Fox Business Network Limps Out Of The Gate

The new Fox Business Network may not be living up to the hype.

Although Nielsen ratings are not being officially released, numbers have leaked that don’t auger well for Murdoch’s new baby:

“After less than three months on the air, Fox Business Network is averaging a mere 6,000 viewers in daytime and 15,000 in primetime”

Putting that in perspective, FBN’s main competition is CNBC which averages 284,000 viewers in total day and 238,000 in primetime. And CNBC passes 90 million homes, about three times as many as FBN. Of course, it is still too early to gloat, but the network’s honchos led us to believe that they had much higher expectations. Roger Ailes told us that he would not settle for “anything short of a revolution.” And Murdoch gave this comment a few days after the launch:

“It’s two and a half to three days old and looks just terrific. Everybody, even in the industry, (recognizes) how different it is to CNBC, which is half-dead,”

It appears that the FBN revolution is having a little trouble taking on their half-dead competition. Time will deliver a fuller picture, but clearly FBN has work to do. However, rather than getting down to business, FBN’s executive vice president, Kevin Magee, is just sniping at CNBC, whom he accuses of having leaked these numbers:

“They spent dearly to get [FBN ratings], which is pretty crazy […] I think it shows how uber-concerned they are about us.”

Actually, it’s pretty much routine to get competitive ratings from Nielsen. And when you consider that Murdoch is well known for deficit financing his ventures indefinitely, it is a fairly hollow complaint that CNBC is investing in itself. This sort of griping just makes one wonder who is uber-concerned about whom?

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Developing: O’Reilly Tangles With Obama Aide

O'Reilly Fear FactorThe Chicago Sun-Times is reporting that Bill O’Reilly had a less than cordial encounter with an aide to Barack Obama at a New Hampshire campaign event. Apparently The Fester wasn’t getting the preferential treatment to which he was accustomed. Here is Lynn Sweet’s account of this developing story:

The incident was triggered when O’Reilly–with a Fox News crew shooting–was screaming at Obama National Trip Director Marvin Nicholson “Move” so he could get Obama’s attention, according to several eyewitnesses. “O’Reilly was yelling at him, yelling at his face,” a photographer shooting the scene said.

O’Reilly grabbed Nicholson’s arm and shoved him, another eyewitness said. Nicholson, who is 6’8, said O’Reilly called him “low class.”

“He grabbed me with both his hands here,” Nicholson said, gesturing to his left arm and O’Reilly “started shoving me.” Nicholson said, “He was pretty upset. He was yelling at me.”

Secret Service agents who were nearby flanked O ‘Reilly after he pushed Nicholson. They told O’Reilly he needed to calm down and get behind the fence-like barricade that contained the press.

Obama had his back turned at this point and did not see any of this.

O’Reilly yelled “sir” at Obama and Obama walked over, not aware of what happened and told him he had an overflow crowd to visit.

This part is a little creepy:

Mr. O’Reilly said he thought Sen. Obama was great and that he loved him and loved to have him on the show and said he would think about coming on after the primaries.

O’Reilly “loves” Obama? With friends like that, who needs enemas? For all of O’Reilly’s obstreperousness, his only purpose in forcing his way up to Obama was to beg him to appear on The Factor. He didn’t even try to ask a substantive question. Since Obama and Edwards have refused to appear on Fox, I guess they feel they need to go out and stalk them. And I certainly hope that after Obama thinks about it, he will continue to decline to appear on Fox and particularly on O’Reilly’s program.

A few minutes ago (approx. 12:05pm), O’Reilly called in to Brian Wilson anchoring the Fox News broadcast. He denied that there was a scuffle but said, laughing, that he might have used profanity (called the aide an SOB). At the end of the call he menacingly warned mankind that “No one on this earth is going to block a shot from The O’Reilly Factor. It is not going to happen.”

Wilson, said that there will be limited video later today and that O’Reilly will show the whole thing on his show on Monday (presumably after having had time to edit/alter it).

I will try to stay on top of this and post video if it becomes available.

Update: Now Wilson says that the video will only be available on The Factor this Monday. Since when does a news channel withhold newsworthy video for two days? Since the video features their #1 personality and can’t be cleared for airing until they make sure it doesn’t reflect badly on him.

