PDA

View Full Version : why is fox news so obnoxious?



Paul Pless
12-23-2014, 08:47 AM
I don't watch much television and almost no TV news. But during the last week I've found myself in a number of business establishments with their televisions tuned to Fox News. Ignoring the content, which at times bordered on racist for coverage of one story that I heard, there was an inordinate amount of yelling and shouting and just an overall sense that heads were going to explode. Is this really how conservatives like to receive their 'news'? And if so why?

Paul Pless
12-23-2014, 08:51 AM
Further, is there a right leaning 'mainstream' alternative to Fox News that is presented in a more calm. . . more intellectual manner?

Norman Bernstein
12-23-2014, 08:51 AM
I don't watch much television and almost no TV news. But during the last week I've found myself in a number of business establishments with their televisions tuned to Fox News. Ignoring the content, which at times bordered on racist for coverage of one story that I heard, there was an inordinate amount of yelling and shouting and just an overall sense that heads were going to explode. Is this really how conservatives like to receive their 'news'? And if so why?

It's called 'manufactured outrage'. They catch and hold viewers by feeding them the red blood they so desperately want and need.... it's a specific type of viewer, one who has a psychological need to be angry, to find appropriate villains and simple-minded arguments which provide a reason to be mad... not unlike some folks we see here in the bilge. The stories certainly don't have to be true, and they certainly don't have to be either fair, OR balanced.... they just need to be able to generate a tagline which fits into a preconceived picture of what feeds these people.

Steve McMahon
12-23-2014, 08:52 AM
Persecution perception syndrome.

Norman Bernstein
12-23-2014, 08:52 AM
Further, is there a right leaning 'mainstream' alternative to Fox News that is presented in a more calm. . . more intellectual manner?
I don't believe there is.

However, it's not hard to find a source or two which is about as neutral as it is possible to get... NPR, for example.

xflow7
12-23-2014, 08:54 AM
Further, is there a right leaning 'mainstream' alternative to Fox News that is presented in a more calm. . . more intellectual manner?

I'm not sure there is as far as televised coverage goes. But bloomberg.com has a couple of columnists who seem to write sane conservative-leaning pieces, though with a focus on finance/economy more than social issues.

Dave

Keith Wilson
12-23-2014, 09:50 AM
A hypothesis: Fox's audience is mostly old, (median age 68), and overwhelmingly white. Since people lived in caves, a substantial fraction of old folks have thought that the world was going to hell, the younger generations were worthless louts, and that things were much better when they were young. For some of us it seems to be built in, like grey hair and wrinkles. I have plenty of grey hair, but I seem to be more or less immune to 'good old days' pessimism; however, a lot of people aren't. That's what Fox both feeds on and encourages. They tell old people what they are predisposed to believe already, and encourage their belief that things are getting worse, that new ideas are dangerous, that we should go back to how it used to be. It's a living, I guess.

"If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention to Fox News."

The Economist has some moderately conservative folks who aren't nuts.

There's a good article on Fox News in New York magazine here (http://nymag.com/news/frank-rich/fox-news-2014-2/).

Peerie Maa
12-23-2014, 10:11 AM
Further, is there a right leaning 'mainstream' alternative to Fox News that is presented in a more calm. . . more intellectual manner?Would that be an oxymoron?

Sky Blue
12-23-2014, 11:01 AM
There is a good article on Fox News in NY Magazine

Good article?

I could hardly get through the first two pages of this sprawling and discursive article, which posits, absurdly enough, that Fox News has "already lost" and would not have near the influence it does if liberals would just stop watching it. The cue to stop reading was in the second paragraph when the author dispensed with any pretense of serious analysis in boorishly referring to Bill O'Reilly as the network's "blowhard in chief."

Mr. Rich may be the only person on earth who believes that Fox News has "already lost."

elf
12-23-2014, 11:04 AM
Well, there it is, in one post. couldn't get through the article before the anger kicked in. Perfect Fox News audience profile.

Sky Blue
12-23-2014, 11:10 AM
Well, there it is, in one post. couldn't get through the article before the anger kicked in. Perfect Fox News audience profile.

Except that I have no TV and don't watch TV news of any kind. Anger? That's your thing, Elf.

Keith Wilson
12-23-2014, 11:11 AM
. . .I have no TV and don't watch TV news of any kind.Good idea. I do likewise.

RodB
12-23-2014, 11:17 AM
Another loopy thread that whines about the success of Fox News. Perhaps when there are hundreds of stories that reflect negatively on this administration and have a strong basis in truth... and you never see any of these stories on the mainstream "news" sources... people began to realize the massive scope of the bias in our news today that protects the current administration.

Fox News has consistently beat all news sources in election coverage simply because they do an excellent job and are perceived to have a more balanced approach.

Item: Midterm elections go completely against the democrats... but almost "crickets" on the majority of news sources in the country.

Fox has their bias but the difference in their straight news (Special Report) compared to most other news sources is significant. which the ratings illustrate. BTW... the passionate interchanges (described by Paul as yelling) are simply because Fox always has both sides of the issue represented so that the viewer can take in both sides and decide for themselves. The difference in views in the country are quite extreme and hollering usually results. The mainstream media seem to only report on one side of an issue..., "their side" so not much "yelling".

The majority of news organizations across the board seem to attack Fox News at some time or another. Face it libs... Fox News gets a lot of the credit for this country learning just how badly Obama has governed... and you hate that because it has hurt the Democrats for the people to know the truth about Obama. All the cover in the world provided by over 80% of the news organizations in the country did not work.... mainly because of Fox...

Have a nice day.

RodB

Paul Pless
12-23-2014, 11:21 AM
Another loopy thread that whines about the success of Fox News.i could care less about Fox News' success or failure Rod. My OP was concerned with the tone of their newscast.

RonW
12-23-2014, 11:22 AM
i could care less about Fox News' success or failure Rod. My OP was concerned with the tone of their newscast.

Then for god's sake don't turn on MSNBC...........save yourself of that pain.....

RodB
12-23-2014, 11:24 AM
i could care less about Fox News' success or failure Rod. My OP was concerned with the tone of their newscast.

My edited post explains the tone. You fail to realize how much resentment an unfair playing field has caused across this nation. The bias of the mainstream press along with the entertainment industry and Hollywood, etc.. has pounded this country with false narratives to the nth degree and people on the right are sick and tired of it. The democrats have such lousy policies that they must lie about them to get any level of acceptance OR... simply demonize the opposition with made up issues to cause fear. Its a hell of a way to campaign or to sell an ideology and its very refreshing to see the American people have become tired of the completely false platform of the left.

RodB

Canoez
12-23-2014, 11:25 AM
Fox "News" isn't news. It's entertainment. Whom for, I have no idea...

Keith Wilson
12-23-2014, 11:26 AM
Fox News has consistently beat all news sources in election coverage . . . This is false. On a good night Fox News has about a million viewers. Network news has about 8 million each for NBC and ABC, 6 million for CBS.

Fox is a niche market for old white folks.

RonW
12-23-2014, 11:29 AM
This is false. On a good night Fox News has about a million viewers. Network news has about 8 million each for NBC and ABC, 6 million for CBS.

Fox is a niche market for old white folks.

Got a chart on those so called facts Keith.........

RodB
12-23-2014, 11:29 AM
This is false. On a good night Fox News has about a million viewers. Network news has about 8 million each for NBC and ABC, 6 million for CBS.

Fox is a niche market for old white folks.


You are wrong again... when the last election took place... Fox beat EVERYONE for the election nite coverage... get it.

This was posted on this forum earlier.
Oh yea... I remember, that was the thread about Fox that was deleted by management.

RodB

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
12-23-2014, 11:38 AM
Where do you get these crazies?

Keith Wilson
12-23-2014, 11:43 AM
Source for the election coverage viewers, please?

I was a bit off previously. Fox prime-time fluctuates a bit; sometimes they'll hit two million viewers, but an average day is under a million. Cable news numbers here (http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/category/cable-news/). The networks' combined average is a bit over 22 million. Network news numbers here (http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2013/network-news-a-year-of-change-and-challenge-at-nbc/network-by-the-numbers/).

Canoeyawl
12-23-2014, 11:53 AM
..., there was an inordinate amount of yelling and shouting and just an overall sense that heads were going to explode. Is this really how conservatives like to receive their 'news'? And if so why?

The classic target marketing strategy.

Whining, yelling, and slick commentary is what the audience needs, and wants. That and who else is going to buy the marketed products except old white guys?
Note the bulk of advertising is drugs for heart patients (Viagra) and adult diapers. How else can you you get the attention of a bunch of addled, hearing and vision impaired customers than by using bottle blonde shills screaming about indignities? It is sad really.

Norman Bernstein
12-23-2014, 11:58 AM
Fox News has consistently beat all news sources in election coverage simply because they do an excellent job and are perceived to have a more balanced approach.

Well, obviously, this 'perception' you claim isn't shared by everyone now, is it? Perceived by WHO? People who seek out fox News for the sake of the obvious bias? :)


.BTW... the passionate interchanges (described by Paul as yelling) are simply because Fox always has both sides of the issue represented so that the viewer can take in both sides and decide for themselves.

'Both sides'? WHO are the liberal voices on Fox? do they have ANY? :):)

Canoez
12-23-2014, 12:00 PM
News should be objective. Fox has no objectivity.

RonW
12-23-2014, 12:07 PM
Yea right keith , here are the real facts............

--ELECTION NIGHT RATINGS: FOX NEWS ANNIHILATES EVERYONE, INCLUDING BROADCAST NETS.

According to Nielsen Media Research, Fox News Channel beat CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC and ABC’s coverage in both total viewers and in the 25-to-54-year-old demographic.

Co-anchored by Bret Baier and Megyn Kelly, the channel’s election coverage averaged 6.3 million viewers during prime time.

CNN was the second most watched news network, with 2.1 million viewers during prime time. MSNBC came in third with about 1.7 million viewers.


Oh no, not Brietbart again....

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2014/11/06/fox-news-ratings-election-night/

Norman Bernstein
12-23-2014, 12:10 PM
--ELECTION NIGHT RATINGS: FOX NEWS ANNIHILATES EVERYONE, INCLUDING BROADCAST NETS.

Let's assume the Fox News did indeed gather more eyeballs on election night. As Keith points out, this isn't generally true, but might have been true, on election night.

Now, explain to us why this is a sign of some merit :):):)

RonW
12-23-2014, 12:11 PM
Norman Bernstein ----------
'Both sides'? WHO are the liberal voices on Fox? do they have ANY?

Why in the world would any one who watches fox want to hear the opinion of a radical left wing ideologue partisan liberaltranian.....

RodB
12-23-2014, 12:12 PM
News should be objective. Fox has no objectivity.

You and Norm are both commenting on something you obviously do not watch. Fox pretty much always has both sides of any issue reported on. Bill O'Reilly will have two lefties on any particular issue and after setting the issue will say "How am I going wrong" or "What say you"?

Fox routinely has both sides of issues represented with interviews and someone from either side of an issue with discussion.

Its the other news sources that only have one side of an issue represented.

RodB

Paul Pless
12-23-2014, 12:12 PM
I don't know about you Ron, but I like hearing all sides of a debate and then forming my own opinion.

RodB
12-23-2014, 12:15 PM
Let's assume the Fox News did indeed gather more eyeballs on election night. As Keith points out, this isn't generally true, but might have been true, on election night.

Now, explain to us why this is a sign of some merit :):):)

They did a damn fine job in election coverage much better than the major networks... all you gotta do is watch next election. The others are pitiful when compared. Also... FYI... in past elections Pew reported Fox was seen to have more balance in coverage than anyone else... MSNBC had about 90% negative towards Republicans, Fox closer to 50:50 with both parties in negative and positive in Obama's first run.

RodB

Bobcat
12-23-2014, 12:16 PM
Norman Bernstein ----------

Why in the world would any one who watches fox want to hear the opinion of a radical left wing ideologue partisan liberaltranian.....

Well, with a motto of "fair and balanced....."

Tom Montgomery
12-23-2014, 12:17 PM
Old, angry, white guys Rod and Ron LOVE FoxNews!

GOT IT?

RodB
12-23-2014, 12:20 PM
Well, obviously, this 'perception' you claim isn't shared by everyone now, is it? Perceived by WHO? People who seek out fox News for the sake of the obvious bias? :)



'Both sides'? WHO are the liberal voices on Fox? do they have ANY? :):)

Juan Williams.... I disagree with him about 95% of the time.

Bob Beckel.... I disagree with him 96% of the time.

Many other libs are Fox contributors.

RodB

RodB
12-23-2014, 12:22 PM
Old, angry, white guys Rod and Ron LOVE FoxNews!

GOT IT?

Guys like you hate them as a single source that at least told the truth about the Obama administration...which in turn explains the last election and Obama's falling approval.

RodB

Canoez
12-23-2014, 12:25 PM
I don't know about you Ron, but I like hearing all sides of a debate and then forming my own opinion.

^^^^
THIS.

"Just the facts, Ma'am." I'll do my own thinking.

Keith Wilson
12-23-2014, 12:28 PM
OK, here's a credible source for election night numbers (http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703805704575594503927860096) (not Breitbart), the WSJ. And more detail on cable (http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/11/05/cable-news-ratings-for-tuesday-november-4th-2014/324175/), although the numbers don't quite match.

