Jon Stewart Vs. Fox News
First, I would like to thank all my fellow contributors for doing all the extra work when I was away. I’m still pretty much out of the loop, but here is a story to warm your heart – Jon Stewart has better ratings than every Fox show except O’Reilly.
Only The O’Reilly Factor (2.8 million) drew more total viewers than The Daily Show (2.3 million). Jon Stewart beat everything else on Fox News. Stewart beat Sean Hannity by 246,000 viewers. He topped Bret Baier by 399,000 viewers. Jon Stewart beat Glenn Beck by almost 500,000 viewers, 1.812 million to 2.3 million. He beat Shep Smith (1.712 million) and Greta Van Susteren (1.702 million) by almost 600,000 viewers each. When Stewart and O’Reilly go head to head at 11 PM, Jon Stewart tops Bill O’Reilly’s replay by almost a million viewers (2.3 million to 1.321 million).
This is why Fox News both hates and fears Jon Stewart. Not only is he more popular than they are, but he devotes much of his program to exposing the biased reporting of FNC. Even worse, Stewart is teaching his younger audience what Fox News is all about. Stewart doesn’t exclusively take on Fox News. His problem is with television news in general, but since Fox is the biggest offender, they get most of his attention.
Jon Stewart is the biggest threat to Fox News’ future out there. He is literally teaching his audience, which is bigger than FNC’s, how to see through the partisan propaganda that Rupert Murdoch has based his network on. Stewart is educating an entire generation of viewers on how to watch cable news, or more specifically how not to watch Fox News.
Fox has another problem – their viewers are very old. The average age of their viewers is 65 and I doubt they are gaining younger viewers.
Tags: Fox News, Jon Stewart
I don’t get why TV executives don’t see these numbers and realize that there is a large market for fearless, genuine, fact based news.
I think if a TV news show decided to break free of the phony objectivity of “he said/she said” reporting that it would be an instant ratings hit.
I think if a TV news show decided to break free of the phony objectivity of “he said/she said” reporting that it would be an instant ratings hit.
Well, I’d watch it. But it wouldn’t have any access to interview elected officials, and it wouldn’t have Fortune 100 advertising revenue. Which would make it essentially a not-for-profit blog. Which is the situation we have now.
I think there is basically no appetite for TV news of any stripe anymore. I get zero news from TV, except maybe for weather and breaking disasters.
I don’t watch any TV news anymore either, but I would and I know lots of Fortune 100 advertisers want to advertise to me. Networks are leaving tons of money uncollected. I’m not talking about NPR, or Democracy TV (whatever that liberal thing is called.)
Perhaps elected officials would be more difficult to interview initially – but elected officials are nothing if not chicken. If they feared being left out of the reporting, they would come around.
Fox has a bigger age problem than its viewers — its CEO. Roger Ailes is 71, and not a model of robust good health. The articles in Rolling Stone and New York magazine a couple of weeks ago made it pretty clear that he’s the guiding force behind the network, and that often he goes not by market research but by gut instinct. Remember, this guy was so good at packaging and marketing that he helped get Richard elected. They won’t easily replace him when the time comes.