Debate-if Fox "news" gets taken down due to bad ratings, would you be ok with NO cable politics?

[graham4anything]

Last edited Sat Dec 1, 2012, 10:20 PM - Edit history (1)

Fox still leads in the ratings, but gets less and less each day

There will come a point when the vanity production of Mr. Murdoch is no longer wanted by the shareholders and at some point mr. Murdoch will retire and his kids or next in line will take over.

Assuming they have free reign of their own corporation, they may want profit over vanity
and switch to sports

However, Fox is the #1 and the others less(though rising).

Would the others also change formats too?

And what if it goes back to just the 1/2 hour news?

(IMHO I would miss Al Sharpton's show and the fighting on MacLaughlan and nothing else.)

I don't watch the media to get my opinion from, but that is just my opinion.

Without the 24/7/365, wouldn't the senate and other branches get more accomplished for the people?

because now, as long as Fox is around, they have free commercials, free tv time and no other opinion and look how it brainwashes people who watch that.

On its best day, Fox only got 4.3 million listeners, and most were the same day in, day out.

That is just 1.45% the entire population rounded down to 1%
99% of the nation does not tune in.

Yet they have such a large voice and undo influence on the politicians

I would be okay with the above of 24/7/365 political talk.

A show here or there would still happen, but not a full days worth 365 days a year.

This seques into the Peggy Noonan thread which until I posted my answer there, no one
mentioned that the media is what made it different
Tip ONeill/Ronald Reagan cannot happen anymore, (if it ever did) due to the media's prying eye
all the time.
But dear Peggy forgot to mention that little tid bit.

[RagAss]

1. Haters are born every day. There will always be a market for FOX.

[southernyankeebelle]

2. Supposedly his wife and his daughter are more liberal. Maybe they would get rid of Ailes.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

3. Can't really call Fox a real reporter of political news

so yes.. But I'm sure something else would fill the void.

[fishwax]

4. I don't think the 24/7/365 is what keeps congress from getting more done

I've got no problem with cable news as a concept. The disgrace of Fox News is in the execution.

[Old and In the Way]

5. What public good has Fox News done for this country?

None - because they misinform their targeted demographic. The rest avoid it like the plague. But they have maintained a reliable 40% of the voters with a knowledge index that compels them to vote against their best economic/social interests.

[RKP5637]

7. 0 = 0 = Fox News! n/t

[julian09]

6. Reagan raised taxes 11 times, current tp repugs only want tax cuts, or will destroy economy.

Govt by hostage taking. Corporations are people, people are tools.

[mahina]

8. Depends on how you define political. Love Rachel,

because she is smart as hell and on point.

[ToxMarz]

9. I don't understand what the debate is

Is there some policy or other regulation/control of cable proposed that would be influenced by our opinions. Are the operators soliciting our thoughts?

[graham4anything]

10. Just a discussion...with ratings dropping for Fox, and shooting the breeze on a Friday night.

while I am watching the trippy "Santa Claus is coming to town" on tv animated one.

[graham4anything]

11. Here is what I would love to see

I would love to see one station that has Rev. Al & Rachel & a few of the others from MSNBC
on
alongside some of their people (say Rush himself and something else).

Maybe a mixed morning show too.

One station.

BUT- UNLIKE FOX NOW-which has their own producers,

I would like to see this mixed merged station have EACH SET OF RULES/PRODUCERS/GUIDELINES and have them all merged into a large TRUE DEBATE

Unlike now on Fox, when a liberal gets through on the radio, or appears on camera, they are cut off afer a few seconds and the conversation becomes a hatefest agianst the liberal
there is no back and forth, and the liberal never gets to tell his side of the story, though of course the head of the show will say something like
wait/wait/wait, we will give you a chance to respond(but 100 out of 100 times that liberal is never heard from again

So let them have their propaganda, however, each and every point will have the other response back and forth(and the mike would be cut dead while the other person is responding)

So no screaming, overshouting

But the rightwing stuff would have to be talked about with THE REST OF THE STORY.

After a few go-rounds the lies and propaganda would be apparent.

(Because Rachel and Rev. Al are much smarter in real life than Sean and the Fox morning people and the others)

The others are just reciting lines given them

wherreas those on our side ACTUALLY HAVE A MIND that has their own opinion of things

(most of the Fox people save for Sean, probably would be liberals if given a bigger salary than the have now. Major Garrett for one is attempting the conversion as we speak).

Imagine if Karl Rove actually has to have the REST OF THE STORY (and we are talking Karl the propaganda talking head here, not his political reason for being which are other threads).

When logic hits the Fox people in the face, the run a fast retreat, but it never happens on Fox as there is ZERO back and forth.

So that is what I would love to see.

Not censoring anyone, but the full right to respond in detail to each and every point.

(IMHO of course. g4a)