Posted on 05/12/2005 1:09:50 PM PDT by LdSentinal
May 9--New York --- When Fox News Channel first elbowed its way into the growing colony of cable TV networks and onto the air in late 1996, it had little more than an attitude, a visionary at the helm and the approval to reach into Rupert Murdoch's deep pockets. Cable companies pay established programmers to carry their content. But Fox News shelled out from $10 to $13 per subscriber to the operators as inducement to sign contracts carving out channel space for 10 years.
From those humble beginnings, the feisty upstart has largely redefined televised news.
Fox News' motto --- "fair and balanced" --- has become a fuse for debate over the network's merits. The more appropriate catchphrase might be "search and destroy," given how it has annihilated cable news rivals in the ratings.
Now negotiations for contracts with cable distributors are tilted in Fox's favor. Industry sources have told the trade publication Multichannel News that the current licensing fee of 23 to 25 cents per subscriber that the network receives from the cable companies could double --- a potentially astonishing increase in the current climate.
"Fox [News] has a strong bargaining position," said Denver-based TV programming consultant Jedd Palmer, who negotiated one of its original deals. He suggested that the network might even be so bold as to seek reimbursement for those $10 to $13 enticement payments.
Fox News could even use its muscle to strong-arm a slot for a financial news offshoot. Preparations are far enough along that, once Fox News President Roger Ailes gets a go-ahead from media mogul Murdoch, a launch could follow within a few months.
"That would be one of the tools in my negotiating kit," said independent media analyst Larry Gerbrandt, who, like Palmer, can only speculate on Ailes' strategy.
On that matter, Ailes isn't talking. When he does, the former politico resembles a coach firing up his troops --- often belittling his opponents.
His hard-charging network has spawned legions of critics, typified in the Al Franken book "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them" and the pointed documentary "Outfoxed." Two entrepreneurs concocted the channel-filter FOXBlocker, a small metal device that screws into the rear of a TV set.
Why all the fuss over a network where only an estimated one in four channel-surfers stop regularly? It's a respectable ratio on a dial with as many clicks as a roulette wheel, yet Fox News still breathes the fumes of broadcasting's big four.
But, in the fragmented world of TV watching, numbers are relative, and the most significant one is this: eight, where Fox News ranks in the cable channel universe. It overtook CNN in December 2001, though the Atlanta-based 24-hour news pioneer has shown gains in some viewer categories during the past few months.
The eyes of the media industry are trained on this alternative choice for news and views. And wondering: How'd they pull it off?
The scrutiny comes as no small source of amusement to Bill Shine, Fox News' senior vice president of programming.
"I'm always surprised at how people can't figure out why we're successful," Shine said recently in his Midtown Manhattan office, a U.S. map broken down by red and blue states over his left shoulder.
Detractors boil down Fox's rise to a perceived pandering to a disaffected segment of society --- read: white middle-class --- weary of U.S.-bashing here and abroad. They are eager to pin the scarlet letter C, for conservative, on the lapels of on-air personalities, beneath the tiny American flags that a few wear.
Some attribute Fox News' ascendancy as fortunate timing. They say the network caught the perfect wave as the nation's political waters shifted to the Republican Party.
The emergence of radio talk shows, the growing mistrust of deep-rooted media and the expanded audience for cable TV, which now exceeds its over-the-air brethren, also dovetailed nicely for the network.
Fox News people say the appeal stems not from leaning right but from presenting all angles.
The winning formula, as described by Shine: See how the other networks cover a story. Ask whether there is another side to present or another way to report it. Then practice solid journalism.
The back-and-forth on bias and coloring the news overshadows a fundamental truth that, by today's standards and tastes, Fox News is good TV that draws an audience from across the spectrum.
A study released last summer by Pew Research Center concluded that 48 percent of its devotees do not consider themselves conservative. Its admirers include CNN/U.S. President Jon Klein, who has said, "They are interesting. They're exciting."
Its style has spawned the so-called Fox Effect, which means different things to different people. For some, it is guaranteeing a so-called conservative view on the air. For others, it is news anchors bantering with on site reporters and tossing out witty asides, even commentary.
If the Fox Effect exists, it could become apparent in the sea change under way behind anchor desks at the traditional networks. Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, Ted Koppel and Peter Jennings are giving way to a new generation that could adopt the Fox News tone.
Fox News anchors convey "a little less of a sense of self-importance," said Robert Thompson, director of the Center For The Study of Popular TV at Syracuse University."There is definitely a Fox style that is appealing to people."
Reese Schonfeld, co-founder of CNN News, finds Fox News easy to absorb. "It's comfortable to watch," said Schonfeld, now involved in cable network start-ups. On-air personalities "seem at ease with each other."
Shepard Smith, host of the nightly news at 7, conveys a looseness that places him closer in manner to faux newscaster Jon Stewart on Comedy Central than the broadcast network cast "We came into it with the idea of not taking ourselves too seriously," he said. "Clearly, others who used to knock it like us now, since they're using it, too."
Shine sees evidence of the Fox Effect in a more patriotic, middle-America bent on some traditional network shows.
"I find it funny that [NBC's] 'Today' show is now 'America's family," Brian Williams is reporting 'America's stories' and hanging out at NASCAR races," Shine said.
Ailes recognized early on that most Americans know the news by mid-evening, so he established pure opinion hours as the network's anchor programs: "The O'Reilly Factor" at 8 p.m., with the polarizing Bill O'Reilly usually leaning right, followed by "Hannity & Colmes," designed as point-counterpoint, though the conservative Sean Hannity is the unmistakable headliner.
"They have turned the news into a spectator sport," Thompson said.
Sport. It's a metaphor the Fox News worker bees often reference, in keeping with Ailes' hyper-competitive nature. To him, the ratings serve as a scoreboard. And his team has been on the winning side in cable news for three years running, mostly by a wide margin.
"We are clobbering the competition," said lawyer Greta van Susteren, who moderates "On The Record" weeknights at 10, a whirlwind news review that touches on legal matters.
The trash talk emanates from the top, where Ailes creates an us-against-the-world aura.
On CBS, whose disputed report on President Bush's National Guard service led to an independent probe and staff shakeup, Ailes said: "I don't have a former attorney general investigating us. I haven't fired my anchors, I haven't fired my producers."
He also dissed MSNBC for hiring "every blonde who hasn't worked for us, and that's not working."
And, of course, CNN. Asked what he envied about Fox News' main adversary, Ailes said favorable media coverage.
On C-Span, Marvin Kalb, who interviewed Ailes, wondered why Fox News has no international news network, like CNN. Ailes cracked, "We decided not to start an anti-American channel."
Ailes has worked for three presidents --- all Republican. In defining viewers drawn to Fox, he cited to Kalb those Americans fed up with a glut of federal programs --- a standard complaint by Republicans.
Ailes prefers to frame the media battleground not as conservative vs. liberal, but mainstream or elite vs. . . . his way.
As Fox News approaches its 10th anniversary, it is well positioned for an extended run. Ailes reported profits in excess of $200 million last year. Ad revenue has leaped nearly 30 percent in a year, with a projection of $500 million in 2005, says Paul Rittenberg, senior vice president of ad sales.
"Fox is now the media elite," Thompson, of Syracuse University, said. "These [networks] that shape themselves as the Davids going against the media Goliaths --- Fox is a Goliath."
Yet Thompson expects Ailes to veer little from his current course, a notion seconded by ex-CNN chief Schonfeld.
Said Smith, "When things are going so well, why would you change?"
CABLE NEWS MARKET SHARE:
--Fox News: 46 percent
--CNN: 24 percent
--MSNBC: 12 percent
--CNN Headline News: 11 percent
--CNBC: 7 percent
*since last December
Source: Nielsen Media Research
Do you think if I read the posts I did't see the signup date? New does not equal troll. Why can't someone put up a valid argument hne they are a newbie, or be feisty. Read the style of the posts & you will see a freeper past, not a troll.
I watch mostly Fox for cable news because they are more interesting & they are pro-American. I do watch a little of MSNBC but CNN just bores me. Nancy Grace, on headline CNN, is interesting but like O'Reilly, she does annoy me at times.
Of course, the best of Fox News is Brit Hume. Unfortunately, he is on rather early for those folks who have to work. If he was on at 7PM, he would soon outdraw the big three.
