Do you often wonder whether mainstream media outlets hate Fox News more than George W. Bush?
If so, such a malady would carry the acronym FDS.
Sadly, Fox Derangement Syndrome is serious business over at Time magazine, which published the following at its website Thursday (emphasis added throughout, image right courtesy AFP):
Fox hasn't gone soft, but from watching its coverage lately, I get a sense that the haven for conservative hosts, and viewers alienated by liberal news, needs to figure out its next act. Fox News is not simply a mouthpiece for the Bush White House: it rose with Bush after 2000 and 9/11, was played on TVs in his White House and reflected the same surety and flag-lapel-pin confidence in its tone and star-spangled look. It was not just a hit; it was the network of the moment.
Now, with two Democrats locked in what seems like a general-election campaign and lame-duck Bush fading from the headlines, it has to figure out how not to seem like yesterday's news.
When the piece finally got to ratings, "the network of the moment" remark seemed rather absurd:
Fox is still the top-rated news channel, but there are signs it's plateauing. Its ratings started to lag in 2006, and in February, CNN's prime time (boosted by several presidential debates) beat Fox among 25-to-54-year-olds for the first time since 2001. (CNN and TIME are owned by Time Warner.) Maybe even more galling, the network has lately faded in the ephemeral category of buzz. MSNBC--with far fewer viewers--has been the political-media obsession of the 2008 primary, largely because of feuds between the Clinton campaign and the network for its perceived pro-Obama bias.
Interesting how the author admitted that MSNBC is a "media obsession" irrespective of its paltry ratings, wouldn't you agree? Yet, maybe most telling was how despite twice referring to media as "liberal," the author seemed rather confused about how this inconvenient truth plays into Fox's success:
As it wades through the fin de régime, Fox News will have one important asset: its loyal viewer base. But even for them, it will need to shake up its comfortable Bush-era routine, perhaps by cultivating new hosts, perhaps by taking a page from McCain and branding itself as the channel of maverick authenticity, not of establishment dogma. The viewers are Fox's to keep. It just has to figure out what's going to make them mad starting in 2009.
Actually, it is press outlets like Time that need to understand that what will likely make Fox viewers mad in 2009 is exactly why they first turned to this station years ago: the obvious liberal bias at press outlets like Time.
Duh!
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
That's an easy one, Time Mag
March 29, 2008 - 20:48 ET by Mica the MagnificentThe viewers are Fox's to keep. It just has to figure out what's going to make them mad starting in 2009.
Any or all of them - McCain, Obama and Hillary will make us mad in '09.
Oh yeah, and the MSM, global warming hoax, Bill, Chelsea, Pelosi, Reid, etc.
C-Span Liberal Bias
March 30, 2008 - 07:03 ET by kiwikitI wish Newsbusters would take on the bias at this supposedly fair network. I had to stop watching it entirely a few years ago. It's moderators and 99% of it's callers suffer from Bush derangement syndrome and seem to absolutely hate our country. Any show they produce themselves: e.g. Washington Journal is nothing but an advert for the liberals. No lie gets questioned but every pro-America statement is called bunkum.
in defense of C-Span
March 30, 2008 - 07:17 ET by sarcasmoWithout them, there'd be 0 (zero) news media coverage of the Libertarians & Greens. None. Goose-egg. Zilch. Nada. And we all know it.
This is one of those 'problems' like the bias at Wikipedia, where people are much more likely to complain-here than actually help out (or in C-Span's case call) there. Are they perfect WRT bias? No. Neither's Fox News, and by a LONG shot. But life's better for me because they're there, and Brian Lamb is one of the few denizens of Washington, DC whose hand I'd actually go out of my way to shake.
JMR
A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover.
Huh?
March 30, 2008 - 08:46 ET by ThisnThat"Without them [C-Span], there'd be 0 (zero) news media coverage of the Libertarians & Greens. None. Goose-egg. Zilch. Nada".
