Your liberal media, now on TV

June 4th, 2008 1:24 pm · 20 comments

One channel, that is - really, when you come right down to it, one personality (though Dan Abrams is following in the footsteps).

That would be Keith Olbermann, and some “insiders” are apparently P.O.’d that he’d dare do the Fox News thing, from the other side:

“Every Tuesday night Keith is up there as the face of NBC News. That’s a problem,” says our source. “[Tim] Russert is upset about it. Russert has spent 20 years building credibility. All of a sudden he’s taking questions from Keith Olbermann, the Daily Kos blogger?”

The insider says Olbermann’s election night partner has reservations as well: “Chris Matthews is quite pissed about it. He knows a lot about politics and he takes it seriously. He’s so close to it that he’s not that political. He’s not an activist — Keith’s an activist. That’s the difference.”

Asked for a response, an MSNBC spokesperson said this:

“Your source is ill-informed and the assertions are laughable.”

Teh funny.

MSNBC is reportedly terrified that Olbermann will quit - and he’s threatened to do just that. Small wonder, given his ratings; “Countdown with Keith Olbermann has been the highest rated program in all of cable news in the A25-54 demo four times during the last two weeks.”

And even the unnamed source concedes:

“There’s a very large untapped market of liberal TV viewers,” says the insider. “It’s probably smart in the short term. Fox has succeeded because there are a lot of alienated conservatives who thought no one was speaking for them. All of a sudden there are huge numbers of liberals who feel the same way.”

And this is the heart of the matter.

The success of Fox News has given some news executives pause, as well it should have. Conservatives will say that the media in general has exhibited a liberal bias for years, and therefore the ideal of neutrality is simply a sham. But Fox News has worn its bias on its sleeve like virtually no other news program/network in history.

It has also been the most successful. So if you own the network - you do the math.

Because that unnamed source is exactly right. There is a huge demographic of ticked-off liberals who, frankly, want their own Fox News. And as there’s so much gold in them thar hills, they’ll get it. 

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Netvouz
  • DZone
  • ThisNext
  • MisterWong
  • Wists

  20 comments  Tags: Media

There are currently 20 comments on this blog post
View Topic | Comment on this blog
Pericles
6/4/08
2:58 PM
QUOTE(Lancaster Online @ Jun 4 2008, 01:25 PM) [snapback]397140[/snapback]


Post your thoughts and comments about this blog post.


You're right when you call Fox News Right leaning. But Fox doesn't put on their firebrands during news programs, like NBC having Olbermann on election night panels.

Brit Hume may be a conservative, but he does offer perspective and he's fair when covering news events. I've never seen that from Olbermann.

You may be right about the public wanting a counter balance to Fox. But I do remember that the same was tried on radio with Air America, which continues to be a dismal failure.


ArtVandolay
6/4/08
3:03 PM
You could be right about a liberal news station, but the challenge on how to make a return on the investment is with MOST lib radio/newscasters is how do they can stop the hate from showing. That turns people off. That's why Airamerica never worked. The mouthpieces all use cynical, make fun of Bush and republicans in a way that just disturbs many people. They get some, but most are turned off to the non stop hate and childish metaphors. Olbermann is a prime example of it with his childish monickers he gives his targets and his worse, worser, worstest idiocy. He does not get that he is trying to get adults to watch, not 17 year olds. No wonder Russert is not happy. Like Russert or not, he has worked hard for his place in a dignified way.



A few examples of liberals or progressives who I feel are interesting and give good analysis in a manner that is easy on the ears are Rachel Maddow, Bill Press, Alex Bennet and Ed Schultz, and they all come off well on on tube. Juan Williams is good to, but I am sure he is considered a selling out Uncle Tom.



But I don't see these guys playing second fiddle to Olbermann. Watching Olbermann last night climaxing over Obama's speech was pretty pathetic, you could tell Matthews knew Olbermann was upstaging.



Gil - One of posts discussed how conservative radio will fade away, I don't think so. There are large cionservative movements on college campuses and that will expand, eventually a new voice will replace Limbaugh.Newspapers will be next victim - NY Times, Washington Post, L.A Times are are bad shape financially. Oh yeah. they lean to the...left! So maybe the time is right for a Cable News station that is progressive.





2fat2ride
6/4/08
3:16 PM
QUOTE(Pericles @ Jun 4 2008, 02:58 PM) [snapback]397183[/snapback]

You may be right about the public wanting a counter balance to Fox. But I do remember that the same was tried on radio with Air America, which continues to be a dismal failure.


Yeah, I never really dig Air America. Just as much hoo-haa propaganda on there as some of the right-wing stuff. It may be tough to judge, though, in terms of numbers or ratings, I don't know how they measure such things.

