Yet the Fox news numbers continue to rise. The ratings actually showed that more people WANTED to see the Aruba story. Someone please explain that one.
reality t.v.
It's actually quite simple. Fox is now a tabloid network, which means their primary competition is no longer CNN or MSNBC -- it's the "Inside Hollywood" type of crap you see on the major networks.
It's becoming increasingly clear to me that Fox is marketing itself to an audience with an average IQ of about 90.
I can't explain that one. I have just about stopped watching Fox during the weekends entirely. The coverage of Crawford was the worst out there. I spent the weekend flipping channels and listening to the radio for coverage and Fox low-balled the pro American groups worse than CNN.
Britt Hume straightened that out when the weekend was over but damage was done to credibility.
"Yet the Fox news numbers continue to rise. The ratings actually showed that more people WANTED to see the Aruba story. Someone please explain that one."
Exactly. Greta's numbers were higher than O'Reilly's when she was in Aruba. Don't blame FOX news...they're just giving the audience what they want...blame Americans for watching 24/7. The same ones who watch all the reality crap tv shows and buy National Enquirer.
O'Reilly and Hannity don't have that much coverage of Aruba lately. I love Neil Cavuto, John Gibson, Brit Hume, Sean and sometime O'Reilly. Compared to the liberal garbage the MSM puts out, FOX is a godsend.
Could it be the difference between 'sustained' viewing & 'drive-by' viewing? I'm not expert on TV ratings, but it seems like the ratings agencies have a hard time distinguishing between the 2. The one place you know where to find the latest development on the Holloway case is FoxNews. Seems to me that this churns the drive-by numbers...
Yet the Fox news numbers continue to rise. The ratings actually showed that more people WANTED to see the Aruba story. Someone please explain that one.
Because, the others suck sooooooooooo bad!