc. And believe they are fair and balanced and all other media is liberal.greenblood said:The point being, like cable, the media has segmented itself into specific demographics based on their agendas. Conservative outlets like Fox News do better because there are fewer of them fighting for half the national viewership, while CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc, have to fight for the other half. The same goes for print media as well, as there is more competition with liberal leaning than conservative leaning print media. Pretty simple.
The game isn't rigged, media businesses need to align themselves where there's less competition, or provide value that the others don't.
For the record, this dumb fuck isn't going to convince people to buy the news. Surviving on subscription revenue has been a dying trend for a couple decades. It's all about advertisement revenue. Don't get me wrong, circulation is important, but the circulation revenue shouldn't be.
The reality is, media on both sides chase the shiny object. They go after whatever they think sells and gets people's attention. Not what reality is.
ABC and CBS slant left.
CNN and MSNBC have fallen off the liberal cliff
Fox News fell off the conservative cliff the moment it was created.
Fox News has less competition for their viewing audience. Which is why they get 2-3 times the viewership. It isn't that hard.
As I said, there's was more media sources than just TV. (Tho I do chuckle when Fox rails on the liberal media as if they aren't the media). Liberals on average get their news from reading. Conservatives on average get their news from TV. Just like conservatives typically get more riled up over news than liberals. There are many studies that show people's behaviors and how they translate to politics. And politicians know this and tailor their message that way. -
Hondo calling anyone simple is hilarious
-
There's a lot of truth in that. Fox railed against Trump until they realized he won the nomination. Then they supported him through everything.dhdawg said:The problem with the media isn't that they are liberal. It's they are establishment. A lot of the conspiring and the leaking of questions was done during the PRIMARY to hurt the liberal candidate bernie sanders and help the establishment candidate hillary clinton.
-
Some did some didn't. Some of the pundits were definitely against him, even till the end. O'Reilly who I like, was pretty easy on him, Hannity who I despise was gurgling Trump from the beginning.2001400ex said:
There's a lot of truth in that. Fox railed against Trump until they realized he won the nomination. Then they supported him through everything.dhdawg said:The problem with the media isn't that they are liberal. It's they are establishment. A lot of the conspiring and the leaking of questions was done during the PRIMARY to hurt the liberal candidate bernie sanders and help the establishment candidate hillary clinton.
But yes, I'd say the media is more establishment than anything. A lot of it has to do with access.
And when I said Liberal I was grouping establishment in there, when there is definitely a difference in extremes. -
I don't think people really read the news anymore. People are so busy now, if you can't get your info in a couple minutes, you move on. Which basically has led us into a headline reading society. Most people only read the headlines, they don't have time for anything else.2001400ex said:
No, Fox news doesn't have 2-3 times the viewership cause they have less competition. If that were true, and it were true that CNN and the rest are liberal, then Fox would have like 10 times the viewership. (MSNBC is liberal and they promote that).greenblood said:
Don't know if this was intended for me, but if so, did I say Fox was was fair and balanced?2001400ex said:
It's not "Fox is conservative and the rest of the media outlets are liberal." And there's print media, etc. The media is like the public, about 35% conservative, 35% liberal and 30% in the middle. I do chuckle at simple minded people that listen to Fox, rush, etc. And believe they are fair and balanced and all other media is liberal.greenblood said:The point being, like cable, the media has segmented itself into specific demographics based on their agendas. Conservative outlets like Fox News do better because there are fewer of them fighting for half the national viewership, while CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc, have to fight for the other half. The same goes for print media as well, as there is more competition with liberal leaning than conservative leaning print media. Pretty simple.
The game isn't rigged, media businesses need to align themselves where there's less competition, or provide value that the others don't.
For the record, this dumb fuck isn't going to convince people to buy the news. Surviving on subscription revenue has been a dying trend for a couple decades. It's all about advertisement revenue. Don't get me wrong, circulation is important, but the circulation revenue shouldn't be.
The reality is, media on both sides chase the shiny object. They go after whatever they think sells and gets people's attention. Not what reality is.
