lame stream media > Fox and friends

[carlfense]

Will this finally crack the epistemic closure?

 

On the biggest political story of the year, the conservative media just got its @$$ handed to it by the mainstream media. And movement conservatives, who believe the MSM is more biased and less rigorous than their alternatives, have no way to explain how their trusted outlets got it wrong, while the New York Times got it right. Hint: The Times hired the most rigorous forecaster it could find.

 

It ought to be an eye-opening moment.

 

But I expect that it'll be quickly forgotten, that none of the conservatives who touted a polling conspiracy will be discredited, and that the right will continue to operate at an information disadvantage. After all, it's not like they'll trust the analysis of a non-conservative like me more than the numerous fellow conservatives who constantly tell them things that turn out not to be true.

http://www.theatlant...nd-file/264855/

[knapplc]

I disagree with the moniker "Mainstream Media" to describe those who are not Fox and/or the New York Post. Fox News is the definition of "mainstream," as the most-watched news source on television. The Post is the #8 most-circulated newspaper. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly are three of the most-listened-to radio hosts in the business, and Laura Ingraham isn't far behind.

 

When did the leaders in their respective media stop being mainstream?

 

Now, I'll grant that, with demographic trends going the way they are these guys are likely to not be the "mainstream" in ten years, but today, they have the viewership to claim that name whether they want it or not. I get that their schtick is to play the victim/underdog card, much to the delight of their audience, but this nonsense is, more and more, not playing with the most important mainstream of all - mainstream Americans.

[carlfense]

I disagree with the moniker "Mainstream Media" to describe those who are not Fox and/or the New York Post. Fox News is the definition of "mainstream," as the most-watched news source on television. The Post is the #8 most-circulated newspaper. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly are three of the most-listened-to radio hosts in the business, and Laura Ingraham isn't far behind.

 

When did the leaders in their respective media stop being mainstream?

 

Now, I'll grant that, with demographic trends going the way they are these guys are likely to not be the "mainstream" in ten years, but today, they have the viewership to claim that name whether they want it or not. I get that their schtick is to play the victim/underdog card, much to the delight of their audience, but this nonsense is, more and more, not playing with the most important mainstream of all - mainstream Americans.

Agreed. Just using their own preferred terms and the term chosen by the author.

[sd'sker]

I disagree with the moniker "Mainstream Media" to describe those who are not Fox and/or the New York Post. Fox News is the definition of "mainstream," as the most-watched news source on television. The Post is the #8 most-circulated newspaper. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly are three of the most-listened-to radio hosts in the business, and Laura Ingraham isn't far behind.

 

When did the leaders in their respective media stop being mainstream?

 

Now, I'll grant that, with demographic trends going the way they are these guys are likely to not be the "mainstream" in ten years, but today, they have the viewership to claim that name whether they want it or not. I get that their schtick is to play the victim/underdog card, much to the delight of their audience, but this nonsense is, more and more, not playing with the most important mainstream of all - mainstream Americans.

Agreed. Just using their own preferred terms and the term chosen by the author.

then you should have said, 'lame-stream media'.

[carlfense]

then you should have said, 'lame-stream media'.

Good point. Fixed.

[sd'sker]

it was truly remarkable watching fox cover the election, especially after it was called for obama. it is like watching 'news' from an alternate universe. really bizarre.

[zoogs]

Another Husker forum I read was asking people what channel they'd watch the election on. An overwhelming plurality responded FOX, the only fair and balanced one that presents both sides.

 

Can anyone make a case for that?

 

Granted, I will say certain liberal media outlets are unabashedly liberal, it's no surprise that they are offensive to conservatives. I loved that ABC guy talking about how Sandy was evidence of global warming as a fact, and wondering why nobody made it a campaign issue.

[knapplc]

I watched Fox last night, along with CNN, but mostly we watched the Mythbusters Halloween special. In amongst commercial breaks we flipped between Fox and CNN to see what was going on, and I was astounded to see Fox call it for Obama before CNN.

 

I saw the Karl Rove outburst, the walk down the hall to show him he was wrong, the roundtable discussion of where the Republican party goes after this, etc.

[sd'sker]

fox news is neither fair nor balanced, which is fine except that they claim to be. i like msnbc, and here is them explaining the absurdity of fox news:

Fox News had called the election for Obama when Rove, a Fox News contributor, began to argue with the network about the announcement. Rove said it was "premature" and "early" to make any real decisions, prompting some awkward reactions from anchors Bret Baier and Megyn Kelly and plain disbelief from observers.

Over at MSNBC, Maddow took stock of the situation. “I don’t mean to cross-advertise here, but on the conservative cable news network Fox News Channel – Fox News Channel called Ohio for Obama, but the on-air talent at Fox News Channel is refusing to concede that they believe it," she said.

She said it was Rove who “is now trying to get on air the Fox News Channel to rescind its call in Ohio in favor of the candidate that he has bankrolled to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. This is a remarkable thing.”

how can you take that seriously? and poor bret baier and megyn kelly

[knapplc]

how can you take that seriously? and poor bret baier and megyn kelly

 

I'd volunteer to console Megyn Kelly. As long as she promised not to talk politics.

[Count 'Bility]

how can you take that seriously? and poor bret baier and megyn kelly

 

I'd volunteer to console Megyn Kelly. As long as she promised not to talk politics.

I'd +1 this if I had any left to give today.

[jimk]

how can you take that seriously? and poor bret baier and megyn kelly

 

I'd volunteer to console Megyn Kelly. As long as she promised not to talk politics.

I'd +1 this if I had any left to give today.

 

 

I googled her and then gave Knapp a +1 from you and me.

[carlfense]

Interesting take . . . (from back in 2009)

http://gawker.com/5332558/whats-bad-for-the-gop-is-good-for-fox-news?skyline=true&s=x

[JJ Husker]

I flipped back and forth between Fox, msnbc, and a couple major network channels last night just to see how the coverage varied but, the majority of what I watched was on Fox. I can't say they were off track with anything. Yes, the Rove tantrum about calling Ohio was a little strange but the fact is the network called it correctly and deservedly so. I don't think one person, Rove, going off on a tangent should discredit their coverage. Rove could've had a good point about which counties were still out in Ohio but he happened to be wrong. I think BB and MK shut him down pretty quickly even if the walk down the hall was a bit awkward. Overall, it seemed fair and balanced to me. The only channel that seemed out of whack was msnbc but, that is to be expected. If I have to watch someone covering something boring like an election, it might as well be Megyn Kelly- she's hot. Sure as heck beats the hell out of Maddow or Chris "thrill up my leg" Matthews.

[zoogs]

Seems like they prepared the dramatic walkdown rehearsal for if they needed to interview that calls team about something that was controversial. When the topic came up, spurred by Rove, they went with what was rehearsed. Even though it came at a time where the entire election had been called and Rove was just trying to say 'hold on, wait a minute.' I'd put this on Rove mainly.