FOX NEWS VS ITS OWN AUDIENCE, ROUND 3

BENGHAZI-TRUTH DAILY MEMO

Filed for Monday, July 1, 2013

MSN partially-correctly reports our 

first FOX NEWS boycotts in March  

Okay, this is actually really, really simple. It works like this: someone decides they will create a form of entertainment, or information source. Both require an audience to make money. To get the audience the provider gives to them what it has established its decided target audience to want. In days of old before motion pictures, the stage was the venue, and if the show was bad, the men would throw eggs and yell, "Bring on the dancing girls!" Sometimes the proprietor of the theater would step out, make a personal apology, offer the audience their money back and offer a free performance the following night to regain the audience trust - and business.

There is no such as "can't" from the provider. Often shows bring a background character forward when audience reaction is particularly strong, and less-often but sometimes create a spin-off series around that break-out character. In the late 1960's NBC, besieged by letters from boiling-mad fans, made television history and reversed a scheduled cancellation and renewed a fledgling and not-very- successful series called Star Trek for a second season because low numbers or not, you don't play games with an angry audience that passionate, because they could use that activism to ruin your whole network. The game is and always has been - from the beginning and honored by the best and brightest - to strike some balance between what you must or can do and to give the audience what it demands. Even Shakespeare was not writing for aesthetes; he wrote for the common audience and by doing the best job he could to please that audience proved himself to be a genius at it. When the great classical European composers wrote ballroom music they didn't regard themselves and wallowing in a sewer artistically, they just wrote the greatest ballroom music imaginable which lives spectacularly even today. 

So what the hell has been going on for the last few years at FOX NEWS? People say "Obama's birth certificate is a fake" as established by every reliable analysis and by law enforcement investigation (Arpaio appears to have more law enforcement offers under his authority for 5 million citizens than FOX has employees to cater to it's now under-2-million audience) and demand FOX give it breaking-news coverage. How does FOX respond in context to the time-honored tradition of pleasing its audience? Here is what FOX has done: they have brutally demeaned and humiliated the "birthers", most of whom constitute the very people whose initial support made FOX successful in the first place.

Brilliant. Thanks, guys. 

People say "We want Benghazi survivor investigations and coverage!" "We think your 'Benghazi special' stinks!" Do they say, "We're sorry you feel that way, we'll do better?" No. We'll assume James Rosen, using his "FNC" handle, speaks for FOX in this twitter exchange: 

What?!?!

Did I not read that right or did Rosen say, in essence, to someone he knew represented a group which had already punished his network with boycotts in the past, "We have conservatives by the balls and if you don't like it you can lump it, you angry jerk?"

Well, okay. I say, "Bring on the dancing girls!"

Bear in mind FOX is in no position to play tough. Look at these numbers from March:

Look at where FOX is now!

June 14, 20132

 June 24, 2013

 June 27, 2013

What is so devastating is FOX - with ratings falling - is supposedly the only right-wing network and that shows like Piers Morgan, whose left-wing audience is diffused over many alternative media sources, on-average, are up slightly. O'Reilly, FOX's flagship prime-time show, from before the first boycott to now, is down an approximate average of over 40%! Don't take my word for it. Play with the numbers yourself and see: www.percentagecalculator.net/

How can that happen? How can the only "conservative" (RINO, please!) network which has all conservatives by the throat - because those conservatives have no alternative - lose viewers so dramatically?!

The answer is that conservatives have grown past their need for what I can only equate to an abusive relationship. I mean that. The analogy holds very well. FOX has mocked and demeaned their core conservative base. They have supported candidates the base loathes. They have not only ignored the demands of their base but seem to delight in teasing them and then denying those needs, all the while reassuring the victims that "No one else will love you." The whole situation has become truly pathetic - even sick -  but the FOX tanking numbers have shown people have found alternatives. You hear everywhere online fed-up conservatives saying they are done with FOX. This abusive relationship already has some tragedy, like the pain which could have been avoided if FOX had done its job and reported to the world those things which would have stopped Obama's re-election in it tracks.  But it's not a complete tragedy - people are walking away from the abuser, and not a moment too soon.

Now we all have a chance to really put the thumbscrews not to ruin FOX, but to put meat into the threat that we can ruin them and therefore make them do what we want, as is the way it's supposed to be between provider and audience (I must suppose Newscorp has shareholders who will not be pleased with the dropping numbers, and CEOs can be replaced): On July 4, ONE AMERICA, from the Washington Times (in my opinion a far better print paper than the tabloid New York Post, Newscorp's claim to ink-and-paper fame) and Wealth TV's Herring Broadcasting, debuts in approx 30% of the US markets. For the first time ever, FOX now has competition, and competition which promises to be a "voice for Tea Party Conservatives". It is doubtful that FOX could continue to exist with the kind of overhead they have established if they have to share 50% or more of their ratings/ad revenue with another channel targeted to the same audience.

So there you have it. Will One America also report the birth certificate and the Benghazi survivors and the rest of Obama's damning scandals? We don't know, but it doesn't matter. FOX automatically loses a share of its audience the moment One America hits the cable lines and dish receivers  and as the current situation proves, conservative are deciding they don't really need either Fox or One America. This means both will have to duke it out to win Tea Party loyalty for survival -with our eager help - to simply stay in business by giving the audience, at long, long last, what the audience wants, not what an arrogant "conservative"/middle-left monopoly news organization tells the audience what it should want.

I really wouldn't want to be Barack Obama right about now, because for either network to survive, they are going to have to break open his countless scandals to the world in a truly meaningful way for the first time.

Boycott FOX, watch One America, create a war for our loyalty between both and force both to do our bidding! Media is my business. This strategy will give us not one truly conservative network, but two. Herring needs FOX's migrating audience and FOX cannot survive with Pier's Morgan's ratings.

Bring on the dancing girls!

*********************