Oh goody! More fan mail from another blind follower of Fox News:
Quote:
|
Started reading your article on the longevity of dvds/vhs/media, etc. updated on April 2008. And almost right away you take a cheap shot at Fox News. Well, guess what? At that point your article looses all credibility and is worthless. I will let people know how bad your service is. It must just kill you that Fox News dominates the cable news. Too bad for you as their ratings show, the MAJORITY of Americans like Fox News. Deal with it and keep your snide remarks off of your articles. You will not get any business from me and I will make sure other people also know about this. I will go somewhere else for video conversion! /72.18.125.186
|
Now let me pick apart this email and reveal it for what it is...
Quote:
|
At that point your article looses all credibility and is worthless.
|
This is a typical world view of Fox News zealots. Anything that points out flaws with Fox, or disagrees with Fox, is suddenly "worthless". While I'd prefer to keep this politics-free, it's hard to do, because extremist zealotry is a hallmark of far right-wing conservatism. It's the old "with us or against us" routine, which is often further distorted by conspiracy theory when you've decided somebody is "against" you.
Quote:
|
It must just kill you that Fox News dominates the cable news
|
As will be explained further down the page, Fox isn't "killing" anything. You've sadly been sucked into more of their propaganda. Beyond that, most cable "news" is an orgy of non-news content, with heavily biased commentary and opinionated drivel. And that extends to everybody, not just Fox.
Quote:
|
the MAJORITY of Americans like Fox News
|
No, they do not. While Fox may have "high ratings" right now, that's because it's really the only ultra-conservative "news" (propaganda) source on video broadcast (cable, satellite, aerial TV). Remember that the country is currently fractured into an approximate 60/40 split, with 60 being centrist or liberal, and the 40 being conservative. When 40% of the population has only one network, and the other 60% has a half dozen or more choices, it's only logical that the ratings break down as they do.
Compared to all other available networks (CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, BBC, PBS, etc etc), Fox is just a minority of the overall consumption of news (or rather, part of the cable network infotainment industry). CNN, MSNBC, et al, may have lower ratings, but their combined viewership still exceeds Fox. Even if you want to argue that MSNBC is left-wing propaganda and should be excluded (and sometimes I'm inclined to allow for that, as I don't like propaganda of any kind), the pie chart changes very little -- Fox is still one of many, and not a majority in any way.
Beyond that, the very nature of ratings gathering is irrationally inaccurate. I don't even have time to go into that can of worms. The sample sizes that are used to calculate ratings these days are so unscientific that they are almost a joke. Yes, sadly, it's still how many decisions on canceling shows or ad prices are set.
You can read more about that here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nielsen...atings_systems
Those who actually work in media are well aware of this mess, and is why the whole "highest rated, most watched" rhetoric being espoused by Fox is nothing more than more of their own half-truth propaganda. The online equivalent is Alexa, which is biased and insufficiently small in its own ways, although it is at least many times larger than the Neilsen system.
Quote:
|
I will let people know how bad your service is.
|
So even though you've never used our service, or seem to have any other valid and germane evidence against it, you somehow find yourself qualified to judge it to be bad? It sounds like you want to engage in propaganda, too. FUD type propaganda, to be specific.
Quote:
|
You will not get any business from me and I will make sure other people also know about this. I will go somewhere else for video conversion!
|
Given the entry source to this site was an article about media longevity, the likelihood that you came here looking for media services is nil. Beyond that, zealots tend to make for terrible customers anyway, often being rude, cheap and impatient. We've not missed out on anything.
Quote:
|
Deal with it and keep your snide remarks off of your articles.
|
You're not the editor, so this isn't your decision to make. And there was nothing "snide" about the comment made in the article.
Again...
... the original phrase in the longevity article was a statement to the scare tactics implemented by Fox News, and those boogeyman articles about CDs/DVDs "dying" (one of which was written just a week ago). Popularity, especially when ascertained/counted by problematic means, is not a condition that matters -- it's still just a bunch of scare tactics. Tactics that we find to be highly unethical, as well as a disservice to the public. That's not the pillar of journalism. At least it's not supposed to be.