Skip to comments.Why Is There No Conservative News Network?
Posted on 03/17/2012 1:42:22 PM PDT by Advocatus Sancti Sepulchri
Why isn't there a dedicated conservative news network on television that covers stories the liberal media won't cover? There's definitely a market for it, in my opinion and who cares if the progressive imams start calling for jihad.
Give CNS a try
Few advertisers want the informed, thoughtful demographic.
The dumb sluts who watch MSNBC ...etc.- now there’s an audience advertisers drool over.
It would take a 2 Billion dollar investment. That’s according to a pundit that spoke at a Western States Leadership Conference(gop) back in 2007.
I was thinking of that as well. FOX bends itself in a pretzel to avoid being “right wing.” And most of their coverage is straight news.
Let FOX can be the right leaning network that claims fair and balance, like the left-leaning networks claim no bias.
But a full-throated conservative channel would be a massive hit.
Opinion shows 24/7. No pretense of where you stand.
Because “CNN” is already taken?
BTW, the main reason FOXnews is the strongest cable
news outlet is because it is the only one even
close to being considered conservative. The rest
of them and the network outlets split the lib and
That’s a large hurdle, no doubt, but there’s an untapped market there.
Fox started out fairly Conservative , but they are falling fast.
Check out GBTV.
I want a network that’s bolder than fox.
I wish I had an “extra $2 billion lying around”, to do it.
“But a full-throated conservative channel would be a massive hit.”
Sure, but not with the kind of audience advertisers want.
Look how FOX has changed to attract the impulsive low-sales-resistance types. Actually CNN started out relatively conservative, but that audience wasn’t where the money was.
I don’t understand why people insist that TV is not for idiots despite overwhelming evidence that it is.
Because the news networks are based in New York City and NYC is the liberal asshole capital of the universe.
2 billion to offer advertisers a frugal thoughtful audience that only buys what it needs- at the best price and value.
Face it: conservatives have small appeal to advertisers.
It’s a niche demographic.
Plus there’d be a zombie boycott every week of an advertiser over something.
Though it might be possible to turn that to advantage- getting ‘stupid’ viewers with constant ‘shock and awe’ controversy.
“I want a network that’s bolder than fox”
I’m not fond of the idea of competing with
FOX. I would rather see FOX leaned on in order
to make it “bolder”. Can you imagine what is
going on over at MSNBC with goofball Keith
Slobbermann doing his rants on Gore’s “Current”
channel now? How long can Keith and Fast Eddy
Schultz pitch on the same mound together?
The other possibility is to take over an existing
libtard network like ABC and cram reality down
A 'niche' that is 60% of the population.
I’m increasingly impressed with Beck.
He was the first person I heard criticize KONY 2012.
Rightly so, he seems to have good instincts.
He’s pretty much always first about the things, he brings up. Almost like Breitbart was.
I listen to Beck most mornings. I’m seriously considering subscribing to GBTV.
I certainly never watch network TV anymore.
And one can only watch so many episodes of Bear Grills.
Would very much like to see Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck work together somehow.
Perhaps even, with cooperation from FR.
The problem with previous attempts at conservative news, has been (if faith-centered FReepers will forgive me) they’ve thus far, been centered on religion.
That’s wonderful, but it’s not why people watch television Monday - Saturday. It’s not why people watch news, and it’s not what sets the dialogue.
What’s needed is a conservative network which provides exactly the same amount of subtle, plausibly deniable bias to the right, which the MSM imbues everything else with to the left.
No question there’s a market. Almost every newspaper, television station, network and radio station is controlled by and spins for the left.
People are hungry for true dissent.
America doesn’t have any.
The first real alternative, will make someone billions.
How about one channel for conservative series and mystery movies?
Maybe stories with a mother AND a father, fidelity, modesty, and Sunday church?
Fox has become a tabloid.
It’s people magazine. All about celebrity.
CNN is all about liberal spin.
MSNBC is all about socialist dogma. Almost every newspaper is about leftwing spin.
Hollywood is about stupid stuff, with a homosexual agenda.
Fox News had the world as their oyster. But no, they decided that Bill O’Reilly was more important then news. So even they dropped the ball.
Fox could have been a real, news-oriented breath of fresh air.
They abandoned that job. Nobody is providing actual, hard news. All American journalism has been co-opted by the left.
Nobody is left, reporting simple honest news.
“60% of the population” probably more.
But a network doesn’t make money from viewers, it makes money from advertisers.
Advertisers don’t make money from viewers, they make it from customers.
Dumb people buy a LOT more at a higher price and for less value than thoughtful ones.
Oh, and they vote Dem of course. That’s why media is so pro-Dem: they’re pro-stupid.
Au contraire: The EUCrats of Brussels make the NYC types look like amateurs. . .
I think the leftwing bias in the media is far more deliberate than you have described.
The media was deliberately taken over, and deliberately dishes out an agenda.
It’s not about stupid. It’s about communism.
GBTV is well worth the money.
After what he did to Andrew Breitbart? Are you serious?
Beck is a dead man walking.
I dont understand why people insist that TV is not for idiots despite overwhelming evidence that it is.
You make an astounding point!
I don’t watch tv news at all.
Why bother. About twenty seconds after it would take to the air, many Conservatives, and probably including many FReepers, would start condemning it for not being Conservative enough. Look at what the Conservativer-Than-Thous are doing to Orrin Hatch (right here on FR even), one of the most Conservative senators ever—a 90 per cent index level from Conservative organizations. Senator Hatch was instrumental in getting Justices Alito, Clarence Thomas et al into the Supreme Court. That doesn’t satisfy the Conservativer-Than-Thous, however. They want him to agree with them point-for-point. Why would we need this kind of thing redressed daily on a television networ?
One word: Money.
It’s been tried. Back in the 1990’s Paul Weyrich founded NET (National Empowerment Television) which I’m sure would fit your conservative bill. It later became America’s Voice. Whatever you call it, it was never profitable and died a horrible death.
When most FReepers use the word conservative they’re really referring to paleoconservatism, and to be honest the numbers are small, really small. I would argue with anyone who thinks that conservatives of all types combined make up anything resembling a majority, but when you narrow it down, it’s tinier than most would ever admit.
Keith the Goose-stepper is circling the drain with the rest of the morons at current TV. My hope is that Gore someday loses every penny he’s ever had and hits rock bottom HARD!
Would very much like to see Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck work together somehow.
Not gonna happen. Maharushi has his own empire and doesn’t need the others.
Which makes me ask: why do you people even bother looking at TV? What’s the charm, what’s the payoff?
A freedom oriented, tea-party type news network would take over the world.
Defiant. Edgy. In your face independent.
THAT is what would sell. Not dignity. Defiance.
That’s pure unadulterated fantasy right there. Honest estimates place conservatives at around 20%. The vast, and I mean vast majority of Americans are apolitical. Liberals, conservatives and moderates combined wouldn’t make up 50% of the population, let alone 60%.
Very nice summary.
That's the absolute truth right there. The other truth is that is where the money is to be made. How do you get around that and still make money?
Rush won the recent dust up handily. But it does show his weakness.
He’s got all his eggs in that one basket.
I seriously think he could be the deep pockets with the badly needed sense of defiant independence, to make a conservative network hugh.
Wouldn’t mind to see Michelle Malkin as a driving force either. That’s favoritism on my part, but she’s likewise on the right track.
That new guy at Brietbart is no slouch either.
Time for some of these heavyweights on our side, to start cooperating. I think.
Take over a new market.
Well, it reflects what everyone’s taught- socialism is the fair way. And it reflects their access to government employees and officials for ‘news’.
But ‘you show me where a person gets there cornpone and I’ll show you where they get their views’, or however Sam put it, carries a lot of weight with me.
Thanks but no. I had it for a while. I have never in my life seen such AWFUL customer service. Emailing them for help did no good---I'd get a form reply telling me I needed high speed broadband, which I have. So I had to call the 800 number, which meant holding for about an hour and then dealing for another hour and a half with someone who didn't know what they were doing. Once, someone accidentally cancelled my account, and it took them two weeks to figure it out.
Then I figured out Beck is a fraud, and I cancelled. Don't miss it----FR is the best source for news I know.
Because conservatism conflicts with globalism and the globalists own the networks due to Al Gore’s Telecommunications Act of 1996. In turn the government, also owned by the globalists uses federal monies to enhance the revenues of news networks that serve their purposes, and threats for those that don’t.
It’s a matter of corruption of Constitutional government and several administrations antagonistic towards freedom and the American way.
You can bluster about left right dems repubs, but they are all following the globalist playbook and there’s hardly a whit of difference.
Just look at the corruption going on in the primaries right now, so you know the republican party has fallen to the depths of the other party and now uses their tactics to ‘win’.
I bet the Koch brothers could fund one.
Correct. I'm quite sure Rush wouldn't tie himself in any way to Beck the nut.
Sell to whom? That's 180 degrees from the direction of something that I would watch.
Then again, you might be on to something. I won't name, names, but I recently (within the last month) had lunch with a fellow FReeper and his wife. The subject came up, that this guy thought I was a liberal plant for years, but when he'd search my posts, couldn't actually find a liberal position I'd taken.
Then he admitted he had figured out what it was that gave him that impression: I'm not angry or emotional, and even give the impression that I look down on those who are angry and emotional. I don't hate Obama, or Clinton, or anyone else, and it shows. My opposition is purely on policy, and I tolerate those who disagree with me without any negative emotions whatsoever.
So, you could be on to something. Maybe a network as you suggest, that does rile the emotions of those who are heavily emotionally invested might just fly. Just not with me.
Good idea, I really see a market for alternatives in news as well as hollywood.
I find his radio show to be at times vaudevillian. Far too much slapstick. His TV show shares nothing with his radio schtick.
The online news show, two hours long is superb. He hired the best in the business, and covers that which the other networks do not. Free two week subscription.
The new normal: All conservative celebrities must hire private security.
Perhaps it could generate revenue through fees and eliminate advertisements. This allows commercial free news without annoying distraction while allowing more time for sustained discussion and eliminates the whole boycott calls by left wingers.
I don’t hate liberals.
I hate the fact we live in a message-controlled society very much like that “big brother” commercial with the giant screen, and the runner who throws the anvil to demolish it.
That’s what we’ve become. Almost a new Soviet Union.
It’s the opposite of what America stands for. And the first competitor bold enough to offer it to a starving citizenry, will make oodles, and oodles of cash.
Almost a limitless opportunity for someone.
Literally there would be no competition right now.
Not one competitor. Not a single one. Five thousand three hundred sources of liberal bias.
Not one independent, conservative source.
Supply and demand is going to make whoever gets there first, with such an independent voice, richer than their wildest dreams.
It’s almost an incomprehensibly huge opportunity for someone. Once in a lifetime.
I had problems at first. They were taken care of. He had a very short beta period.
The content of his show is topnotch.
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.