The conservative news channel’s only real power is in riling up liberals, who by this point should know better.
A pithy analysis full of zingers (for example, comparing Fox prez Roger Aile’s obsession with blond anchors to Alfred Hitchcock’s use and abuse of lead women), this article ponders the unthinkable: Is Fox News really the big bad wolf that deserves the obsessiveness of the left? His answer is, no. With an average viewership age of 64, Fox, the article argues, is more isolated and out of touch with America as ever. Furthermore, it claims that during the news network’s tenure, the Democrats have been far more successful than the "good old days" of mainstream TV when Republicans dominated national elections. But this also ignores the damaging role it had in the post-9/11 era by propelling the Afgan and Iraq invasions.
The article concurs with feelings that I have long held: that Fox’s influence is overblown and that the attention the left gives it only makes it stronger. However, I think the network’s influence is underplayed in the article’s analysis. While it is true that Democrats are making gains in national elections and our demographics are going the opposite direction of Fox’s core audience, the network manages to influence the other news programs in how they cover the news and talk about the issues. Fox lowers the bar, so-to-speak, which is really evident with climate change coverage. Fox has done more damage to muddy this issue than on almost every other key point, and for that reason, Fox News remains very dangerous.
I do agree that people need to stop feeding the Fox troll, and to just deny attention to the likes of drag queen Ann Coulter and Bill Scrooge O’Reilly. They are contrarians who feed off of people’s ire, so let them be as Fox’s anti-pot, anti-gay Titanic sinks. Nonetheless, to say that Fox doesn’t set the news agenda would be naive and wrong. Fox still has the strategic role of spreading disinformation, and on this count it remains quite successful.
See on nymag.com