CNN’s fourth place primetime finish during Tuesday’s off year election could perhaps be explained away because “nobody cared about it, but the Ft. Hood murders yesterday were the kind of big event that would typically send casual news viewers flocking to CNN. However, as the Ft. Hood news was unfolding, CNN found itself in a distant second place in the ratings.
Here’s a 3pm-12am time period slice of the data we don’t normally see:
3PM-12AM
FNC: 3,039,000 in P2+ (837,000 in 25-54)
CNN: 1,576,000 in P2+ (471,000 in 25-54)
MSNBC: 820,000 in P2+ (248,000 in 25-54)
HLN: 428,000 in P2+ (177,000 in 25-54)
Live + Same Day Cable News Daily Ratings for November 5, 2009
P2+ Total Day
FNC – 1,757,000 viewers
CNN – 896,000 viewers
MSNBC –457,000 viewers
CNBC – 217,000 viewers
HLN –336,000 viewers
P2+ Prime Time
FNC – 3,765,000 viewers
CNN – 2,024,000 viewers
MSNBC –1,101,000 viewers
CNBC – 255,000 viewers
HLN –621,000 viewers
25-54 Total Day
FNC –472,000 viewers
CNN –278,000 viewers
MSNBC –146,000 viewers
CNBC – 85,000 viewers
HLN- 158,000 viewers
25-54 Prime Time
FNC – 1,147,000 viewers
CNN – 596,000 viewers
MSNBC –308,000 viewers
CNBC – 126,000 viewers
HLN – 221,000 viewers
35-64 Total Day
FNC – 820,000 viewers
CNN – 404,000 viewers
MSNBC – 235,000 viewers
CNBC – 114,000 viewers
HLN – 199,000 viewers
35-64 Prime Time
FNC –1,820,000 viewers
CNN – 887,000 viewers
MSNBC –551,000 viewers
CNBC – 145,000 viewers
HLN –316,000 viewers
Morning programs (6:00AM-9:00AM) P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
FOX & Friends- 1,015,000 viewers (367,000) (625,000)
American Morning- 358,000 viewers (125,000) (181,000)
Morning Joe- 285,000 viewers (69,000) (154,000)
Squawk Box- 160,000 viewers (83,000) (115,000)
Morning Express w/ Meade- 314,000 viewers (188,000) (228,000)
5PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
Fort Hood Shooting Coverage – 3,227,000 viewers (801,000) (1,483,000)
Situation Room—1,803,000 viewers (523,000) (870,000)
Hardball w/ Chris Matthews—778,000 viewers (222,000) (420,000)
Fast Money—240,000 viewers (74,000) (128,000)
Prime News–413,000 viewers (206,000) (254,000)
6PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
Special Report with Bret Baier– 3,351,000 viewers (843,000) (1,553,000)
Situation Room—1,452,000 viewers (449,000) (724,000)
Ed Show—799,000 viewers (278,000) (445,000)
Mad Money —185,000 viewers (84,000) (125,000)
Prime News — 358,000 viewers (184,000) (207,000)
7PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
The Fox Report w/ Shep –3,966,000 viewers (1,055,000) (1,757,000)
Lou Dobbs Tonight—1,522,000 viewers (513,000) (724,000)
Hardball w/ C. Matthews—1,064,000 viewers (315,000) (551,000)
Kudlow Report — 177,000 viewers (69,000) (80,000)
Issues– 511,000 viewers (202,000) (312,000)
8PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
The O’Reilly Factor– 4,955,000 viewers (1,485,000) (2,292,000)
Campbell Brown – 2,024,000 viewers (605,000) (952,000)
Countdown w/ K. Olbermann – 1,360,000 viewers (351,000) (674,000)
Cruise Inc. – 289,000 viewers (145,000) (182,000)
Nancy Grace – 996,000 viewers (293,000) (517,000)
9 PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
Hannity –3,845,000 viewers (1,176,000) (1,872,000)
Larry King Live —2,211,000 viewers (619,000) (941,000)
Rachel Maddow Show —1,161,000 viewers (283,000) (572,000)
Inside American Airlines — 282,000 viewers (131,000) (152,000)
Joy Behar- 454,000 viewers (125,000) (214,000)
10 PM P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
On The Record w/ Greta Van Susteren —2,480,000 viewers (778,000) (1,293,000)
Anderson Cooper 360 — 1,837,000 viewers (565,000) (767,000)
Countdown w/ K. Olbermann – 782,000 viewers (290,000) (406,000)
Inside American Airlines – 195,000 viewers (102,000) (103,000)
Nancy Grace –470,000 viewers (258,000) (246,000)
11 PM P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
On The Record Special —1,695,000 viewers (526,000) (927,000)
Anderson Cooper 360 — 1,267,000 viewers (451,000) (573,000)
Rachel Maddow Show —517,000 viewers (210,000) (272,000)
Mad Money – 141,000 viewers (79,000) (61,000)
Showbiz Tonight– 319,000 viewers (147,000) (153,000)
I wouldn’t really call that a BAD performance….that’s like TRIPLE their usual numbers. Fox, on the other hand, was only up slightly. So it IS true…many casual viewers “flocked” over to CNN yesterday.
That’s pretty good for CNN.
that news broke at ~3:15 ET, so you don’t really have the data for “as the news was breaking!” though there was still news breaking into the 5pm hour on additional details.
Perhaps there was too much emphasis on “break”, word choice changed a bit.
Shep Smith and Bret Baier both had increases of over 1.2 million viewers compared to an average news day…the point of the article, and I agree with it, is CNN would normally surpass even Fox’s huge ratings on a day like this and be number one. They were not. Those days are over.
YEP, CNN has lost it numbers that it once had for big news events, MSNBC doesn’t even compete, how pathetic. Looks like everyone is with FOX NEWS again, they truly rule cable news and light years over all the competition.
CNN can’t even claim that they are the go-to network for big news stories anymore. Clearly, people are going to FOX.
Are those typical numbers for CNN?
A more accurate headline for this story:
Fox News Clobbers CNN On Ft. Hood Story
I’ve updated the post with the normal data
People turn to CNN for no-critical news issues like Michael Jackson’s death. When there is something of importance, people trusts Foxs the most.
The problem for CNN is this was an actual news story. For CNN to do well theyneed balloon boy stories or a Michael Jackson type story to draw viewers. Nobody will take anything MSNBC has to say seriously they were already looking for a way to blame the military for the incident. It appears when people want to get the story from a real news perspective they turn to FOX.
bruce, the point is that in the past news stories like this would put CNN #1 for the night, yesterday’s didn’t, and that’s a fairly new occurrence. Yes, Fox beat them, had someone *else* beaten them that would have been even bigger news.
Anonymous–You say Fox was only up slightly?? O’Reilly was up almost 1.5million over his usual 3.5 million. No wonder you call yourself anonymous–your really Keith Olbermann aren’t you??
I agree FOX finally beating CNN with “Breaking News” is unusual. How many times has FOX beaten CNN with “Breaking News” and how will one know when this is the new norm? I’d like to see the % in jumps for both networks to see which one had the biggest jump in viewers from the norm. As far as people turning to FOX for “real” news? Death Panels? Hardly “real news.”
DB, FOX’s “slighly up numbers” are still bigger than CNN’s totals. More people who don’t regularly watch FOX tuned in to get the story, than CNN had with its regulars and casual viewers tunning in combined.
Not bad for a “slight” increase
gbd, when big news comes along again we will see. We didn’t see early afternoon numbers for Balloon Boy day (and that’s debatably very different), but Fox was well ahead of CNN in the 5pm hour which was mostly the post-balloon story. But Michael Jackson’s death was owned by CNN.
gdb, what are you drinking? Just can’t stand it, can you. FOX is taking over.
I used to prefer CNN, but now I dislike all the major news outlets because they all put their own little spin on the news. But when something like yesterday happens, I flip between CNN and Fox.
In reality, Fox and CNN split “casual” viewers somewhere in the middle. Both were higher by 1.5M from 6 to 10. MSNBC got some bump until 8 pm and almost not afterwards.
I guess this should put to rest claims that Fox News is not a legitimate news channel. Many journalism professors all over the country have some explaining to do, e.g. why the Associate Press cited FNC as a source in one of its articles on Fort Hood earlier today.
db, I didn’t see the full slate of numbers when I posted my comment.
But thanks for adding nothing of value to this discussion.
I love it when the liberal morons always say MSNBC is the most watched “news” channel. And when real news breaks….NO ONE watches it lol. Look at Fox News and CNN got huge ratings. Hannity, Baier, and Shep all went up. Look at BSNBC….not much of a boost. Because no one watches BSNBC not for their commentary and sure as hell not for the news. This proves it. BSNBC is a joke, it’s the laughing stock of cable. I bet Fox News loves it when one of their own is the “worst person in the world”. Overbite might be more successful without the lame insults of Fox News, he’s not bad when it comes to sports because he’s not trashing people. This proves BSNBC is the most biased news channel, it also proves no one cares what BSNBC has to say. I know libs aren’t great with numbers but its so funny watching them say BSNBC is the most watched news channel. Even when some of them see these numbers, that proves only liberal morons watch BSNNC.
When will Inmelt and Obama wake up and see how truly awful and disgusting Matthews, Olbermann & Maddow really are.
They are actually hurting the left by the bias and absolute nonsense they spew.
Which is fine by me, because MSNBC, among others, reflects who Inmelt, Obama and the rest of the clan really are.
Thank God people are smart enough to see through it.
If the Left makes a move to silence Fox and any other source of Free Speech, it will be a transparent attempt to control the media.
But, then, they did promise transparency.
Bill i know CNN owned Michael Jackson’s story.
Southern Charm, I’m not drinking anything. Can you say the same?
Let me guess. Will Rogers (I never met a man I didn’t like) never met Dolbermann(or Madcow).
The O’Reilly Factor stomped all over Olbermann once again.
Right now CNN and FOX are showing the news conference from Fort Hood while Ray Maddow is reporting on an obscure “right wing” website is trying to link Obama to the shooter. Who really is the real news station? Of course this is Obamas fault he should have known about this guy just like Bush should have known about 9-11 as MSNBC has reported for years. When will the White House report that MSNBC is not a real news network? Ray also had an “expert” that claimed in his opinion that friendly fire was involved no one could have caused that much damach with just two handguns with a maximum of forty rounds. I guess in his “expert” opinion he has never heard of anyone carrying extra clips. Too bad Ray never learned to be a reporter and ask questions that might not coincide with his liberal agenda.
“I guess this should put to rest claims that Fox News is not a legitimate news channel. ”
How so, Apple? I don’t recall the charges being about ratings, but content.
Ken:
“I love it when the liberal morons”
You seem to have this thread confused with a pro wrestling rating discussion thread. There’s no need to engage in name-calling to make a point, if you have one.
” always say MSNBC is the most watched “news” channel. And when real news breaks….NO ONE watches it lol. Look at Fox News and CNN got huge ratings. Hannity, Baier, and Shep all went up. Look at BSNBC….not much of a boost. Because no one watches BSNBC not for their commentary and sure as hell not for the news. ”
Let’s see… lots of name calling.. and a claim that “no one” watches MSNBC. Other than hundreds of thousands of people. Keeping in mind that the population of the U.S. is 300 million, it’s a fair argument that not many Americans are watchinng any tv news. The majority of what’s aired on the “news” channels are really commentary/discussion programs anyway. Also, surveys have shown that the number of people who rely completely on the Internet for their news is large and rising.
“This proves it. BSNBC is a joke, it’s the laughing stock of cable.”
The laughing stock of cable is Fox Business Channel, based on ratings.
” I bet Fox News loves it when one of their own is the “worst person in the world”. Overbite might be more successful without the lame insults of Fox News, he’s not bad when it comes to sports because he’s not trashing people. This proves BSNBC is the most biased news channel, it also proves no one cares what BSNBC has to say.”
Ken, you’ve typed and typed, but you’ve not proven anything, or even made it clear to this reader what you’re trying to prove. I think the argument is… FNC’s ratings were higher than MSNBC’s during this time period, so… no one watches the channel, the reporting is biased, no one cares about it, etc., etc., none of which follow from a set of ratings figures. You’re on a web page where many people will tell you that show X is really awesome even though its ratings may not be high. (One of the site moderators explicitly made this very point in the post about Fringe being in trouble, and the difference between quality and ratings.) Most of the readers here can understand the difference between metrics that indicate what’s popular, what’s profitable and what’s worth watching.
“I know libs aren’t great with numbers but its”
Does this mean “cons” aren’t great with the appropriate use of apostrophes?
“so funny watching them say BSNBC is the most watched news channel. Even when some of them see these numbers, that proves only liberal morons watch BSNNC.”
You, sir, have a funny definition of “proof”.
I believe the argument being put forth from the White House and others is that Fox is run by a former GOP operative and serves as a propaganda wing of the Republican party, hence it is not a genuine news channel. Removing them from the equation would leave MSNBC as the #1 news channel. I’m not endorsing this argument, but you’ve not only offered nothing resembling proof to debunk that argument, you’ve also shown per your mentioning of numbers that you don’t even understand the argument being made. I believe if you wish to refute the argument (that no one here made but you decided to fight anyway) you’re going to need, for instance, to explain away Fox being caught reading a GOP talking points memo verbatim (including typo) as “news”, promoting the “tea bagger” protests, being caught getting protestors to make noise at said protest, “accidentally” labeling any Republican caught in a scandal with a “(D)” after their names (which they did with Foley, Sanford, and I think another), the “terrorist fist jab” remark, allowing their commentators to raise issues regarding the president being racist or foreign-born, Condoleeza Rice being caught on mic referring to Fox News reporters as “our boys”, etc., etc., etc.
What’s interesting is that Fox is showing the news conference while MSNBC is still trying to bash Conservatives.
And, by the way, the march on Washington, against the government takover of Health Care is based in rascism.
No surprise there, as anyone disagreeing with the Administration is rascist, according to MSNBC.
Blame everything on racism so you don’t have to actually discuss the validity of other people’s opinions.
Everyone in the March was white, marching to look into the “whitesof their eyes”, etc…
Really, Ms. Maddow, is that the lowest you can go? Somehow, I don’t think so.
Fox is there again – fair and balanced!
Isn’t the average age of a Fox News viewer above 75? That should speak volumes.
CNN trumps Fox where it matters, the internet.
So anonymous–you make a statment about the ratings, a false statement, without looking at the ratings. See you are Olbermann!!
Joseph,
Viewers went to Fox News to get Fort Hood news: content. AP cites Fox News as a news source: content. Good ratings was icing on the cake.
Joseph,
Proof that Fox News is real news? Why don’t you try going to CNN and the New York times websites and see how many stories they use FOX NEWS AS A SOURCE! I found your posting so funny, I hope you didn’t wast too much time on it hahaha. I’m not even going to wast time with you. Fox News is king and the ratings prove it. So go back to media matters because we all know thats where you got those false stories about Fox News. “Tea baggers” lol. You should just go back to begging for welfare and free healthcare you bum.
There is a rule regarding Debates.
When name calling ensues, the Debate is over.
The name caller loses by default because of introducing name calling into the Debate.
You all have valid points that should be respected.
Name calling just debases the debate and undermines your points.
Chuck fan says:
November 6, 2009 at 6:48 pm
Isn’t the average age of a Fox News viewer above 75? That should speak volumes.
CNN trumps Fox where it matters, the internet.
So what does this mean Chuck we are rascist and a bunch of old meaningless people?
And BTW the top five shows on network TV were on Fox even if they were World Series Games I would venture a guess that Fox made more money on advertising revenues then CNN will make this year.
One aspect of the American Indian culture that I have always admired was the respect they hold for their elders.
People who have reached the grand age of 75 have years of experience and stories to tell.
They shouldn’t be disrespected.
Not to say that some elderly individuals have closed minds. But, they are survivors, and that is something remarkable in this world.
Sorry,
I meant to say:
Not to say that some elderly individuals don’t have closed minds. But, they are survivors, and that is something remarkable in this world.
Hey Chuck Fan lol, you must be in 6th grade still, you can’t even read the ratings? FOX gets more viewers age 25 to 49 then MSPMS or CNN get in total viewers. As for the internet hits, I am sure CNN would rather have FOX’s numbers on TV then the internet.
GaryD my point exactly!
Gary, I believe ChuckFan’s figures are specifically for the O’Reilly Factor, which does indeed skew towards the senior citizen demographic: a poll found the average age to be 71, I believe.
