Fox News Nabs Historic Cable Ratings Victory

[240 is Back]

I think many people are either just dog tired of the bullshit the main outlets spew all the time, or theyre getting their news on the internet from other sources.

I know a huge chunk of the age 25-40 employees at my work all get their news online from alternative sources...... Breitbart, Huffpo, Drudgr, Blaze, RT, zerohedge, etc.

LOL!  I see the problem now!   Drudge and HuffPro are the TOP news outlets for the Right and the Left. 

It's not alternative news, not by a mile lol.  Move to raw story or even prisonplanet if you want shit that isn't hand-fed by corporate interests.

LOL @ Huff Pro, the default AOL news service, being independent.  And Drudges?  LOL!!!

[Shockwave]

LOL!  I see the problem now!   Drudge and HuffPro are the TOP news outlets for the Right and the Left. 

It's not alternative news, not by a mile lol.  Move to raw story or even prisonplanet if you want shit that isn't hand-fed by corporate interests.

LOL @ Huff Pro, the default AOL news service, being independent.  And Drudges?  LOL!!!

i didnt say independent there genius, i said alternative, as in, an alternative to the maonstream CABLE NEWS channels. Reading comprehension Rob, reading comprehension.

99% of Americans will never put any stock in true independent, underground news channels.

[240 is Back]

i didnt say independent there genius, i said alternative, as in, an alternative to the maonstream CABLE NEWS channels. Reading comprehension Rob, reading comprehension.

99% of Americans will never put any stock in true independent, underground news channels.

drudge and foxnews.com ain't that much different lol.

huffpro and msnbc are note-for-note, most of the time.

"Alternative" doesn't count once they sell stock, are worth hundreds of millions, and owned by the bank, not owned by a group of free thinkers who want to reveal truth.  You think HuffPro would show us a GE exposeee?  LOL!!  Do you think Drudge would show us a newscorp exposee?  lolololol   

They're not alternatives.  They're corporate.  maybe they WERE, but not now.

[Shockwave]

drudge and foxnews.com ain't that much different lol.

huffpro and msnbc are note-for-note, most of the time.

"Alternative" doesn't count once they sell stock, are worth hundreds of millions, and owned by the bank, not owned by a group of free thinkers who want to reveal truth.  You think HuffPro would show us a GE exposeee?  LOL!!  Do you think Drudge would show us a newscorp exposee?  lolololol   

They're not alternatives.  They're corporate.  maybe they WERE, but not now.

Dude. Theyre alternative in the fact that they take ratings from fox, msnbc, and cnn. No one ever said they werent corporate.

Stop trying to argue semantics just to argue. The employees at my work dont watch msnbc, cnn, fox, etc, because theyre getting their news from alternative sources like drudge, huffpo, etc.

Those sites are taking ratings from the mainstream canbles channels. Thats what i saidx theres nothing there to argue about. It doesnt matter what their content is, this thread was about ratings and my comments reflected that.

Christ Rob.

[Dos Equis]

McDonald's is incredibly popular. I guess it's the best food available.

You could say the same about a number of fast food companies.  I've seen them all over the world. 

Perhaps Fox has been killing other networks because they're just better at delivering the news and opinion shows.  At least that's what I told one of my very good liberal friends when he used that precise McDonalds analogy. 

[240 is Back]

Perhaps Fox has been killing other networks because they're just better at delivering the news and opinion shows.  At least that's what I told one of my very good liberal friends when he used that precise McDonalds analogy. 

agreed.  half of the population has an IQ below 100.  And elderly lose more brain cells each year as a result of the aging process.

There's a lot of 92 IQ people with venom in their veins (from both parties, but toss in the aging thing and the dumb do tend to lean older).  FOX is an amazing outlet for them.  Obama is the ultimate bad guy.  it's a wonderful marriage, and FOX doesn't want it to end over impeachment.

[Dos Equis]

agreed.  half of the population has an IQ below 100.  And elderly lose more brain cells each year as a result of the aging process.

There's a lot of 92 IQ people with venom in their veins (from both parties, but toss in the aging thing and the dumb do tend to lean older).  FOX is an amazing outlet for them.  Obama is the ultimate bad guy.  it's a wonderful marriage, and FOX doesn't want it to end over impeachment.

Another example that shows you live in a fishbowl. 

[240 is Back]

Another example that shows you live in a fishbowl. 

Everything I said there is accurate.  100 is the average IQ.  And half the people around us are of below average IQ.

The brain stops firing as one ages.  Sucks, and crossword puzzles help, but at 90, we're not what we were at 30.  Sorry, thems' just facts.

do older people enjoy spoon-fed feel-good tv to help them cope with frustration of aging?  Definitely.  FOX gives them that. 

[Dos Equis]

Everything I said there is accurate.  100 is the average IQ.  And half the people around us are of below average IQ.

The brain stops firing as one ages.  Sucks, and crossword puzzles help, but at 90, we're not what we were at 30.  Sorry, thems' just facts.

do older people enjoy spoon-fed feel-good tv to help them cope with frustration of aging?  Definitely.  FOX gives them that. 

You don't know "the facts" about average people, or their intelligence, or what constitutes true intelligence, because you don't interact with average people and you're not a well read person.  That is patently obvious by reading what you post on the board.

I recall reading on here years ago how you said most people are stupid.  Irony.   

[chadstallion]

You could say the same about a number of fast food companies.  I've seen them all over the world. 

Perhaps Fox has been killing other networks because they're just better at delivering the news and opinion shows.  At least that's what I told one of my very good liberal friends when he used that precise McDonalds analogy. 

you answered your own question with your first word in the response.
"Perhaps"
perhaps they're not just better but more entertaining; who doesn't love it when Hannity and Judge Jeanine start shouting into the camera; and steve doocy making a fool by not reading the teleprompter correctly. its the morning version of comedy central with F and F gets rolling.

[Dos Equis]

you answered your own question with your first word in the response.
"Perhaps"
perhaps they're not just better but more entertaining; who doesn't love it when Hannity and Judge Jeanine start shouting into the camera; and steve doocy making a fool by not reading the teleprompter correctly. its the morning version of comedy central with F and F gets rolling.

Do you really believe that?  For example, do you think Megyn Kelly is just flat out superior to Rachel Maddow?  Across the board.  Content, humor, honesty, eye candy, etc.

[RRKore]

Do you really believe that?  For example, do you think Megyn Kelly is just flat out superior to Rachel Maddow?  Across the board.  Content, humor, honesty, eye candy, etc.

No, Megyn is not flat out superior to Rachel. 

Rachel is better educated and, more importantly, can almost surely kick Megyn's ass in a physical fight.  Maddow is 5'11" and played 3 sports in high school (Basketball, volleyball, swimming) whereas Megyn is 5'6" and was the head cheerleader in high school.  Both women are in their 40's but Maddow is 3 years younger than Megyn.

BTW, considering the tiny percentage of the population that regularly watches any and all TV news these days, who really cares which is more popular?  People who want to know how folks that don't have internet access get their news?

[polychronopolous]

I was shocked to see just how far MSNBC has fallen.

It has always pretty much been Fox in first place with CNN and MSNBC vying for 2nd place but CNN has been leaving them in the dust here recently it seems.

[2Thick]

No, Megyn is not flat out superior to Rachel. 

Rachel is better educated and, more importantly, can almost surely kick Megyn's ass in a physical fight.  Maddow is 5'11" and played 3 sports in high school (Basketball, volleyball, swimming) whereas Megyn is 5'6" and was the head cheerleader in high school.  Both women are in their 40's but Maddow is 3 years younger than Megyn.

BTW, considering the tiny percentage of the population that regularly watches any and all TV news these days, who really cares which is more popular?  People who want to know how folks that don't have internet access get their news?

Megyn is a lawyer. Is Rachel a "career student" or something? Going beyond a JD in formal education has got to be pretty pointless.

[chadstallion]

Do you really believe that?  

yup

[RRKore]

Megyn is a lawyer. Is Rachel a "career student" or something? Going beyond a JD in formal education has got to be pretty pointless.

