Posted on 06/05/2017 8:57:08 AM PDT by LS
With the firing, then death, of Roger Ailes, the departure of Bill OReilly, and the swirling rumors about Sean Hannity either leaving or being fired at Fox News, many conservatives flippantly insist that any one (or combination) of these and other conservative entertainers/news people could start their own network. Its certainly possible that the right combination of entertainers and capitalists could buy an existing structure and form it into a networkitself a mammoth undertaking, but not impossiblebut start one from scratch?
Its worth the time to recall how Fox News got to where it is today. In 1986 20th Century Fox television began operations, first with a Joan Rivers late night show (a failed undertaking that got her permanently banned from Johnny Carsons Tonight Show), then in 1987, with Married . . . With Children and The Tracey Ullman Show, then added a show a week on Sundays only.
It gradually expanded its lineup and then added Mondays with The Simpsons, which remains the longest running sitcom in television (27 years). Fox Television fought its way into competition with the Big Three for entertainment value by the early 1990s. In 1996, Rupert Murdoch founded Fox News Channel (FNC) and appointed Roger Ailes as the CEO, with its ratings surpassing those of rival CNN in 2002. Bill OReillys show, first called The OReillly Report, then changed to The OReilly Factor was also started in 1996, along with Your World With Neil Cavuto and Hannity & Colmes. Murdoch, meanwhile, had acquired a significant interest in Fox in 1985. In 2013, FNC was split off from 21st Century Fox entertainment, including 20th Century Fox Television.
Currently, the stock repurchase price of 21st Century Fox is $4.96 billion. Thats with a b. The companys revenues have shrunk from $31.8 billion in 2014 to $27.6 billion in 2016. Of that, the films account for 31% of the incomedown from 33% in 2015and television (including FNC) yields $5.1 billion in revenues (up from $4.89 in 2015). Television, while seeing more revenue, has witnessed its share of the companys overall revenue fall from 19% in 2015 to 17%, mostly due to affiliate fees. Sports can be a money maker if Fox carries the Super Bowl, but the NFL keeps raising its rates too. Still, there appears to be no good news on the horizon. In December 2014, the companys stock stood at $37.32 per share, compared to todays price of around $24. Both the net sales and net income through the first three months of 2017 are down (5.7% and 3.9%, respectively. Meanwhile, despite a huge hit with Deadpool (over $280 million), Foxs film revenues declined by $1 billion in 2016, producing fewer blockbusters than 2015.
The film industry, as everyone knows, is somewhere between a slow descent and a death spiral. Hollywood execs measure their tenure in months instead of decades. Studio wizards who had presided over a string of hits are now fired for a single pending bad quarter. The latest blockbuster to tank appears to be Dwayne The Rock Johnsons Baywatch, and despite a few tentpole super-hero/spandex movies, its entirely likely that at least one major studio could leave the scene in the next year. In short, for FNC, it will not be possible for even a committed conservative leadership (which the company doesnt have) to subsidize a conservative news organization the way Jeff Bezos can prop up the Washington Post with Amazon millions, or Carlos Slim can keep the struggling New York Times on life support with outside cash. A thriving Hollywood, with the right leadership, could have provided a nice buffer for FNC. No more.
What does all this mean for the Hannity, and FNC? First, while television revenues are up, sports remains a key driver. And since overall the television affiliate continues to lose its share of revenues, FNC has a problem. The Murdoch boys can play it safe and hold fast to the conservative audience that built Fox News, but this would require them to suppress their Inner Liberal (as well as that of their wives). If one lives inside the LA/NY/DC bubble, and thinks Donald Trump and his supporters are toxic, it might appear on the surface that shifting leftward would be a good business move. Again, though, that requires that one live in the bubble. Foxs only chance to avoid irrelevance is to tack much harder to the right, not only keeping Hannity, but recruiting strong Trump defenders such as Laura Ingraham, or witty iconoclasts such as Mark Steyn.
That is, of course, if one is approaching FNCs problems through a business eye. Its unlikely thats the case with the Murdoch boys, who seem intent on virtue-signaling to the Hollywood and New York elites. In such a case, falling revenues are less important than rising social status.
And as for that new network? The history of Fox shows that it was carefully planned, with FNC only arriving some 17 years after launch of the network itself. Most of all, Foxs history shows that from the outset its leadership understood the core value of entertainment. However informative Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, or Glenn Beck are, the entertainment value of watching someone do a live radio show on television rates down there with The Great Octopus Cookoff and Recycling Kings. And entertainment aint cheap. Any new competitor must be phenomenally well-capitalized (in the billions), have a clear business plan that focuses on entertainment value first, and which is in it for the long haulat least five years before seeing success. Right now, few such billionaires with a conservative vision are raising their hands.
Or create opportunities for more competition, ie new owners.
Stop funding the existing liberal media cartel.
Cut your cable tv. They get a subscriber fee whether you watch or not.
Purchase local, store brands rather than national brands. The national brands fund the liberal media cartel.
Eat out at local restaurants, stay away from chains. The restaurant chains fund the liberal media cartel.
Please feel free to add to the list.
And THE OBVIOUS!...Why NOT Mister Trump HIMSELF!???????????
