Economy President Trump's family trying to buy a 100 million dollar stake in OANN and stick it to FOX

[PEB]

As soon as Fox posts some news that is not flattering to Trump, Trumpers trash Fox.
So is Fox supposed to always show fealty to Trump.

I think he applauding Trump for using his office to enrich himself an family.

 

[MicroBrew]

I think he applauding Trump for using his office to enrich himself an family.

He is implying Fox is moving away from the Right because they occassionally run news that isn't flattering of Trump.

I have been reading criticism of Fox on sites like Breitbart , and what it boils down to is that Trump can never be criticised, even by entities everyone knows are on the Right, be they Nikki Haley, Ann Coulter or Fox. Anyone not being 100% pro Trump gets attacked.

-
That’s a smart fucking move.

FOX is retardedly trying to rebrand themselves as "straight news". It’s not gonna work. Anyone even near the left is incapable of believing anything said on fox.


Meanwhile they’re losing right leaning viewers because they waste time covering Democrat nonsense.

 

[Not A Theist]

I'm not criticizing the "every." The general idea that it's most or a very high percentage seems wrong.

Your interpretation is incorrect. "Every" is a very colloquialized word` and I think most people who don't have some sort of a bone to pick will recognize this outright. Someone says "It seems like every day we see another murder!" about their city and a good faith individual, recognizing the term being deployed as a colloquialism is a feature of casual conversation, takes it for what it is - a generalization with no rigorously arrived at truth claim attached, and rather a nod towards some general trend.

If you want to make a thing out of interpreting what percentage of billionaires I meant by my glib comment I must say, life is too short to engage in conversations which seem like they will require me to make a spreadsheet to conclude. For everyone else, they can take it for what it was meant as - an invitation to wonder if billionaires have a more varied interest in news networks than just profit, particularly given recent events.

Sometimes talking to you feels like explaining human feelings to a robot.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Your interpretation is incorrect. "Every" is a very colloquialized word` and I think most people who don't have some sort of a bone to pick will recognize this outright. Someone says "It seems like every day we see another murder!" about their city and a good faith individual, recognizing the term being deployed as a colloquialism is a feature of casual conversation, takes it for what it is - a generalization with no rigorously arrived at truth claim attached, and rather a nod towards some general trend.

Er, read my post again:

I'm not criticizing the "every." The general idea that it's most or a very high percentage seems wrong.

You know what "not" means, right? I'm specifically clarifying for you that I'm not interpreting "every" literally, and I am responding to it as a colloquialism, which I think is still wrong.

 

[Hadron90]

That’s a smart fucking move.

FOX is retardedly trying to rebrand themselves as "straight news". It’s not gonna work. Anyone even near the left is incapable of believing anything said on fox.


Meanwhile they’re losing right leaning viewers because they waste time covering Democrat nonsense.

I like it. Tucker Carlson is the only good thing in mainstream media. They should just realign the whole network around Tucker, and fire all the Hannities.

 

[bobgeese]

As soon as Fox posts some news that is not flattering to Trump, Trumpers trash Fox.
So is Fox supposed to always show fealty to Trump.

This is the case with all Talking Heads and all TV news. They were just calling on the msnbc guy who looks like Rachel Maddow (who’s names of my mind) to be fired the other day for simply mentioning the Biden scandal on air.


People aren’t tuning in to the news, for news. So yes, if fox values profits, they should cater to their audience.


PS Chris Hayes

 

[bobgeese]

Last big issue caused major advertisers to pull ads from FOX. People like GM, Pepsi, Coke, P&G and others pulled ads. It was over the issue with women in the FOX News offices being sexually harrassed an pressing charges on then head of network. After this new charges that sent Bill O'Reilly to leave the network. Then immigration stance very hot button topic caused 70 advertisers to run from Carson. Fox is hardly unfamiliar with these issues causing them to cool it down.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.gq.com/story/tucker-carlson-boycotts-working/amp

Is Tucker still on the air?

There ya go.

 

[Not A Theist]

Er, read my post again:



You know what "not" means, right? I'm specifically clarifying for you that I'm not interpreting "every" literally, and I am responding to it as a colloquialism, which I think is still wrong.

The problem is that I can't see it as anything but a negative interpretation (IE - critical) of "every" because I can't conceive of "The general idea that it's most or a very high percentage seems wrong" as anything but an interpretation of what specific number, or range of numbers, I'm referring to by "every." You're either trying to interpret what number I mean by "every" or you're not. It seems pretty obvious that you are - and doing so critically. As best I can tell your post starts off saying "I'm not being critical of your use of every" and then being critical of what you think I mean by "every" - but using different words. Hence my statement of "life is too short." What do you think I mean by that?

 

[bobgeese]

I like it. Tucker Carlson is the only good thing in mainstream media. They should just realign the whole network around Tucker, and fire all the Hannities.

All of this makes complete sense, as long as you realize these networks are entertainment, not news.

I can’t even stand to watch cable news anymore unless someone’s got egg on their face. It’s actually aggravating if you have an iq north of a summer day.

 

[F1980]

Their HAPA news anchor is absolutely perfection

 

[Jack V Savage]

The problem is that I can't see it as anything but a negative interpretation (IE - critical) of "every" because I can't conceive of "The general idea that it's most or a very high percentage seems wrong" as anything but an interpretation of what specific number, or range of numbers, I'm referring to by "every." You're either trying to interpret what number I mean by "every" or you're not. It seems pretty obvious that you are - and doing so critically. As best I can tell your post starts off saying "I'm not being critical of your use of every" and then being critical of what you think I mean by "every" - but using different words. Hence my statement of "life is too short." What do you think I mean by that?

Let's say the number is 3%, which might be accurate. Would the "every" be beyond criticism in that case?

 

[Hadron90]

All of this makes complete sense, as long as you realize these networks are entertainment, not news.

I can’t even stand to watch cable news anymore unless someone’s got egg on their face. It’s actually aggravating if you have an iq north of a summer day.

Most anything with a panel is completely grating. The anchors sound like they should be hosting reality shows on CNN. Like I said, Tucker is the only thing I care to watch. He at least sounds intelligent, and usually offers a take on things with a little nuance.

 

[tonni]

Interesting that every billionaire seems to want to own their own news network. I wonder why?

They do?

 

[Higus]

The headline in 5 years will be about another Trump business declaring bankruptcy

 

[MicroBrew]

This is the case with all Talking Heads and all TV news. They were just calling on the msnbc guy who looks like Rachel Maddow (who’s names of my mind) to be fired the other day for simply mentioning the Biden scandal on air.


People aren’t tuning in to the news, for news. So yes, if fox values profits, they should cater to their audience.


PS Chris Hayes

Re. Bolded

So you admit that Fox is not a News station then? That they should preach to the choir ?

 

[Higus]

They do?

Probably fairer to say that media ownership is being concentrated by a few billionaires. I think I read somewhere that 15 people own +90% of all news media outlets in the US.

 

[Not A Theist]

Let's say the number is 3%, which might be accurate. Would the "every" be beyond criticism in that case?

In reference to what I have identified as a "glib" comment:

"Someone says "It seems like every day we see another murder!" about their city and a good faith individual, recognizing the term being deployed as a colloquialism is a feature of casual conversation, takes it for what it is - a generalization with no rigorously arrived at truth claim attached, and rather a nod towards some general trend."

Let's operate on a presumption of truth of your claim that you're not criticizing the every and not start criticizing the every, treating it like the colloquial usage embedded in a glib statement that it was intended as.

 

[chardog]

Apparently Trump's recent criticism of FOX could be more to do with Jarred an Don Jr interest in acquiring a controlling stake in One America News Network or OANN.

It seems that OANN wants to expand their network foothold to more carriers then just their current base of 36 million people.

They are only 1/4 the size of FOX if not less. These actions cost money so naturally the millions from Jarred an Don jr are interested in investing.

Here the issue FOX has many multiples the valuation of OANN so 100 million is pretty meaningless for a a network the size of FOX but OANN likely buys you a controlling stake.

Trump been attacking FOX pretty regularly on Twitter and even boosting OANN at every chance he gets. Recently FOX sold their media outlet for nearly 100 billion dollars. Their network news outlet has been valued at around 45 billion dollar.

When you look at FOX it's all about distribution and viewers. Pulling these people over to OANN via Trump's reach could greatly boost OANN valuation pretty quickly an Trump empire's fortunes.

You think this is not weighing into Trump family interests at turning OANN into a major conservative news outlet? Turning 100 million into billions within a year or two? The one issue weighing into this is OANN parent company wants 300 million.

It could be fun watching how Trump directs questions to OANN during press briefings how the talks are going lol.

Let's drain that swamp lol shXXXt.

Trump figured it's a working formula to control the media

 

[A Lurker]

They should just realign the whole network around Tucker, and fire all the Hannities.

A bonfire of the Hannities.

Ill make my own way out.

 

[vapor&dust]

Smart move. OANN is much better than FOX. The gateway pundit is better than both.