I haven't owned a television for some time...I've taken to watching all my movies, programming, and most radio thru the net. Mostly thru netflix, democracynow, and the radio show through The Nation, the TED talks, cycling.tv, etc...and on many days I just scan around for archived lectures and discussions on topics I just happen to feel interested about on that particular day...this makes me pretty good at trivia games, but pretty lousy at the popular media's current events.

I suspect that many folks, lib and cons, are moving in the same direction, and it will be incredibly difficult to monitor the mass vibe on topics with there being so many avenues.



Pericles
6/4/08
3:25 PM
QUOTE(2fat2ride @ Jun 4 2008, 03:16 PM) [snapback]397199[/snapback]


Yeah, I never really dig Air America. Just as much hoo-haa propaganda on there as some of the right-wing stuff. It may be tough to judge, though, in terms of numbers or ratings, I don't know how they measure such things.



The best indicator of success is profitability, which is a direct reflection of ratings.
2fat2ride
6/4/08
3:36 PM
QUOTE(Pericles @ Jun 4 2008, 03:25 PM) [snapback]397205[/snapback]


The best indicator of success is profitability, which is a direct reflection of ratings.


Or a failed business model...

cyberscribbler
6/4/08
3:47 PM
QUOTE(ArtVandolay @ Jun 4 2008, 03:03 PM) [snapback]397189[/snapback]
One of posts discussed how conservative radio will fade away, I don't think so. There are large cionservative movements on college campuses and that will expand, eventually a new voice will replace Limbaugh.Newspapers will be next victim
Broadcast radio is in no better shape than printed newspapers. It's being replaced by satellite radio, web radio, podcasts, etc.
Newspapers and the blogosphere will occupy more of the same space. The main area where it will change will be in content delivery.
gsmart
6/4/08
4:38 PM
QUOTE(Pericles @ Jun 4 2008, 03:25 PM) [snapback]397205[/snapback]


The best indicator of success is profitability, which is a direct reflection of ratings.




Which is why Olbermann is such a hot property right now at MSNBC, and if he walks, will be courted extensively.

ArtVandolay
6/4/08
5:00 PM
QUOTE(gsmart @ Jun 4 2008, 04:38 PM) [snapback]397236[/snapback]




Which is why Olbermann is such a hot property right now at MSNBC, and if he walks, will be courted extensively.





I don't think so. He has become what Rachel Ray has become to the food network - parodies of themselves, and laughing stocks.

Yummo! equals Bill O!



I hear college students are doing drinking games to Keith - do a shot when he says one of his "signature" expressions.



Who ever gets stuck with him will regret it.

gsmart
6/4/08
5:19 PM
QUOTE(ArtVandolay @ Jun 4 2008, 05:00 PM) [snapback]397249[/snapback]

Who ever gets stuck with him will regret it.





If his ratings stay high amongst the 25-54 crowd, a lot of networks will clamor to "regret it."



Check out the trendline. O'Reilly still outpaces Olbermann in total viewership by a longshot. Long-term - Olbermann has caught up, and appears to be slowly overtaking, O'Reilly in the 25-54 demographic. That's money, right there.



Bigby_M
6/4/08
5:21 PM
QUOTE(Pericles @ Jun 4 2008, 02:58 PM) [snapback]397183[/snapback]


You're right when you call Fox News Right leaning. But Fox doesn't put on their firebrands during news programs, like NBC having Olbermann on election night panels.

Brit Hume may be a conservative, but he does offer perspective and he's fair when covering news events. I've never seen that from Olbermann.




Really? I saw a very dour Britt Humes interupt programming to announce a Catholic priest made fun of Hillary at Obama's former church.

Did he mention Phil Gramms lobbying for bankers while working for McCain or Charlie Black being a lobbyist for horrendous African dictators?

McCain is supposed to be ridding America of the influence of lobbyists so I would assume a fair newsprogram would at least give the truth to their viewers, yes?

I mean was it ever mentioned at all?

dragonrider
6/4/08
7:42 PM
QUOTE(ArtVandolay @ Jun 4 2008, 03:03 PM) [snapback]397189[/snapback]
You could be right about a liberal news station, but the challenge on how to make a return on the investment is with MOST lib radio/newscasters is how do they can stop the hate from showing. That turns people off. That's why Airamerica never worked. The mouthpieces all use cynical, make fun of Bush and republicans in a way that just disturbs many people. They get some, but most are turned off to the non stop hate and childish metaphors. Olbermann is a prime example of it with his childish monickers he gives his targets and his worse, worser, worstest idiocy. He does not get that he is trying to get adults to watch, not 17 year olds. No wonder Russert is not happy. Like Russert or not, he has worked hard for his place in a dignified way.

So how is that different than the speil of Ditto Head. Your only problem is its a liberal now attacking Bush and McBush instead of a conservative attacking Billary.
ArtVandolay
6/5/08
5:44 AM
QUOTE(dragonrider @ Jun 4 2008, 07:42 PM) [snapback]397313[/snapback]
So how is that different than the speil of Ditto Head. Your only problem is its a liberal now attacking Bush and McBush instead of a conservative attacking Billary.




I have no problem with a liberal on the air, just read my first post here.



Ditto Head makes huge, huge $$ and will continue to,

PS: If BHO wins, it will only help the right broadcast outlets. While the left will argue amongst themselves, because things never happen fast enough and the factions will split even farther from each other.

Gil - Just remember what CBS thought they got when they brought in Katie Couric - it bombed big time. And they damaged the egos of the talking heads there. And then there is poor Dan Rather... a sad, sad case.





Shawn
6/5/08
9:02 AM
QUOTE(ArtVandolay @ Jun 4 2008, 03:03 PM) [snapback]397189[/snapback]
You could be right about a liberal news station, but the challenge on how to make a return on the investment is with MOST lib radio/newscasters is how do they can stop the hate from showing. That turns people off. That's why Airamerica never worked. The mouthpieces all use cynical, make fun of Bush and republicans in a way that just disturbs many people. They get some, but most are turned off to the non stop hate and childish metaphors. Olbermann is a prime example of it with his childish monickers he gives his targets and his worse, worser, worstest idiocy. He does not get that he is trying to get adults to watch, not 17 year olds. No wonder Russert is not happy. Like Russert or not, he has worked hard for his place in a dignified way.




I think primary difference here is the target audiance. Air America, Olbermann, and others of their ilk aren't doing anything different than Limbaugh, O'reilly, Hannity, Coulter, etc. However, it appears that type of broadcasting works very well to those who proclaim to be conservative. Their target audiance are the folks who like to be told what to think, how to think, facts just get in the way, and the ends always justify the means. Progressive audiances, the target of Air America, Olberman, etc. don't tend to think that way. As a result they style of broadcasting just doesn't work with them, so such endeavors are pretty much destined to fail eventually. But, its a double edge sword. If you eliminate the childish rhetoric, political talk isn't very entertaining. Marketing to progressives just might not be all that profitable no matter how you slice it. However, targeting an audiance who are more than willing to flock like sheep and are proud of their irrational allegiance to something as stupid as a TV or Radio show is always going to be profitable.



Later...Shawn

Pericles
6/5/08
9:55 AM
QUOTE(Shawn @ Jun 5 2008, 09:02 AM) [snapback]397504[/snapback]


I think primary difference here is the target audiance. Air America, Olbermann, and others of their ilk aren't doing anything different than Limbaugh, O'reilly, Hannity, Coulter, etc. However, it appears that type of broadcasting works very well to those who proclaim to be conservative. Their target audiance are the folks who like to be told what to think, how to think, facts just get in the way, and the ends always justify the means. Progressive audiances, the target of Air America, Olberman, etc. don't tend to think that way. As a result they style of broadcasting just doesn't work with them, so such endeavors are pretty much destined to fail eventually. But, its a double edge sword. If you eliminate the childish rhetoric, political talk isn't very entertaining. Marketing to progressives just might not be all that profitable no matter how you slice it. However, targeting an audiance who are more than willing to flock like sheep and are proud of their irrational allegiance to something as stupid as a TV or Radio show is always going to be profitable.

Later...Shawn



Conservatives just think what they're told, while progressives (liberals) think through issues.

Guess what Shawn, both sides suffer from the same ailments.

Apparently the difference is that I'll give you credit that your point of view was formed through thought, while you don't offer me the same in return. Because I'm conservative, I must be unthinking and stupid.




dragonrider
6/5/08
10:09 AM
QUOTE(Pericles @ Jun 5 2008, 09:55 AM) [snapback]397528[/snapback]


Conservatives just think what they're told, while progressives (liberals) think through issues.

Guess what Shawn, both sides suffer from the same ailments.

Apparently the difference is that I'll give you credit that your point of view was formed through thought, while you don't offer me the same in return. Because I'm conservative, I must be unthinking and stupid.




I think a large portion of both sides only parrot what they are told that fits with their already formed way of thinking. There probably is only 10% of either side that does balanced research before forming an opinion.
Pericles
6/5/08
10:28 AM
QUOTE(dragonrider @ Jun 5 2008, 10:09 AM) [snapback]397533[/snapback]
I think a large portion of both sides only parrot what they are told that fits with their already formed way of thinking. There probably is only 10% of either side that does balanced research before forming an opinion.


Right on.
Shawn
6/5/08
11:24 AM
QUOTE(Pericles @ Jun 5 2008, 09:55 AM) [snapback]397528[/snapback]

Conservatives just think what they're told, while progressives (liberals) think through issues.

Guess what Shawn, both sides suffer from the same ailments.

Apparently the difference is that I'll give you credit that your point of view was formed through thought, while you don't offer me the same in return. Because I'm conservative, I must be unthinking and stupid.




Of course. It is more of a percentage issue. If both sides suffer the same ailments, and both sides offer they same type of juvenille unproductive programming, but only one side generates profit and ratings, that would lead me to believe that a higher percentage of the ailment come from the side that gets the higher ratings.



I never said anything about the way you may or may not form your thoughts. I was specifically referring to those who are rabid fans of this type of progamming being discussed. Whether that shoe fits in your case, I don't know. I don't generally like the labels "conservative" and "liberal" as they are pretty much meaningless. They mean different things to different people. Like you, I also consider myself to be conservative. However, I doubt most folks who go about touting themselves as "conservative" would consider me to meet their definition of "conservative".



Later...Shawn





QUOTE(dragonrider @ Jun 5 2008, 10:09 AM) [snapback]397533[/snapback]
I think a large portion of both sides only parrot what they are told that fits with their already formed way of thinking. There probably is only 10% of either side that does balanced research before forming an opinion.




If that were the case, I would expect the same ratings and profitiblity from similar shows that cater to a specific side of the fence. As has been indicated here, that simply isn't the case. If 90% of liberals or progressives were parrots or sheep, I would expect that Air America and similar programs would be just as profitable/successful as their "conservative" counterparts.



Later...Shawn

Pericles
6/5/08
11:31 AM
QUOTE(Shawn @ Jun 5 2008, 11:24 AM) [snapback]397589[/snapback]




Of course. It is more of a percentage issue. If both sides suffer the same ailments, and both sides offer they same type of juvenille unproductive programming, but only one side generates profit and ratings, that would lead me to believe that a higher percentage of the ailment come from the side that gets the higher ratings.



I never said anything about the way you may or may not form your thoughts. I was specifically referring to those who are rabid fans of this type of progamming being discussed. Whether that shoe fits in your case, I don't know. I don't generally like the labels "conservative" and "liberal" as they are pretty much meaningless. They mean different things to different people. Like you, I also consider myself to be conservative. However, I doubt most folks who go about touting themselves as "conservative" would consider me to meet their definition of "conservative".



Later...Shawn









If that were the case, I would expect the same ratings and profitiblity from similar shows that cater to a specific side of the fence. As has been indicated here, that simply isn't the case. If 90% of liberals or progressives were parrots or sheep, I would expect that Air America and similar programs would be just as profitable/successful as their "conservative" counterparts.



Later...Shawn



Obviously conservative talk shows have a larger audience than liberal ones. Therefore they have higher ratings and are more profitable. However, you take a big leap when you attribute the cause to unthinking conservatives. You have no evidence to support that assertion.
Shawn
6/5/08
11:43 AM
QUOTE(Pericles @ Jun 5 2008, 11:31 AM) [snapback]397597[/snapback]


Obviously conservative talk shows have a larger audience than liberal ones. Therefore they have higher ratings and are more profitable. However, you take a big leap when you attribute the cause to unthinking conservatives. You have no evidence to support that assertion.




That is why I prefaced my original assessment with "I think". I am only providing an assessment based on my personal observations and experiences with both types of programming. Obviously the "conservative" talk shows have a larger audience; but the question is why? It certainly isn't due to substance. The point I was trying to make is that the programming from both sides equally lack substance and objectivity. However, only one side has higher ratings and is profitable. Given the fact that the country is pretty much split 50/50, it is my opinion that the success of the "conservative" shows of this nature are a result of a higher percentage of "conservatives" willing to buy into that type of programming, and a lower percentage of progressives willing to do so.



Later...Shawn

dragonrider
6/5/08
11:47 AM
QUOTE(Pericles @ Jun 5 2008, 11:31 AM) [snapback]397597[/snapback]


Obviously conservative talk shows have a larger audience than liberal ones. Therefore they have higher ratings and are more profitable. However, you take a big leap when you attribute the cause to unthinking conservatives. You have no evidence to support that assertion.
Possibly liberals just watch less TV but you can get your same talking points without research or thinking by going to liberal blogs.
View Topic | Comment on this blog