Fox News Dying By Frank Rich | Nymag.com | 01/24/2014 Excerpts: There aint no sanity clause, Chico Marx told Groucho. There is also no Santa Claus. And there was no sanity in the Santa fracas that became an embarrassing liberal-media fixation just before Christmas. For those who missed it, what happened was this: A Fox News anchor, Megyn Kelly, came upon a tongue-in-cheek blog post at Slate in which a black writer, Aisha Harris, proposed that Santa be recast as a penguin for the sake of racial inclusiveness. After tossing this scrap of red meat to her all-white panel of prime-time guests, Kelly reassured any kids watching (this was nearing 10 p.m.) that Santa just is white. (For good measure, she added, Jesus was a white man, too.) At CNN, one anchor brought on Santas of four races to debunk Kelly. BuzzFeed reported that MSNBC programs hopped on the story fourteen times in a single week. Of course what Kelly said was dumb. But the reaction was even dumber. Every year, Fox News whips up some phantom war on Christmas plotted by what the networks blowhard-in-chief Bill OReilly calls secular progressives. This seasonal stunt has long been old news, yet many in the liberal media still cant resist the bait. You had to feel for the NBC News White House correspondent Kristen Welker, who was drafted into filing a Kelly-Santa story on the Today show for no discernible reason other than that she is not white. Because they cant defeat us on the media battlefield, the far left seeks to demonize Fox News as a right-wing propaganda machine and a racist enterprise, said OReilly when sermonizing about the episode on his show. Thats why Miss Megyn got headlines about a Santa Claus remark that was totally harmless. Fox News is a right-wing propaganda machine and at times a racist enterprise (witness, among other examples, its fruitless effort to drum up a New Black Panther Party scandal over some 95 segments in the summer of 2010). But OReilly was half-right. Kellys inane remark was harmless and unworthy of headlines. Without the lefts overreaction, there wouldnt have been any pseudo national firestorm. Still, OReillys summation was predicated on an erroneous underlying assumption that few bother to question: In truth, Fox News has been defeated on the media battlefield - and on the political battlefield as well. Even the 73-year-old wizard of Fox, Roger Ailes, now in full Lear-raging-on-the-heath mode as portrayed in my colleague Gabriel Shermans definitive new biography, The Loudest Voice in the Room, seems to sense the waning of his power. Ailes would like the president and everyone else to keep believing he has that clout. But these days Fox News is the loudest voice in the room only in the sense that a bawling baby is the loudest voice in the room. Read more: http://nymag.com/news/frank-rich/fox-news-2014-2/ ..... IMO: Fox News is a joke in its portrayal of American life as it is today. It appears that they are living on another planet as they seriously proceed to ply their right-leaning agenda to the gullible FN listeners. It is true that FN is dying because there are many less listeners now that their shock-jocks are so flagrantly stupid, with their orange makeup, tinted hair, and these are the males, folks. The females are notoriously blonde because that is the image they portray for what the republican women should look like. Their material is based on pleasing the semi-literate, armed, religious redneck truck drivers that can only comprehend what is happening from the seat of his truck while caught in a tornado.
Google the comedian Gallagher. You probably won't get many hits. Why? Who would bother? He had his day. He was great and groundbreaking and funny as hell and a top draw in the 1970's and 1980's. Maybe even the 1990's. But now? He's on his farewell tour and I wish him all the luck in the world and hope his dreams all come true. But as far as being worth spending time criticizing his act or anything, why bother? So, now let's get to your post. Why would you bother to post an article by a washed up Frank Rich who wrote a critique of a strong, vibrant and ratings juggernaut, Fox News if it was down the tubes? Here's the secret everyone knows but you. It is still going as strong as ever. You are trying to convince people who have eyes and brains and can think for themselves, to believe your lie. And Rich's lie. WE know you both are full of it. Now you know that we know. So, go forth and do not replicate your kind.
None of this makes any mention of Fox news ratings or revenue. It is only redundant claims about the accuracy of some reports or comments from fox news. This hardly equates with " dying ". Show me where the company is going bankrupt or losing viewers and then you can accurately claim they are dying.
It would have taken me a century to put it in context as well as you did. You couldn't be more spot on;
If you want to describe dead people still walking and talking. Well then yea, you're probably right. - - - Updated - - - Don't bother! Yours was dismissed.
...... I find it fun feeding the animals at the zoo, but when they get rowdy, it is stop feeding them time! Although you know that you have scored, by their strange replies, you soon get bored by their blatant resistance to simple truths. They only feel safe listening to their own echos...heh...
According to Nielsen data through Dec. 8, Fox News Channel averaged 1.774 million viewers in primetime (down 13% from 2012). AboveAlpha
Ratings and revenues? Are we talking about the "NEWS" channel, or all the entertainment programs? Because, what they pass up for "news" is indeed dying since no serious, independent thinker would consider that constant spinning and ouright lying "news." Howeve, I am perfectly content to eecognize that I watch several of their entertainment programming, as do so many people! But, I can see why there would be some confusion, since reasonable people ALSO consider their "NEWS" to be nothing more than "entertainment!"
I wouldn't say FOX news is dying but it is losing viewership at an alarming rate as far as FOX is concerned. It lost 13% of it's viewership in ONE YEAR and current projections from FOX itself estimates a 2014 viewership loss conservatively at 21% and as high as 28%. If I owned stock in FOX I would be VERY CONCERNED. AboveAlpha
Lol...Right-wingers need to breed faster if they don't want faux news to become extinct. It could survive as a right-wing comedy parody but Colbert already has that market sewn up.
If Fox News had been around during Jim Crow it might have been able to have kept it going. They are doing their best to revive it.
To bad. M/b if they got rid of Geraldo Rivera, that would help their ratings. Noticed they now have Pat Robertson as an occasional commentator.... a religious zealot. Good grief! Anyway, I'm sure the powers that be at Fox will have them back on top. Now if you want to talk about ratings, well there's that joke called MSNBC....
Pat Robertson is a man with a target on his back and those putting there are members of the U.S. Military. AboveAlpha
No no, post the whole thing... Fox News(*)Channel maintained its grip on the cable-news network ratings prize in 2013, drawing more viewers than the combined averages of(*)CNN,(*)MSNBC(*)and HLN. According to Nielsen data through Dec. 8, Fox News Channel averaged 1.774 million viewers in primetime (down 13% from 2012) and 297,000 adults 25-54 (down 30%). It was followed by MSNBC with 645,000 viewers and 203,000 adults 25-54 (down 29% in both); CNN with 578,000 (down 15%) and 187,000 adults 25-54 (down 16%)
And I couldn't find the most listened to radio, but Rush is #1 again with somewhere over 12.4 million viewers (2nd is The Morning Edition with 12.3). Wasn't it CNN that just fired 40 journalists and had (almost) their worst ratings year ever in 2013?? Wrong news channel guy.
Ratings and revenues applies to both. All news channels and entertainment channels. And no evidence exists that fox is dying. Fox news is news it is as accurate as any other news channel which means usually accurate sometimes not. Serious indedpendant thinkers recognize fox news for what it is. An accurate news channel without the spin and outright lies which the rest of the left wing dominant media covers. What you are in fact objecting to is that so many independant thinkers know those facts to be true and you hate those who think different than you and ignore the liberal programming you follow. For the record I do not watch fox news it is simply clear you hate them because they are merely different and succesful they are no where close to dying.
If you don't watch fox News, how do you know they are "usually accurate?" And, obviously ratings and revenues apply to both the "NEWS" and entertainment! My point is, I would like to see accurate ratings and revenues for "news" and entertainment SEPARATELY! Capish? Do you have anything to contribute to that part?