Almost every evening, Brit exposes some hypocrisy of MSM or the RATs. Hell, he could probably do an hour on examples. Is that bias, or is that just getting the truth out?
I suspect that tonight Brit will mention how CBS Evening News and Gloria Borger totally distorted Ken Starr's comment to make it look as if he was opposed to ending the judicial filibusters. It was an incredible forgery, just as bad as Rathergate.
Oh man, you are gonna fry.
Hopefully, it will be the big news of the week. Those people need to be exposed for what they are. There are people (a small handful) in this country that still watch the little 3 network news stations, and those people are being grossly misled.
Yeah, I agree it's a fireball chucker, but why does everybody here always slam the bejeezus out of new people with an opinion. This is a conservative news discussion forum, not the GOP sheep farm. We have some seriously hardcore conservatives, and some middle of the road folks too.
When people jump on newbies so bad, it makes FR a nastier and more bitter place. A few years back, this was not nearly so mean. Sure, trolls got the zot, but not every single new person. People nowadays need to lighten up unless they are relatively confident the poster is a troll.
The comment about Extremely Extreme Extremist isn't out of line, because EEE hasn't bothered to fill out his/her/it's about page, and there are more women than men, so the likely assumption is he/she/it is female.
Thanks for the ping!
I finally got to watch FNC in what is argueably the most socialist juridiction in all of North America (exluding Cuba)-Quebec Canada and I can tell you that FNC is refreshing compared to the Democratic Party Channel-CNN. My wife who is not a republican or tilts condervative likes the style and pace of their programming. O'Reilly is too much for her but likes Brit Hume and Shepard Smith. I like Anderson Cooper but I will not sit through a CNN hour on general principle. The timing for the availability of FNC in Canada could not be better. The country is immersed in a Liberal political scandal that may (I hope) push the country to the right for the next 10 years. God knows Canadians need it. Having FNC talking about this issue in a non-Liberal point of view is remarkable! You cannot get an objective criticism of the scandal up here since the Liberals have bought off the entire MSM (including that pathetic excuse for tax payer funded CBC!) I felt like I was living in the USSR until FNC came along!
Fox is about 40% conservative. I have stated for decades that a TRUE conservative network would clean up.
ping
Bye, Ironfang."He's dead, Jim!"
"He's dead, Jim!" :)
How to Make a Guerrilla Documentary
(Liberal Campaign to smear FOX News)''Outfoxed'' has been made in secret. The film is an obsessively researched expose of the ways in which Fox News, as Greenwald sees it, distorts its coverage to serve the conservative political agenda of its owner, the media tycoon Rupert Murdoch. It features interviews with former Fox employees, leaked policy memos written by Fox executives and extensive footage from Fox News, which Greenwald is using without the network's permission. The result is an unwavering argument against Fox News that combines the leftist partisan vigor of a Michael Moore film with the sober tone and delivery of a PBS special. A large portion of the film's $300,000 budget came in the form of contributions in the range of $80,000 from both MoveOn and the Center for American Progress, the liberal policy organization founded by John Podesta, the former chief of staff for Bill Clinton; Greenwald, who is not looking to earn any money from the project, provided the rest.
Wow, does this mean Neil Cavuto 24/7?
I think you mean ROGER Ailes
Agree.
Fox is my news channel of choice for the obvious reasons. But there's room for improvement:
Day long repetition of the same news items.
Blasting that frigging 'Fox News Alert" tone every other minute....jeeez!
Although talking heads are reading off a teleprompter, I'm getting increasingly irritated with the recent habit of using a National Enquirer mentality with breathless lead- ins to upcoming segments..."Wait to you hear about the shocking blah blah blah", "You won't believe blah blah blah," and "See the shocking video blah blah."
Thanks for that. Like I said I'm still relatively new and wasn't aware of how FR was a few years back. I totally agree with you on the tendency here to jump down new peoples throats. I truly believe that there are people posting here is that their sole reason for posting here is the ZOT. Like I said, I still step lightly for that very reason. The only reason I used the "troll" moniker is that he/she seemed a little boisterous. One more thing, I apologize for taking so long to reply as I left for work at five (EST.)
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.