Update: For good measure, O’Reilly also crashed a Clinton campaign event (YouTube) earlier the same day and attempted to plant a question with a member of the audience. The woman stood up and fingered O’Reilly who Clinton then pointed out before answering the question.


Chris Wallace Justifies Fox News Embargo

Chris Wallace has proven once again why John Edwards (and any other Democrat) is thoroughly justified in declining to appear on Rupert Murdoch’s Foxic airwaves.

In a segment that was only three and a half minutes long (video below), Wallace wasted half of it badgering Edwards’ spokesman, Chris Kofinis, about why Edwards wouldn’t come out and play with Wallace. This already too brief interview, on the day of the Iowa caucus, was halved because Wallace was determined to make a self-serving point that could only have been of interest to Fox News insiders. Wallace asked a total of five questions, three of which concerned Edwards’ non-appearance on the network. Here’s the first question:

“Before we get to the caucuses, let me ask you a question. When is Senator Edwards going to stop boycotting the voters who watch Fox News?”

First of all, let’s be clear about who the voters who watch Fox News really are:

“…research revealed that Fox viewers supported George Bush over John Kerry by 88% to 7%. Only Republicans were more united in supporting Bush. Conservatives, white evangelical Christians, gun owners, and supporters of the Iraq war all gave Bush fewer votes than did regular Fox News viewers.”

Secondly, despite Wallace’s dishonest phrasing, Edwards is not boycotting viewers at all. He is sending a clear message to Murdoch and Fox that they cannot repeatedly disparage a party, its members, supporters and ideals, and expect to be received with gracious hospitality.

This exchange is proof that a concerted effort by Democrats to embargo Fox News (see Starve the Beast for more) is both warranted and working. It is warranted because, as you can see in this interview, Fox is more interested in its own affairs than in providing fair access to information. It is working because, as is also apparent, Wallace is obsessed with Edwards’ cold shoulder. If the strategy wasn’t hurting Fox, Wallace would not have spent half his time whining about it. He even came back to his lament at the close of the segment saying:

“Chris Kofinis it’s a pleasure talking to you. It would be even more of a pleasure to talk to your boss, but thank you so much.”

Wallace couldn’t let it go, and there is a reason for that. He knows that this strategy could result in delegitimizing Fox News on a broad scale (yeah I know, delegitimizing Fox News is like dehydrating the Sahara). A reputable news agency is not sustainable if half of its subjects refuse to respect its validity. Wallace knows this and that is why he is so fixated on it and fearful of it. Just last month he resorted to insulting the very constituency he is now pretending to covet:

“I think the Democrats are damn fools [for] not coming on Fox News.”

If that’s an example of how Wallace intends to cajole Democrats into his lair, he may encounter some resistance. However, it is a good example, along with this interview, of why Fox should be considered off-limits by reasonable Democrats and progressives.


Conservative Vultures Circling Over Wounded Media

John K. Carlisle of the arch-conservative National Legal and Policy Center is peddling a cynical strategy to exploit an ailing newspaper industry. The plan is an undisguised blueprint for media manipulation [Note: The NLPC scrubbed this article from their website, but through the persistent survivability of the Internet it is still available here and here]. Here are some examples of how Carlisle presents his initiative:

“The long-term decline in newspaper circulation presents the conservative movement with an excellent opportunity to increase its influence with the media.”

“Falling readership and tighter budgets are forcing newspapers to dedicate fewer staff to investigative reporting. As a result, they are increasingly relying upon nonprofit organizations to fill the gap.”

“If conservative nonprofit organizations significantly increase their use of investigative reporting, then the movement will be able to partly offset the liberal bias of the mainstream media.”

“…by aggressively getting involved in investigative journalism conservative nonprofit organizations stand to enormously change the terms of the media debate, perhaps in much the same way that Fox News and Talk Radio revolutionized media coverage.”

The plan, in short, is for conservative think tanks to produce stories that they could feed to newspapers and television who, due to their desperation for content, would gladly publish it. But you have to wonder what need is being filled when so much of the media is already shoveling rightist propaganda produced from within the media companies themselves. Carlisle even supplies the examples of Fox News and talk radio, which are dominated by conservative ideologues.

The real purpose of this proposal is not to offset any mythical liberal bias, but to fortify a conservative one. Carlisle cites the launch of ProPublica, an independent investigative news service, as evidence that conservatives need to redouble their efforts to influence the media. He correctly points out that the founders of ProPublica are long-time progressive activists. But he dismissed the fact that the service is headed by a former editor of the Wall Street Journal who insisted on, and was granted, editorial independence.

The right’s echo chamber is already at work attempting to discredit ProPublica, beginning with a report on Fox News where Brit Hume criticizes the new firm and its founders before they have published even one story (YouTube):

“They are major Democratic political donors, who gave all their campaign contributions to Democrats in 2006. They have also been longtime critics of President Bush.”

If that’s the criteria used to discredit ProPublica, what can be said of Carlisle’s group, the National Legal and Policy Center, that has received about 73% of their funding since 1995 from the ultra-right Scaife Family Foundations? The network of Scaife institutions has not only contributed millions of dollars to Republicans and criticized President Clinton, they have also spread outrageous smears against other Democrats including a story that accused Hillary Clinton of murder.

The NLPC is an avowedly conservative group that proudly asserts its intention to infect the media with its rightist perspectives. Their plot to plant slanted news items into conventional media outlets is a nauseating assault on journalistic ethics. And this is coming from an organization whose motto is “Promoting ethics in public life.” They are also mimicking the M. O. of Bush administration agencies that have previously been caught engaging in illegal distribution of propaganda through the use of video press releases and payoffs to public figures like pundits and celebrities. If Carlisle succeeds the government’s abhorrent practice of shipping pre-packaged fake news “reports” to media outlets for distribution, without disclosing the producer, will shift to the private sector where it could pick up steam from aggressive fundraising, marketing, and the absence of oversight.

The tactics of the NLPC and other organizations like them must be closely watched and, when necessary, countered to prevent them from succeeding in contaminating the media any more than it already is. Keep an eye on the bylines in your local paper and be aware of who you are reading. Know the names of staff writers and regularly syndicated independent and wire correspondents. If you see reports from other outsourced authors who are affiliated with partisan think tanks, let the editors know that this will not be tolerated and will result in a lost subscriber. Don’t let your local media become a bazaar where any two-bit propagandist can set up a stall and hawk their snake oil.

See update here (4/21/2010).


Rudy’s 9/11 Generation

If you thought Rudy Giuliani couldn’t get more crass in his exploitation of the tragic attack on September 11, 2001, you underestimate Rudy. On the second day of the new year he proves that there is no bottom to his well of puke.

Rudy 911

“I think it wouldn’t be unfair to describe us as the 9/11 generation, because how we handle this is going to say something about us in history.”

That’s right, Rudy thinks that the entire current population should be defined by a single, horrible day that represents both the hatred of a small tribe of barbarous extremists, and the woeful unpreparedness of an incompetent and illegitimate administration. I think I’ll stick with Baby Boomer.


OPEN Government Act Signed In Near Secret By Bush

In an unpublicized, media-free, non-ceremony, President Bush secretly signed a bill intended to bring an end to much of the secrecy that has surrounded this administration. The OPEN Government Act was passed by Congress with overwhelming majorities. But that was only after it had been blocked for months by a secret “hold” that was placed on it by Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ), who was acting on behalf of Bush and former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

The OPEN Government Act is a positive step forward, enhancing the 41 year old Freedom of Information Act. Among other things, the Act will…

  • require the release of requested documents unless their disclosure would do actual harm
  • bring government contractors under FOIA
  • compel the government to respond to FOIA requests within 20 days of their receipt
  • create a system by which citizens may track the progress of their requests
  • establish a hot-line service for all federal agencies to cope with problems
  • establish an ombudsman to help resolve disputes about non-disclosure

In addition it codifies the definition of a “representative of the news media” as…

“…any person or entity that gathers information of potential interest to a segment of the public, uses its editorial skills to turn the raw materials into a distinct work, and distributes that work to an audience. In this clause, the term `news’ means information that is about current events or that would be of current interest to the public.”

That is an admirably broad definition that would include much of the blogging and alternative media communities. With these changes the public has a much better chance of gaining access to documents that were produced in their name, and with their tax dollars. And there is a much higher likelihood that government agencies will be foiled in their attempts to keep vital information from being made public.