ABC and CBS slant left.
CNN and MSNBC have fallen off the liberal cliff
Fox News fell off the conservative cliff the moment it was created.
Fox News has less competition for their viewing audience. Which is why they get 2-3 times the viewership. It isn't that hard.
As I said, there's was more media sources than just TV. (Tho I do chuckle when Fox rails on the liberal media as if they aren't the media). Liberals on average get their news from reading. Conservatives on average get their news from TV. Just like conservatives typically get more riled up over news than liberals. There are many studies that show people's behaviors and how they translate to politics. And politicians know this and tailor their message that way. -
Conservative fake news sites and liberal fake news shows say differently.2001400ex said:
No, Fox news doesn't have 2-3 times the viewership cause they have less competition. If that were true, and it were true that CNN and the rest are liberal, then Fox would have like 10 times the viewership. (MSNBC is liberal and they promote that).greenblood said:
Don't know if this was intended for me, but if so, did I say Fox was was fair and balanced?2001400ex said:
It's not "Fox is conservative and the rest of the media outlets are liberal." And there's print media, etc. The media is like the public, about 35% conservative, 35% liberal and 30% in the middle. I do chuckle at simple minded people that listen to Fox, rush, etc. And believe they are fair and balanced and all other media is liberal.greenblood said:The point being, like cable, the media has segmented itself into specific demographics based on their agendas. Conservative outlets like Fox News do better because there are fewer of them fighting for half the national viewership, while CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc, have to fight for the other half. The same goes for print media as well, as there is more competition with liberal leaning than conservative leaning print media. Pretty simple.
The game isn't rigged, media businesses need to align themselves where there's less competition, or provide value that the others don't.
For the record, this dumb fuck isn't going to convince people to buy the news. Surviving on subscription revenue has been a dying trend for a couple decades. It's all about advertisement revenue. Don't get me wrong, circulation is important, but the circulation revenue shouldn't be.
The reality is, media on both sides chase the shiny object. They go after whatever they think sells and gets people's attention. Not what reality is.
ABC and CBS slant left.
CNN and MSNBC have fallen off the liberal cliff
Fox News fell off the conservative cliff the moment it was created.
Fox News has less competition for their viewing audience. Which is why they get 2-3 times the viewership. It isn't that hard.
As I said, there's was more media sources than just TV. (Tho I do chuckle when Fox rails on the liberal media as if they aren't the media). Liberals on average get their news from reading. Conservatives on average get their news from TV. Just like conservatives typically get more riled up over news than liberals. There are many studies that show people's behaviors and how they translate to politics. And politicians know this and tailor their message that way. -
There's a lot of truth in that too. Headline and the first paragraph. Maybe. Hence the mantra on here "did you just read the headline."greenblood said:
I don't think people really read the news anymore. People are so busy now, if you can't get your info in a couple minutes, you move on. Which basically has led us into a headline reading society. Most people only read the headlines, they don't have time for anything else.2001400ex said:
No, Fox news doesn't have 2-3 times the viewership cause they have less competition. If that were true, and it were true that CNN and the rest are liberal, then Fox would have like 10 times the viewership. (MSNBC is liberal and they promote that).greenblood said:
Don't know if this was intended for me, but if so, did I say Fox was was fair and balanced?2001400ex said:
It's not "Fox is conservative and the rest of the media outlets are liberal." And there's print media, etc. The media is like the public, about 35% conservative, 35% liberal and 30% in the middle. I do chuckle at simple minded people that listen to Fox, rush, etc. And believe they are fair and balanced and all other media is liberal.greenblood said:The point being, like cable, the media has segmented itself into specific demographics based on their agendas. Conservative outlets like Fox News do better because there are fewer of them fighting for half the national viewership, while CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc, have to fight for the other half. The same goes for print media as well, as there is more competition with liberal leaning than conservative leaning print media. Pretty simple.
The game isn't rigged, media businesses need to align themselves where there's less competition, or provide value that the others don't.
For the record, this dumb fuck isn't going to convince people to buy the news. Surviving on subscription revenue has been a dying trend for a couple decades. It's all about advertisement revenue. Don't get me wrong, circulation is important, but the circulation revenue shouldn't be.
The reality is, media on both sides chase the shiny object. They go after whatever they think sells and gets people's attention. Not what reality is.
ABC and CBS slant left.
CNN and MSNBC have fallen off the liberal cliff
Fox News fell off the conservative cliff the moment it was created.
Fox News has less competition for their viewing audience. Which is why they get 2-3 times the viewership. It isn't that hard.
As I said, there's was more media sources than just TV. (Tho I do chuckle when Fox rails on the liberal media as if they aren't the media). Liberals on average get their news from reading. Conservatives on average get their news from TV. Just like conservatives typically get more riled up over news than liberals. There are many studies that show people's behaviors and how they translate to politics. And politicians know this and tailor their message that way.
A great example of that is the bill Gates/Trump meeting. The headlines from conservative sites are vastly different than the headlines from liberal sites. -
Agree. Noone was harder on Socialism than Chris Matthews.dhdawg said:
CNN has fallen off the liberal cliff? That's funny.greenblood said:
Don't know if this was intended for me, but if so, did I say Fox was was fair and balanced?2001400ex said:
It's not "Fox is conservative and the rest of the media outlets are liberal." And there's print media, etc. The media is like the public, about 35% conservative, 35% liberal and 30% in the middle. I do chuckle at simple minded people that listen to Fox, rush, etc. And believe they are fair and balanced and all other media is liberal.greenblood said:The point being, like cable, the media has segmented itself into specific demographics based on their agendas. Conservative outlets like Fox News do better because there are fewer of them fighting for half the national viewership, while CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc, have to fight for the other half. The same goes for print media as well, as there is more competition with liberal leaning than conservative leaning print media. Pretty simple.
The game isn't rigged, media businesses need to align themselves where there's less competition, or provide value that the others don't.
For the record, this dumb fuck isn't going to convince people to buy the news. Surviving on subscription revenue has been a dying trend for a couple decades. It's all about advertisement revenue. Don't get me wrong, circulation is important, but the circulation revenue shouldn't be.
The reality is, media on both sides chase the shiny object. They go after whatever they think sells and gets people's attention. Not what reality is.
ABC and CBS slant left.
CNN and MSNBC have fallen off the liberal cliff
Fox News fell off the conservative cliff the moment it was created.
Fox News has less competition for their viewing audience. Which is why they get 2-3 times the viewership. It isn't that hard.
Also this myth of msnbc being a liberal network. It's a democratic partisan network. Is morning Joe liberal? Mark Halperin? Michael Steele? Fuck even Chris Matthews was bashing bernie sanders during the primary.
Give me a fucking break. -
Morning Joe is banging Mika hard. He is whatever she wants him to be.dhdawg said:
CNN has fallen off the liberal cliff? That's funny.greenblood said:
Don't know if this was intended for me, but if so, did I say Fox was was fair and balanced?2001400ex said:
It's not "Fox is conservative and the rest of the media outlets are liberal." And there's print media, etc. The media is like the public, about 35% conservative, 35% liberal and 30% in the middle. I do chuckle at simple minded people that listen to Fox, rush, etc. And believe they are fair and balanced and all other media is liberal.greenblood said:The point being, like cable, the media has segmented itself into specific demographics based on their agendas. Conservative outlets like Fox News do better because there are fewer of them fighting for half the national viewership, while CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc, have to fight for the other half. The same goes for print media as well, as there is more competition with liberal leaning than conservative leaning print media. Pretty simple.
The game isn't rigged, media businesses need to align themselves where there's less competition, or provide value that the others don't.
For the record, this dumb fuck isn't going to convince people to buy the news. Surviving on subscription revenue has been a dying trend for a couple decades. It's all about advertisement revenue. Don't get me wrong, circulation is important, but the circulation revenue shouldn't be.
The reality is, media on both sides chase the shiny object. They go after whatever they think sells and gets people's attention. Not what reality is.
ABC and CBS slant left.
CNN and MSNBC have fallen off the liberal cliff
Fox News fell off the conservative cliff the moment it was created.
Fox News has less competition for their viewing audience. Which is why they get 2-3 times the viewership. It isn't that hard.
Also this myth of msnbc being a liberal network. It's a democratic partisan network. Is morning Joe liberal? Mark Halperin? Michael Steele? Fuck even Chris Matthews was bashing bernie sanders during the primary.
-
It's not as much reading. A lot of liberals get their news off of YouTube and other new media outlets. Even many young conservatives do as well. There's a reason O'Reilly has an average viewer of age 71.greenblood said:
I don't think people really read the news anymore. People are so busy now, if you can't get your info in a couple minutes, you move on. Which basically has led us into a headline reading society. Most people only read the headlines, they don't have time for anything else.2001400ex said:
No, Fox news doesn't have 2-3 times the viewership cause they have less competition. If that were true, and it were true that CNN and the rest are liberal, then Fox would have like 10 times the viewership. (MSNBC is liberal and they promote that).greenblood said:
Don't know if this was intended for me, but if so, did I say Fox was was fair and balanced?2001400ex said:
It's not "Fox is conservative and the rest of the media outlets are liberal." And there's print media, etc. The media is like the public, about 35% conservative, 35% liberal and 30% in the middle. I do chuckle at simple minded people that listen to Fox, rush, etc. And believe they are fair and balanced and all other media is liberal.greenblood said:The point being, like cable, the media has segmented itself into specific demographics based on their agendas. Conservative outlets like Fox News do better because there are fewer of them fighting for half the national viewership, while CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc, have to fight for the other half. The same goes for print media as well, as there is more competition with liberal leaning than conservative leaning print media. Pretty simple.
The game isn't rigged, media businesses need to align themselves where there's less competition, or provide value that the others don't.
For the record, this dumb fuck isn't going to convince people to buy the news. Surviving on subscription revenue has been a dying trend for a couple decades. It's all about advertisement revenue. Don't get me wrong, circulation is important, but the circulation revenue shouldn't be.
The reality is, media on both sides chase the shiny object. They go after whatever they think sells and gets people's attention. Not what reality is.
ABC and CBS slant left.
CNN and MSNBC have fallen off the liberal cliff
Fox News fell off the conservative cliff the moment it was created.
Fox News has less competition for their viewing audience. Which is why they get 2-3 times the viewership. It isn't that hard.
As I said, there's was more media sources than just TV. (Tho I do chuckle when Fox rails on the liberal media as if they aren't the media). Liberals on average get their news from reading. Conservatives on average get their news from TV. Just like conservatives typically get more riled up over news than liberals. There are many studies that show people's behaviors and how they translate to politics. And politicians know this and tailor their message that way.
New media is what will eventually end mainstream media unless they adapt
-
That and people are ending their cable subscriptions. 24 hour news channels will be like newspapers soon. Which is why they all have an online presence. And trying to make ad revenue there.dhdawg said:
It's not as much reading. A lot of liberals get their news off of YouTube and other new media outlets. Even many young conservatives do as well. There's a reason O'Reilly has an average viewer of age 71.greenblood said:
I don't think people really read the news anymore. People are so busy now, if you can't get your info in a couple minutes, you move on. Which basically has led us into a headline reading society. Most people only read the headlines, they don't have time for anything else.2001400ex said:
No, Fox news doesn't have 2-3 times the viewership cause they have less competition. If that were true, and it were true that CNN and the rest are liberal, then Fox would have like 10 times the viewership. (MSNBC is liberal and they promote that).greenblood said:
Don't know if this was intended for me, but if so, did I say Fox was was fair and balanced?2001400ex said:
It's not "Fox is conservative and the rest of the media outlets are liberal." And there's print media, etc. The media is like the public, about 35% conservative, 35% liberal and 30% in the middle. I do chuckle at simple minded people that listen to Fox, rush, etc. And believe they are fair and balanced and all other media is liberal.greenblood said:The point being, like cable, the media has segmented itself into specific demographics based on their agendas. Conservative outlets like Fox News do better because there are fewer of them fighting for half the national viewership, while CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc, have to fight for the other half. The same goes for print media as well, as there is more competition with liberal leaning than conservative leaning print media. Pretty simple.
The game isn't rigged, media businesses need to align themselves where there's less competition, or provide value that the others don't.
For the record, this dumb fuck isn't going to convince people to buy the news. Surviving on subscription revenue has been a dying trend for a couple decades. It's all about advertisement revenue. Don't get me wrong, circulation is important, but the circulation revenue shouldn't be.
The reality is, media on both sides chase the shiny object. They go after whatever they think sells and gets people's attention. Not what reality is.
ABC and CBS slant left.
CNN and MSNBC have fallen off the liberal cliff
Fox News fell off the conservative cliff the moment it was created.
Fox News has less competition for their viewing audience. Which is why they get 2-3 times the viewership. It isn't that hard.
As I said, there's was more media sources than just TV. (Tho I do chuckle when Fox rails on the liberal media as if they aren't the media). Liberals on average get their news from reading. Conservatives on average get their news from TV. Just like conservatives typically get more riled up over news than liberals. There are many studies that show people's behaviors and how they translate to politics. And politicians know this and tailor their message that way.
New media is what will eventually end mainstream media unless they adapt -
No one can possibly like that pompous fuck O'Reilly.
My grandpa gave me his book for kids when I was like 11 and it was the most sanctimonious "I've never once done anything bad or drank or anything in my life!" shit I've ever seen. I was like you gotta be fucking kidding me. -
I don't know about him, but I like his showPitchfork51 said:No one can possibly like that pompous fuck O'Reilly.
My grandpa gave me his book for kids when I was like 11 and it was the most sanctimonious "I've never once done anything bad or drank or anything in my life!" shit I've ever seen. I was like you gotta be fucking kidding me. -
I'm hearing you're the PurpleDawgFan of liberalism.2001400ex said:
That and people are ending their cable subscriptions. 24 hour news channels will be like newspapers soon. Which is why they all have an online presence. And trying to make ad revenue there.dhdawg said:
It's not as much reading. A lot of liberals get their news off of YouTube and other new media outlets. Even many young conservatives do as well. There's a reason O'Reilly has an average viewer of age 71.greenblood said:
I don't think people really read the news anymore. People are so busy now, if you can't get your info in a couple minutes, you move on. Which basically has led us into a headline reading society. Most people only read the headlines, they don't have time for anything else.2001400ex said:
No, Fox news doesn't have 2-3 times the viewership cause they have less competition. If that were true, and it were true that CNN and the rest are liberal, then Fox would have like 10 times the viewership. (MSNBC is liberal and they promote that).greenblood said:
Don't know if this was intended for me, but if so, did I say Fox was was fair and balanced?2001400ex said:
It's not "Fox is conservative and the rest of the media outlets are liberal." And there's print media, etc. The media is like the public, about 35% conservative, 35% liberal and 30% in the middle. I do chuckle at simple minded people that listen to Fox, rush, etc. And believe they are fair and balanced and all other media is liberal.greenblood said:The point being, like cable, the media has segmented itself into specific demographics based on their agendas. Conservative outlets like Fox News do better because there are fewer of them fighting for half the national viewership, while CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc, have to fight for the other half. The same goes for print media as well, as there is more competition with liberal leaning than conservative leaning print media. Pretty simple.
The game isn't rigged, media businesses need to align themselves where there's less competition, or provide value that the others don't.
For the record, this dumb fuck isn't going to convince people to buy the news. Surviving on subscription revenue has been a dying trend for a couple decades. It's all about advertisement revenue. Don't get me wrong, circulation is important, but the circulation revenue shouldn't be.
The reality is, media on both sides chase the shiny object. They go after whatever they think sells and gets people's attention. Not what reality is.
