A Ratings Downer for Fox "News"

[realFedUp]

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-et-channel8may08,1,5034990.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

A ratings downer for Fox News
By Scott Collins, Times Staff Writer
May 8, 2006

Some recent ratings news no doubt gladdened the hearts of Fox News Channel haters.

First, Nielsen Media Research reported that Fox News' overall prime-time lineup dropped 17% last month compared with a year ago (MSNBC grew 16% during the same period, while CNN plummeted by 38%).

Late last week, a reliable television industry website, TVNewser.com, reported that in April, Fox News host Bill O'Reilly had his worst month in nearly five years among viewers age 25 to 54, the most coveted audience in TV news.

Although the network still churns out ratings light-years ahead of competitors' and O'Reilly remains cable news' No. 1 host, Fox News' explosive growth appears to be, like the president's 90% approval rating in the days following Sept. 11, a relic from the first Bush term.

That's the elephant in the room, of course — the broadly assumed, and occasionally documented, affinity between Fox News and the current administration (Vice President Dick Cheney's office prepared a hotel checklist, recently posted on TheSmokingGun.com, that ordered "all televisions tuned to Fox News" during Cheney visits). Could it be mere coincidence that O'Reilly, populist scourge of both Clintons and countless left-wing causes, is seeing his still-formidable nightly audience of 2.1 million or so start to shrink in tandem with the Bush/GOP's rapidly fading grip on the electorate?

[bottomofthehill]

1. This is very bad news

Just another reason to invade Iran, to drive the pResidents numbers and those of FOX back up. Whats good for FOX is good for the country.

We are fucked now

[SammyBlue]

12. Personally, who gives a shit? News is for information, not ratings.

You want ratings, it turns into infotainment!

Sorry, even Air America is infotainment, but it's infotainment I listen to.

This is why I stick to internet news sources overseas for my news!

[AndyA]

2. Thanks for posting this - good news indeed, and may the trend continue

because Faux deserves to be at the bottom of the barrel. With their one sided news that misrepresents the true story, they do a disservice to all of their viewers.

Americans don't want to have their news censored for them, they want the whole story, every side, presented in an honest and factual manner. Then they can decide for themselves what's right and what's wrong.

I really do believe if another news network (any of them, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, etc.) presented the news in a fair and well-rounded manner, not censored by corporate ownership, their ratings would skyrocket.

[realFedUp]

3. a news station that aired all the facts....what a novelty

:-)

[MessiahRp]

4. I wonder where you can see

in that MSNBC growth, what each program's ratings did. I am willing to bet Scarborough and Carlson, hell even Tweety's numbers were marginal gains at best compared to Olbermann's.

Right wing media beware.... the left is coming.

Rp

[originalpckelly]

5. Sad to see a network that gives both sides of every story have low ratings

By the way I mean, the President's side and the Vice President's side.

[tabasco]

6. The difference between Fox News and Pravda:

The people in the Soviet Union knew Pravda was bullshit.

[Recursion]

7. Fox

I caught Larry Beinhart (who wrote the novel that became "Wag the Dog") on the radio a while ago talking about "faith based" people vs. "reality based" people (I think that may be needlessly inflammatory; I prefer "principles-based" vs. "results-based"). He pointed to a poll that was absolutely fascinating, though I can't seem to find it anywhere (and I really hope he didn't just pull it out of nowhere to further prove his "wag the dog" point...)

The poll asked self-identified liberals and conservatives to rank from best to worst several media outlets and give some "absolute" judgment from "very good" to "very bad" on each. The ranking was no real surprise: conservatives picked something like Fox > WSJ > CBS > etc. > BBC > NPR while liberals did basically the opposite ranking. What was a real surprise to me was the absolute judgment: conservatives gave Fox etc. higher ratings on the scale from "very good" to "very bad" than they gave the other outlets, but those scores were lower than the liberals gave Fox and WSJ. That is, on a scale from very good to very bad, conservatives rank their favorite news outlets lower than liberals rank their least favorite outlets.