Update: Well, it only took 3 weeks for BushCo to pervert the intent of Congress and the just passed OPEN Government Act. The administration is attempting to shift the funding for the Act to the Department of Justice which has no facility to perform the duties enumerated by the Act, thus killing it. The matter is not, however, concluded as the bill’s authors will oppose this subterfuge and insist that the National Archives retain jurisdiction. Stay tuned.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Huckabee Calls On Bloggers To Stop The Presses

In a campaign event to thank bloggers for their support, Mike Huckabee told about 700 of them that they were “doing the Lord’s work.” He drew specific attention to a little known Commandment that compels disciples…er…voters that “Thou shalt disrupt the work of journalists.”

“He noted that the mainstream media might be ‘filing a bad story’ right now, and if the bloggers were relying on the same wireless system at the hotel, they might be ‘clogging up the lines’ and preventing them from filing.”

This sermon from the uber-righteous former minister and presidential hopeful says a lot about the state of morality in religious right-wing circles. It is especially revealing coming from a candidate who just held a press conference disavowing negative advertising, but showing his negative ad to same press gathering.

Apparently the God Huckabee worships thinks it’s OK to manipulate the media by seeding it with attack ads, and simultaneously interfere with reporters who are trying to do their jobs. This is the sort of hypocrisy that Huckabee regards as “the Lord’s work.”


The News Corpse 7 For 2007

While I am not particularly a fan of “Best of…” lists, I happened to be going over the just past year of News Corpse columns and it became a nostalgic journey through many rants and raves that had slipped from my conscious recollections. So I compiled a short list of a few of my favorites that have also been amongst the most popular as determined by visitor traffic.

Murdoch in DavosMurdoch Confesses To Propaganda On Iraq
Murdoch was asked if News Corp. had managed to shape the agenda on the war in Iraq. His answer?

“No, I don’t think so. We tried.” We basically supported the Bush policy in the Middle East…but we have been very critical of his execution.”

Bill O'BealeThe Cult Of Foxonalityâ„¢
Most liberals (and objective observers) recognize the tight-knit relationship between Fox and the GOP. However, while we fret about the Murdoch/RNC cabal, we may be missing an even more frightening scenario. Fox viewers appear to be more loyal to Fox than to Republicans or conservatism.

American Fuhrer
 
The Next American Fuhrer
Befitting a nation that prides itself on its entrepreneurial creativity, the United States is preparing the way for a uniquely American innovation in governance: a democratically elected dictator. And neither politicians, nor judges, nor journalists, are rising to oppose the coming tyranny.

Media BlindnessStarve The Beast
Democrats and progressives have got to swear off Fox News. Every time one of our representatives appears on Fox, they are setting back our agenda. They are not just wasting a little time trying to confront the enemy in its lair. They are literally causing harm to the efforts of the rest of us who are fervently struggling to repair and improve our country.

O'Reilly Fear FactorThe O’Reilly Fear Factor: They’re Coming To Take Me Away
O’Reilly is advancing onto Armageddon and steeling for the battle with his secular-progressive foes. When the ultimate clash commences, he will view himself as a valiant Culture Warrior lashing out at the many-headed beast that imperils children and Christmas and virtue and the traditional values that are so fragile that they can be turned to dust by the wispy breath of Pagans.

[See also The Collected Verses for more O’Reilly insanity]

Ailes NewsroomDemocrats And Media: Battered Party Syndrome
The number one cable news network is an unapologetic apologist for the White House and an unabashed basher of Democratic policy and personage. The other networks feature conservative program hosts like Dobbs, Beck, Carlson, etc., but there is only one progressive host on any network – Keith Olbermann on MSNBC’s Countdown. So why do 66% of Democrats trust the media?

Jon Stewart & Steven ColbertStop Hurting America: The WGA And The Daily Show
While news programs continue spewing their corporatist, insider views of presidential politics throughout the strike, programs like The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, David Letterman, Saturday Night Live, etc., have become silent. This is not a trivial matter. Many of these programs have assumed a unique role in our culture by highlighting the absurd quirks and contradictions of our politicians and press. The light these programs shine on the political landscape is nowhere countervailed in the dimwitted din of the so-called Mainstream Media.

It was quite a year. I only hope that I have far less about which to complain in 2008. May we all have far less about which to complain in the new year (Now that’s a Hallmark moment if I ever heard one).


Fox News Is Scared Of Ron Paul

Fox canceledA Republican presidential primary forum in New Hampshire is set to proceed on January 8, two days before the New Hampshire primary, without the participation of Ron Paul. Paul’s exclusion has understandably infuriated his supporters but it has also revealed a(nother) gaping hypocrisy at Fox News.

Never mind for the moment that Paul is polling ahead of Fred Thompson, who has been invited to participate. And set aside the fact that Paul has broken fund raising records, accumulating over $19 million dollars in the last quarter.

The part of this story that I find noteworthy is that Fox News, who has lambasted Democrats for declining to appear in Fox-sponsored debates, is now using questionable criteria to decide whom they will permit to grace their debate stage. Fox thinks it’s inexcusable for Democrats to voluntarily refuse to subject themselves to the abuse of a network that has been overtly hostile to them, but that it’s perfectly swell for the network to involuntarily refuse to allow viable candidates to take part in their supposedly public forums.

Fox News, and their disciples, has said that Democrats are just scared to appear on the network. Now Paul has accused the network of being scared of him:

“They are scared of me and don’t want my message to get out, but it will. They are propagandists for this war and I challenge them on the notion that they are conservative.”

Chris Wallace, the host of Fox News Sunday, will be the moderator of the New Hampshire forum. But he and Fox News have declined to comment on the Paul controversy. Wallace didn’t have any such hesitation when called upon to comment on the Democrats:

“I think the Democrats are damn fools [for] not coming on Fox News.”

Well, Ron Paul wants to come on Fox News but Fox won’t let him. This is a thorough vindication of the Democrat’s decision to shun Fox. Now it’s the Republicans turn to suffer the prejudices practiced by Murdoch, Ailes, Wallace, etc. It serves them right. Perhaps now they will realize that a network that traffics in propaganda and bias is not beneficial even it is slanted your favor. If Republicans were interested in doing the right thing (for once), they would join the Democrats’ embargo on Fox and steer their candidates away. [For more on why all Democrats and progressives should stay the Hell off of Fox, read Starve The Beast]

Now, I’m no disciple of Ron Paul. In fact, I regard him as a dangerous political anachronism who would roll back gains in civil rights, foreign affairs, economic justice, and more. He advocates a deregulation agenda that would permit corporations to run roughshod over public interests including abandoning Net Neutrality. But Republican voters have made him a contender in their primary process and it isn’t up to Fox News to weed him out.


The War On New Years Day

Now that Bill O’Reilly has declared Mission Accomplished in the War on Christmas™, it may be a good time to redeploy our forces to the battle for New Years Day.

What? You say you’ve never heard of the War On New Years? Well, the New Years War is indeed less well known than the Christmas conflagration. It could be characterized as the Afghanistan of the Holiday Hostilities. But like Afghanistan, it is fully engaged and may have even more significance than other Season’s Grievings.

The battle, as always, is centered on a religious dispute. The celebration commemorating the passing of the year is based on a calendar that presumes time began with the birth of Christ. However, according to heathens like Secular Progressives and, let’s say, Jews, it is not the dawning of 2008 at all. The Jewish calendar is already up to 5768, having been based on a Biblical triviality that no one cares about anymore – the year G-d created the Earth and everything else. And Rosh Hashanah rings in the new year sometime around September.

It’s fair to say that the enemies of New Years have not been as successful as the enemies of Christmas. There are no major department stores that prohibit their employees from wishing their customers a Happy New Year, and New Years decorations can be displayed even in government facilities. Although there have been scattered reports of pagan retailers compelling greetings to be confined to “Happy Gregorian Day.”

Women’s groups are also up in arms due to the traditional characterization of time as an old man, as in “Father Time.” Mother Time is nowhere to be found. This is particularly disturbing because the New Year is often depicted as an infant who was seemingly conceived by its father.

While the ACLU has yet to take any War on New Years cases, it is just a matter of … um … time. It would be better to prepare for battle than to be caught off guard and find ourselves reduced to wishing each other a Happy New Orbit Around the Sun.

Actually, that doesn’t sound half bad. Happy Orbit Day everybody!