************
The TRUMP Network USA!
************************
Sad I am :(
So, now all we have is high speed cable internet routed through a wireless, which is perfect for our PCs, smart phones and streaming. We just got a new Vizio - which seems to be the hot item since it came out 2 mos ago - that has Roku and every other streaming service built in.*
* Except Amz - we had to buy a Firestick, but since we're prime customers, we get the service for 'free'. And yes, I'm perfectly aware we're supporting Bezos & Wapo. Still, it feels great not to have the crap networks getting a cut of the cable TV fee whether we watch them or not. (Haven't in 15-20 years.)
I agree. First provider to offer individualized menu of x$ per channel selected-—with no “packages”-—wins for the time being.
The monopoly on our “news” has got to end. Even Fox News was controlled to a large extent. I remember when O’Reilly was forced to say “French Youths” instead of Muslim youths, over a decade ago and he complied with his controllers. (Got to control the narrative/emotions of the masses.) Religion of Peace-—that lie was repeated over and over and over as “equality” repeated for sodomites to flip good and evil so our legal system is now a Vice System which will collapse civil society. It is a matter of time. Virtue and Truth is essential for Freedom—and all Just Laws promote public virtue only—not socialism (theft) or baby-killing or lies of sodomy—all vice promotion destroy Objective Truth (Our Constitution) and corrupts children.
The Hegelian Dialectic put in place by the psychopathic elites has to control ALL our information and that is what they have been doing since 1916 (and earlier). They have gotten us into all the wars, etc., by their lies and propaganda since their funded War of 1812-—and they funded the French Revolution and chaos, also for their dialectic (to force us into a NWO—order from the ashes).
We need free competition in the news again (It was taken over completely by 1920)-—the great young muckrakers (truth), like Ida Tarbell, have to be set free again. They have to have a platform to debate their ideas. Now, those like Tarbell, with Truth are banned for PC (Marxism). Truth (God) was killed a century ago in Europe and by 1950 in America for the takeover by the evil psychopaths.
The CIA-controlled “news” (Operation Mockingbird) even in the 30s with the evil Walter Duranty’s who won the Pulitzer (for control of our emotions/”truth” about wonderful communism) and the lies were and are repeated in all newspapers—lies over and over, so it becomes the “truth”, so we are deluded and brainwashed, as our children are. They are totally ignorant of all of our true history.
Whoever controls the information will control the beliefs, etc. of the masses. It is the M.O. of Marxists/Elites, known since the 1700s. We need to take back the information—the textbooks—go to original source documents, Classics and the Great Books/Bible for Truth. Truth will set us free. Christian worldview only led to the Age of Reason and the most just, free nations in the history of the World; Individualism and free will (Natural Rights Theory/God’s Laws (Christianity)) No other worldview is based on truth and right reason (Natural Laws/Objective Truth).
That is why the US Constitution (freedom) must be restored again. It is the most perfect political document in the history of the World. It was ejected unconstitutionally in 1912 with the founding of the Federal Reserve and Marxist “income tax”.
We need “open architecture” for the evening news so that competition can increase.
But CNN headline news I am talking about was back in the day when Jesse Helms and Ted Turner were still friends and before Ted began shacking up with Jane Fonda. USA Today came out about that same time too. It was fresh and a worthy competition to the ossified MY/DC/Chic/LA media. Today it is no different from them - like CNN, totally co-opted.
There was chatter about TrumpTV as a possible opposition media voice last fall should Trump's campaign fail. We won and chatter subsided.
What I think I'd like to see is a melding together of OANN (presently west-coast, San Diego) and their sharp presenters/commentators (loved Liz Wheeler) and under the guidance of "Breitbart Bannon" roll out BretibartTV, to become the new conservative media giant. Give Drudge a show like Fox did at one time -- major sleuthing and expose stuff. Throw something to Greta Van Sustren.
Hey, if this Seth Rich thing gets beyond the control of the elites and Putin keeps talking about the US intelligence community that causes people to see some patterns between today and how things were handled during the JFK cover-up, and George Webb decides he wants a TV show instead of 5 You Tube videos a day, I think BretbartTV could become the David that slays the Giant.
Have magazine shows based off the blog brands: BreitbartTV presents ... "Big Government," "Big Journalism," "Big Hollywood," "Big Politics," "Big Business - with Lou Dobbs and Maria Bartiromo." And then for some lighter entertainment - "Big Boobs - starring Bill O'Reilly" (The Boob Factor? -- Nah ...), "Hannity's Heroes," "Tucker 'n the BowTies."
Fox News can then just be left to do "The Five" from 8 - 11PM EST, and reruns of the same beginning at 11 PM for insomniacs.
I don't think it would be that hard to ramp up a brand when and if the SHTF.
FReegards!
Probably if anyone has a shot its OANN, but it would require a significant ENTERTAINMENT quotient beyond just talking heads.
This is because it would now have to draw viewers from all the others, and I’m not sure straight news could do it 24/7. But news, documentaries, original (like the old 60 minutes) investigative pieces could work.
Maria Bartiromo- Izzit me or does she always look like she had a "great" prior evening? (i.e. rode hard and put up wet)
FReegards!
great synopsis
great suggestions..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.