Rachel Maddow

Rachel Maddow Beats Hannity’s Media Bias Special

Posted by on April 25, 2011 at 11:33 pm. 5 Comments :

It’s time for the folks at Britannica to replace whatever picture they’ve been using to illustrate “poetic justice” and insert Rachel Maddow’s picture in its place.

Last Friday, Fox News broadcast a special episode of the Sean Hannity program that promised to get “Behind the Bias,” of what he called the liberal, Obama-mania media. What was truly special about the show is that it came in second place to Rachel Maddow’s show on MSNBC. Maddow beat Hannity in the key advertising demographic of 25-54 year olds. How fitting for Hannity to lose to a liberal on the night he thought he would be exposing them.

Hannity began the program by saying…

“Now, it is common knowledge that the mainstream media, from the major television networks to the country’s most influential newspapers, are biased against the GOP.”

Common knowledge? Sure it is. It is common in that it is unexceptional or of inferior quality. And it is knowledge in the same way that lemmings “know” to follow their fellow lemmings off the cliff.

Hannity provided nothing in the hour-long program to support his opening assertion of bias against the GOP. He certainly didn’t address the fact that the top Sunday news broadcasts have featured far more Republicans than Democrats. And he failed to note that all three broadcast networks are owned by giant, multinational corporations with predictably conservative leanings. And there was no mention that even newspapers like the New York Times and the Washington Post advance conservative themes like support for Wall Street and foreign wars. And, of course, he didn’t discuss the role of Fox News itself as the preeminent organ of institutional bias and its being a part of a conservative empire that includes the Wall Street Journal, 27 television stations, dozens of newspapers, Internet sites, and satellite broadcasting.

The show was mainly a collection of incidents that Hannity regarded as bias. However, that does not actually prove bias. It only catalogs it. And since Hannity makes no effort to catalog all incidents of bias, including those on the right, he proves nothing. Furthermore, there is a difference between cataloging random, subjective soundbites by individuals, and conducting an objective content analysis that looks at the whole institution of the media. Hannity doesn’t come anywhere near that sort of examination.

In short, Hannity’s program on bias was blatantly biased. It would be easy to collect twice as many examples of right-wing media disparaging the left as Hannity presented directed at Republicans. But what is even worse is that Hannity had to manufacture some of his evidence of bias.

For instance, he played a clip of Katie Couric saying “Good morning. The Gipper was an airhead.” Hannity left that sentence fragment hanging with the implication that it was Couric expressing her own opinion. Had he played the clip for a few seconds longer, his audience would have heard her say “The Gipper was an airhead. That’s one of the conclusions of a new biography of Ronald Reagan that’s drawing a tremendous amount of interest and fire today.” She went on to say that the book’s conclusions were “startling” and that the author still thought Reagan was “a great president.” But Hannity chose to misrepresent a tiny slice of the comment in order to advance his phony premise.

It is heartening to know that Hannity’s hour of deceit was so poorly received. It is even more gratifying that he was beaten in the ratings by someone as conscientious and committed to honest discourse as Rachel Maddow.

The Fox Follies: March 14, 2011

Posted by on March 15, 2011 at 1:42 am. 5 Comments :

When Fox News isn’t bastardizing the truth or shilling for right-wing billionaires and Tea Baggers, they can be surprisingly entertaining – if you find gross ignorance and deception funny. For instance…

Fox News is already intimately associated with at least one delusional conspiracy theorist and fear monger (Glenn Beck). Now Fox Nation is advancing to the next level by promoting news obtained from Super Conspiracator Alex Jones (who thinks Beck has been ripping off his shtick anyway):


By the way, despite the foreboding headline, the article merely speculates as to the risk of fallout reaching California with experts saying that they regard it as unlikely. But why should that stop the Fox Nationalists from bluntly asserting that we are in the path of radioactive fallout?

A few weeks ago Rachel Maddow was lured in by a satirical article that she mentioned briefly in an eight minute segment. She discovered the error and owned up to it the same day. Still, Fox Nation ridiculed her with a featured story. Today Fox Nation posted an item about Islamic objections to padded bras. Guess what?


It’s as fake as they come. It was the work of a Pakistani version of The Onion. Did Fox Nation then follow up by ridiculing themselves? Did they even own up to the mistake? Nope. They just scrubbed the story and pretended it never happened, creating innumerable broken links by gullible FoxPods on Facebook. (Here’s the Google cache).

And my favorite:


Fox News displayed this graphic in a report on Japan’s nuclear power facilities. The problem is that there is no reactor in “Shibuyaeggman.” In fact, there is no Shibuyaeggman. Now that would be bad enough, but Media Matters investigated further and discovered that “Eggman is the name of a dance club in a trendy neighborhood of Tokyo called… Shibuya.” So unless there’s a reactor under the dance floor somebody has seriously violated Fox’s “Zero Tolerance” policy?

Finally, I find it interesting that Fox Nation has removed their “Search” box. They used to have one in case somebody wanted to find something on their web site. Now it’s gone. I think it’s because enabling research is contrary to the Fox mission of preserving ignorance. Either that or they don’t want to help people find evidence of prior mistakes they neglected to delete.

Shibuyaeggman everybody.

Rachel Maddow Beats Glenn Beck In Key Demo

Posted by on March 4, 2011 at 4:11 pm. 17 Comments :

Glenn BeckGlenn Beck’s star has been fading for most of the last year. He has lost about half of his television audience. His radio ratings have also been declining leading to stations dropping his program in big markets like New York, Philadelphia, and Madison. His most recent book, “Broke,” was the first in eight years to fail to hit number one on the New York Times bestseller list. Over 300 advertisers regard him as toxic and will not permit their ads to air during his program.

Yesterday, another milestone was reached. The Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC drew 39,000 more viewers in the key advertising demographic of 25-54 year olds. Beck did manage to draw more total viewers, but even that statistic is revealing. It shows that Beck’s audience is comprised of only 21% of the young demo. That compares to Maddow’s 31%.

This is further evidence of Beck’s accelerating collapse. Last week it was reported that Beck declined 32% (25-54) and 26% (total viewers) year-to-year for the month of February. And that’s on top of a January year-to-year drop of 50% (25-54) and 40% (total viewers).

The public is obviously tiring of this manic-paranoid’s freak show. As a result, many staunch conservatives are becoming bolder with regard to their criticisms of Beck. And some are even recognizing that Beck may be just the tip of the iceberg and that anyone who hitches their wagon to Beck is equally deserving of ridicule and revulsion. That applies particularly to Beck’s primary benefactors, Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch, but also to those who work with and/or defend Beck. They will all learn that this stench is unremitting.

As for Maddow, this is just one day, so it will take some time to see if her strength continues. Pessimists will whine that Maddow’s primetime scheduling gives her an advantage, but the fact is that this is the first time she has outdrawn Beck and that makes it significant. For now she deserves to celebrate and I congratulate her.

Rachel Maddow Attacked By Rightist Media Machine

Posted by on February 2, 2011 at 1:51 pm. 8 Comments :

Rachel MaddowEarlier this week Rachel Maddow broadcast a story that contained a reference to a satirical web site that Maddow and/or her staff took to be real. It was embarrassing, to be sure, but Maddow owned up to it the same day without reservation:

Maddow: Props to them for a brilliant piece of satire, shame on us for believing them. But in a world where China taking over New Zealand is what passes for real analysis on the situation in Egypt, how do we know that’s not satire too?

The latter half of that comment was obviously intended to be ironic and humorous. However, since the professional conservative bashing society has no sense of humor, they laid into Maddow with accusations that she was blaming others for her mistake. For example:

  • NewsBusters: Maddow Blames Beck and Other Conservatives for Her Getting Duped by Satirical Website
  • Fox Nation: Maddow’s Excuse for Reporting Spoof Story as Fact: It’s Beck’s Fault!
  • Pajamas Media: Rachel Maddow gets suckered by Palin hoax, blames Beck
  • David Horowitz’s NewsReal: River in Egypt: Rachel Maddow blames Glenn Beck for her own stupidity

On Glenn Beck’s radio show, sidekick Pat Gray went on an extended rant wherein he called Maddow an idiot and said that she was…

“So deceptive. So deceitful. Such Liars. Rachel, take responsibility for your own actions. Man up. Or woman up, whatever the case may be.”

