"Crazy Like A Fox": The Inside Story of how Fox News beat CNN.

CableNewser ^ | 04/12/04 | CableNewser

[Pikamax]

"Crazy Like A Fox" Comes Out Today "Crazy Like A Fox," a behind-the-scenes account of the cable news wars, officially hits bookstores today. CableNewser interviewed author Scott Collins last month, and excerpts are online now:

"The rise of Fox News is, to me, one of the biggest stories to hit the TV business in the past decade. In just a few years, FNC has not only overtaken CNN, but also changed the very dynamics of the news business. For instance, FNC's hosted shows are now the prime time model for cable news outlets. CNN's longtime "news is the star" mantra has been deemphasized, at least in prime. Witness that network's intense focus on Paula Zahn and Anderson Cooper. You certainly wouldn't have seen that even five years ago. One could even argue that cable news nets are helping turn politics into entertainment and polarizing popular debate."

[Pikamax]

CableNewser Interview Scott Collins, Author, "Crazy Like A Fox"

-- What was the impetus for writing the book? Why cable news?

The rise of Fox News is, to me, one of the biggest stories to hit the TV business in the past decade (right up there with development of DVR technologies, the success of HBO original series, the ongoing decline of broadcast market share, etc). In just a few years, FNC has not only overtaken CNN, but also changed the very dynamics of the news business. For instance, FNC's hosted shows are now the prime time model for cable news outlets. CNN's longtime "news is the star" mantra has been deemphasized, at least in prime. Witness that network's intense focus on Paula Zahn and Anderson Cooper. You certainly wouldn't have seen that even five years ago. One could even argue that cable news nets are helping turn politics into entertainment and polarizing popular debate.

-- When did you start researching and writing the book? Did news events covered by the cablers have any factor in when and what you wrote?

I started researching the book in the fall of 2002. Earlier that year, FNC had for the first time established a clear lead over CNN. Readers like underdog stories, and this seemed like a good one. People forget that when FNC was first announced, most "experts" dismissed it as a joke. CNN simply had too commanding a lead, and if anyone was going to take on Turner, it would be NBC/Microsoft. When FNC was announced, the New York Times called the network Roger Ailes' "imaginary friend." As for news events, my book pays special attention to the 2000 election and 9/11, both of which I believe played a role in changing the news dynamic (specifically, FNC was able to tap into many viewers' feelings about those events).

-- Were all of the cable nets cooperative with you?

All the networks cooperated, at least to some degree. CNN was probably the hardest to persuade. After much back and forth, management made on-air people like Paula Zahn and Aaron Brown available to me, as well as executives such as Eason Jordan and (the now-departed) teya ryan. however, jim walton would not agree to speak with me. i contacted reese schonfeld, tom johnson and walter isaacson on my own, and each graciously agreed to participate.

-- Cable news networks, to a significant degree, dictate the news cycle and determine what is news-worthy. What do you see as the consequences of that?

I don't know about this thesis. I think cable dictates news more than it did 10 years ago, certainly. That's especially true when it comes to crime stories, such as laci peterson or kobe. and O'Reilly has plenty of reach in getting viewers to care about whatever interests him at the moment. But i still think cable -- to a surprising degree -- takes its cues from print news sources such as the NYTimes. Although... that's changing.

-- "How did Fox News pull off this amazing victory?," your book description asks. How did they? (Or is it too complicated to be summed up in a few sentences?)

A complicated answer, but briefly: Ailes had strong plan to bring talk radio-type shows to prime news; Turner's decision to merge TBS into TW brought cable news competitors into play; and CNN didn't effectively counter Ailes/Murdoch's attack.

-- Were you surprised by the changes in cable news over the years? And similarly, are there any future changes (shifts in the next few years) that would surprise you?

It depends on what you mean by changes. My sense is that, in terms of ratings, FNC now has an enormous advantage, one that CNN and MSNBC will likely not be able to match or exceed for years (In march, FNC had more viewers in prime than CNN, MS and CNBC *combined*). As for programming, I think CNN is currently in a mess during primetime. They need to sort out exactly what sorts of shows they want to do during those hours, and I don't think they're close to finishing that process. The network is still stuck between trying to compete with FNC and Turner's old "news is the star" mantra. As for FNC, the challenge for them will be grooming a new generation of stars -- and inevitably, thinking about who will run the network once ailes moves on. It's hard to imagine someone else doing as good a job as he has done. Finally, in terms of the financials, it's important to remember that the cable news networks seem to be fairly mature businesses at this point. All of them are nearing full distribution domestically, and it's doubtful that any of them will see explosive ratings growth outside of future "shock" events, such as another news event comparable to 9/11. So I think it's possible that at least one of the networks could, at some point in the not-too-distant future, be sold or merge with another entity, if for no other reason than to find a way to lower fixed costs. Gathering the news is expensive.

[pcx99]

- "How did Fox News pull off this amazing victory?," your book description asks. How did they? (Or is it too complicated to be summed up in a few sentences?)

I can answer that. Fox news went to #1 because it was the only media outlet that covered the Iraq war in a truthful and accurate manner and didn't try to force the facts to fit an anti-american, anti-war, anti-bush agenda. It's really that simple. Don't need a book to tell you that.

[Lancey Howard]

If this book fails to mention that a whole lot of people across the nation were simply fed up with news that had a built-in "liberal default", then the book is useless.

[patj]

Ditoo that!

[AmericaUnited]

"a whole lot of people across the nation were simply fed up with news that had a built-in "liberal default"

Save your money on the books folks. We all know it was this simple.

[FreedomPoster]

<*ding*>

We have a winner!

[TomGuy]

FoxNews doesn't present a 24/7 liberal bashing of conservative. Not perfect, FoxNews does seem to try to be moderate and objective.

On the other cable networks, when panels, for example, are stacked 3 libs to 1 conservative (who is actually a moderate, because they'd never go that far to the right), the agenda is obvious.

FoxNews seems more supportive of the President, the War on Terrorism, the Military.

The liberal media are still clueless. It isn't Paula Zahn, it's the in-your-face liberalization of the news. Why else would Good Morning America spend so many dollars advertising on Fox and Friends last year? It isn't the personalities, it's the moderate balance FoxNews presents.

If the other networks really want to improve their ratings, drop the agenda. FoxNews doesn't seem to have an agenda they are pushing. Most of the other alphabetchannels do have an agenda. Drop the agenda, present a moderate, equal balance of viewpoints, and and you might get some viewers back.

Bringing Phil Donahue out of retirement to be 'fair and balanced'? People aren't buying that any more since they have choices. Generally, people are sick of liberalization being crammed down their throats.

Wait 6 months and you will see a similar commentary about Air America Liberal Radio. It isn't going to work because the vast majority of radio listeners don't want to hear hours of Al Franken or Jeanine Garofalo bashing. Al needs new material. His jokes and 'funnies' are so lame that they even embarrass his female co-host.

Liberal media, consider this: People do have brains. Instead of agenda cramming, try treating veiwers as intelligent and informed, and capable of drawing their own conclusions. Drop the agenda, present unbiased or balanced views. People will respect that. But don't think people are stupid enough to buy, for example, Peter Jenning now being fair and balanced. Or Wolfie Blitzer. Or Larry King.

See, the people you treated as stupid and who really are buying your agenda still watch your channel. The people with brains and intelligence moved on--to FoxNews.

[norwaypinesavage]

"But don't think people are stupid enough to buy, for example, Peter Jenning now being fair and balanced. Or Wolfie Blitzer. Or Larry King."

But that is exactly the strategy of the liberal media. Name one mainstream news personality who does not argue that Jennings, Blitzer, and King is not liberally biased. They all truly think that people are stupid enough to buy it.

[uncbob]

If this book fails to mention that a whole lot of people across the nation were simply fed up with news that had a built-in "liberal default", then the book is useless.

Probably exactly what the book is trying to NOT admit

So it cites all these other so called factors so they don't have to face that fact

They even lie to themselves

[mewzilla]

Just out of curiosity, Collins' book is published by Portfolio. Anyone know anything about them?

[mtbopfuyn]

But FNC is slowly getting more liberal so it'll soon become a carbon copy of CNN. People are beginning to look elsewhere for events other than Iraq and Kerry 24/7.

[an amused spectator]

Media Schadenfreude ping - FOXnews In The Liberal Media Henhouse

On, Off, or grab it for a Media Shenanigans/Schadenfreude/PNMCH ping:
http://www.freerepublic.com/~anamusedspectator/

[an amused spectator]

Media Schadenfreude ping - FOXnews In The Liberal Media Henhouse

On, Off, or grab it for a Media Shenanigans/Schadenfreude/PNMCH ping:
http://www.freerepublic.com/~anamusedspectator/

[Dog]

I watch Fox for the car chases....

[MrB]

a whole lot of people across the nation were simply fed up with news that had a built-in "liberal default"

This is IT. Without the dearth of ANY conservative viewpoint in this (cable news) medium, Fox News would not have had a chance.

[mewzilla]

You know I still can't find anything on Portfolio. Ever heard of it?

[Ciexyz]

I am unable to forgive CNN for their biased news coverage during last year's Iraq war, specifically, a clip they broadcasted that showed an American soldier aiming around a corner of a building with his rifle--and a woman and child passing in the foreground. The implication was that the rifleman was aiming at the woman and child. I was horrified and most upset at CNN for this biased coverage.

[Dog]

I don't understand the question.

[Hank Rearden]

As long as there are bazillions of video cameras in people's hands, to feed FNC's clip shows, there will always be a Fox News.

And therefore, unfortunately, Shepard Smith will still have a platform for his idiocy.

[GOPJ]

You're right, the people with brains have already moved to FOX .

CNN's problem is the next step -- the people who hate to stand alone will also move to FOX. When that happens, CNN's numbers will plummet.

Liberal media, consider this: People do have brains. Instead of agenda cramming, try treating veiwers as intelligent and informed, and capable of drawing their own conclusions. Drop the agenda, present unbiased or balanced views...

See, the people you treated as stupid and who really are buying your agenda still watch your channel. The people with brains and intelligence moved on--to FoxNews.