They just don't like news, even news slanted towards them.

[RamboLiberal]

8. Also the median age for Faux News is 60+

Not the age audience that advertisers are looking for(though IMHO the age thing with advertisers is dumb).

http://www.variety.com/VR1117942664.html

<snip>

Seldom mentioned, however, is the fact that cable news is equally geriatric. Indeed, Fox News Channel and CNN are two of only three leading basic networks (the other being the Hallmark Channel) whose median viewer age is over 60. Headline News rings in next at 59.9, and MSNBC is still on the rickety side at 57.

This is the dirty little secret cable news would rather not discuss -- namely, that half their viewers graduated from the 18-49 demographic during the first Bush administration. Nevertheless, their primetime hours are replete with the young, restless and at risk -- whether it's a missing girl in Aruba, spring break shenanigans or alleged rape at a prestigious university.

In that context, Fox and CNN's content sounds more like retirement-home residents lamenting what's wrong with kids today than catering to their audience. It also proffers a skewed vision of teens and young adults, whom the network newsmags also present as being either constantly threatened by Internet miscreants (see "Dateline's" "To Catch a Predator" series) or determined to kill themselves (witness "20/20's" "binge-drinking coeds" expose).

Pedophiles, in fact, have become the de facto star of the May rating sweeps, low-lighted by KCBS-TV in Los Angeles promoting a piece about child molesters living near Disneyland. It's the most cynical kind of scare tactic ("Your children might be in danger!") designed to reel in young women, mirroring Fox News host Greta Van Susteren's obsession with the Natalee Holloway case.

[xxqqqzme]

9. just because murdoch named it fux news,

doesn't mean it is in any way - News....maybe people are starting 2 understand that.

[texasleo]

10. attica! attica!

:evilgrin:

[SoCalDem]

11. Be sure and read the Freeper comments..Posted yesterday

SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Sun May-07-06 04:48 PM
Original message

In The Demo, O'Reilly Hits A New Low

found this while looking for pics of *² (find some of my best ones over there)

you gotta read some of their replies about Bill-O
..........................................................................................

In The Demo, O'Reilly Hits A New Low
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1628332/posts
Posted by churchillbuff
On 05/07/2006 4:00:54 PM PDT · 22 replies · 689+ views

media bistro ^ | MAy 5 06 | media bistro

Young viewers just don't watch The O'Reilly Factor like they used to. April marked Bill O'Reilly's lowest-rated month in the 25-54 demographic since August 2001. His 415,000 demo viewers in March was a new low, but O'Reilly managed to lose a few more in April, averaging 412,000 in the demo. Here's his post-Katrina track: Sept: 1,115 / Oct: 518 / Nov: 468 / Dec: 460 / Jan: 472 / Feb: 458 / Mar: 415 But this trend started long before the hurricane. for O'Reilly, April's numbers reflected his lowest demo rating in almost five years. Among total viewers, O'Reilly delivered...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1127177&mesg_id=1127177

[degreesofgray]

13. Arguing with Fox "News" viewers

is pointless. It's like they've been inside Plato's cave and watched cartoons.

[Kurovski]

14. Maybe the "viewers age 25 to 54" have switched to The Colbert Report?

:evilgrin:

[RamboLiberal]

15. Tidbit I picked up

The Colbert Report appears to be piqueing the interest of the media-centric students majoring in PR and journalism.

http://blogs.mediavillage.com/elaineliner/

I've been trying to find the ratings for Colbert, so far no luck.

[Kurovski]

16. I take that as a good sign. Seeing the ironic relationship

between politics and media in a clear light will be the saving grace of our future media. How'z that for a grand pronouncement? :-)

in another article at that link, I enjoyed this from "10 ways to make tv better NOW":

"5.Get Roseanne Barr back in a sitcom. She's crazy as a bushel of bedbugs, sure, but she's also funnier than any woman in any current network comedy."