ABC and CBS slant left.
CNN and MSNBC have fallen off the liberal cliff
Fox News fell off the conservative cliff the moment it was created.
Fox News has less competition for their viewing audience. Which is why they get 2-3 times the viewership. It isn't that hard.
As I said, there's was more media sources than just TV. (Tho I do chuckle when Fox rails on the liberal media as if they aren't the media). Liberals on average get their news from reading. Conservatives on average get their news from TV. Just like conservatives typically get more riled up over news than liberals. There are many studies that show people's behaviors and how they translate to politics. And politicians know this and tailor their message that way.
New media is what will eventually end mainstream media unless they adapt -
If that's what sources say.Sources said:
I'm hearing you're the PurpleDawgFan of liberalism.2001400ex said:
That and people are ending their cable subscriptions. 24 hour news channels will be like newspapers soon. Which is why they all have an online presence. And trying to make ad revenue there.dhdawg said:
It's not as much reading. A lot of liberals get their news off of YouTube and other new media outlets. Even many young conservatives do as well. There's a reason O'Reilly has an average viewer of age 71.greenblood said:
I don't think people really read the news anymore. People are so busy now, if you can't get your info in a couple minutes, you move on. Which basically has led us into a headline reading society. Most people only read the headlines, they don't have time for anything else.2001400ex said:
No, Fox news doesn't have 2-3 times the viewership cause they have less competition. If that were true, and it were true that CNN and the rest are liberal, then Fox would have like 10 times the viewership. (MSNBC is liberal and they promote that).greenblood said:
Don't know if this was intended for me, but if so, did I say Fox was was fair and balanced?2001400ex said:
It's not "Fox is conservative and the rest of the media outlets are liberal." And there's print media, etc. The media is like the public, about 35% conservative, 35% liberal and 30% in the middle. I do chuckle at simple minded people that listen to Fox, rush, etc. And believe they are fair and balanced and all other media is liberal.greenblood said:The point being, like cable, the media has segmented itself into specific demographics based on their agendas. Conservative outlets like Fox News do better because there are fewer of them fighting for half the national viewership, while CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc, have to fight for the other half. The same goes for print media as well, as there is more competition with liberal leaning than conservative leaning print media. Pretty simple.
The game isn't rigged, media businesses need to align themselves where there's less competition, or provide value that the others don't.
For the record, this dumb fuck isn't going to convince people to buy the news. Surviving on subscription revenue has been a dying trend for a couple decades. It's all about advertisement revenue. Don't get me wrong, circulation is important, but the circulation revenue shouldn't be.
The reality is, media on both sides chase the shiny object. They go after whatever they think sells and gets people's attention. Not what reality is.
ABC and CBS slant left.
CNN and MSNBC have fallen off the liberal cliff
Fox News fell off the conservative cliff the moment it was created.
Fox News has less competition for their viewing audience. Which is why they get 2-3 times the viewership. It isn't that hard.
As I said, there's was more media sources than just TV. (Tho I do chuckle when Fox rails on the liberal media as if they aren't the media). Liberals on average get their news from reading. Conservatives on average get their news from TV. Just like conservatives typically get more riled up over news than liberals. There are many studies that show people's behaviors and how they translate to politics. And politicians know this and tailor their message that way.
New media is what will eventually end mainstream media unless they adapt -
He's still railing against reefer madnessPitchfork51 said:No one can possibly like that pompous fuck O'Reilly.
My grandpa gave me his book for kids when I was like 11 and it was the most sanctimonious "I've never once done anything bad or drank or anything in my life!" shit I've ever seen. I was like you gotta be fucking kidding me. -
Nothing says freedom like saying people who smoke pot belong in jail.RaceBannon said:
He's still railing against reefer madnessPitchfork51 said:No one can possibly like that pompous fuck O'Reilly.
My grandpa gave me his book for kids when I was like 11 and it was the most sanctimonious "I've never once done anything bad or drank or anything in my life!" shit I've ever seen. I was like you gotta be fucking kidding me.
