This is so spot on. Cable News has sacrificed quality following Fox. I always thought that moving away from hard news to more opinion (entertainment shows) was a mistake. The 24 hr news cycle has also become so repetitive it's tiring.
Great analysis. Though when you say that Ailes first grasped the power of racial, political and class antagonisms, I'd note that the British press had been pushing that for decades. Also, shortly after Murdoch bought Dow Jones, he had Ailes speak to an auditorium full of Dow Jones senior managers on business strategy. Ailes advice basically was that when all the competitors are doing the same thing, do the opposite. There will be a market for that. So if everyone is purveying truth, you do the opposite?
Point taken on the (previously) more partisan British press.
Thanks for the Ailes story. Interesting that Murdoch promoted that advice from Ailes and then did the opposite with the Journal news report, which, while still often very strong, is unquestionably less distinctive than it was under previous ownership.
Here's a fifth and more important reason. With the neutering of FOX and the banning of Tucker Carlson, under the new regime of state-sponsored censorship, every single cable outlet is now little more than a propaganda mountpiece, relying on the same sources (usually domestic intel agencies) and parroting the same implausible narratives. Americans aren't stupid, and they're waking up. They're either ignoring current events completely, or looking to alternative sources (Substack, for instance) to cover and analyze current events with actual ivestigative reporting.
YES, Richard, on your essay, "If Cable News is Dying...."! I feel it's already dead, which is why I no longer watch it. Especially your final point, "Cable news still can’t handle demagogues." That alone remains the most sickening malaise of American media. You know why, and I know why. You detailed the engine behind it quite accurately. And your perfectly marvelous, sane, suggestion, i.e., policy change that says, "lie, and you're history here," would change tv media quickly. But that gets into the pathology of lying which America doesn't seem ready to examine.
This is so spot on. Cable News has sacrificed quality following Fox. I always thought that moving away from hard news to more opinion (entertainment shows) was a mistake. The 24 hr news cycle has also become so repetitive it's tiring.
Insightful, as always. Thanks Dick.
Great analysis. Though when you say that Ailes first grasped the power of racial, political and class antagonisms, I'd note that the British press had been pushing that for decades. Also, shortly after Murdoch bought Dow Jones, he had Ailes speak to an auditorium full of Dow Jones senior managers on business strategy. Ailes advice basically was that when all the competitors are doing the same thing, do the opposite. There will be a market for that. So if everyone is purveying truth, you do the opposite?
Point taken on the (previously) more partisan British press.
Thanks for the Ailes story. Interesting that Murdoch promoted that advice from Ailes and then did the opposite with the Journal news report, which, while still often very strong, is unquestionably less distinctive than it was under previous ownership.
Great points!
Here's a fifth and more important reason. With the neutering of FOX and the banning of Tucker Carlson, under the new regime of state-sponsored censorship, every single cable outlet is now little more than a propaganda mountpiece, relying on the same sources (usually domestic intel agencies) and parroting the same implausible narratives. Americans aren't stupid, and they're waking up. They're either ignoring current events completely, or looking to alternative sources (Substack, for instance) to cover and analyze current events with actual ivestigative reporting.
YES, Richard, on your essay, "If Cable News is Dying...."! I feel it's already dead, which is why I no longer watch it. Especially your final point, "Cable news still can’t handle demagogues." That alone remains the most sickening malaise of American media. You know why, and I know why. You detailed the engine behind it quite accurately. And your perfectly marvelous, sane, suggestion, i.e., policy change that says, "lie, and you're history here," would change tv media quickly. But that gets into the pathology of lying which America doesn't seem ready to examine.