I agree with jalinda, that the degree to which many participants need to punctuate their statements with belittling and name-calling is shameful.
Ken,”Why don’t you try going to CNN and the New York times websites and see how many stories they use FOX NEWS AS A SOURCE!”
Perhaps you could tell me how many articles cite Fox News as a source. Still, this doesn’t address the critique of the nature of FNC’s content. Other outlets are quite capable of citing poor sources of information – the New York Times, for instance, and their string of articles leading up to and during the Second Gulf War regarding WMDs in Iraq. Being cited by others doesn’t make poor journalism better any more than being watched/read by many people.
” I found your posting so funny, I hope you didn’t wast too much time on it hahaha. I’m not even going to wast time with you.”
I spent slightly more time on it than you spent on proofreading those two sentences (hint: make sure your “e” key is working).
I’m glad to learn that my argument was so persuasive, and the challenge so daunting to contruct an insult-free, content-heavy deconstruction based on fact and not emotion that you’ve simply agreed to cede the point (which you were the only one debating).
“Fox News is king and the ratings prove it.”
Odd though, that your original argument was that Fox news was better news. At least you changed it to something that no one was arguing.
“So go back to media matters because we all know thats where you got those false stories about Fox News.”
I think what we all know is that you decided not to “wast” any time checking the veracity of anything I wrote, so you’ve simply decided that it’s all false because it’s easier and validates your beliefs.
” ‘Tea baggers’ lol. You should just go back to begging for welfare and free healthcare you bum.”
Again – do you believe you demonstrate your intellectual superiority through attacking me like that? Or simply a paranoid worldview that holds anyone who disagrees with you beneath contempt?
I tried to watch CNN to maybe find out more about the shootings and found myself finding their coverage less than informative. I watched for about 20 minutes before flicking back to FOX and learning more about the guy and what was happening in a few minutes than I did during the whole time I was watching CNN.
I can’t say much about MSNBC because I just can’t stand their one sided view on everything else so I couldn’t see them changing their format for this one time news broadcast.
Yesterday in primetime, with adults 18-49 O’Reilly factor was ranked #9 (1.076M) and was the highest rated Cable news show in that demo during primetime. it came in behind two Real Housewives arings, It’s Always Sunny, Project Runway, a Family Guy rerun at 8:30 on TBS, The League, an NBA game and The Jeff Dunham show. but it came in ahead of every other news program, including The Daily Show (which beat everything on CNN, MSNBC). FNC was the only news network to have any shows in the top 50. Hannity was #18 and Greta was tied for #34.
It’s not on the map with 18-34 year olds, but NO news program mad the top 50 shows on Thursday night with adults 18-34.
With the 25-54 crowd, O’Reilly was 4th for the night on ad supported cable trailing only the two Real Housewives airings and Project Runway.
Joseph,
Your characterization of Fox New’s journalism as being “poor journalism” is your admission that it is in fact journalism.
“And, by the way, the march on Washington, against the government takover of Health Care is based in rascism.
No surprise there, as anyone disagreeing with the Administration is rascist, according to MSNBC. ”
Jalinda, you’re not addressing the actual argument. You’re taking the premise, stripping out all factual evidence for it, then insinuating that the charge is empty.
Many, many examples were seen (and photographed) of racist signs and banners and others that were in extremely poor taste, including one of Obama in whiteface, and another that compared health care reform to the murders of Auschwitz and used an actual photograph of stacks of dead bodies at a concentration camp. Can you maintain your position when the justification for the racism charge is added back in?
Oh, and incidentally, you’re factually incorrect when you use the talking point “government takeover of healthcare”. Neither bill brought to the floor in the house or senate shuts down insurance companies or makes doctors government employees, which is the only sense in which the government could “take over” health care. In Britain the health professionals do work for the government and that is government-run health care. The bills in Congress mandate people to buy private insurance and help pay for those who can’t afford it. This isn’t government-takeover – if anything, it’s the Private Health Insurance Company Enrichment Act of 2009 – I wish Obama would make everyone in America by the products of the company I work for, too. We may or may not see a not-for-profit insurance pool in a final bill – the so-called “public option”. This doesn’t take over anything and provides competition to force insurance companies to either lower rates or provide more value for the dollar. The amount companies pay for insurance for their workers has doubled since 1999 (and I was part owner of a small business in 1999 and we couldn’t afford it them). The average deductable has gone up, so in 10 years the product price has increased 100% yet the insured are getting less for their money. On average, the insurance industry pays out only 30 cents of each dollar it takes in to health providers, resulting in some amazing profit margins, and the industry is also exempted from anti-trust laws so they can collude and fix prices. A public option would help “keep them honest” and lower the extraordinary cost of health care insurance.
“Blame everything on racism so you don’t have to actually discuss the validity of other people’s opinions. ”
Obama does discuss other people’s opinions.. to an almost maddening fault. The Onion headline “Obama to enter into negotiations with California wildfire” has some justification. He appoints Republicans to his cabinet, invites them to participate in the formation of a health care bill, Sen. Reid drives his constituents to fits with his bending over backwards to go beyond bipartisanship, a suggestion by Sen. McCain is added to the bill, etc. – meanwhile, it’s taken to this week for the opposition party to offer any alternative plan whatsoever. How is that dismissing other people’s opinions? Meanwhile, the health care lobby and people like Rep. Bachmann encouraged people to go to town hall meetings where they behaved like the President’s detractors on this page – shouting down the speaker, hurling insults, carrying firearms in attempts to intimidate, hanging their congresspeople in effigy, etc. I think you need to reevaluate who’s trying to ignore other people’s opinions. Here in my home state when a woman in a wheelchair with a debilitating illness began prefacing her question by explaining her circumstance, members of the crowd (mob) began making mocking crying sounds and yelling at her to just ask her *%&$ question. That’s a far cry from this president, who any legitimate political observer would agree has made a hallmark of his presidency his willingness to listen to, and find common ground with, those who disagree with him (which both his strength and weakness).
“Really, Ms. Maddow, is that the lowest you can go? Somehow, I don’t think so.”
Rachel Maddow holds a doctorate in political science, and even when we disagree, I’ll always concede she backs up her positions with facts. Why don’t you try listing the specific facts Rachel used to make her argument and disprove them in order to make a more convincing counterpoint?
MADDOW and MSNBC are losing it. Ok they lost it long ago. I was trying to watch maddow to see how she covered the Texas shooting, and all they could talk about was how the gun was so horible, no way two guns that can hold 20 rounds a piece could shoot more than 40 people. Ever heard of magazines?
I dont think she once mentioned the shooter as muslim, or what the other channels were reporting with regard to what the shooter was shouting, has said to friends, or doing on the internet posting.
And then when they had the press conference today from Ft Hood, they did not cover it. Fox and CNN found it news worthy though.
Unbelievable, hobo
Joseph writes: “Fox is run by a former GOP operative and serves as a propaganda wing of the Republican party.”
If Fox is in the back pocket of the Republican party…
(1) Why did Sarah Palin refuse to come on the O’Reilly Factor during the campaign? (Answer: She knew that O’Reilly is a hard-hitting interviewer who doesn’t kowtow to power brokers in either party.)
(2) Why didn’t John McCain show up on O’Reilly’s show during the fall presidential campaign? (Answer: See #1 above).
(3) Why don’t you see Dick Cheney on O’Reilly’s show? (Answer: See #1 above).
(4) Why did Beck, Hannity lead the campaign against the Republican candidate in the New York congressional race? (Answer: Because they base their position on their values, not on party politics.)
(5) Why did Glenn Beck say that McCain would have been worse than Obama? (Answer: See #4 above).
Etc. etc. etc.
Face it Joe, the real political hack here is you. Next time, come up with some credible comment rather than drool out second-hand idiotic White House spin.
There you go joseph. She is a loser, maybe a well educated loser, but a loser just the same. Anyone who holds out her degree to prove ones point is not living in the real world.
You know and i know she is unable to debate the real facts with those of apposing view points. Anyone can make a point and sound intelligent when you have the choir there agreeing with everyone of your points.
Put Rove or Gingrich on with her, and they would eat her lunch.
what was sad about the day was so many pundits were aching for this to be a case of terrorists sneaking onto the base disguised as soldiers. They were all coming up with Tom Clancy plots and even how we would have to retaliate. Soon as word got out that it was a single gunman and he was a Major in the Army, they were like kids being told their was no Santa this Christmas. These people were begging for terrorists to kill American troops on Ft. Hood and that’s just wrong on all levels.
Corey,
Not sure what you heard but it was terrorism at Ft Hood. A single man jihad IMO. But we need all the facts to come out over time. It was unfortunate tragedy, that probably could have been avoided. Most likely political correctness gone mad again.
Watch FOX if you want to get the real story. MSNBC was basically providing cover all night for the Killer. They can be so insensitive.
HOBO
between the election and this i think even the most hardened left leaning nbc news exec is going to realize they have a disaster on their hands. the other stations skyrocket and their 2 shows barely move.
Joseph, you were doing typically “liberal fine” until your last post there, that’s when you showed all of us how uninformed you truly are. Go mix up another batch of Kool-Aid, rlax on the sofa and watch your sweety Rachel ok?
Oh and thought I’d look at one of your claims about her education and found you were right. Unusual that a liberal could be right about anything, but here’s what I found at Wikipedia;
A graduate of Castro Valley High School in Castro Valley, Maddow earned a degree in public policy from Stanford University in 1994. At graduation she was awarded the John Gardner Fellowship. She was also the recipient of a Rhodes Scholarship and began her postgraduate study in 1995 at Lincoln College, Oxford. In 2001, she completed her Doctor of Philosophy degree (styled a DPhil) in politics from Oxford University.Her doctoral thesis is titled HIV/AIDS and Health Care Reform in British and American Prisons. She was the first openly gay American to win a Rhodes scholarship.
Honors and awards
Maddow was named in Out magazine’s “Out 100″ list of the “gay men and women who moved culture” in 2008.
Maddow was voted “Lesbian/Bi Woman of the Year (American)” in AfterEllen’s 2008 Visibility Awards.
Maddow won a Gracie Award in 2009, presented by the American Women in Radio and Television.
Also in 2009, Maddow was nominated for GLAAD’s 20th Annual Media Awards for a segment of her MSNBC show, “Rick Warren, Change To Believe In?”, in the Outstanding TV Journalism Segment category.
On March 28, 2009, Maddow received a Proclamation of Honor from the California State Senate, presented in San Francisco by California State Senator Mark Leno.
In April 2009 she was named in Out magazine’s Annual Power 50 List, landing at number 4.
Maddow placed no.6 in the “2009 AfterEllen.com Hot 100″ list (May 11, 2009) and no.3 in their “2009 Hot 100: Out Women” version.
Maddow is included on a list of openly gay media professionals in The Advocate’s “Forty under 40″ issue of June/July 2009.
In June 2009, Maddow’s MSNBC show was the only cable news show nominated for a Television Critics Association award in the Outstanding Achievement in News and Information category.
