Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Impending Entertainment News Realignment (worth a re-post now)
Big League Politics ^ | June 5, 2017 | LS

Posted on 08/19/2017 5:16:42 PM PDT by LS

With the firing, then death, of Roger Ailes, the departure of Bill O’Reilly, and the swirling rumors about Sean Hannity either leaving or being fired at Fox News, many conservatives flippantly insist that any one (or combination) of these and other conservative entertainers/news people could “start their own network.” It’s certainly possible that the right combination of entertainers and capitalists could buy an existing structure and form it into a network—itself a mammoth undertaking, but not impossible—but start one from scratch?

It’s worth the time to recall how Fox News got to where it is today. In 1986 20th Century Fox television began operations, first with a Joan Rivers late night show (a failed undertaking that got her permanently banned from Johnny Carson’s Tonight Show), then in 1987, with “Married . . . With Children” and “The Tracey Ullman Show,” then added a show a week on Sundays only.

http://bigleaguepolitics.com/impending-entertainment-news-realignment/

(Excerpt) Read more at bigleaguepolitics.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bannon; breitbart; foxnews; media; trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last
In light of what most people think Bannon is going to do, this is worth reviewing.
1 posted on 08/19/2017 5:16:43 PM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LS

They were not PC back then. It looks like they are trying to be just like CNN, now. I thought “Married With Children” was the funniest thing I had seen in a long time. Now the shows are all virtue signalling quota shows.


2 posted on 08/19/2017 5:23:28 PM PDT by dynachrome (When an empire dies, you are left with vast monuments in front of which peasants squat to defecate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS

Very interesting, thanks! Huge business opportunity there.


3 posted on 08/19/2017 5:24:45 PM PDT by dynoman (Objectivity is the essence of intelligence. - Marilyn vos Savant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS
Cable revolutionized alternate news giving people more choices than the uni- networks whose grip on society was weakened via fox news. Likewise streaming on demand is going to be liberating by taking away the chains of cable news that has now gone the way of the uni- networks. However, Streaming with even more choices isn't going to capture a major market share like the networks or cable, there just will be too many choices to get news, so cant see how any one player will dominate, unless we loose control of the Internet, which is areal possibility someday with all the liberal fascists amongst us now.
4 posted on 08/19/2017 5:27:37 PM PDT by seastay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS

Don’t laugh...perhaps Bannon hires Hannity?


5 posted on 08/19/2017 5:29:14 PM PDT by CincyRichieRich (We must never shut up. Covfefe: A great dish served piping hot!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS

Just as long as there are NO ED commercials....sheesh


6 posted on 08/19/2017 5:34:08 PM PDT by HokieMom (Pacepa : Can the U.S. afford a president who can't recognize anti-Americanism?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS

From an alliance with OANN


7 posted on 08/19/2017 5:35:56 PM PDT by kdot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dynachrome

“In Living Color” would be impossible today.


8 posted on 08/19/2017 5:37:17 PM PDT by LS ("Castles Made of Sand, Fall in the Sea . . . Eventually" (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: seastay

No, doesn’t make sense. If you have 100 lib channels, but only one conservative channel, it will dominate 50% of the market.

Now, there are NO conservative channels except OANN.


9 posted on 08/19/2017 5:38:19 PM PDT by LS ("Castles Made of Sand, Fall in the Sea . . . Eventually" (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LS

True! “Men on film”!


10 posted on 08/19/2017 5:38:35 PM PDT by dynachrome (When an empire dies, you are left with vast monuments in front of which peasants squat to defecate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: HokieMom

Noticed that too? I notice as places sell out, the quality of the commercials likewise declines.


11 posted on 08/19/2017 5:43:03 PM PDT by TheZMan (I am a secessionist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TheZMan

Talk radio is the worst. I understand about the necessity of revenue — would be nice if corporate america weren’t so dominated and intimidated by liberal fascists.


12 posted on 08/19/2017 5:45:37 PM PDT by HokieMom (Pacepa : Can the U.S. afford a president who can't recognize anti-Americanism?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LS

How does one create a truly conservative station in this day and age? An enormous, untapped audience is there, but one still needs to turn a profit. Many potential advertisers, i.e. large corporations, are controlled by the anti-American, multi-culti/diversity spouting, no borders globalists, and those that aren’t, would be ostracized by the media.


13 posted on 08/19/2017 5:56:22 PM PDT by CitizenUSA (Proverbs 14:34 Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people.a)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS

CNN is for sale.


14 posted on 08/19/2017 6:06:48 PM PDT by arthurus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS

The barriers to a ‘conservative network’ are indeed huge.

FOX started when there wasn’t overwhelming cable control of programming. People watched the UHF channels.
It started by offering entertainment for Dem voters (young, female) that advertisers would pay extra for.

Tough road. Conservatives have a low value to advertisers ( old-fogey tightwads).
Big money advertisers are internationalists- not going to support nationalist programming.
Pressure groups are effective and will be supported by the competition.

OTOH there is a desire for ‘American’ programming.

2 big helps for him would be permissary cable ala carte regs and a First Amendment legal overthrow of ‘Community’ license renewal regs which allow any pressure group to legally blackmail stations and networks.


15 posted on 08/19/2017 6:06:58 PM PDT by mrsmith (Dumb sluts: Lifeblood of the Media, Backbone of the Democrat/RINO Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seastay

“Loose” control? Is it too tight?


16 posted on 08/19/2017 6:08:22 PM PDT by arthurus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LS

I’d guess the path is a Netflix/Google hybrid: broker content AND provide better targeting of advertising.

Avoids all the regulatory barriers, heightens the value of the audience.

Looking forward to see what happens! I sure hope something does.


17 posted on 08/19/2017 6:18:04 PM PDT by mrsmith (Dumb sluts: Lifeblood of the Media, Backbone of the Democrat/RINO Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kdot

A group should take control of OANN and place it live on the internet for free. It’s easier to start with a working network than to start from scratch.

Have several open ad spots in each hour, let anyone broadcast the news network for free and let them run paid spots in the open ad spaces....but the ad content must be passed by OANN...NO PROPAGANDA.

Allow the same free use of the audio for radio listeners.

It would be worth a try to buy a channel on both DISH and Direct TV, these channels would best be in the clear...meaning that anyone with a dish and receiver could watch without subscribing to anything.... the sat providers would get both the purchase $$ and the free ad spots to sell. They could use the spots to pitch the purchase of a TV package.

It would take a big purse to operate such a network but the viewership would be phenomenal.

It is possible to successfully do such a thing.

No pretense at fair and balanced, pitch it as a counter to the constant propaganda on all other media.


18 posted on 08/19/2017 6:41:06 PM PDT by Bobalu (Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses, yearning to be freeloaders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: arthurus

I tend to lose interest when an article is loose with spelling and grammar. :-)

It’s odd how otherwise intelligent people can constantly spell simple words incorrectly.

My Dad, he was a smart man, always mixed up weak and week...lol

i.e. I was ill last weak and I felt very week.

“Newsweak” magazine would have looked correct to him... and in that one instance he would have been correct :-)

I tend to post using poor spelling...it’s my terrible typing skills and that damned auto-correct.


19 posted on 08/19/2017 6:48:35 PM PDT by Bobalu (Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses, yearning to be freeloaders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Bobalu
I tend to lose interest when an article is loose with spelling and grammar. :-)

Same here. I associate such carelessness/ignorance with careless/ignorant thinking, hence the loss in interest.

20 posted on 08/19/2017 6:50:18 PM PDT by TChris ("Hello", the politician lied.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson