Posted on 09/12/2004 12:11:15 PM PDT by John Jorsett
Regardless of who wins the election, the campaign of 2004 has already made history. For the first time, a cable news channel -- Fox -- attracted more viewers than a broadcast network when they were competing head to head, covering the Republican National Convention.
Was this a watershed for a new partisan journalism in America? I think the real meaning is something else.
What happened this summer, and particularly last week, is likely to be recalled as the end of the era of network news. At the very least, mark this as the moment when the networks abdicated their authority with the American public.
Should we care? Consider: The rise of network television news was arguably the most important development in American politics in the latter half of the 20th century. The arrival of news divisions in the 1950s and '60s meant that for the first time citizens could regularly see events for themselves.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
*** The arrival of news divisions in the 1950s and '60s ***
Interestingly, this rise also correlates with the rise in Socialism, Communism, and radical extremists who want to kill babies but save trees.
Who apparently has no opinion or is unwilling to speak about forged documents being used to smear someone. Yet he speaks of "Excellence". Give me a break.
Actually in the 10PM boradcast hour, FOX had more viewers than ALL THREE brodcast networks combined..
And "TRUTH FLYS" at the speed of light on the "NET"
This was inevitable, In liberty's century the weakness of the arguments of the left pale in comparison to the facts of living Free or dying from terror.
No, what is lost is the chance to spin, to deceive and to impose a specific point of view.
You'll note the rise of CNN didn't scare the editors of "Pravda on the Potomac," but the rise of Fox did. Why? For all the complaints we may have about O'Reilly being a blowhard mock-conservative, and Hannity being a wuss, Fox truly IS fair and gives conservatives a fair shake. In a war of ideas, THAT scares the libs to no end, and hence, why the "concern" about the rise of cable news channels.
I say give us more balance! Hel*, give us a flat out conservative basic cable network! Let the libs have ABCNNBCBS and MTV....I'd rather have Fox, CMT and a hypothetical all-conservative-all-the-time network. THERE'S freedom of thought for ya!
So G-d was claimed to have died. And everything would be taken care of! And should be too! Our parents demanded it, we demand it -- we constantly insist that somebody take care of every bothersome thing, from health care to retirement, from schooling to determined what is or isn't true, to keeping gas prices down and milk prices fixed -- on and on and on. The sleepers griped in their sleep. We sleepers.
Now we are wakening.
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
TO: CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN
FM: Enterprise
RE: News
DT: 09/12/04
Sirs/Maams:
The evening news was intended to serve the public good. You have with obvious partisanship abandoned any intent to serve the public good, and you are hereby relieved of any further news assignments. Please replace your evening news segments with the usual mindless sitcoms and maybe some hip-hop documentaries.
Toodles:
Enterprise
The GM of a TV station I worked at in the early 80's predicted that network news dominance would end by the year 2000. He didn't miss it by much. News divisions at every level must realize that the schmuck they've been talking down to for the past 40 years is not only keeping up with the news without tuning in, he's ahead of them.
The End of Daily Print Media
In an article that Drudge has from the Seattle P-I (of all papers), the authenticity of he Bush docs is questioned and the article cites many of the discrepancies.
When a paper from as liberal an area as Seattle begins to question the authenticity of those forged memos, Blather and SeeBS are definitely spitting into the wind. This story is getting more fun by the minute.
I hate excerpt only registration sites.
And when it became obvious that the news divisions were offering opinion and not news, the public recreated its own news divisions via the World Wide Web, with FreeRepublic in the vanguard.
"Network journalism originally was designed not to make a profit but to create prestige."
And what news program was the first to turn a profit and change news divisions into money-makers? Why, that would be "60Minutes".
The American public has lost nothing in the switch from Old Media to New Media...they are now part of the process, and that's good. But the networks have lost their control over news, and that's GREAT.
Have some cheese Dan.
He also says that it's the end of verification, because people are asserting facts instead of investigating and verifying facts.
Hmmmmm......
CBS has a fact checker? Since Dan Blather has been anchor?
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.
