Viewership numbers and demographics are the key criteria for advertising placement. it is not valid to compare a demographic group of viewers with only one choice for like minded news/opinion with a demographic group with a wide variety of options, in order to draw some kind of conclusion of popularity, reach or influence.
So, you are saying that there are more "like[-]minded" people for a center-left (to further left) point of view, than there are to a center-right point of view? Is that really what you wish to claim? If so, it is quite difficult to see just how the Republicans control the Senate. And the House of Representatives...
I can't say for sure. I only look at how the market is served, and in cable news, there are more center or left leaning media outlets than there are right of center media outlets. According to free market principles, that indicates that there is a narrower appetite for such hard right outlets like FAUX. And as for election results, I suggest you get some glasses. There are a myriad of reasons for the republican majority in congress and senate and cable news only played its part.
Actually, there are no "cent[rist]...media outlets" whatsoever. FNC leans center-right. All the rest lean center-left--or, in MSNBC's case, even further to the left. For openers, Fox News is not "hard right"; it is center-right. (Some of the nighttime commentators--such as Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham--do, indeed, lean heavily to the right. But there are enough others--including Shepard Smith, Neil Cavuto, Bret Baier, et al.--that are centrist, to make FNC, overall, a center-right network. The "appetite" for a center-right news channel was seen by Ruport Murdoch in 1996. Prior to that, American citizens were steadily spoon-fed a center-left perspective; which the coastal elitist seem to view as normal.
Mostly agreed. You rightfully point out that it's the "commentators" who lean hard right, but that also applies to the Left. Disagreed that, prior to Murdoch in 1996, all the media was center left. As Sarah Sanders pointed out on Chris Cuomo's show last night, when someone sees a news report and can't tell if the author was Left or Right, that's a good news report. Sometime in the late 1960s, early 1970s, it became fashionable to not only report the news, but to comment on it. That was the beginning. Once Ted Turner started the 24 hours news cycle in 1980, the race was on to make the most money by attracting the most viewers with the most populist ideas. Businesses quickly realized they could find profitable niches by presenting increasingly biased points of view.
Oh? and how exactly do you measure this? Got any links to source other than your personal perceptions? So the various conservatives on CNN and MSNBC don't balance out, but Smith and Cavuto balance out HANNITY? What a convenient rationalization. Yeah, because he thought Clinton was getting off too easy in the media in the Lewinsky case, as did a big chunk of the citizenry. He recognized an opportunity and went for it. Smart guy and helluva opportunist. No wonder he has an empire.
I am giving you my "personal perceptions"--just as you are doing also, to me. Say what? Just who are those "various conservatives" on CNN and MSNBC, anyway (who are not paired with liberals)? Actually, Ruport Murdoch was very wealthy even before his founding of Fox News: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Murdoch But I do find it quite disappointing that you cannot debate the issue at hand, without resorting to ad hominem attacks.
Your post came out--well, rather odd--so I am replying to it in a bit different way than usual. As you say yourself, most of those conservatives that you mention are mere "contributors--not panelists with their own respective shows. And Joe Scarborough--who, by the way, is paired with Mika Brzezinski--has actually become rather liberal. (Perhaps Ms. Brzezinski had something to do with his transformation.) As concerning Ruport Murdoch, there is no "rationalization" on my part, at all. Your apparent distaste for the man--presumably, because he is wealthy--amounts to an ad hominem attack on the man.
In as much as she and her husband are actively going arould peddling their positions for financial gain, it seems appropriate. Indeed, the influence peddling is right out there in the open!
Confused. Why was it okay to go after the Obama girls, but it's not okay to go after a high ranking member in the Trump administration? Odd position to take.
Its not okay to go after the obama girls. Those who did, got shunned. Democrats cheer when people attack trump's daughter, because they have no decency.
She's a high ranking member of the Administration. Her daughter status is irrelevant. Calling her a ghoul was quite nasty, but pretending only the democrats can be nasty is silly.
She's an adviser to the president. She has an office in the West Wing. She has staff, WH issued communication devices and high level security clearance. That's way more than, "daughter."
Yes, and hopefully the left will stay away from Barron. Attacking the kids is wrong, no matter which party is in the big chair.
"Without exception, the Trumps are a family of crooks and liars..." Everyone in the New York real estate and construction industry has known that for decades. That's why he has to go to Russian gangsters for his financing. BTW, there is a Post story today about how Jared sold his influence to friends of Shelly Adelson for financing for a project called Quail Ridge Apartments. I'm not used to having news stories like this break so close. I was one of the contractors who built that particular project originally.
I certainly avoid saying anythign about Baron. I don't know anything about him, except he appears to be an unhappy and lonely boy when you see him in pictures. I don't attack Melania either. I think she's the only hint of real class that any of these people in Trump's orbit has, and I think she will ultimately wind up fine, once she cashes out Trump at the end of his time in office. Of course, right wingers seldom hesitated to attack either the Obama twins or Chelsea Clinton........
She and Jared had income over $82 Million last year,at least $3.9 million of Iwankers was generated by the Trump D.C.hotel.
