If Fox News could profit more from programming for liberal/strong/smart people, would they switch?

[onehandle]

Poll question: If Fox News could profit more from programming for liberal/strong/smart people, would they switch?

Switch from conservative/weak/dumb people, that is.

[Echo In Light]

1. A central view of moderates, or, any who disavow CTs, is that our media is ALL about $, NOT ideology

Problem is, if that were actually the case, one wouldn't find such glaringly obvious ideological disinfo/omissions/propaganda time after time throughout the entire M$M ... which is to say, moderates of course prefer it all boil down to $ since doing so completely removes any trace of collusion (CT) among powerful people beholden to powerful orgs

[Echo In Light]

11. More:

"In the west, 10 or 20 years, there has been massive research documenting the fact that the media are extraordinarily subordinated to external power. Now, when you have that power, the best technique is to ignore all of that discussion, ignore it totally, and to eliminate it, by the simple device of asserting the opposite. If you assert the opposite, that eliminates mountains of evidence demonstrating that what you are saying is false. That's what power means. And the way we assert the opposite is by just saying that the media are liberal." ~ Chomsky

Myth: The U.S. has a liberal media.

Fact: The media are being increasingly monopolized by parent corporations with pro-corporate or conservative agendas.

Summary

The U.S. media are rapidly being monopolized by a dwindling number of parent corporations, all of whom have conservative economic agendas. The media are also critically dependent upon corporations for advertising. As a result, the news almost completely ignores corporate crime, as well as pro-labor and pro-consumer issues. Surveys of journalists show that the majority were personally liberal in the 1980s, but today they are centrists, with more conservatives than liberals on economic issues. However, no study has proven that they give their personal bias to the news. On the other hand, the political spectrum of pundits -- who do engage in noisy editorializing -- leans heavily to the right. The most extreme example of this is talk radio, where liberals are almost nonexistent. The Fairness Doctrine was designed to prevent one-sided bias in the media by requiring broadcasters to air opposing views. It once enjoyed the broad support of both liberals and conservatives. But now that the media have become increasingly owned and controlled by corporations, conservatives defiantly oppose the Fairness Doctrine. This is probably the best proof that the media's bias is conservative, not liberal.

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-liberalmedia.htm

[Walk away]

2. Roger Ailes ... .... n/t

[Kahuna]

3. No. Their agenda is strictly political. nt

[leftstreet]

4. If Fox wanted to make REAL $ they'd have Congressional Mixed Martial Arts

I'd actually watch it

[Echo In Light]

5. .

[arcadian]

6. Liberalism and helping people doesn't sell.

[walldude]

7. No.. as has been PROVEN by the fact that they have a hell of a time

finding people to advertise on Glen Beck. They have gone even beyond greed into ideological insanity.

[librechik]

8. profit is not as important to them as influence--they want to stop anyone who might be opposed

to their obvious fascist agenda.

[Turbineguy]

9. Liberal/Progressives discriminate between low and high quality.

They are less willing to pay to be lied to.

So it's a really big "If".

[Echo In Light]

10. Should also be noted that Fox serves as a red herring of sorts

It leads many to believe they'll actually get unbiased 'news' from the other corporate media outlets. Not.

[mitchum]

25. THAT is the correct answer

[old mark]

12. No, but not because THEY believe it, but because their OWNER believes it.

They believe in doing and saying anything that continues to furnish a paycheck. I doubt there are any really serious political junkies in the whole bunch.

mark

[obxhead]

13. NO, not because they believe it, but because they have an agenda that

is far more important than profit.

[Garbo 2004]

14. Faux wasn't started as a profit making venture but a propaganda outlet.

I recall when it first started making a profit and mgt was surprised. Just like NY Post...it exists for a purpose other than profit.

[jpljr77]

15. Sure...when this man dies

[classysassy]

16. As a former service man(retired)

when ever I go o9n a military post more often than not fox new is on the tv where ever I go,when I am at the doctors office its on there also.I always go up to the reception desk and ask if they will change the channel to a soap opera,telling him or her I just can't miss my favorite soap,I love watching the faces of the wingnuts when they change channels,try it you'll love.

[mzclinton05]

17. Who's Smarter?

Sean Hannity claims that sarah palin is smarter than obama? Um hello, if sarah's so smarter than obama then how come she's teaching at wing nut elementary school? First of all sean's not even smarter than archie bunker, he probably worships him and sarah maybe a so called perfect cheerleader in the tea party, she's not even smarter than edith bunker so I guess these two can settle that on the jerry springer show and work it out!

[JackRiddler]

18. FOXNEWS is the flagship of Murdoch's Attack on America...

It is very much a project of ideological conviction and will remain so.

He loses millions to keep the New York Post running, and will continue doing this indefinitely, to the point where the other tabloids though on sounder footing will go bankrupt because of his willingness to take the loss so that he can maintain a right-wing attack sheet in the heart of the media capital. Long as the rest of the media empire pulls in the revenues to support it, it will remain so. The whole shebang would have to go down.

Finally, FOXNEWS could never have the same audience if it moved off the right-wing line. It's not a question of the numbers who hold given convictions but of their reliability as a TV audience. FOXNEWS is pitched at a demographic who don't consult a variety of sources, are lukewarm on the Web, and do not read books. They watch it because it confirms them in their views. Other demographics do not have the same need for a TV network that tells them they're right.

[Initech]

19. Fox News was started with the sole purpose of destroying Bill Clinton. Doubt they'll change soon.

[athenasatanjesus]

20. I didn't like either answer

I put no,however most of them have no real ideology, right wing ideology simply helps oppress people better so they would always stick with it.

[Doctor_J]

21. Oh, God. Another "Media isn't right wing" post

Impeachment procedings and/or war crimes trials for Bush and Cheney and Yoo would have been GREAT for ratings. So would have treason trials for Rove and Libby. And impeachment for Roberts, Alito, and Thomas. So why didn't they press for those things?

[Canuckistanian]

22. The boycott against Beck should have answered that question

No. Murdoch puts ideology above both common AND business sense.

[mwooldri]

23. Fox does NOT have a news channel. OK?

It's a media outlet of the RNC. Enough said.

I can't get more fair and balanced than that.

[BlooInBloo]

24. Murdoch conceivably, but Ailes, never.