Former Fox Host calls Fox watchers a cult
- Thread starter wildcatdad
- Start date
Precisely. I don't even care about these "lies" from O'Reilly.
If you watch him for 15 seconds you realize he's not a serious journalist. He's just up there pushing his opinion as if it is fact. It's fine, others have similar opinions.
It's actually kinda disrespectful to Williams to lump him in with Bill. Williams made a huge error, and he should (and hopefully will) pay for it, but he's still a journalist. O'Reilly is just a a pundit.
Also, I get that his transgressions might be from the years where he actually did try journalism (because of this Dallas story? I admit I don't care enough to really follow it), but again, who really cares? I'm sure most of these guys have fudged the truth here and there. I guess maybe that's the way I look at it growing up when I did. Pretty much no one in the media can be universally trusted.
1. I've been watching Fox News Channel regularly since late 2000 and I honestly don't recall ever seeing this guy, or hearing his name, or for that matter, a program called "Fox News Watch."
2. I don't disagree with anything he is quoted as saying. I might quibble with the pejorative word "cult," but he explains the loyalty to the network correctly when he explains that it's a reaction to the overwhelming liberalism of the other media.
3. He is also right about O'Reilly being held to a different standard than Williams, but they SHOULD be held to different standards. As I and others have said repeatedly -- and to deaf left-wing ears on this board -- O'Reilly gives opinions and Williams purports to be giving objective news reports. It is proper to hold Williams to the same standard as Bret Baier, but not Bill O'Reilly.
4. Basically, what he's saying is that people loyal to Fox News Channel actually understand what they are watching, while critics of the network do not.
2. I don't disagree with anything he is quoted as saying. I might quibble with the pejorative word "cult," but he explains the loyalty to the network correctly when he explains that it's a reaction to the overwhelming liberalism of the other media.
3. He is also right about O'Reilly being held to a different standard than Williams, but they SHOULD be held to different standards. As I and others have said repeatedly -- and to deaf left-wing ears on this board -- O'Reilly gives opinions and Williams purports to be giving objective news reports. It is proper to hold Williams to the same standard as Bret Baier, but not Bill O'Reilly.
4. Basically, what he's saying is that people loyal to Fox News Channel actually understand what they are watching, while critics of the network do not.
I have no problem with FNC.
There does need to be a counter balance to the left wing(what little there is) and middle of the road media in our country. I also wouldn't call it a cult as much as it is a demographic that is too old and set in their ways to open their lives to differing views. The interesting thing to watch for FNC is that as the geriatric make up of our country declines in quantity will the youngsters replace them in the same numbers to keep the network profitable.
There does need to be a counter balance to the left wing(what little there is) and middle of the road media in our country. I also wouldn't call it a cult as much as it is a demographic that is too old and set in their ways to open their lives to differing views. The interesting thing to watch for FNC is that as the geriatric make up of our country declines in quantity will the youngsters replace them in the same numbers to keep the network profitable.
The most recent survey I saw showed the median age of Fox News Channel viewers to be 45, which is younger than the median age for any of the other TV news channels, broadcast or cable. FNC also has a much larger share of the 25-49 age group.
The average age of FNC viewers is higher than that of the other channels.
What I think we're seeing is a reflection of the reality that the younger a group is, the less interested it is in getting the news -- left, right or whatever. You can see this clearly in the demographics for newspapers, and it doesn't matter what the political persuasion of the newspapers are.
The youngsters will be on their smart organ phones, won't sit still for a half hour or hour to catch the news in traditional formats, twitter and instagram beckon too strongly for their attention spans. Tsunami headed the way of tv news. Affecting televised sports already in big ways.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,079
- 190,340
- 113
Well, it has a viewership that is bigger than all its competitors combined, so I doubt that their demographic is as narrow as you imply. All those younger viewers? People usually get more conservative as they grow up; many younger people already watch the network. Especially after the debacle of the last six years.
Wow, Wildcat started a thread. Unsettling to say the least. There must be a lot of cultists out there then since FNC has been dominating the cable ratings for over a decade (maybe that's what bothers you).
Bingo. It depends upon what point you're trying to make.
When it comes to the 18-49 age group, the relevant factor is that more of them watch Fox than all the rest of the options COMBINED.
Fox ratings reflects a niche market since ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC and CNN are liberal news organizations lots of people turn to fFox. The percentages show more people trust fox over other networks.
ThIs. It's always comical how the people who complain that FNC is biased, are blind to the liberal bias everywhere else.
Wow, I don't think this thread had gone exactly the way the OP intended. Facts are stubborn things. Good for you LC for demolishing the left wing talking points about Fox. Oh and Torbee, you suggesting others are pushing fiction is really rich, well done. This made me laugh.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,079
- 190,340
- 113
Tell us more about that fictional story you posted a week ago about Scott Walker. Did that come from Fox News too?
Any credibilty you once may have had on media bias is now gone. But speaking of fiction, please continue to tell us how Fox is biased and all the other major news networks are not.
Perfect example of what we see from too many modern journalists. He's not biased. It's just those other people who don't think like me that are biased.
And what's also funny about this post, after torbees monumental scott walker debacle you'd think he'd be avoiding this subject...
Not just journalists. Many on the left consider them to be smarter than everyone else. Typical delusion.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,079
- 190,340
- 113
Ever hear the old expression "If you come to the conclusion that every single person around you is an asshole, the truth is probably that YOU are the asshole?"
Let's think about this - according to Fox and it's viewers:
Fox tells the truth.
And these professional organizations ALL are liberal liars: The New York Times, NPR, The Washington Post, BBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, The Atlantic, The New Yorker, The Weather Channel, The Los Angeles Times, The Guardian, The Economist, Every Single Local Newspaper in America.
Applying Occam's Razor - Fox is full of shit.
Nope never heard that. I doubt that your colleagues appreciate the names you are calling them though
Posted from Rivals Mobile
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,079
- 190,340
- 113
My colleagues?Originally posted by jthawk:
Nope never heard that. I doubt that your colleagues appreciate the names you are calling them though
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Originally posted by torbee:
My colleagues?Originally posted by jthawk:
Nope never heard that. I doubt that your colleagues appreciate the names you are calling them though
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Pls disregard. Just a cheap shot for which I know better.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,079
- 190,340
- 113
I didn't think it was a cheap shot - but I haven't been in the news game for over half a decade. Unless you count writing a goofy football column for Hawkeye Report as "journalism".Originally posted by jthawk:
Originally posted by torbee:
My colleagues?Originally posted by jthawk:
Nope never heard that. I doubt that your colleagues appreciate the names you are calling them though
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Pls disregard. Just a cheap shot for which I know better.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
And I'm sure Torbee was a perfect example of an objective member of the media. Clearly his political bias could never have influenced his reporting.Originally posted by torbee:
I didn't think it was a cheap shot - but I haven't been in the news game for over half a decade. Unless you count writing a goofy football column for Hawkeye Report as "journalism".