For Beck and his crew to accuse others of being deceitful is its own kind of irony. Especially when Gray was being deceitful in this very rant. He asserted that Maddow spent three and a half minutes of a five minute segment blaming Beck for her error. In fact, Maddow spent only a minute and a half of an eight minute segment on the subject, and thirty seconds of that was consumed in replaying the original video of her mistake.

These critics should also be aware that Maddow is not alone in getting hooked by a hoax. Fox Nation posted a fake story about Obama emails, without attribution, by the satirists at The Onion. Several right-wingers, including Fox, posted a fake story about a global warming activist who had allegedly frozen to death. Fox, Rush Limbaugh, and others posted stories about a fake college thesis by Obama. Fox & Friends aired a bogus story about jetpacks being purchased by the Los Angeles Police Department. And this doesn’t even count the hoaxes that are invented by Fox, Andrew Breitbart, Sarah Palin, Glenn beck, et al.

It should also be noted that, but for the errant reference to the satirical site, Maddow was making a valid point. At times it really can be difficult to separate satire from reality with regard to right-wing conspiracies. The other examples she used in the segment were that China was taking over New Zealand (Beck), that Obama supports annihilation of Israel (Atlas Shrugged), and that the turmoil in Egypt was a plot hatched by unions (RedState). Those are all real, and all delusional. It’s a shame that the point is being obscured because of the one item she included that was phony.

That is not an excuse for making editorial mistakes. The problem isn’t that there are satirical commentaries that sound too much like actual events. The problem is that conservative analyses of actual events sound too much like satire.

Rachel Maddow On Keith Olbermann: Here’s The Larger Point…

Posted by on November 6, 2010 at 11:24 am. 23 Comments :

Keith Olbermann’s suspension from MSNBC for making a couple of political donations without getting prior approval from the network bosses has set media tongues to wagging. However, the real story here is not what Olbermann did, but what other hosts and networks (i.e. Fox News) do regularly without shame or consequence. Rachel Maddow summarizes it nicely:

Here’s the larger point, though, that’s going mysteriously missing from the right-wing cackling and old media cluck-cluck-clucking: I know everyone likes to say, “Oh, cable news, it’s all the same. Fox and MSNBC — mirror images of each other. But if you look at the long history of Fox hosts not just giving money to candidates, but actively endorsing campaigns and raising millions of dollars for politicians and political parties — whether it’s Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck or Mike Huckabee — and you’ll see that we can lay that old false equivalency to rest forever. There are multiple people being paid by Fox News to essentially run for office as Republican candidates. If you count not just their hosts but their contributors, you’re looking at a significant portion of the entire Republican lineup of potential contenders for 2012. They can do that because there’s no rule against that at Fox. Their network is run as a political operation. Ours isn’t.


The deep collusion between Fox News and the GOP is there for all to see if they just open their eyes. The sad thing is that most of the audience, even Fox fans, are aware of this cozy relationship. In fact, Fox’s audience actually approves of it, insists upon on, and takes pride in it. It’s the media that is willfully and woefully blind.

Much of the old-school press goes out of their way to defend Fox as if it were a credible source of news. They did so after former White House Communications Director Anita Dunn correctly called Fox “the communications arm of the Republican Party.” They did so after a false allegation was raised regarding Fox being denied access to a White House event. They did so when controversy erupted surrounding the seating arrangements in the White House briefing room after the departure of Helen Thomas.

