You mean NET?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Empowerment_Television
Net isn’t what I’m talking about. NET is more like Fox than anything, even worse. From what I’m seeing, NET was based solely on ‘dish networks’.
At least Fox enjoys both cable and satellite support.
I’d like to see what NET’s viewership numbers were. But given that it was limited to ‘dish networks’, it couldn’t have even come near to what Fox is able to do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cable_and_satellite_television_networks
I hate to say it, but I’m not surprised it failed. Who would buy a dish/service simply to get one single channel?
See, part of the problem is decentralization.(which I should’ve brought up sooner) Fox already has stations all over the nation. I have a fox affiliate right here in my market.
For someone to come in brand new, create affiliates all over the nation would take a tremendous amount of capital. Billions, if not even trillions, who knows?
We need conservatism(broadcast) that can be had with a set of rabbit ears and nothing more; that goes above and beyond AM radio.
Big toes in the GOP like Trent Lott were getting stepped on at N.E.T. and rightfully so. NET's origional host were Janet Parshall, Major Garrett, Bill Lind, Tom Jippin, Tom Fitton, Brad Keena, John Lofton, Weyrich, Alan Keyes, Mike Reagan, and others I can't remember right off. It was highly viewer interactive actually. Ever talk to a congresscritter on TV? I have several times :>} Before FR became popular NET was chewing up and spitting out the goods on the Clintons.
The simple truth though is no Conservative network is going to be allowed to exist until the GOP is taken out as a party and replaced with a true Conservative one. Conservatives of today have no real representation or voice in the GOP except a few congresscritters and senators. NEOCONs control the rest including who the party supports. There is simply too many persons with too much pull to get it shut down before they can even get a good start.