She’s a more accomplished lesbian than a journalist or commentator for sure!
forgot to add,,,,,,,,,it’ll be interesting to see the numbers over the next week,,,,what few new viewers msnbc got were probably appalled by the apologetic/let’s try to understand tone of coverage
Why is CNN’s getting its logo pimped anyways? should be FNC!
guy come join our forum we have going here to talk polotics and such on:
http://www.voyagertrans.com/forum1/viewforum.php?f=6
MikeS:
Much of Ms. Maddow’s honors read like: “We’re against discrimination except we award achievements within our group exclusively”
The little boy Maddow needs a shave.
Isn’t it ironic that Fox News panders to people already receiving their Social Security check?
CNN owns the news on internet…
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/cnn.com
While Fox News and Huffington Post are comparable…
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/foxnews.com
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/huffingtonpost.com
By using a computer, you can decide what information is truth or not. You can’t get brainwashed like TV or radio, when you can compare more information with more sources.
Why should we listen to old people when they have left society in ruins? They have repeated history and have not learned anything.
Like Ms. Maddow is the only journalist/commentator out there with a degree! Or a doctorate or in political science. So many get their start in news because of some great accomplishment(s) and that didn’t start, or end, with Ms. Maddow. This also doesn’t mean I have to believe everything she says because there is a doctorate degree next to her name.
Here’s how to tell you are talking to someone who watches MSNBC, they have an opinion, which they mistake for fact, on everything and feel the need to tell us we are all wrong about everything.
On the ratings this week, it’s called a SMACKDOWN <=========Opinion, no need to correct me
The numbers above <===============The Facts
HOBO
A major in the army flipped out. This was not a sleeper cell. The Army ignored warning signs on this guy and the troops paid the cost. Although his neighbor who damaged his car over a bumper sticker ought to be beaten up for doing his part in setting off the human timebomb.
Fox News wants us attacked. They root for bin Laden’s minions to kill Americans at shopping malls and military bases. They are truly begging for the minute they can announce that Obama allowed foreign terrorists to kill us on American soil. Fox News loves America so much that they want us to die for it.
Seeing how the DC Sniper was also muslim – under Fox News rules of Jihad, that mean Americans were killed by a radical islamic terrorist during George W Bush/Dick Cheney’s time in the White House after 9/11? So Fox News needs to admit that Dick Cheney is full of himself when him and his daughter proclaim W kept America safe in post 9/11
And Corey, the White House tells us we can’t call the terrorist terrorist, we might offend them, one of the most stupids things I have even heard. The Fort Hood killer is a terrorist, no two ways about it and if MSPMS the left wing nuts try to tell us different, then shame on them.
What else could they possibly define a terrorist as?
Rachel Maddow has a large Lesbian viewing audience. I believe she is the only gay TV commentator on Network and Cable TV. TV needs her slant or point of view.
Ever since the White tried to expose FOX as a bogus news operation there viewership has continued to increase as MSNBC declines.
@corey
Corey, Major Hassin didn’t just “flip out”. He aquired the pistols (at least 3-4 days). He cleared out his apartment. He gave away his furniture and qaran (sp?) to others. He yelled “allah akbar” (god is great in arabic) before shooting. It was clearly planned out.
And yes, the army ignored MANY signs that could have prevented this. But you know why? – Political correctness gone mad. The army feared doing anything to this guy because they knew some group like the ACLU would come along and try to sue for millions.
You would know this if you stoped watching msnbc and started watching Fox. MSNBC spent all day trying to defend this guy and blame it on the wars and *suprise suprise* Bush.
“Fox wants us attacked”
Fear mongering at its finest. MSNBC also tried to blame O’Reillyfor an extremist who killed Tiller (the baby killer). Its disgusting and wrong – and THATS why the other networks rating are tanking and Fox is skyrocketing. As I flipped through the channels I learned nothing from CNN, and MSNBC was just spinning like crazy. I don’t think once did I hear anyone on MSNBC mention he was a muslim. Fox delivered FACTS, not speculation. And from the ratings, clearly most people agree.
I imagine that if you covered sports, your Thursday headline would have featured a large Phillies logo under the banner headline “During World Series, Phillies distant second.”
Bottom line is:
*FOX is the most trustworthy at getting viewers the truth.
*CNN takes too long to fact-check
*MSNBC has an agenda & can’t be trusted
Annie, I have no problem with Maddow’s sexual orientation and no objections to most of your comment. I do however disagree with everything I have ever heard Maddow say or that I have read attributed to Maddow. As far as needing Maddow’s slant, it seems to me that first you would need to get people to watch her show, a task that so far has eluded her.
You are not correct in assuming that she is the only lesbian commentator on cable. She may be the only one with her own show, however poorly rated, but she is not the only lesbian commentator that can be seen on cable. Fox News frequently features Tammy Bruce, who is among other things a former president of the Los Angeles chapter of the National Organization for Women (NOW) (1990-1996). Bruce’s website describes her as openly gay. She also has a successful radio talk show, something else Maddow can’t seem to manage. There are probably other lesbians out there, but Tammy Bruce was the first that came to mind when I read your comment.
So the dreaded FNC does provide a voice, a slant, a point of view for lesbians, even conservatitive ones.
All I know is when this first happened, MSNBC was first on the air with it by several minutes. I know this because I got a breaking news text from MSNBC and immediately turned on MSNBC to see what was happening. Since I don’t get MSNBC in HD and I do get CNN and Fox in HD, I tuned to both of those hoping to watch the coverage with a better picture. Neither of them had it or any mention of it for at least 10 minutes. I notice this to be the case on their website as well….MSNBC almost always kicks the other two’s asses on getting stuff on their website. Partisan coverage aside, MSNBC is almost always first…
Joseph is one of the 9 lonely people that watch msnbc.