And exactly how would that adversely affect me? Here are a couple of headlines from the Greens official website:
"Greens urge economic pressure and cutoff of all military aid to Israel as Gaza situation worsens "
"The Green Party remains the only major national party committed to peace at home and abroad and has called for impeachment of Bush and Cheney for years"
"Congress Must Reject Patriot Act, Ban Warrantless Spying"
Looks like, at least for the Greens, there's only a difference without distinction between them and other looney, far-left groups out there. So, I say -- shut down C-Span quickly.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
LOL! He's an English Major
March 29, 2008 - 20:48 ET by Del DolemonteFrom his Time bio
"Poniewozik was the media critic and media section editor at Salon.com from 1997 to 1999, where he wrote two columns a week of media criticism for the acclaimed on-line magazine. He covered subjects ranging from advertising to Internet radio to TV shelter shows to the cultural significance of eBay and Antiques Roadshow.
Prior to Salon, he worked for several years in publishing in New York and has contributed to such publications as Fortune, Rolling Stone, New York, The New York Times Book Review, Suck.com and Talk. He is also a regular radio commentator for NPR's "On the Media" and "All Things Considered."
A native of Monroe, Michigan, Poniewozik graduated with a BA in English from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and attended the graduate program in fiction writing at New York University."
He should never have left
March 29, 2008 - 20:56 ET by Jack BauerHe should never have left SUCK.COM... that's were he did his best work.
Wonder If He Graduated
March 29, 2008 - 20:56 ET by CGatton"...[He] attended the graduate program in fiction writing..."
I'm guessing he didn't do well enough to market fiction as a stand alone job, however it seems he has brought major elements of the course to his job as an 'analyst,' lol.
V/R
Clyde
"...the aspirants to tyranny are either the...men of the state, who in democracies are demagogues,... or those who hold great offices, and have a long tenure.." - Aristotle, Politics, c350BC
I particularly like these
March 29, 2008 - 21:10 ET by kgI particularly like these two statements:
"FOX News is not simply a mouthpiece for the Bush White House"
"MSNBC--with far fewer viewers--has been the political-media obsession of
the 2008 primary, largely because of feuds between the Clinton campaign and the
network for its perceived pro-Obama bias."
At the bottom of the article it should have said " JAMES PONIEWOZIK is a staff writer for Daily KOS and a contributor to MoveOn.org"
"Forget change, I want improvement!"
What a Resume!
March 30, 2008 - 00:52 ET by Del DolemonteLet's dissect this
""Poniewozik was the media critic and media section editor at Salon.com from 1997 to 1999, where he wrote two columns a week of media criticism for the acclaimed on-line magazine"
That's 10 years ago, and Salon's stock was about as valuable then as it is now. $1 a share?
"The acclaimed on-line magazine"? Who has "acclaimed it? This English Major's biographer doesn't tell us.
As I recall, "Hairdressers" was founded by a leftist whose only claim to fame was that his kid brother played Gilbert on "Leave it to Beaver". Has he managed to get any of his candidates elected yet, like his pals did at fellow fever-tree websites like truthout, DU, KOS, Puffington, or Dog Lake Fire?
Oh, that's right. None of those people managed to elect their candidates for major office either. George Soros and Ned Lamont could not be reached for comment.
Liberal Definitions abound
March 29, 2008 - 20:53 ET by exLibTo a liberal Conservative means "Establishment", liberal means "gutty, go against the grain...blah, blah, blah".
It doesn't matter that in society today it takes courage to stand up against the PC non-sense and be open about being a conservative. Bush hate is PC and gets you allot of mileage.
PS - The "Fox is dying" mantra was started during the 04 election and repeated endless, saying KO was the new BO.
One thing is for sure Time
March 29, 2008 - 20:53 ET by Jack BauerOne thing is for sure Time Magazine needs to figure out its current act, because it sure ain't working.
Maybe they could figure out that if you couldn't care less about half your potential audience don't be surprised when they say "screw you."
If I was a betting man, I'm put money on Time running out before FNC.
I'll take that bet,
March 30, 2008 - 10:16 ET by FastEdand raise 'ya an olberwoman and a side bet of nyt.
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
FastEd -- ha dude, I'm
March 30, 2008 - 14:08 ET by Jack BauerFastEd -- ha dude, I'm looking for a bookie that'll lay those bets.
I have a theory about Olberjerk and how he will end...
RIDICULE. Have you ever seen a guy so ripe for a "sex" scandal to break out about.
That's what's going to kill him. Eliot Spitzwad level dirtola. Something humiliatingly kinky, though "private" will get people laughing so much he can't face it.
The only "demise" Time need concern itself with is its own.
March 29, 2008 - 20:54 ET by R D HelmTheme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
Just what I was thinking.
March 30, 2008 - 15:08 ET by needleThis guy could be practicing for Time’s obit.
Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat.
Somebody still prints Time Magazine ??
March 29, 2008 - 20:56 ET by desertdwellerI don't think I've seen one of those in at least 20 years. Seriously.
When you're stuck with a
March 29, 2008 - 21:08 ET by danboWhen you're stuck with a layover between flights. And you go to one of the small news stands at the airport. It's one of those magazines you have to weed through when you're looking for something insightful or entertaining enough to pass the time.
That's the only time I see it. Don't buy or read it. Just see it.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
They Can't Give Them Away
March 30, 2008 - 00:58 ET by Del DolemonteMom subscribed to TIME, then cancelled it. They kept sending it anyway.
Ma got sick, went in hospital and died. I cancelled the subscription. Still getting them for free a year later.
Don't forget the dreaded
March 31, 2008 - 12:58 ET by lotrDon't forget the dreaded waiting room. Also, I sometimes find throwaway copies at the gym. For the most part, they are mind-numbing gossip-rags, only one step up from People magazine.
It's weird how you can tell
March 29, 2008 - 21:01 ET by FairlightIt's weird how you can tell when liberals write the headlines before the story.
And they will continue to
March 29, 2008 - 21:26 ET by motherbeltAnd they will continue to find or create reasons why Fox continues to
beat them, be it anger, or lack of intelligence among its
viewers. Whatever the reasons are, the one thing for certain wll
be that none of it is because of any lack on their part.
Ane this "dream of Fox's demise"
March 29, 2008 - 21:27 ET by JerAnd this "dream of Fox's demise" is revealed exactly where in Time's article?
Jer
between the lines
March 29, 2008 - 21:43 ET by Angry AfricanHey Jer,
They'll tell you to read between the lines. Or in the Fox case - read between the lies. They keep the "n" for special occassions.
Save a whale, harpoon a conservative!
Help me. Just why are you an
March 29, 2008 - 21:56 ET by Gary P JacksonHelp me. Just why are you an angry African?
Sleeper Cell
March 30, 2008 - 01:01 ET by Del Dolemonte"1 week, 5 days"
Tongue in cheek
March 30, 2008 - 11:11 ET by Angry AfricanIt is actually tongue in cheek. I wrote a rant in my blog about global warming and Africa on another old blog of mine and a friend commented that I am an Angry African on the Loose. I liked it and merged all my blogs under that. It's more about trying to break down some of the views people have of Africa - the narrow "it's all bad" views. You'll see more in the "About" section of my blog on why. It does not really have any political meaning as such.
What, liberals aren't taught
March 29, 2008 - 21:55 ET by Gary P JacksonWhat, liberals aren't taught reading comprehension in school?
Huh? I don't understand
March 29, 2008 - 22:13 ET by JerHuh? I don't understand your question.
Actually, it wasn't necessary, Gary...as a liberal, it just came naturally. <wink>
Jer
Yeah, I see how well that
March 29, 2008 - 22:25 ET by Gary P JacksonYeah, I see how well that works for you guys. <rolls eyes>
Reading Comprehension?
March 30, 2008 - 01:05 ET by Del DolemonteIn the 2004 Presidential election, Kerry and Bush pretty much equally split the votes of high school dropouts. Yet 4 years earlier, Al Gore won well over 60 percent of the same group. Why the difference?
The Dream Exposed
March 30, 2008 - 13:13 ET by CobraMan"Now let's not jump the gun. Somewhere in a cabinet at Fox headquarters,
there must be a bulging file of the premature obituaries written for it."
There's the dream, poised as reflection. Time just admits that the dream is unattainable.
Wow!
March 29, 2008 - 21:32 ET by heldmywDo I detect a big ol' bowl of OlberMatthews-Brand Spittleflecked Sour Grapes, spiced with rank envy, wishful thinking and a healthy slug from jug of blatant self-pity?
Why, I believe it is!
Nicely festered and suppurating with fresh bile and hatred-y goodness!
Mmmmmm. It's Time!
as
Hmmmm...
March 29, 2008 - 21:32 ET by BondPlainBondPoniewozik sounds rather naive and afraid. As for deep thinking on the part of Poniewozik? I doubt it will ever happen.
*grin*
Clueless
March 29, 2008 - 21:51 ET by SATerpThe MSM has no more of a clue as to why Fox is successful than they do of how conservatives think.
Fox News is the most fair
March 29, 2008 - 22:20 ET by SupermanPeople love to hate on Fox News. But they are the most fair news network in America. And that is a big reason why they are #1 in the ratings.
Did Time really write this comment?
March 29, 2008 - 22:41 ET by ThisnThat"the same surety and flag-lapel-pin confidence in its tone and star-spangled look". The flag-lapel-pin must be the red flag in liberals' eyes. Can I ask why Time believes wearing the flag-lapel-pin is wrong? I could understand if Time reacted to anyone saying that they are unpatriotic for not wearing a pin; but to make this kind of unprovoked statement in the middle of a bash-article really says a lot about these so-called "journalists". Time, the MSM in general, and liberals in specific are simply the most biased, sick people in the world.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
Time would bend over
March 29, 2008 - 23:21 ET by jay_1975Time would bend over backwards to defend someone wearing a Cuban lapel pin before supporting a Patriot. The MSM thinks that love of country is pase' and so they will take their little cheap shots every chance they get.
The Disinformation Age
March 29, 2008 - 23:09 ET by Kuso JijiOf course Time Warner is pissed at FNC, CNN and TIME have been exposed for what they really are, propagandists masquerading as independant media.
FNC has been a refreshing change and provides a more balanced look at today's events. Critics of FNC just don't get it, the vast majority of people who switched to Fox were already sick and tired of being spoonfed the Democrats talking points.
This is the liberal medias
March 29, 2008 - 23:18 ET by jay_1975This is the liberal medias tried and true fall back plan. When things don't go their way, they try to create news to sway public opinion to their twisted views. I.E. flimsy "evidence" of AGW, yet they harp om it daily so that the masses will fall lock step into their views. Same now. Fox is beating everyone else in the raings, but they hope that by saying that Fox will decline will be enough to turn people off to them. Luckily most Fox viewers know the difference between news and propoganda. Too bad the MSM hasn't realized this yet.
"...yet they harp om it
March 30, 2008 - 09:13 ET by Indiana Joe"...yet they harp om it daily so that the masses will fall lock step into their views."
You mean kinda like the "recession" they've been claiming we're in for over a year?
"It's here. No, no, wait. It's coming. Now it's here. Almost.... Consumer confidence is down!"
Gee, wonder why?
As someone who worked in
March 29, 2008 - 23:20 ET by fitzfongAs someone who worked in advertising for several years, one thing I've learned is that you can make statistics mean anything you want them to mean. If you don't like an overall rating number, you can drill down to find optimism in an advertiser-friendly demographic subcategory. If that doesn't work, you can attempt to shift focus to a statistical spike in growth. Failing that, you can pin your self-satisfaction on the peer-level praise that comes from an endless supply of awards shows. And if that fails, there's always "media buzz". I don't know what "media buzz" is worth...but, if that fails, I can't see MSNBC having anything left.
They love it when CNN or
March 29, 2008 - 23:23 ET by jay_1975They love it when CNN or MSNBC beats Fox in a younger category, but they fail to remember that the majority of the voting block are in the older crowd. While trying to be "hip" they alienate the voting block while pumping up the Pepsi generation.
Exactly. And they make a
March 29, 2008 - 23:42 ET by fitzfongExactly. And they make a mountain out of less than a mole hill when they claim an extreme anomaly (like CNN winning prime time one night because it was the exclusive carrier of a live debate) is somehow suggestive of a greater overall trend.
I remember MSNBC promoting itself as the "fastest growing" cable news network. Well, when your ratings are a statistical zero, even the increase of one viewer per night can create a high percentage growth.
What was it that Mark Twain said? I think it was, "There are lies, damn lies and statistics".
No.
March 30, 2008 - 08:11 ET by Joe C.It was Benjamin Disraeli who said that, often misattributed to Mark Twain.
If Time Magazine did an
March 30, 2008 - 00:08 ET by jdhawkIf Time Magazine did an article about themselves would it read like this:
The Audit Bureau of Circulations has the following to report in regards to Time Magazine and the first half of 2007 (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/14/business/media/14mag.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss):
Circulation down 17% from the same time period the year before - 2006
Rate base reduced - in another words advertisers aren't spending as much
Staff cuts, redesign of magazine, and newstand price increase (like their liberal brethern in politics that raise taxes right through a recession they are raising rates in the face of declining sales - go figure)
Nah! Like the clintoons, they are triangulating. Telling a story of a make believe demise of Fox News while their own business is falling through the floor.
Have you noticed how skinny
March 30, 2008 - 05:02 ET by marvlHave you noticed how skinny Time has gotten? I can remember many years ago when it was a healthy, overweight, relevant magazine with lots of news stories. Now it is positively bulimic: all those editors, reporters, and writers over there are constantly puking from having to read and write the liberal clap-trap that is currently in vogue on the left. News is no longer news, it's opinion and entertainment.
We can only hope the trend continues, until it finally reaches the weight of a neighborhood newsletter and then expires in a final gasp of trite irrelevance. So long, Time. Good riddance.
I like to think the
March 30, 2008 - 09:17 ET by Indiana JoeI like to think the slimness is due to the loss of ads. ;^)
A study of ad column-inches now vs. "then" would be interesting, no?
Rush is still here, and Fox will be too
March 30, 2008 - 09:15 ET by nkviking75It's the same song we've been hearing about Rush for years, and yet El Rushbo is about to hit his 20th anniversary. Time magazine is slipping away, and CNN, which more or less invented cable news, is a perenniel 2nd fiddle to Fox.
And if MSNBC is the media darling, who cares? Advertisers don't buy on media buzz, they buy on ratings. If MSNBC weren't owned by a very rich company, they'd have folded by now.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
It's amazing that they think
March 30, 2008 - 10:38 ET by obxrayIt's amazing that they think Fox is some far right news network.This just shows how far left everyone else is.Funny how they never mention all of the far lefty pea brains that work at the other networks.MSM has been in a panic ever since Fox hit the scene.They prove to us everytime they whine about fox that they don't want any opinions from the right.They truly hate it when America gets some honest news once in a while.
Noel
March 30, 2008 - 11:17 ET by shawn228I gotta go with Jer or AngryAfrican on this one, I do not see where anyone says or implies dreams of Fox's demise.
Angry white males... You
March 30, 2008 - 14:01 ET by usinkoreaAngry white males...
You know.....given this theme the media elites like to hold onto as a rationale for why they are not popular in the viewing public, you would think they might report Islamic fundamentalism differently....
....or is it the "white" part that makes it different?
Fox viewers are dismissed out of hand as being nothing more than angry (white) people who are angry because that is just the way they are.
But, rage filling the streets in the Middle East or Indonesia is, well, justified, can't you see?
Americans who do nothing more than change channels to Fox or listen to Talk Radio are rabid....
......but violent, deadly protests against Danish cartoons need to be understood.......what are the "root causes"? (aka "Can't we see how we caused this?")
Time magazine..picture a
March 30, 2008 - 15:13 ET by ConservativeRexTime magazine..picture a dinosaur with one foot stuck in the La brae Tar pits..they are bleeding readers. It'll not get better. Time cast it's lot with the anti-Bush people thinking the country would go along with them. It's anti-war, anti-Bush stance has no traction. It's like all these anti-war movies that come out and are duds. Both Hollywood and the MSM has once again misread the public. So let Time die a natural death, it will not be lamented or missed by right thinking Americans.
Big Mouth Jon Klein
March 30, 2008 - 18:38 ET by KrisI was reading some comments by CNN head honcho Jon Klein today, and of course he was bragging about how his network is blowing everyone else out of the water. The idiot even said that CNN represents the "middle" when it comes to news broadcasting, with Fox leaning right and MSNBC going left. Does this jerk really think that we are going to buy that "middle of the road" crap that he's trying to sell us? Everything they do at that channel, whether it's outright opinion or the way stories are presented, it's all got a liberal bent to it. I remember reading the other day about how the english version of Al Jazeera was started in order to try and compete with CNN and the BBC. Well, that pretty much says it all.
Sounds like Time needs to
March 30, 2008 - 19:56 ET by bigtimerSounds like Time needs to concentrate on their own little biased problems with their decline in readers...instead of showing the green-eyed monster side.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill