Although I agree with the general thrust of your post…….sorry, there’s a lot to be commented on, here.
FOX News doesn’t have to do that, because they are the only TV “news” outlet to support the GOP. All they have to do is spend their money for either pretty/vivacious or pretty/cutesy women in sexy makeup and clothes to keep the oldsters tuning in.
Hm. Please don’t turn around after accusing women of getting jobs based on their looks alone and then claim you’re for women’s rights. Doesn’t work like that. If you do it, expect men to do it right back at us.
Yes, Fox hires very attractive women — — with substantive resumes. They are not only there for their looks. Back in the early days of Fox and Friends, E.D. Hill was anecdotally referred to as the “Mensa Blonde.”
But the larger point which tends to be missed regarding Fox and all the Fox-Hate from the left is that its news organization is professional and well regarded and SEPARATE from its commentary/entertainment organization. Shep Smith is not part of the Hannity/Carlson zoo. They are professional and although they report from a center-right perspective, they are very good at providing solid news reporting. (Anecdotally, I have a friend who is a political science professor who rates Catherine Herridge as the very best national affairs correspondent employed by any national media organization today.)
Since we have no other center-right broadcast media organizations, and with the other outlets becoming more and more slanted in the other direction as you correctly note, Fox NEWS (not commentary) becomes systemically important for a person to be fully informed if their only consumption is broadcast.
Whatever they say is just what the Dem message is on any topic. But somehow they think they are fooling the old people into thinking they are each “fair and balanced” or whatever bullshit line they use to pretend they are being unbiased and honest. Even though it is obvious to most people that they are selling a politically biased propaganda model posing as news by occasionally also adding some random news to their otherwise incessant propagandizing — still they think it will work by either being constantly on message or that the old people are gullible.
Setting aside your obvious and shameful age bigotry for a moment (and I’m 63, for full disclosure), consider the fact we oldsters of us look at the world (and news, for that matter) with a lot more experience and a broader perspective than a younger person does. Can’t be helped.
Examples? The parallels between the 60’s and todays “progressives”, and their respective movements; parallels between Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan; similarities between Nixon and Trump and Watergate and Russiagate; sexual harassment from Clinton (Bill) to Weinstein. If you’re older, you have perspective that young people don’t have, and at times, while the young are running around being so absolutely sure that they’re right and that old people are wrong, we’re chuckling because we remember being just like you when WE were young; and then taking our lumps when we had to admit that our parents were right all along. :-)
Now, how does that relate back to network coverage? Well, worry not; we know they’re all biased. And like you, we gravitate to the outlets that confirm our biases. Young, old, we all like to be with people who confirm our beliefs.
Yes, this is a “bug” in America today, not a feature; but I solve that bug by accessing a plethora of sources; and if you’re not accessing right-leaning media, then you’re less informed than I am.
Despite my advanced age. :-)
In both cases it is a planned stoking of hatred, and not just for ratings, but also by extension to get voters to hate the other side so much that they will vote for anything the Dems or GOP support — purely out of spite against the other side…in that way the suckers do the bidding of the Dems or GOP against their own interests.
BINGO. Touchdown. Home Run. Ultimately, if you can get your “side” to not just respectfully disagree, but to HATE the other “side”, then you keep those voters home, no matter what kind of nutcase (Trump, Clinton) you nominate.
I’d also add that the factions within the parties are now applying this tactic INTRAparty. If you’re a conservative you have to hate the RINOs (although nobody can completely agree on a definition of RINO), and if you’re a “regular democrat” you have to hate the Sanders people.
And vice versa, of course.