Clearly some only want their news framed in context of their faith - and that's what the Republican party is becoming: faith based.

Newspapers aren't what they once were but they still have investigative reporting. I'll read both the New York Times and the Wall St. Journal. I am much happier staying away from the hysteria found on cable and local news.

P2+ Total Day
FNC – 1,412,000 viewers
CNN – 520,000 viewers
MSNBC –395,000 viewers
CNBC – 223,000 viewers
HLN –355,000 viewers
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/10/22/cable-news-ratings-for-wednesday-october-21-2009/31248

It is funny how the same people who CLAIM to be against bias have to spin the news ratings. How come they don't include the ratings of ABC, CBS, and NBC news?

It really don't matter what liberals think of FOX. They can hunker down and watch the Olberfurher and Mr. Potato Head Chris Matthews on MSLSD. Meanwhile FOX will continue, grow and flourish as Americans choose to watch FOX.

From my POV, the contest isn't between MSNBC and FOX. There is a bigger problem than this, which is that so many Americans have abdicated their responsibility to be informed and think critically about what they hear. While I think that much of the trumpeting going on here is vacuous and (itself) uninformed (you guys exaggerate ratings and fail to understand the difference between sitting on an entertainment channel for 12 hours a day and actively tuning into an actual news program in order to hear--gasp--the news) it IS troubling that so many Americans DO sit on FOX for twelve hours a day.

But FOX and its "success" in this respect is merely a reflection of a bigger problem, which is broad American intellectual laziness. I see it every day in my job--this idea that being challenged to think is some kind of offense. Wait....this is HARD. Well yes it is--and it's supposed to be--but sadly, we've been trained to think that being asked to exercise your brain is a bad thing.

The average FOX audience member--the type that gets everything he or she knows about the world from FOX--is just lazy. HERE is a source not just for the "news" (lol), but also for a whole world view. Why BOTHER thinking--comparing sources--weighing arguments--analyzing? Why trouble yourself? It's all right here--wrapped up in a shiny bow, ready made! YAY!

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091123/dailyshow_video

Here's how the Society of Professional Journalists describes the craft:

Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist's credibility.

The organization's Code of Ethics declares "the Society's principles and standards of practice." In terms of a broad-based definition of what journalism ought to be, the Code of Ethics remains the industry standard. And as you'll see below, Fox News routinely, and blatantly, breaks the code to which ethical journalists are supposed to aspire. Fox News staffers (and not just the opinion show hosts) don't simply fail to live up to the industry's own ethical standards. They produce broadcasts that run directly counter to established values and rules. In other words, they obliterate the Code of Ethics on a regular basis, which to me signals that Fox News is not a legitimate source of journalism...
Below are some cornerstones to journalism's Code of Ethics, followed by clear-cut examples of how Fox News tramples that code:

--
Timeline of a [madrassa] smear

--Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.

After teasing story by saying "Obama makes a little girl cry," Fox News' Kelly acknowledged it was not true

--Never distort the content of news photos or video. Image enhancement for technical clarity is always permissible. Label montages and photo illustrations.

Fox News airs altered photos of NY Times reporters

--Never plagiarize.

Fox passes off GOP press release as its own research -- typo and all

--Avoid stereotyping by race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, geography, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance or social status.

Media adopt gender, racial stereotypes in characterizing Sotomayor's temperament, intellect

--Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.

REPORT: "Fair and balanced" Fox News aggressively promotes "tea party" protests

--Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.

Fox News, CBS air clips of peephole video of ESPN's Erin Andrews

--Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone's privacy.

O'Reilly Producer Stalks Amanda Terkel: THE VIDEO

--Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.

Foxy News breaks out the boudoir B-roll to cover "the great breast augmentation scandal"

--Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.

Would a real news organization help GOP PACs raise money?

--Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and shun secondary employment, political involvement, public office and service in community organizations if they compromise journalistic integrity.

FLASHBACK: When Fox News boasted about its "unprecedented" access to the Bush White House

--Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable.

After exclusive access, softball interviews during Bush admin, Fox News blasts ABC for White House exclusive

--Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.

EXCLUSIVE: Fox News seeks to confirm wildly inaccurate reporting that it's already aired on Jennings controversy; former student seeks Fox News correction

I normally wouldn't spend so much time with the chapter-and-verse examples to highlight the clear fact that Fox News is not a legitimate news organization. But since Beltway media elites continue to cling to the claim that it is, as well as peddle the bizarre, anti-free speech concept that the White House somehow ought to be forbidden to criticize the press, I'll continue with even more inescapable examples to back up the observation that Fox News is not a legitimate news outlet.

For instance, a legitimate news organization does not:

Source its research to "conservative blogs."
Purposefully present stories out of context.
Regularly declare "Victory!" when a White House initiative fails.
Ignore a breaking news story that embarrasses the Republican Party.
Invite fringe conspiracy theorists to appear on news shows.
Suggest during a news program that Democrats voted to "protect pedophiles, but not veterans."
Routinely accuse the president of the United States of being like Adolf Hitler.
Describe itself as the "voice of the opposition."
Air more than 100 commercials promoting partisan political rallies.
Show 22 clips of health care reform opponents who attended town hall forums, and none of health reform supporters.
Purchase full-page newspaper ads to spread falsehoods about the news competition.
Invade the privacy of second-grade students.
Promote violent political rhetoric.
Fail to fact-check a murder story before airing allegations about it.
Allow a news anchor to suggest a Supreme Court nominee is guilty of "reverse racism."
It certainly would be helpful if reporters and pundits who work for respected corporate news outlets and who today defend Fox News as a legitimate operation (or at least chastise the White House for raising doubts) examined the 30 examples I listed above and ask themselves this: If they committed just one of those newsroom transgressions, would they still have a job? Would bosses at ABC or The New York Times or The Washington Post or wherever be willing to have those journalists on staff if they bent, and then busted, journalism's Code of Ethics the way Fox News regularly does?

I suspect the obvious answer is no. And I suspect journalists understand that. So why the Beltway charade? Why refuse to acknowledge the self-evident truth that Fox is not a legitimate news organization?



(Additional research by Simon Maloy.)
http://mediamatters.org/columns/200910270002

Fox News Tops For Fort Hood Breaking News Coverage Ratings
Huffington Post | Danny Shea
First Posted: 11- 6-09 05:22 PM | Updated: 11- 6-09 05:53 PM

When news of the shooting at Fort Hood broke Tuesday, Fox News is where the majority of Americans turned for breaking news coverage.

Over the course of the breaking news, from 3PM-12AM, Fox News averaged 3.039 million total viewers, more than CNN (1.576 million), MSNBC (820,000), and HLN (428,000) combined. In the Adults 25-54 demographic over that time period, Fox News averaged 837,000 viewers, more than CNN's 471,000, MSNBC's 248,000, and HLN's 177,000.

In primetime, Fox News averaged 3.765 million total viewers to CNN's 2.024 million, MSNBC's 1.101 million, and HLN's 621,000. In the primetime A25-54 demo, Fox Nes averaged 1.147 million total viewers to CNN's 596,000, MSNBC's 308,000, and HLN's 221,000.

The breaking news brought several ratings records for Fox News as well: "Special Report with Bret Baier" (3.351 million), "Fox Report with Shepard Smith" (3.966 million) and "The O'Reilly Factor" all drew their largest total viewer audiences of 2009. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/06/fox-news-tops-for-fort-ho_n_349091.html&cp

Also, I have noticed over time that liberals are more likely to tune in to conservative shows ...

Countdown to Crawford: Tracking the final days of the Bush administration

« Hey hey, ho ho...Bailout draws protest at White House | Main | With House Republicans in revolt, Bush, Cheney scramble to rescue the $700-billion rescue plan »
Paul Begala calls Bush a 'high-functioning moron'
11:01 PM PT, Sep 25 2008

With the days of the Bush presidency dwindling, and yet one more crisis ramping up, the talk is getting hot on the TV circuit.

Paul Begala, the television commentator and Democratic strategist who with James Carville propelled Bill Clinton to the presidency in 1992, knew he was about to get into trouble on CNN's "Anderson Cooper 360" show Thursday night with his description of President Bush.

He said as much as soon as he opened his mouth.

Still, with a panel that included Ed Rollins, the Republican strategist who ran Ronald Reagan's 1984 reelection campaign, he blurted it out:

I'm going to get in trouble. He's a high-functioning moron, and that's what Congress treats him as. Both parties.

To be sure, the panelists were egging each other on:

COOPER: "Watching the president last night give that speech, it was like watching him in Jackson Square in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. I mean, he did not seem to be there."

ROLLINS: "No, he wasn't there."

GLORIA BORGER: "He's not comfortable — "

COOPER: "He was physically there but — "

At which point Begala chimed in.

And lit up the Web — from the liberal DailyKos site ("one of the most awesome moments in the history of cable news") to the conservative Media Research Center's NewsBusters ("What is it with Democrats and their grotesque slurs upon the intelligence of their political rivals?").