Repubs. not helped by Fox News, study concludes

[KipWellsFan]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/18/business...ia/18scene.html

 

A new study by Stefano DellaVigna of the University of California, Berkeley, and Ethan Kaplan of the Institute for International Economic Studies at Stockholm University, however, casts doubt on this view. Specifically, the economists ask whether the advent of the Fox News Channel, Rupert Murdoch's cable television network, affected voter behavior. They found that Fox had no detectable effect on which party people voted for, or whether they voted at all.

 

...

 

The professors' preferred explanation is that the public manages to "filter" biased media reports. Fox's format, for example, might alert the audience to take the views expressed with more than the usual grain of salt. Audiences may also filter biases from other networks' shows.

 

The tendency for people to regard television news and political commentary as entertainment probably makes filtering easier. Fox's influence might also have been diluted because there were already many other ways to get political information.

 

Much more at link

 

Very interesting stuff

[YASNY]

There's some filtering going on alright. FoxNews is the highest rated cable news channel so the audience is filtering themselves in that direct vs. CNN, MSNBC and whatnot.

 

They also seem to be filtering themselves on political talk radio. Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Riley, Reagan, etc. are all over the AM dial. They are there because they get good ratings. They get good ratings because people choose to listen to them.

[FlaSoxxJim]

I think the study is seriously flawed if it only looks at the final outcome of voter behavior in determining if the GOP is being helped by Fox News and the conservative talk shows. These media clearing houses present the issues and provide the talking points that frame and inform (or misinform) daily debates on these subjects - as do their counterparts on the left (including misinformation).

 

In general, we're all more politicized as a country now than we were a decade or so ago, and I think it is precisely because we have teh immediate, around-the-clock access (via broadcast media and the internet) to the kind of information and speculation that only Washington insiders used to have. The average Googlemonkey blogger today has as clear a view of the inner workings of Washington as the best reporters did a few years ago.

[Texsox]

There's some filtering going on alright.  FoxNews is the highest rated cable news channel so the audience is filtering themselves in that direct vs. CNN, MSNBC and whatnot.

 

They also seem to be filtering themselves on political talk radio.  Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Riley, Reagan, etc.  are all over the AM dial.  They are there because they get good ratings.  They get good ratings because people choose to listen to them.

 

Mega Dittos to that YASNY!

 

And those shows have done that by screaming media bias.

 

Interesting in athis area which voted 83% for the Democratic candidate in the last election, there are no moderate or liberal shows on the air. Just Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, Ingrams, Savage, etc. Could that have something to do with the giant corporations that control the programming and the advertising? If the public doesn't have a choice, how can you point to the GOPerhead's show ratings and make any conclusion?

 

With giant corporations controlling the media, we are getting programming that they want, not the reverse. Broadcasters have been benefiting from GOP policies in regards to monopolies for the past couple decades. In turn, the giant broadcasting companies are kissing the GOP backsides.

 

YAS, you remember the days when the same company could not own a TV station, radio station, and newspaper in the same city. Now it has become common place.

[JUGGERNAUT]

I think a better survey would be along the lines of this:

1) Ask the people which cable new network the watch the most

2) Ask the people whether they feel it affects the way they vote

3) Ask the people how often they watch news programs on PBS, MSNBC & CNN.

 

The last question is the biggest because if the majority of people are filtering their news then these same people would be less loyal to a single network.

[jasonxctf]

people will always gravitate to the show that closely alligns itself with their views. Politics are like Sports. If you had a choice between watchng the sox game or cubs game, you're certainly going to choose the sox game. That being said, with this country basically split 50/50 between dems and repubs.. does it surprise you that fox news is #1. it shouldnt. the 50% repub group mostly watches fox. the 50% dem group is split between cnn, msnbc, cbs, etc.

 

i also think that most ppl who vote democratic aren't going to spend their time listening to AM talk radio where the conservative pundits are. i'm the most loyal dem out there and I couldnt stand listning to air america. i listened to howard stern or music in the morning.

[Balta1701]

The real key element that this survey misses is the impact that a channel like Fox News has on the rest of the media.

 

When Fox News picks up a story and flaunts it heavily because it leans right...that leaves other channels feeling like they have no choice but to run with it. It keeps things alive.

 

Think about the Swift Boat Liars for Lies mess last year...who was it who kept pushing and pushing and pushing on that to make sure it stayed on the air? That was Fox News first and foremost. And because they kept harping on it...other channels felt like they had no choice but to let people on the air, and other news organizations, newspapers, etc, followed along with op-ed pieces.

 

So you end up with guys like Corsi getting featured repeatedly on Hannity & Colmes...and a few days later Michelle Malkin is on Chris Matthews's show wondering why no one is asking whether or not Kerry shot himself to get a medal.

 

That is the impact of Fox News...by giving 1 party a mouthpiece, it makes it such that every other channel feels to some degree like they have to go along with it. It keeps stories alive on other networks, and provides free advertising for the Republican party.

 

I wouldn't mind the existence of Fox News if 2 things were true:

 

1. There was a liberal version of it. There is nothing close to one.

2. They were unable to call themselves "Fair and balanced" when they clearly are not.