To the people on here that constantly quote TV viewing figures

[the_steevo_uk]

I would just like to point out...ratings actually dont mean a damn thing. AND I WISH WISH WISH that people on here would stop quoting them to prove whether their argument is correct or not.

People who are actually interested in what is going on in the world get their news from Newspapers and Weekly News Magazines and Academic Journals. I cant recall many people with an MA or more (even some with a BA) who watch either Fox or MSNBC to get the news. I dont know about you guys but i watch the news to get a brief overview of whats going on, thats about it. If someone here posts up a youtube video of something funny on CNN, FOX or MSNBC then i'll watch it for a laugh, not for my news. The only other time i watch the news is for live election updates since it's the quickest way of getting information about vote returns.

Further to that, almost everybody under the age of thirty gets their news from the internet...so all this ratings debate is essentially focusing on a demographic that will become increasingly obsolete. I think focusing on internet numbers might be a lot more interesting than quoting whether O'Reilly or Olberman has higher ratings or not

Just my 10 cents, but I really am getting tired of people here pulling out ratings figures to prove that what they believe is more valid than the other person. Baring in mind the people who actually make the decisions in the world use a completely different method of getting their news and understanding the world, it might be time that some on here got a reality check.

[Dan-O]

Let me spell it out again for you, "steevo"...

Whether you like it or not--people are going to tune into what they want and like to watch.  It's not necessarily an issue of whose reporting is more accurate or valid.  It's not that there's necessarily a direct correlation between ratings and validity.  What it is, is an issue of who people like to watch and whom they trust for their TV news.  And the ratings prove that not many people like to watch that angry ugly dyke Maddow or that sniveling dickless whiner Olbermann.  It's that simple--again, as I said to someone else previously in another thread--quit trying to over-intellectualize this whole ratings issue.  It just "is."  The numbers tell the story.

[the_steevo_uk]

Let me spell it out again for you, "steevo"...

Whether you like it or not--people are going to tune into what they want and like to watch.  It's not necessarily an issue of whose reporting is more accurate or valid.  It's not that there's necessarily a direct correlation between ratings and validity.  What it is, is an issue of who people like to watch and whom they trust for their TV news.  And the ratings prove that not many people like to watch that angry ugly dyke Maddow or that sniveling dickless whiner Olbermann.  It's that simple--again, as I said to someone else previously in another thread--quit trying to over-intellectualize this whole ratings issue.  It just "is."  The numbers tell the story.

Yeah but if you read my post again, I was saying that the numbers dont tell the story, because many people dont get their news from the TV. I was only pointing out that some people on here quote viewing figures as a way of justifying their positions

[headhuntersix]

Well I happen to have both a BA and an MA and I watch Fox News. I would accept CNN but they have decided to devele into the Left/Right debate instead of bringing the news. I think education level doesn't mean a friggen thing as regards this debate. Fox presents a good product. The packaging is good and people enjoy both Oreilly and Hannity over Obermann and the dyke. Maybe if they put on people who actually disagree with them and can defend their position, those two would have better ratings. Hannity still has people that disagree despite dumping or lossing Combs. Oreilly always has great debates with guests, even if he talks over them at times. Most people get their news from TV or the net and neither exclusively. Newspapers are quickly vanishing. Maybe if there was more straight news and less editorializing, organizations like the NYT would be doing better.