The end of the road for Barack Obama?

[scandal 951]

"Obama's big problem," a senior Democrat told me, "is that four times as many people watch Fox News as watch CNN."

Now now. We all know that Fox is just the scrappy underdog, and the big powerful liberal media dominate America's news broadcasting, right?

Any day now I expect NY Times editorials, and Robert Segal (All Things Considered) and Terry Gross (Fresh Air) to begin re-indoctrinating Americans on the "correct" way to vote.

Really, how can it be both ways? How can there be an influential liberal media elite, and yet we're all supposed to be running scared of what the airheads on a cable news channel babble on about?

[alienlovechild 75]

Regardless of how bad Obama has been, the Bush Administration brought the country to its knees and damaged our reputation abroad.

Don't worry. Obama's already done as much damage in his first year as Bush did in his 8 years. There are very few economists that believe Obama can even get close to Bush's worst year for unemployment at 6% in 2003. Obama will be lucky if he can get the country up on its knees.

Obama efforts in Afghanistan appear noble but the troops are dying so Obama can claim he was tougher than Bush on the Taliban and Al Qaeda but nobody will care as our allies drop away which Obama's charisma can nothing to change.

Our reputation abroad isn't getting better as fewer foreigners are willing to pay for Obama's grand vision.

"It took the current administration less than a year to provoke a rating agency to warn that unless our government mends its profligate ways, it will lose the triple-A credit rating it has had since U.S. government debt was first assessed in 1917."

"Desmond Lachman, resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, thinks the grace period granted by the market might be as short as three to four years, and says a downgrade would send “a really bad signal” to overseas investors who are funding about half of our massive deficits."

http://www.sfexaminer.com/opinion/columns/...d-79033527.html

[alienlovechild 75]

Now now. We all know that Fox is just the scrappy underdog, and the big powerful liberal media dominate America's news broadcasting, right?

Any day now I expect NY Times editorials, and Robert Segal (All Things Considered) and Terry Gross (Fresh Air) to begin re-indoctrinating Americans on the "correct" way to vote.

Really, how can it be both ways? How can there be an influential liberal media elite, and yet we're all supposed to be running scared of what the airheads on a cable news channel babble on about?

Reminds me of the pre-Fox News media when conservatives complained about media bias and liberals would say conservatives should start their own news outlets if they didn't like it. Now the genie is out of the bottle so we can only discuss what's on Fox as if the other outlets were invisible or irrelevant.

[scandal 951]

Reminds me of the pre-Fox News media when conservatives complained about media bias and liberals would say conservatives should start their own news outlets if they didn't like it. Now the genie is out of the bottle so we can only discuss what's on Fox as if the other outlets were invisible or irrelevant.

You can discuss what's on Fox to your heart's content. I salute their First Amendment rights to stay on the air and contribute whatever they like to the public discourse. You'll forgive me if I don't pay any attention to them at all, yes? That's just me exercising my rights as a free citizen to get my news and analysis from the sources that actually inform me, rather than shout at me.

That's really my main problem with Fox (from the very little I've seen of it). It's not the political agenda, it's the fact that whenever they have a panel everyone always seems to be yelling and interrupting each other. I can't make out the opinions since it's all noise. Maybe it's age, but my comprehension works better when I can hear a question followed by a reasonable amount of time for a respondent to answer. I guess that doesn't sell as much stuff on commercials as the loud and noisy style. The other thing that bugs me about all cable news networks is that you would think with 24 hour dedicated channels they could really explore issues in depth. Loads of time to get into the policy wonk stuff, right? But none of them seem to do that (ok, granted I really wouldn't know, I sample them all very rarely). The sense I have is that they'll cover balloon boy to death with non stop coverage all day long live frmo Colorado. But they won't do a CSPAN treatment of healthcare because there are no ratings to that kind of coverage. It's a business, not news and information, ultimately. I don't blame News Corp or Time Warner for running businesses, but it is what it is. That's why I stick with The Newshour, Meet The Press, etc.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I feel the same way about CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, PMSMSNBC & PBS as you do about FOX.

You can discuss what's on Fox to your heart's content. I salute their First Amendment rights to stay on the air and contribute whatever they like to the public discourse. You'll forgive me if I don't pay any attention to them at all, yes? That's just me exercising my rights as a free citizen to get my news and analysis from the sources that actually inform me, rather than shout at me.

That's really my main problem with Fox (from the very little I've seen of it). It's not the political agenda, it's the fact that whenever they have a panel everyone always seems to be yelling and interrupting each other. I can't make out the opinions since it's all noise. Maybe it's age, but my comprehension works better when I can hear a question followed by a reasonable amount of time for a respondent to answer. I guess that doesn't sell as much stuff on commercials as the loud and noisy style. The other thing that bugs me about all cable news networks is that you would think with 24 hour dedicated channels they could really explore issues in depth. Loads of time to get into the policy wonk stuff, right? But none of them seem to do that (ok, granted I really wouldn't know, I sample them all very rarely). The sense I have is that they'll cover balloon boy to death with non stop coverage all day long live frmo Colorado. But they won't do a CSPAN treatment of healthcare because there are no ratings to that kind of coverage. It's a business, not news and information, ultimately. I don't blame News Corp or Time Warner for running businesses, but it is what it is. That's why I stick with The Newshour, Meet The Press, etc.

Edited March 9, 2010 by Sofiyya

[Ban Hammer 14,640]

Fox News is an organization which Hitler could only dream of. I watch it in awe as they spew and spin 'news' precisely as this article indicates.

so why do you watch it then? you might be the reason they have so many viewers!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It only really makes sense to be derisive of ALL of the major corporate networks - by and large they are a waste of time.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

so why do you watch it then? you might be the reason they have so many viewers!

I rarely do, and even more rarely of my own volition. However they appear to have taken over the minds of some folks near and dear to me, and all I can think is "why?"

It only really makes sense to be derisive of ALL of the major corporate networks - by and large they are a waste of time.

I concur.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

so why do you watch it then? you might be the reason they have so many viewers!

There was some hyperbole in his statement, certainly, but there is some benefit to watching these things - especially if you are interested in how they actually work.

Once people get beyond the idea that the news networks have some sort of authority over them (and the truth) you look at it in a whole different way.

[scandal 951]

I concur.

I don't think they're all created equal. The network Sunday shows - Meet the Press, Face The Nation, This Week - are of a different calibre. These are the shows (along with the Newshour, imho) which still pay a direct tribute back to the standard set by Edward R Murrow. None of the cable news programming holds a candle to these serious journalistic efforts. Here's how MTP describes its illustrious history of over 60 years on NBC:

For 62 years, "Meet the Press” has featured headline-making interviews with world-leaders and U.S. newsmakers every Sunday morning on NBC. On December 7, 2008, David Gregory, former NBC News Chief White House Correspondent, was named moderator of the venerable television institution. If you have any questions or comments, you can e-mail the show.

ABOUT “MEET THE PRESS”:

"Meet the Press," the longest-running program ever on network television, premiered on NBC-TV on November 6, 1947, with James A. Farley, the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee and Franklin Roosevelt’s postmaster general, as its’ first guest. The show made its initial debut two years earlier – as a radio program with Martha Rountree and Lawrence Spivak as producers. For almost as long as there has been television, there has been "Meet the Press."

NBC’s Chief White House Correspondent, David Gregory, was named moderator of “Meet the Press” on December 7, 2008. He is only the tenth person ever to be a permanent host of the program. He assumed the role from veteran NBC newsman Tom Brokaw, who had served as interim moderator after the untimely death of longtime moderator Tim Russert on June 13, 2008.

President John F. Kennedy once called “Meet the Press” the “fifty-first state.” Since then, every man who has occupied the Oval Office has appeared on the program during his career, as has every vice president since Alben Barkley in 1952.

In addition to the commander-in-chief, “Meet the Press” features interviews with all the key players in each presidential administration. Every Secretary of State from John Foster Dulles to Hillary Clinton and every Secretary of Defense from Robert McNamara to Robert Gates has appeared on the program.

Foreign policy has always been a staple of “Meet the Press” interviews. Some of the world leaders interviewed on the program include Fidel Castro, Francois Mitterrand, Indira Gandhi, David Ben-Gurion, Golda Meir, Ferdinand Marcos, Jean Monnet, Mikhail Gorbachev, Anwar el-Sadat, Yitzhak Rabin, King Hussein of Jordan, Hamid Karzai, Pervez Musharraf, King Abdullah of Jordan, Tony Blair and Ghazi al-Yawar.

“Meet the Press” has always been an equal opportunity news program, with women playing a significant role right from the start. The co-creator of “Meet the Press” and the show’s first moderator was noted journalist Martha Rountree. The first female guest was Elizabeth Bentley, a former Soviet spy, who was interviewed on September 12, 1948.

“Meet the Press” has since interviewed First Ladies Eleanor Roosevelt, Nancy Reagan, Rosalynn Carter, Hillary Rodham Clinton and Laura Bush. Other notable women appearing as guests over the years include Madeleine Albright, Shirley Temple Black, Shuttle Commander Eileen Collins, Shirley Chisholm, Elizabeth Dole, Marian Wright Edelman, Geraldine Ferraro, Jane Fonda, Indira Gandhi, Tipper Gore, Anita Hill, Barbara Jordan, Caroline Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Janet Reno, Condoleezza Rice, Phyllis Schlafly, and Gloria Steinem.

Nearly every important newsmaker in the U.S. – from politicians, religious leaders and astronauts to sports stars, authors and comedians – has appeared on “Meet the Press”. Some of these prominent figures include Martin Luther King Jr., Robert F. Kennedy, Hubert Humphrey, Joseph McCarthy, Billy Graham, Robert Frost, Jackie Robinson, Jimmy Hoffa, John Glenn, George Wallace, Michael Jordan, Jay Leno, Rick Warren, Bill Cosby, Lance Armstrong, Stephen Colbert, and Jon Krakauer.

Every Sunday morning for 62 years, millions of Americans tune in to get answers from U.S. and world leaders, and hear analysis, discussion and review of the week’s political events from noted journalists and experts.

We are proud to be the highest rated, most watched and most quoted Sunday morning public affairs program. An average of 4 million viewers join us each week to share in a national dialogue about the important issues of our time.

If it’s Sunday, it’s “Meet the Press.”

[alienlovechild 75]

I rarely do, and even more rarely of my own volition. However they appear to have taken over the minds of some folks near and dear to me, and all I can think is "why?"

As usual the strongest critics don't actually watch Fox because it's just too difficult for critics to use a remote to switch channels. It's pretty easy to do and I did it when I had cable. We tolerated newspapers with avowed different party positions for decades and most people knew where they were coming from ideologically. Jefferson and Madison wanted more newspapers to inform the public and counter each other.

It's a market niche thing. Most of the other major outlets are interchangable as soap brands. They just assumed people would watch them forever no matter what the content of the news was. There are far more outlets than Fox out there now thanks to the Internet and I'll take that over the Washington Post and New Yorks Times spoon feeding ABC, CBS and NBC for decades and churning out 30 minutes of nightly news.

[Ban Hammer 14,640]

I rarely do, and even more rarely of my own volition. However they appear to have taken over the minds of some folks near and dear to me, and all I can think is "why?"

you better quit watching then, before you become one of "them"

[ready4ONE 5,400]

As usual the strongest critics don't actually watch Fox because it's just too difficult for critics to use a remote to switch channels.

I have difficulty with propaganda in all its forms, and Fox is a propaganda machine. I have seen enough to speak firmly that that is my point of view. Those who buy the propaganda of course think Fox is fair and balanced because they churn out the rhetoric which their viewers believe in to begin with.

This is America, watch what you want, but understand what you are watching.

you better quit watching then, before you become one of "them"

No worries! Won't happen.

[Ban Hammer 14,640]

No worries! Won't happen.

fox news.......turn it on. watch it. and when i snap my fingers, you'll vote republican!

[Pooky 3,930]

The funny line is, in the first paragaph, which proclaims, "The Fox network is a remarkable cultural phenomenon which almost shocks those of us from a country where a technical rule of impartiality is applied in the broadcast media" as if there is any impartiality in the entire first paragraph.

However, all in all, the Dims are, once again, eating their young, as those of us who have seen all this before knew would happen. And, it didn't take long Anyone heard Massa's rant today?

Here's a little irony for you. In the UK, the Telegraph is a little right of centre in its political outlook.