So if you missed the news yesterday, Fox has announced Megyn Kelly will be taking over the 9 p.m. ET slot from Sean Hannity this fall, which will cause something of a shake-up in their primetime schedule yada yada yada. Personally, I like it. Nothing against Hannity, but his shtick has gotten a bit old and it's nice to see some fresh air in this important ratings slot.
But more importantly, I think this is a useful marketing move for Fox. Kelly's no liberal, but she gives the impression of being a journalist first and a pundit second, and she enjoys about as much personal popularity as any of the channel's hosts. It would appear, then, that Fox is hoping to reach out beyond its usual audience to people more in the center by sticking into its evening shouty-time someone who can be plausibly considered impartial, and thus weakening the claim that it is a "right-wing noise machine." Good on it.
On that note, what are some other moves you might suggest, to Fox or other conservative news outlets, to reach and win over a more mainstream audience? (FYI, "stop being so stupid and knee-jerk right-wing" is not an answer.) Otherwise, consider this an open thread of necessity. And remember, I'm not ignoring your posts, I'm just probably throwing up.
37 comments:
Thoughts... hmm. Ok, here goes.
First, I suspect this is a mistake. Hannity has a strong and loyal audience and my guess is they will lose those people without gaining any replacements.
Secondly, I don't see any chance that Kelly appeals to moderates. She will appeal to non-Hannity conservatives, but she's clearly known as a right-wing conservative. Conservatives have feted her repeatedly, she spins hard on her show, and she's constantly mocked by leftists. So she MAY bring Shep's audience to the 9:00 pm hour, but she won't be poaching any moderates.
How to help Fox reach moderates? I'm not sure that's possible in this partisan age once you get a reputation. Still, I would suggest doing a real network newscast each night... like the networks. That show would need to be hard news with no spin... something Fox does not do. Then hire some journalists and start breaking news stories rather than just spinning AP stories.
In the end though, I don't think Fox cares about moderates. I think they are happy being the only conservative kid on the block.
I'd love to see a real news show. Kelly is, apparently, the hot commodity, knows it, and drove a good bargain, I suppose, that kept her from going to a network. I'm not sure that Hannity is necessarily the odd man out. Maybe he and Greta do a Hannity and Greta show?
Ailes did say that they're keeping everyone. I'd like to see a real news show too. There really isn't one in prime time out here.
Networks are gearing up for the Clinton run. Fox probaby figures Kelly wold be a better person to attack Clinton. *Shrugs* I am unfamiliar with her work so maybe I'm selling her short.
I don't know Megyn Kelly, so I really can't comment on her. As far as attracting audience, Fox is a trove of wasted opportunity. How they could improve:
1) Utilize their broadcast affiliates to simulcast the evening news. The cable news wars are piss in a river compared to the vast audiences that the Big 3 enjoy at 6/5c PM.
2) Develop at least ONE investigative magazine program, à la 60 Minutes, Dateline, 20/20, 48 Hours, Primetime, Frontline, etc. Broadcast it.
3) Stop back-spinning the AP wire. If you're gonna use it, don't change the spin. It's obvious and painful. Better yet, figure out where AP is wrong and report the correct story. Or, the best option, generate your own news!
Finally, props to Fox for having a Sunday show. At least they have one toe in the water. Unfortunately, they don't seem to recognize that it is the one program that garners some respect.
P.S. alternate spellings of the name "Megan" are hot. We would also have accepted "Meghan," "Meigan," or "Maegan."
tryanmax, I concur with you fixes. I particularly like the idea of debunking the AP stories, that would make for a really strong news program.
Anthony, Very possible. Kelly is an attack dog and she would be hard to accuse of being anti-woman.
T-Rav.....Thanks for the pic! Always nice to start the day looking at a pretty face. Re the point that Fox needs to start becoming more moderate, that is assuming the cereal networks are moderate and Fox needs to beat them on their own turf. They are not moderate by any stretch, as much as they like to label themselves such. They are propagandists and ANYTHING to the right of them would be moderate as opposed to hard right.
Also, remember, we are talking ranters ratings here. Hannity is considered a right wing nut by the MSM, not a news reader. Anyone who does not follow the old news reader format (and some commenters here who worked in TV know a heckuva lot more about that) of int'l, national, local, sports, weather, etc. in that order is considered "not hard news."
These networks have become places where pretty people go to gather followers for the network. There are many places to go to "get the news" now and I think all this chatter over who goes where at what time slot is more for ratings than content. So, no need for Fox to change its m.o., just change the faces.
Patriot, I'm curious to know your reaction to my suggestions above. Bear in mind, none of them are suggesting that Fox change it's slant. I just see a lot of opportunity for Fox to compete in the mainstream that they're not taking. I do believe there are a lot of people who would prefer the Fox News perspective but are unwilling to pay for cable. (*raises hand*)
Despite the increased diversity of news sources, the vast majority still get the news from broadcast television. And even as TV viewership declines, the rest of the media still reacts strongly to what goes on TV. Fox could generate a much larger media footprint if they didn't dance off to the side as they do.
tryanmax.....I like your investigative show premise. Call it "59 Minutes" or some such so that people immediately know it's similar to 60 minutes. They could have regulars on such as John Stossel, Bill Whittle, Peter Kirasanaw, etc. Guys, and gals, who are not household names but provide great content.
Give them the resources to track down stories from the "other side" and then let the MSM react to them. Today it's the other way around.
If CNBC and MSNBC combined would it be like combining matter and antimatter?
Koshcat, LOL! Nice!
Fortunately, no. The universe is safe. Contrary to what you've heard, MSNBC isn't antimatter, it's "doesnotmatter."
When you combine matter with doesnotmatter you get PBS.
I watched a little Kudlow last night and had to repeatly check that it truly was an NBC related channel.
Magyn is hot. I would prefer to watch her than Sean.
There's a lot I like on CNBC. Some I don't but a lot I do. The Tea Party was born on CNBC you know -- Rick Santelli.
Matter v. Antimatter v. Doesnotmatter! Interesting...
Hey, T-Rav, how are you feeling? Do I need to send you some virtual chicken soup?
Bev, That's what a scientist from the future told me.
Andrew - There are times when I feel the crushing blow of "doesnotmatter" surrounding me.
Did you see the sudden pivot from Obama today from "major distraction from Republicans" to "needs my/our full attention as I go on vacation" from Obama about the whole NSA domestic spying issue? Even the hacks at HuffPo are confused and slamming him...
As it it just me, or has Obama set US/Russia relations back about 40 years?
Patriot,
My fear re Bill Whittle is that he would be too partisan (though he does do good work sometimes).
But a good investigative journalism show would be great. Those shows can, once in a while. If Fox did we might have found out about those IRS shenanigans a bit earlier.
And it does not need to be called 60 Minutes. Australia has one called Four Corners.
Bev, I know the feeling. The "doesnotmatter" seems to be slowly taking over the universe and pushing everything else out.
I don't know what to make of Obama except that he's just shooting off his mouth in every direction. There is no substance there and I can't believe he believes a word of what he's saying these days.
On Russia, I can't wait until gay groups force him to take a stand on moving the Olympics. If you want to see a Cold War, wait until Putin stares him down on that one!
Kit, There was a time when investigative journalism shows really drove the news. They would uncover all kinds of things and the public would respond. The problem was that some (NBC for example) abused it by faking their presentations and others (60 Minutes) pushed ideology instead of investigation.
I wouldn't even consider Whittle because he's basically a partisan comedian. You really need skilled investigators if you're going to do something like that.
What did NBC do?
A whole bunch of things, but the biggie was when Dateline got caught igniting the fuel tank on a pickup truck or SUV to make it look like it had burst into flames during a side collision. That wiped out their credibility. Sidesaddle tank controversy
Shortly thereafter, ABC got caught sneaking people into a Food Lion store as employees and then video taped themselves bleaching the fish (an illegal, but apparently not uncommon practice) to hide the age of the fish and doing some other nasty things. Then they showed the tape and claimed this was Food Lion policy.
Both got sued and lost/settled and those shows started to fail thereafter, at least in the credibility department.
Here's the Food Lion story. I actually remember those.
The sad part is, in both cases, even though the news programs were in the wrong, they still "won" in that they achieved what they set out to.
Ok, pork not fish. LOL! Thanks for the link. You've helped my feeble brain. :)
On winning, I'm not sure they did. This causes massive blowback and really opened the door to them losing their credibility. Also, if I recall correctly, some states eventually passed laws making it illegal to do investigations in this manner. I never kept up with those laws, but I know they're trying it again -- making it illegal to become an employee for purposes of exposing wrong doing.
So that is why Dateline is stuck trying to catch Herbert the Pervert.
Yeah, I guess you're right. They achieved small victories compared to the loss of credibility and the manacles slapped on them.
tryanmax, Ultimately, it's one of those things, they traded their own credibility for a small victory against a company who just wrote off the loss on their next earnings statement. I see that as a mistake.
Kit, Wasn't that a children's book by Dr. Seuss? Oh wait, that was Chester the Molester.
Andrew,
He's a Family Guy character
Chester the Molester, wasn't that this guy?
You know, anybody who didn't realize that Saville was a pervert just by looking at him is an idiot. The guy reeks of "child molester."
Andrew,
To be fair, he didn't always look that creepy. He used to only look "creepy".
LINK.
As someone who watched the investigative journalism special on ITV*, I can say it makes the shenanigans at Penn State look downright tame.
*ITV, a private station unaffiliated with the BBC, was the one that broke the story after 40+ years of silence.
Kit, I know. It sounds like the BBC was a perverted swingers club throughout most of its history.
Also, the guy looked like a blonde version of the Child Catcher from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang.
See, look: LINK
And, Andrew, what makes the BBC's antics bizarrely ironic is the same time they were burying Sir Jimmy Savile* (and, by the way, a Newsnight story on him) they were hammering Murdoch's and his News Corp for the News of the World scandal.
*Yes, he was knighted.
If you want a really good example of Investigative journalism uncovering something dark and depraved, look up the Exposure doc on Sir Jimmy almost a year after his death called "The Other Side of Jimmy Savile".
Post a Comment