No one watches that station.
It is a bitter mean channel. everyone there is angry
The reason is simple. The state run media (abc,cbs,nbc,cnn,msnbc,cnbc, etc..) and the government have one narrative when it comes to Islamic terrorism. They ignore it. On cnn, along with the administration, claimed we don’t know why this happened. That the real “victims” are the peaceful Muslims. They completely ignored the fact that the man was screaming “allah akbar” during the shootings. The state run media even tried to claim the terrorist had PTSD……..only problem with that is he never saw combat.
While CNN, the administration, and the rest of the state run media claim that Muslims are the true victims I’ll have to disagree and say the victims are those who were slaughtered, wounded, and their families and friends.
what exactly is a lesbian point of view,,,,,by the way i looked up one of her awards. some gay top 50 list. some intersting names. barry diller suze orman—–anderson cooper and ready for this,,,,,,,,,,,,,matt drudge
“Rascism”…?
Deconstructing Liberals
Joseph says:
November 6, 2009 at 8:52 pm
“And, by the way, the march on Washington, against the government takover of Health Care is based in rascism.
No surprise there, as anyone disagreeing with the Administration is rascist, according to MSNBC. ”
Jalinda, you’re not addressing the actual argument. You’re taking the premise (the premise that BSNBC is news? This from the station that declared the shooter used an “armor piercing gun”, but didn’t realize that it’s not the gun, but the rounds used in the gun to make it armor piercing.), stripping out all factual evidence for it (What stripping of facts, I have heard BSNBC state that protesters to Obamas plans are racist or agree with show guests when they make the claim), then insinuating (as opposed to you insinuating the charge has merit?) that the charge is empty.
Many, many examples were seen (and photographed) of racist signs and banners and others that were in extremely poor taste, including one of Obama in whiteface (first, that’s “white face”. Did you forget to use the space key, since your so hooked on others typing skills? Second, Do you not see or understand the social commentary involved in comparing Obama to the Joker character from Batman? Or do always jump to the conclusion that the picture is racist? Would that be because BSNBC calls it racist as opposed to a cleaver social commentary?) , and another that compared health care reform to the murders of Auschwitz and used an actual photograph of stacks of dead bodies at a concentration camp (seems to me the point was, that under government run health care, as opposed to private ownership, someone else will decide what treatment you shall receive, even if it is life saving care. I live in Canada with Single Payer Health care, and a rationing of care leads to unnecessary deaths compared to an open market where a person may purchase the care needed even if the government says no.). Can you maintain your position when the justification (you don’t give examples of said justification, you run on the progressive premise of “I declare it as such, therefore it is true”, without any actual facts to back it up.) for the racism charge is added back in?
Oh, and incidentally, you’re factually incorrect when you use the talking point “government takeover of healthcare”. Neither bill brought to the floor in the house or senate shuts down insurance companies or makes doctors government employees (actually, both bills state that ALL hospitals shall be considered government entities while restricting the opening of any private run hospitals, until said group receives permission to open said hospital from the government. Also, it declares that all hospitals shall conform to government rules and regulations in operations, which includes forcing unions into private hospitals. Also, if card check is passed, the rules would allow service staff to unionize without requiring the doctors to vote, but once unionization occurs, it specifically states that ALL staff would be unionized. This rule could be used to force doctors and nurses to be part of the union.)the only sense in which the government could “take over” health care. In Britain the health professionals do work for the government and that is government-run health care (see previous comment). The bills in Congress mandate (forces or go to jail) people to buy private insurance and help pay for those who can’t afford it (if someone can’t afford health insurance, does that then mean they shall go to jail? If they can’t afford insurance, then where are they going to buy it? Will it be given to them for free? If so, doesn’t that qualify as government run health insurance? If they can afford it, then why do they need help in the first place? Also, where in your constitution does it say the government has the right to force the purchase of a product on all citizens?). This isn’t government-takeover (if the government forces you to do something, isn’t that by definition: Government Run?)– if anything, it’s the Private Health Insurance Company Enrichment Act of 2009 – I wish Obama would make everyone in America by (oops, spelling. The word is “buy” not “by”. You need to get that “u” key checked out to see if it is working.) the products of the company I work for, too. We may or may not see a not-for-profit insurance pool in a final bill (Umm, check your facts, the insurance groups that have the lowest refusal rates, and the lowest insurance cost rates are ALL not-for-profit insurance pools.)– the so-called “public option”. This doesn’t take over anything and provides competition to force insurance companies to either lower rates or provide more value for the dollar (if a government mandate forces people to buy, then why would insurance companies have a need to lower costs. By removing competition from the market, you are removing the incentive to private market companies to control costs.). The amount companies pay for insurance for their workers has doubled (Did you ever consider that this might have something to do with limited insurance packages in each state because of inter-state barriers to provide insurance nationally among companies?)since 1999 (and I was part owner of a small business in 1999 and we couldn’t afford it them (oops, another spelling error. You might want to use the word “then”, not “them”)). The average deductable (spelling again, try using an “i” in deductible) has gone up, so in 10 years the product price has increased 100% yet the insured are getting less for their money (again, limited competition restricts the requirement to offer a lower priced package, and also prevents expanding a company’s insurance pool, which would lower costs.). On average, the insurance industry pays out only 30 cents of each dollar it takes in to health providers, resulting in some amazing profit margins (Do you mean the whopping 2.3 – 3.2% profit margin that they make? Now that is funny. You need to again check your facts, as stated previously, the best companies are already not-for-profit insurance pools.), and the industry is also exempted from anti-trust laws so they can collude and fix prices( Again, see inter-state barriers to trade. Remove those barriers, and instead of 5 or 6 companies available to a person in Florida, they would have access to over 1300 companies to choose from.). A public option would help “keep them honest” and lower the extraordinary cost of health care insurance (A public option would never have to ensure a profit, and would be able to undercut all other companies, because they could make up the loses from tax payer money, like AMTRAC and US Postal Service already does. You would have “cheaper” insurance, but you would pay for it with even more in taxes, and a skyrocketing increase your national debt.).
“Blame everything on racism so you don’t have to actually discuss the validity of other people’s opinions. ”
Obama does discuss other people’s opinions.. to an almost maddening fault. The Onion headline “Obama to enter into negotiations with California wildfire” has some justification. He appoints Republicans to his cabinet (while Bush appointed democrats, so whats your point?), invites them to participate in the formation of a health care bill (he never invited them, they were never allowed to participate in the discussions, had all amendments voted down by party line, and even had the doors locked on them while some democrats, white house officials, and private interest groups discussed and wrote the bills behind closed doors.), Sen. Reid drives his constituents to fits with his bending over backwards to go beyond bipartisanship (there was never any bipartisanship in any of the bills.), a suggestion by Sen. McCain is added to the bill, etc. (which suggestion was that, and why was it included? Was it because McCain asked for it, or was it because the public were in disfavor of it?) – meanwhile, it’s taken to this week for the opposition party to offer any alternative plan whatsoever (Umm, the alternative plans were online for 4 months now, and there were 8 separate pieces of legislation that the republicans tried to bring to the floor for a vote, and all 8 were refused by Pelosi and Reid for discussion, until now.). How is that dismissing other people’s opinions? (see previous comment) Meanwhile, the health care lobby and people like Rep. Bachmann encouraged people to go to town hall meetings where they behaved like the President’s detractors on this page – shouting down the speaker (shouting down the speaker when the speaker tried to spew the government line, or when the speaker tried to spew the government lie?), hurling insults (really? I never heard one of them call the person a fascist, un-american, nazi, hater, mob, racist, etc.), carrying firearms in attempts to intimidate (carrying firearms in a right to carry state. Seems to me a comment about the second amendment as opposed to intimidation, since all of these incidents happened at least two blocks away from any of the town hall forums.), hanging their congresspeople in effigy (I seem to remember plenty of Bush effigies hanging from poles during his presidency), etc. I think (here, have a cookie.)you need to reevaluate who’s trying to ignore other people’s opinions (You mean like 85% of democrats voting for a bill that 58% of the people do not want?). Here in my home state when a woman in a wheelchair with a debilitating illness began prefacing her question by explaining her circumstance, members of the crowd (mob) began making mocking crying sounds and yelling at her to just ask her *%&$ question. (and your proof would be?) That’s a far cry from this president, who any legitimate political observer would agree has made a hallmark of his presidency his willingness to listen to (Iran, Palestinians, North Koreans, Taliban et al.) , and find common ground with (see above), those who disagree with him (which both his strength and weakness).
“Really, Ms. Maddow, is that the lowest you can go? Somehow, I don’t think so.”
Rachel Maddow holds a doctorate in political science, and even when we disagree, I’ll always concede she backs up her positions with facts (Yes facts. Cherry picked, out of context, or even doctored. Remember the white supremacists carrying guns with the video carefully edited to not show that it was a black man carrying said gun?) . Why don’t you try listing the specific facts Rachel used to make her argument and disprove them in order to make a more convincing counterpoint? (Why don’t you list some of her facts that aren’t made up or out of context? I know that would be hard to do, since there aren’t any.)
Robert and Bill,
I humbly and politely suggest anytime a post regarding cable news is put out here (not just for the daily ratings of Fox, CNN, MBNBC, whomever) from this point forward you may way to consider putting your “No Political Comments, No Personal Attacks or Deletion Will Occur, If You Don’t Like This Dialogue, Don’t Read” warning sign at the top. Just a thought.
Fox has no rivals. It has beaten all competitors because viewers believe they’re getting a fair shake in the news department. It’s very simple, fair and balanced is kicking ass.
First off – Shepard Smith was outed on HBO with the Outrage documentary. So at least Fox News has a gay voice.
I used to watch Fox News. Cavuto read a bunch of my letters on the air. And then I just stopped watching when I realized that even though I watch to get my White House lies good and fresh. But I realized that it just made me dumb to watch this Rupes and Roger’s puppet show. Their reporters rarely did any real reporting. They merely repeated other sources – and even when that source was wrong, they’d keep it up. Why? Because as a pal at Fox News told me – you can repeat a good lie a hundred times, you only have to air the correction at 4 a.m.
Keep sucking on the teabags.
You people want to think that somehow Obama programmed this guy to kill our troops – keep sucking on those teabags. You think that it’s not desecrating the American flag by dumping it in a vat of tea – go Bizzaro World conservative with your supreme genius Chuck Norris. Go watch the Daily Show and Colbert Report when they show how Fox News is going back on everything it said about treating a president back when their boy was in the White House.
There will always be extremists, bigots, and just plain nutty people on all sides that come out during marches and protests.
They aren’t relegated to one side only.
The protest march wasn’t organized to be racist. It’s unfortunate that the actions of a few changes the tenor of the original intent.
And, by the way, Maddow is very biased in her reporting. Don’t care how many degrees she holds.
so corey, cavuto read a “bunch” of your letters? doubt it—the odds are simply against it. oh and can you name a lie your pal is talking about? i can give you one about maddow—-she looked in the camera and said abortion isn’t in the hc bill—-it is what other comedians do you get your info from