Back in the day perhaps thirty or so years ago conservatives had routinely stated that liberals dominate the media. This may have once been true, but today the liberals are kowtowing to a conservative choir. When you examine the market shares of prime-time viewership of the traditional broadcast news media like NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, and Fox broadcast networks. (Not to be confused with Fox News), the traditional broadcast media, most of them were considered liberal, and got 32.8 million viewerships and 8.5 million of those who watch Fox networks. So liberals had an early market advantage. When cable networks such as Fox News and MSNBC became part of the equation, marketing figures began shifting and tilted 12.9 million to a shrinking 9.6 million in viewerships of liberal cable networks like MSNBC – this time favoring conservatives. The radio audience is where conservatives really trumped the liberals – in large part to an early broadcasting lead which began with the advent of programs such as Rush Limbaugh’s EIB, circa 1984. Conservatives now dominate the liberals with 80 percent of the radio market share. There may be an explanation for the growing popularity of conservative news sources, which dovetails with some interesting polling data. Since 1992, Gallup and other major pollsters have tracked the partisan demographic and when asked, 38 percent of Americans consider themselves to be conservative, 35 percent consider themselves Independent, and 21 percent saw themselves to be liberal. Meanwhile – Independents are seen as mostly moderate and are skewing moderately conservative. These numbers suggest a growing political polarization from those on the left, which probably explains the strident voices of those, whom have become frustrated with the growing clarity of conservative and independent news organizations like Fox News. If we were to go ahead and use your Neilson figures and assume the average Fox viewer is 68 years old, white and conservative, one might conclude that this demographic is going extinct (I’m sure to your glee), but you’d be wrong… Mr. Tim Russert of Meet the Press back in 2000 handily explained that America is split down the middle between both parties. If you decide to examine the numbers you’d find the parties themselves split by alternatively cynical interests, which have turned off viewership of major media. Interesting that you bring up social media though Mike. As it was “Twitter” that coordinated the twin attacks on Canadian Parliament this morning… So at this point I’ll go ahead and assume you are a thirty-something millennial (or at least sympathetic), and perhaps stung by an economy that has literally abandoned your concerns with education, employment, and even perhaps the debt you incurred getting there. This has been the driver of the new movement in political social media you are right about that, but when we talk of “social media”, I’m sure even here there are resources that might be disagreeable with your demographic – Breitbart ring any bells? You see, Salon, or Motherjones, and yes-even Breitbart, are not governed by the same journalistic standards that major networks are held to, and have thus offended many in all political spectrums – including yours… Before all is done, if this new media is to succeed, some kind of standard of ethicacy will impose itself for a larger more diverse audience. When this happens, once again the political camps will be drawn in and as you would have it “pigeon holed” by regulatory process. You see Mike, the country, as we know it is still divided and will probably remain so, because many of those who glommed on to the alternative social media will move on in their later successes and become the very part of what this right/left political culture has been for generations… Awesome stuff though… Be careful!
Posted on: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 20:18:05 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015