When will the Conventional Media recognize that Fox is NOT a news network? When will they report the truth about the collusion between Fox and their partisan pals in the GOP? When will they wise up to the fact that while they are propping up Fox, Fox is slandering them? I previously wrote an article that asked the question: Who’s Afraid Of Fox News? (The answer: The Rest Of The Media!). Fox regularly smears their competitors in the most hostile terms yet rarely has to take a return punch. Their very slogan, “Fair and Balanced,” is an insult that implies their rivals are unfair and biased.

So when do they fight back? To date they have exhibited the courage of a flock of ostriches. The “larger point” that Maddow raises has been looming over the mediasphere for years and it is far past time for them to defend themselves, to defend ethical journalism, and to advance the interests of the public they purport to serve. If the Olbermann affair can shine a light on the brazen politicking of Fox News and incite an uprising of truth-telling with regard to it, this whole messy melodrama might actually end up being worth it.

An Open Letter To Rachel Maddow Re: Jan Brewer

Posted by on September 3, 2010 at 4:56 pm. 1 Comments :

Rachel Maddow has been reporting on a wide-ranging scandal in the Arizona statehouse. The local CBS affiliate in Phoenix has been investigating Governor Jan Brewer and her staff for alleged improprieties surrounding the passage of SB1070, the anti-immigrant bill. The investigation has shown that members of Brewer’s advisors and staff are also lobbyists for private prison enterprises who stand to gain from the bill’s passage:

“As CBS station KPHO-TV has revealed, two of Governor Brewers advisers, Paul Senseman and Chuck Coughlin, have extensive ties to a private prison company called the Corrections Corporation of America, CCA. As a prison operator in Arizona, that company stands to benefit from every person detained under SB1070.”

Since the story broke the Brewer campaign has removed all campaign advertising from KPHO-TV. Maddow followed up and learned that the decision was Brewer’s and that the reasons were specifically due to the station’s investigation.

What this amounts to is a sort of blackmail on the part of the Governor. It is considered inappropriate and unethical for a public servant to seek to punish members of the press for doing their jobs. This is very different than declining to grant interviews to an adversarial reporter. This attacks the news enterprise financially by refusing to purchase advertising.

However, there is a bigger question here. While KPHO-TV is to be commended for their integrity in pursuing this story in the face of these repercussions, I have to wonder where the rest of the Arizona media is. I have not heard any reports that Brewer’s campaign has halted advertising on any other Arizona television station. Maybe that’s because I have also been able to find any stories on this subject by any other station. This is clearly a matter of importance to residents of the state. So why haven’t the other stations covered it? Are they now afraid of losing ad dollars? Are they deliberately suppressing the news to facilitate the Governor?

These would be great questions for Maddow to raise when following up further on this story. If the media in Arizona has been either biased in favor of Brewer, or intimidated by her or her staff, it needs to be revealed and reported to the citizens who have an important election coming up in a couple of months. Are you listening Rachel?

Rachel Maddow Schools Bill O’Reilly – In Latin

Posted by on August 7, 2010 at 4:13 pm. 3 Comments :

Let’s face it, it doesn’t take much to reveal the intellectual vapidity of Fox News characters like Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, or Bill O’Reilly. When their arguments are not devoid of logic, they are devoid of facts. Most of the time they manage to include neither. But leave it to Rachel Maddow to escalate a debate with a Fox Newsie to the point of employing Latin definitions to make her case.

In this video, Dr. Maddow had to correct an earlier appraisal of Bill O’Reilly’s attacks on her as “ad hominem.” To be accurate, the attacks were “ad populum.” The distinction is important, as Maddow says, because the former is an attack based on personal insult, while the later is an attack based on popularity. In this case, it was Bill O’Reilly asserting that he was right and Maddow was wrong because more people watch his show.

I made the point years ago that this was an irrelevant measure. It would be like saying that since McDonald’s is the #1 restaurant it must have the best food. In truth, McDonald’s just delivers the cheapest crap that is loaded with filler and seasoning to appeal to the largest number of consumers with the least sophisticated taste. Which, by the way, is exactly what Fox News does. Now, thanks to Dr. Maddow, I now the Latin term for it.

This segment from Maddow’s show is significant for another reason. After straightening out the rhetorical matter, Maddow went on to the substance of her debate with O’Reilly. It began when she quite correctly observed that Fox News makes a habit of presenting (or inventing) stories, the purpose of which are to incite their predominately white audience (only 1.38% of Fox viewers are black) into fearing black people. This is what O’Reilly objected to, but had no substantive response for. He merely boasted about his ratings and said that Maddow had no evidence. Of course the evidence is readily available: Van Jones, ACORN, New Black Panthers, Shirley Sherrod, etc.

At this point Maddow gets down to brass tacks. She describes O’Reilly’s assertion that she had no evidence of her claim as “…something stupid. Something stupid enough that it doesn’t even get dressed up in Latin phrasing.” Whereupon Maddow played a brilliant highlight reel of just O’Reilly’s contribution to these phony so-called news items.

Lest anyone complain that Maddow has now engaged in the very sort of ad hominem attack for which she criticized O’Reilly, just settle down. The evidence to back up calling O’Reilly’s position stupid is plentiful. And since there are millions more people that do not watch O’Reilly than do, we can also make an ad populum argument as to his stupidity. So there.

Keith Olbermann Was Right About TVNewser

Posted by on March 17, 2009 at 11:47 am. 5 Comments :

In the recent dust up between Comedy Central’s Jon Stewart and CNBC’s Jim Cramer, TVNewser inserted itself into the controversy with an anonymously sourced item that asserted that MSNBC was told to refrain from stories on the matter. TVNewser’s Steve Krakauer did not reveal who told MSNBC to do this, nor who told him about the instruction.

Keith Olbermann responded to Krakauer’s claim in a posting on Daily Kos. He denied that any restrictions were placed on him, and he noted Krakauer’s and TVNewser’s reputation for partisanship and for regurgitating Fox News PR:

“Frankly, the guy who posted this, the site’s Associate Editor, Steve Krakauer (‘SteveK’), is well known around the industry as being entirely in Fox’s pocket […] Rachel [Maddow] could get the cover of Newsweek and he wouldn’t link to it.”

Well, this morning TVNewser is featuring two stories on its front page on Glenn Beck (both by Krakauer), including one that links to a Beck interview by The Daily Beast. But no mention that Rachel Maddow was on David Letterman last night.

Good call, Keith. I have previously documented other incidents of blatant bias by TVNewser. In one story about the marital infidelity of politicians Krakauer cited Hillary Clinton (who has never engaged in infidelity) and John Edwards (who, at the time, was the subject of unsupported rumors in the National Enquirer). He didn’t bother to mention the multiple marriages and notorious philandering of John McCain, Fred Thompson, and Rudy Giuliani. The other story offhandedly referred to Al Franken as “a rabid leftie.”

Krakauer is not only in Fox’s pocket, he is a former Fox News employee. The evidence of TVNewer’s bias is all over its web site. It’s apparent in what they chose to cover and what they chose to ignore. And, most of all, its community of commenters posting remarks to their articles is a buzzing hive of partisans so far to the right they would make RedStaters nervous. They congregate in items referencing Fox News and are devotedly defensive of anything and everything Fox does and says. Their boards are thoroughly useless as a forum for media discussions. Any comment that is contrary to the rightist hive-think is pounced on and assaulted in overtly personal terms.

TVNewser may eventually put up some notice of Maddow’s Letterman spot, but that will not resolve the larger problem that the site is infected with slanted coverage and lunatic rantings. It’s a shame, because there is a real need for a web site that offers balanced media news and informed discourse.

Update: Well, TVNewser did get around to posting a brief notice that Maddow appeared on Letterman. But they also followed it up immediately with a ridiculous Krakauer composed hit piece on Jon Stewart (more on that here).

Changing Channels: Fox News In the Age Of Obama

Posted by on January 20, 2009 at 4:24 pm. 3 Comments :

In 1996 Rupert Murdoch hired Roger Ailes, a Republican media consultant, to build a new 24 hour cable news network. Fox News immediately went to work to disparage Democrats and liberals. They spent their early years mired in debt, losing $80-90 million annually. It was only Murdoch’s deep pockets that kept them out of bankruptcy. Still, they had some strategic success as they badgered Bill Clinton with Whitewater and Lewinsky, and they corralled Republican and evangelical voters so that George Bush and Karl Rove could reach them more easily.

However, it was during the Bush years that Fox News began to outperform the cable competition. CNN, HLN, and the launch of MSNBC diluted the non-rightist audience giving Fox a plurality of viewers and bragging rights for ratings victories. Fox enjoyed first shots at interviews and scoops from the administration and Congressional Republicans. That brought them greater influence and gratitude from the halls of power. In addition, the White House kept its TVs tuned to Fox, as well as those at Camp David, the Crawford ranch, and even on Air Force One. Vice-President Dick Cheney even had a travel directive that required that “all televisions [be] tuned to Fox News.” Woe to those staffers who failed in that duty.

There may never have been (and hopefully never again will be) such a close relationship between a news organization and a presidential administration. In the end, they were even trading places as if they were merely different departments of the same enterprise: When presidential advisor Karl Rove moved out of the White House to become a Fox News contributor, Fox anchor Tony Snow moved in to become Bush’s press secretary.

Going forward, Fox will find themselves on a new frontier. It is highly improbable that they will be the exclusive broadcaster in the White House of Barack Obama. Although, I certainly hope that the new administration will pay close attention to the spew emanating from Fox, I don’t expect them to be in cahoots. Murdoch and company are definitely going to lose some of their clout. There will be a new Chairman at the FCC, and a new position for a White House Technology advisor. These will be knowledgeable and independent people who will serve the public interest – for a change. Here is a sampling of the views of Fox News, and Big Media in general, from some senior members of the new administration:

President Obama: “In recent years, we have witnessed unprecedented consolidation in our traditional media outlets. Large mergers and corporate deals have reduced the number of voices and viewpoints in the media marketplace.”

Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State Designate: “There have been a lot of media consolidations in the last several years, and it is quite troubling. The fact is, most people still get their news from television, from radio, even from newspapers. If they’re all owned by a very small group of people – and particularly if they all have a very similar point of view – it really stifles free speech.”

Eric Holder, Attorney General Designate: “With the mainstream media somewhat cowered by conservative critics, and the conservative media disseminating the news in anything but a fair and balanced manner, and you know what I mean there, the means to reach the greatest number of people is not easily accessible.”

More President Obama: “I am convinced that if there were no Fox News, I might be two or three points higher in the polls. If I were watching Fox News, I wouldn’t vote for me, right? Because the way I’m portrayed 24/7 is as a freak! I am the latte-sipping, New York Times-reading, Volvo-driving, no-gun-owning, effete, politically correct, arrogant liberal. Who wants somebody like that?”

This can’t be good news for Fox News. But the network seems to be aware of the shifting landscape and has been preparing for battle. They signed new long-term contracts with Ailes, Bill O’Reilly, and Sean Hannity. They axed Hannity’s foil, Alan Colmes. They hired reinforcements like Mike Huckabee, Glenn Beck, and Judith Miller. Clearly they see trouble ahead and are responding by stocking their armory with ever more weapons of mass deception.

Unfortunately for Fox, forecasts are not rosy for the disinformation station. They are consistently the slowest growing cable news network, particularly in the all-important 25-54 demographic. They have the oldest skewing cable news audience. They are facing stiffer competition than ever, with the surging Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow’s record-breaking debut. The Fox News ratings crown was once unassailable. Today, while still maintaining their first place average, they often come in second and occasionally third. That was unthinkable two short years ago.

As for their future prospects, it is difficult to make a case for Fox to be optimistic. In addition to their recent ratings woes, they are entering a period wherein the American public may not appreciate a network that is hostile to a new president who is held in high regard. Obama is beginning his term with an 80% approval rating. Of course, that won’t last, and Fox will surely seek to shorten Obama’s honeymoon. But contrary to some media analysts who suggest that an adversarial relationship with Washington will benefit Fox, the truth is that Fox experienced its strongest growth amidst the friendliness of Bush years. This suggests that it is not simply drama and controversy that propelled Fox (although that is their preferred programming model), but that having powerful political allies helped them to succeed. When looked at objectively, that shouldn’t surprise anyone. When has having powerful political allies ever been a disadvantage?

Nevertheless, Fox is pursuing the path of most hostility, as evidenced by their new schedule. For further evidence note the response by Fox News commentators following Obama’s inaugural speech. Brit Hume’s first comments were to find passages that might please the right. Chris Wallace actually speculated that the flubbed oath of office (due to Chief Justice Roberts mangling the text) might mean that Obama isn’t really president (Let the conspiracy emails begin). Glenn Beck spent the whole hour of his second show on Fox heaping scorn on Obama. And while Rush Limbaugh isn’t technically on Fox, he is a charter member of the same ideological fraternity, and he has published a long dissertation on why he hopes Obama fails. These guys aren’t wasting any time.

This is just a preview of what we have to look forward to. The influence of Fox News is bound to decline. The Obama camp would be justified in giving Fox a cold shoulder. Fox deserves it for their brazen partisanship and for failing the test of responsible journalism. Other networks should now get some exclusives and scoops. And the more that this historic administration ignores Fox, the less relevant they will be.

We will now see Fox revert to the behavior of an injured wild beast that becomes even more ornery and more dangerous. We see it already. It’s important that we keep an eye on this threat, as it is not retreating to its lair. But it is retreating in the hearts and minds of the American people, and for that we should feel some sense of relief.

MSNBC Celebrates Strongest 2008 Growth

Posted by on January 2, 2009 at 4:50 pm. 9 Comments :

Once again, MSNBC has demonstrated its dominance over the stodgy CNN and the rightist snake oil of Fox News. MSNBC’s programming grew more than twice as much as Fox during 2008:

The fact that this was an election year raised the numbers of all of the players, but in the end Fox took its usual place at the bottom of the scale of growth. On the other hand, MSNBC was the only network to finish the year with more viewers post-election than their average for the year. That’s because their rate of increase far exceeded what was given back after November 4, when audiences predictably declined.

As the new year kicks off, the battle for cable news supremacy will only heat up. MSNBC will continue to rely on of its powerhouse one-two punch of Keith Olbermann’s Countdown and the Rachel Maddow Show. Both programs continue to drive the network’s growth. CNN is sticking with the status quo. Their schedule is little changed for the year, with the exception of adding Campbell Brown, who hasn’t really made her presence known.

Fox News, however, is making several changes that seem to be geared to digging an even deeper conservative hole. This year saw the hiring of right-wing stalwarts like Karl Rove, Judith Miller, and Mike Huckabee, as well as Foxocrats and Obama opponents Lanny Davis and Howard Wolfson. In addition to that, they are losing Alan Colmes and debuting what they call a new “pure” Sean Hannity solo show. I’m sure they are happy to have filtered out the contaminants. Hannity also signed a multimillion dollar contract renewal, as did Bill O’Reilly. Brett Baier, a reliable Fox ideologue, is succeeding Brit Hume as anchor of their signature news program, Special Report. And later this month will see the premiere of Glenn Beck’s new program on the network for which he was born to work. His obnoxious, immature, fact-free squealing will fit right in on Fox.

These uber-conservative reinforcements called in by Fox News suggest that they are preparing for a new offensive directed at the incoming administration of Barack Obama. It’s hard to see any other justification for such a hardening of their right flank when political winds are shifting in a more centrist, post-partisan direction. Consequently, in the new year, Democrats and progressives had better be vigilant and prepare for an onslaught of contemptuous attacks from the Murdochian Empire. Their troops are amassed on the border and the rising sun is illuminating a determined and disturbing red dawn.