Career student?  Do you really not know that both are well-known professional TV hosts and political commentators?

Both are very accomplished and near the top of their fields, for sure.  

But, pointless or not, Rachel's educational accomplishments (Rhodes Scholarship with a PhD from Oxford University) would seem to be superior to Megyn's (JD from Albany Law School), wouldn't you say?

[Soul Crusher]

Career student?  Do you really not know that both are well-known professional TV hosts and political commentators?

Both are very accomplished and near the top of their fields, for sure.  

But, pointless or not, Rachel's educational accomplishments (Rhodes Scholarship with a PhD from Oxford University) would seem to be superior to Megyn's (JD from Albany Law School), wouldn't you say?

Faggetbama has a nobel peace prize remember ?

[RRKore]

Faggetbama has a nobel peace prize remember ?

Which network does Fagebolabama work for, though?

Also, I think Maddow could whip him in a physical fight, too.

[Soul Crusher]

Which network does Fagebolabama work for, though?

Also, I think Maddow could whip him in a physical fight, too.

He works for EBT 

[Bear232]

Straw man is well errrr... grasping at straws. .

[2Thick]

Career student?  Do you really not know that both are well-known professional TV hosts and political commentators?

Both are very accomplished and near the top of their fields, for sure.  

But, pointless or not, Rachel's educational accomplishments (Rhodes Scholarship with a PhD from Oxford University) would seem to be superior to Megyn's (JD from Albany Law School), wouldn't you say?

I know who the fuck they are, jerkoff. Is Madrow one of those people who is always taking classes, etc? Nothing wrong with that, and yes such an academic record is impressive. But common sense and other things such as success, responsibility, the ability to get along with others, a firm grasp of reality, etc are just as important, if not moreso IMO.

[Dos Equis]

No, Megyn is not flat out superior to Rachel. 

Rachel is better educated and, more importantly, can almost surely kick Megyn's ass in a physical fight.  Maddow is 5'11" and played 3 sports in high school (Basketball, volleyball, swimming) whereas Megyn is 5'6" and was the head cheerleader in high school.  Both women are in their 40's but Maddow is 3 years younger than Megyn.

BTW, considering the tiny percentage of the population that regularly watches any and all TV news these days, who really cares which is more popular?  People who want to know how folks that don't have internet access get their news?

No, Maddow is not better educated. 

I don't think what they did in high school is relevant to what they're doing in their 40s, twenty years later  , but since you obviously looked at their backgrounds why did you misrepresent Megyn Kelly's background?  "At Bethlehem Central High School, she played on the basketball and field hockey teams and captained the cheerleading squad."  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megyn_Kelly

Who are you, 240?? 

[Dos Equis]

yup

 

[RRKore]

No, Maddow is not better educated. 

I don't think what they did in high school is relevant to what they're doing in their 40s, twenty years later  , but since you obviously looked at their backgrounds why did you misrepresent Megyn Kelly's background?  "At Bethlehem Central High School, she played on the basketball and field hockey teams and captained the cheerleading squad."  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megyn_Kelly

Who are you, 240?? 

Mea culpa, BB.  I missed Megyn's field hockey and BB experience in high school.  Turns out she was an aerobics instructor between the ages of 16 and 26, also. 

Based on the size advantage, I still think Maddow can probably beat up Megyn in the cage but Megyn, based on cardio as a former aerobics instructor might have a chance in the ring, lol.
 
Why do you think Maddow is not better educated, though?

Maddow:
-  Bachelor's in Public Policy at Stanford University in 1994
- Awarded John Gardener Fellowship (Annually 6 are chosen, 3  from Stanford and 3 from UC Berkeley, from graduation seniors to encourage pursuit of careers in public and community service.)
- Awarded Rhodes Scholarship 
- Doctorate in Political Science from Oxford University in 2001

Kelly:
- Bachelor's in Political Science from Syracuse University in 1991 or 1992 (?)
- J.D. (Juris Doctor) from Albany Law School in 1995
--was associate editor of Albany Law Review

[RRKore]

For BB: