[Design_Me_A_Tom]

Wait a minute, can someone tell me, does Murdock own Faux News? If so I hate him more than I origionally thought!

[Roaroaroar]

(Original post by alex5455)
i mean the obviously false assertion only 5% of americans watch fox news the 50% for same sex marriage has been fairly well reported on

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel

Simple Mathematics. There are 17 Million subscribes, that's less than 7% of the American population. If you look at the average viewing figures it's much lower, the highest rated show on Fox News is Bill O'riely at 3.1 Million. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_O%2...actor#Audience. The highest it peaks is at 6-7 Million when it comes to important events.

So even if we assume that 17 Million watch it (which they don't) then it would still be a heavy minority. Don't get so ****ing ignorant.

[ak137]

(Original post by Design_Me_A_Tom)
Wait a minute, can someone tell me, does Murdock own Faux News? If so I hate him more than I origionally thought!

Yes, Murdcock owns False News.

[A.galloway]

(Original post by Design_Me_A_Tom)
Wait a minute, can someone tell me, does Murdock own Faux News? If so I hate him more than I origionally thought!

He owns News International, which owns and operates Fox news several British papers and a lot of other media businesses.

[alex5455]

(Original post by Roaroaroar)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel

Simple Mathematics. There are 17 Million subscribes, that's less than 7% of the American population. If you look at the average viewing figures it's much lower, the highest rated show on Fox News is Bill O'riely at 3.1 Million. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_O%2...actor#Audience. The highest it peaks is at 6-7 Million when it comes to important events.

So even if we assume that 17 Million watch it (which they don't) then it would still be a heavy minority. Don't get so ****ing ignorant.

actual sources instead of being rude, please and thankyou

The channel was launched on October 7, 1996[2] to 17 million cable subscribers. The channel grew in the late 1990s and 2000s to become the dominant cable news network in the United States.[3] In 2010, the network's programs took the top 10 spots for most-watched cable news programs in the 25–54 demographic and the top 12 spots among total cable news programs viewers.[4] as you will se according to your "source" it launched to 17 million subscribers in 1996 its now 2012 look at the figures for 2010, bad for your argument

[Design_Me_A_Tom]

(Original post by A.galloway)
He owns News International, which owns and operates Fox news several British papers and a lot of other media businesses.

Do you not think that this guy should be stopped? News and Newspapers can be very influential and yet he has control over a vast proportion of it and can therefore manipulate sheeple and affect society, brainwashing them. He must have links with politicians because in business, firms which have too much control of the market get monitored by the competition commison etc. yet he has a large control over media yet the government is not that concerned?

[Roaroaroar]

(Original post by alex5455)
actual sources instead of being rude, please and thankyou

The channel was launched on October 7, 1996[2] to 17 million cable subscribers. The channel grew in the late 1990s and 2000s to become the dominant cable news network in the United States.[3] In 2010, the network's programs took the top 10 spots for most-watched cable news programs in the 25–54 demographic and the top 12 spots among total cable news programs viewers.[4] as you will se according to your "source" it launched to 17 million subscribers in 1996 its now 2012 look at the figures for 2010, bad for your argument

Yeah but this is irrelevant. You're right though, that subscription has increased and I admit that was a mistake. However, viewing is what tells us about the amount of Americans that watch Fox News and viewings are much lower.

[A.galloway]

(Original post by Design_Me_A_Tom)
Do you not think that this guy should be stopped? News and Newspapers can be very influential and yet he has control over a vast proportion of it and can therefore manipulate sheeple and affect society, brainwashing them. He must have links with politicians because in business, firms which have too much control of the market get monitored by the competition commison etc. yet he has a large control over media yet the government is not that concerned?

That was one of the major points in the current Leveson enquiry. Prior to the phone hacking scandal they were trying to buy BskyB and the government appointed someone who had a close relationship with the Murdochs (He went onto to approve it).

[alex5455]

(Original post by Roaroaroar)
Yeah but this is irrelevant. You're right though, that subscription has increased and I admit that was a mistake. However, viewing is what tells us about the amount of Americans that watch Fox News and viewings are much lower.

In 2010, the network's programs took the top 10 spots for most-watched cable news programs in the 25–54 demographic and the top 12 spots among total cable news programs viewers

taken from your own "source"

[Roaroaroar]

(Original post by alex5455)
In 2010, the network's programs took the top 10 spots for most-watched cable news programs in the 25–54 demographic and the top 12 spots among total cable news programs viewers

taken from your own "source"

Cool, I don't deny that. Just like X university is the biggest university but it isn't the university represents America. Just like just because Fox has the biggest viewers doesn't mean it represents America. Because the numbers are far too small in comparison to average population.

[alex5455]

(Original post by Roaroaroar)
Cool, I don't deny that. Just like X university is the biggest university but it isn't the university represents America. Just like just because Fox has the biggest viewers doesn't mean it represents America. Because the numbers are far too small in comparison to average population.

but it is the most watched you dont deny that? so it is the most representative

[Roaroaroar]

(Original post by alex5455)
but it is the most watched you dont deny that? so it is the most representative

30% White. 20% Black. 20% Hispanic. 20% Asian. Is white representative of this hypothetical country? If so, then yeah I guess you're right in saying it is. But, the majority aren't white just like in this case the majority aren't fox-news watching religious nut. And that's merely my point.

[alex5455]

(Original post by Roaroaroar)
30% White. 20% Black. 20% Hispanic. 20% Asian. Is white representative of this hypothetical country? If so, then yeah I guess you're right in saying it is. But, the majority aren't white just like in this case the majority aren't fox-news watching religious nut. And that's merely my point.

hence why i said MOST representative

[Jack93o]

(Original post by SpiggyTopes)
It already exists, it's called SkyNews Have you ever watched that tripe!

I don't think they could get away with it because Ofcom would keep them in order. We have much more regulation than America when it comes to things like this. Also, our broadcasters are all supposed to be politically disinterested, I think.

LOL YEAH, skynews.

brb need giant flashing 'BREAKING NEWS' text in the background to tell me what I'm watching

[Subology]

(Original post by Jack93o)
LOL YEAH, skynews.

brb need giant flashing 'BREAKING NEWS' text in the background to tell me what I'm watching

Seriously though, Fox news is on another level.

[tc92]

Some people believe the media to be biased here anyway. Perhaps with a more-overtly partisan media as in America, no one would be duped into believing the nonsense about 'impartiality', and might learn to take everything with a pinch of salt.

[thunder_chunky]

(Original post by A.galloway)

What are your views?

Easy:

Spoiler:

Show

A bad idea to say the least.

[LPK]

I wouldn't object to a Fox News UK channel, just as long as we also got Jon Stewart to do a Daily Show UK so he can regularly mock it.

[thunder_chunky]

(Original post by LPK)
I wouldn't object to a Fox News UK channel, just as long as we also got Jon Stewart to do a Daily Show UK so he can regularly mock it.

That would be awesome. Also Keith Olberman to do his "worst persons in the world" segment for UK related things. That would be good. Even if he can be a bit pompous at times.

[LPK]

(Original post by thunder_chunky)
That would be awesome. Also Keith Olberman to do his "worst persons in the world" segment for UK related things. That would be good. Even if he can be a bit pompous at times.

I used to love that segment, especially when he used to do the impression of Lou Dobbs.

It's a shame he no longer does Countdown on MSNBC. I really liked his Worst Persons in the World segment and the occasional Special Comments he did. I watched a few when he worked for Current TV, but they just didn't seem on par.

Ah well, at least there's Rachel Maddow.