Rounded off a little:

Fox 7 million
ABC 6.8 million
NBC 6.4 million
CBS 5.9 million
CNN 2.1 million
MSNBC 1.7 million
Univision 1.5 million

Total audience was 35 million, Fox got 20% of the viewers in an off-year election with most of the major contests in red states. Is this supposed to be significant?

Norman Bernstein
12-23-2014, 12:29 PM
Norman Bernstein ----------

Why in the world would any one who watches fox want to hear the opinion of a radical left wing ideologue partisan liberaltranian.....

Wasn't it RodB who said:


Fox always has both sides of the issue represented so that the viewer can take in both sides and decide for themselves.

So, explain to me exactly HOW Fox News produced 'both sides of the issue', if they don't have anyone representing the other side? :):)

Or are you disagreeing with your soul-mate in politics? :)

Wow, extreme right-wing partisan blindness is pretty impressive, at times.

RonW
12-23-2014, 12:30 PM
Old, angry, white guys Rod and Ron LOVE FoxNews!

GOT IT?

Ron hardly ever watch fox news, I do watch fox business channel, totally different then fox, and I watch a lot of MSNBC just to keep tabs on what the craxy libs are up to..

Tom Montgomery
12-23-2014, 12:32 PM
Guys like you hate them as a single source that at least told the truth about the Obama administration...
I don't "hate," Rod.

I love all of God's creatures.

John Smith
12-23-2014, 12:35 PM
A hypothesis: Fox's audience is mostly old, (median age 68), and overwhelmingly white. Since people lived in caves, a substantial fraction of old folks have thought that the world was going to hell, the younger generations were worthless louts, and that things were much better when they were young. For some of us it seems to be built in, like grey hair and wrinkles. I have plenty of grey hair, but I seem to be more or less immune to 'good old days' pessimism; however, a lot of people aren't. That's what Fox both feeds on and encourages. They tell old people what they are predisposed to believe already, and encourage their belief that things are getting worse, that new ideas are dangerous, that we should go back to how it used to be. It's a living, I guess.

"If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention to Fox News."

The Economist has some moderately conservative folks who aren't nuts.

There's a good article on Fox News in New York magazine here (http://nymag.com/news/frank-rich/fox-news-2014-2/).

Fox feeds what its viewers already believe. My brother was CONVINCED Obama was going to take his guns; Fox told him. I'm not as concerned with the Jerry Springer Show aspect as I am with the number of times they get caught literally making up facts, or taking stuff out of context so to totally reverse the meaning.

Some will say, "Both sides do it," but I don't think there is anything anywhere equal in that area. Bias is one thing. Making up facts to support that bias is totally different.

John Smith
12-23-2014, 12:36 PM
Another loopy thread that whines about the success of Fox News. Perhaps when there are hundreds of stories that reflect negatively on this administration and have a strong basis in truth... and you never see any of these stories on the mainstream "news" sources... people began to realize the massive scope of the bias in our news today that protects the current administration.

Fox News has consistently beat all news sources in election coverage simply because they do an excellent job and are perceived to have a more balanced approach.

Item: Midterm elections go completely against the democrats... but almost "crickets" on the majority of news sources in the country.

Fox has their bias but the difference in their straight news (Special Report) compared to most other news sources is significant. which the ratings illustrate. BTW... the passionate interchanges (described by Paul as yelling) are simply because Fox always has both sides of the issue represented so that the viewer can take in both sides and decide for themselves. The difference in views in the country are quite extreme and hollering usually results. The mainstream media seem to only report on one side of an issue..., "their side" so not much "yelling".

The majority of news organizations across the board seem to attack Fox News at some time or another. Face it libs... Fox News gets a lot of the credit for this country learning just how badly Obama has governed... and you hate that because it has hurt the Democrats for the people to know the truth about Obama. All the cover in the world provided by over 80% of the news organizations in the country did not work.... mainly because of Fox...

Have a nice day.

RodB

Fox news told its viewers Romney was winning the election. Doesn't that say it all?

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
12-23-2014, 12:47 PM
Further, is there a right leaning 'mainstream' alternative to Fox News that is presented in a more calm. . . more intellectual manner?

No problem.
Linky (http://www.aljazeera.com/) - really.

Tom Montgomery
12-23-2014, 12:52 PM
Fox News has consistently beat all news sources in election coverage simply because they do an excellent job and are perceived to have a more balanced approach.
Oh yes! Who will ever forget the excellent job Fox News did in covering the last general election result?


http://youtu.be/9TwuR0jCavk

You guys crack me up! :D

RodB
12-23-2014, 01:50 PM
Oh yes! Who will ever forget the excellent job Fox News did in covering the last general election result?


http://youtu.be/9TwuR0jCavk

You guys crack me up! :D

Meaningless crap. Most got it wrong, I doubt you'll be slamming the left wing news sources.

R

Tom Montgomery
12-23-2014, 02:10 PM
Meaningless crap.
Temper, temper.... that angry attitude will eventually get you banned if you're not careful.

John of Phoenix
12-23-2014, 02:22 PM
Most got it wrong,Psychotic.

Peerie Maa
12-23-2014, 02:26 PM
Careful, they can be vicious when cornered. ;)

Keith Wilson
12-23-2014, 02:26 PM
Fox News has consistently beat all news sources in election coverage . . . Again, this is false. On election night 2014, Fox had 20% of the total audience (see sources above), and that was their best night ever . On a normal night, they have under 20% of the audience of any one of the three major broadcast networks. around 5% of the total. If this is 'beating all sources', what would being beaten would look like?

Osborne Russell
12-23-2014, 02:27 PM
It's called 'manufactured outrage'. They catch and hold viewers by feeding them the red blood they so desperately want and need.... it's a specific type of viewer, one who has a psychological need to be angry, to find appropriate villains and simple-minded arguments which provide a reason to be mad... not unlike some folks we see here in the bilge. The stories certainly don't have to be true, and they certainly don't have to be either fair, OR balanced.... they just need to be able to generate a tagline which fits into a preconceived picture of what feeds these people.


Yep. Psychology, then ideology.

John of Phoenix
12-23-2014, 02:27 PM
If this is 'beating all sources', what would being beaten would look like?You would have to create your own (psychotic) reality.

Osborne Russell
12-23-2014, 02:28 PM
Persecution perception syndrome.

I would say fabrication rather than perception.

RonW
12-23-2014, 02:38 PM
I enjoy one sided obnoxious slanderous news , so do the liberals. That is rather obvious. As further proof of ..

http://forum.woodenboat.com/forumdisplay.php?5-The-Bilge

Osborne Russell
12-23-2014, 02:57 PM
If you're materialistic, you're anti - intellectual. Therefore you remain ignorant. You have no other standard by which to evaluate anything except whether it is useful in making money. On this crippled basis, over time, you construct your world view. Along the way, so many people point out so many times that you're so wrong -- inevitable when you're ignorant -- that you come to think they have it in for you, and that theory comes to dominate your world view, ultimately an impervious belief. You have a psychological need to perceive it as persecution because persecution originates outside yourself. You choose to entrench your ignorance rather than confront it. Otherwise you would be led to question your anti-intellectualism and then your materialism. And that would make you a freak in your community. So forget it. A nation of these is a business opportunity. Demand calls forth supply. It's a free country. The pursuit of happiness.

When people are free to be who they really are, we see what they really are:


One of the distinctive characteristics of democratic centuries is a taste for easy successes and instant gratification. This can be seen in intellectual pursuits as well as other areas of life. Most people who live in ages of equality are bursting with an ambition which, while keen, is also lackadaisical. They want to achieve great success instantaneously, but without great effort. These contradictory instincts lead directly to a search for general ideas, with which they flatter themselves that they can paint vast subjects with little effort and command the attention of the public without difficulty.

I do not know, moreover, whether they are wrong to think this way, for their readers are as afraid of delving into things as they are, and usually look to works of the mind only for facile pleasures and effortless instruction.

Vol. 2, Part 1, Chap. 3, "Why The Americans Show More Aptitude And Taste For General Ideas Than Their English Forefathers , p. 498

Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America (1835) trans. by Arthur Goldhammer, Literary Classics of the United States, Inc.

Chris Coose
12-23-2014, 03:06 PM
I enjoy one sided obnoxious slanderous news , so do the liberals. That is rather obvious. As further proof of ..


I know more about the mineral composition of the moon than I do about that entertainment program. I have no TV, which I suppose the thing is broadcast on to.

Chip-skiff
12-23-2014, 03:18 PM
The only time I watch Fox News is in terminals or at the auto dealer while the car's getting fixed. I seldom pay much attention.

It seems to me like a nightmare parody of actual news, with blonde bobbleheads straight out of a Tim Burton film, and mean-looking commentators (I think of him as O Really?) spouting lame invective.

The last few times I've sat in the dealership, they didn't have it on the TV. I asked why, and they said it put everyone in a bad mood.