1825
Comments (58)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
11
Equality72521 11 points ago +11 / -0

These propaganda mills whether it's the NYT, WaPo, Fox News, MSNBC etc... do not need to turn a profit themselves. Their value is in swaying public opinion for promoting their investor's other lucrative businesses such as pharmaceuticals, armaments, or foreign influence.

8
Cyer6 8 points ago +8 / -0

But losing millions year after year? That can only go for so long before the tank runs dry. Many lucrative companies and industries have died off over the decades because people stopped buying their products, technology evolved, public and consumer opinions changed and so on. I think all of them are vulnerable given enough time.

7
Equality72521 7 points ago +7 / -0

Media companies are not like other companies. It's true that they make money on advertising but that is the smallest part of how they stay afloat. Their primary objective is peddling influence and propaganda. Under a communist oligarchy (which is what we are becoming) your media sources do not need to make any profit. They are simply propped up as long as you are proclaiming the virtues of the establishment and demonizing any alternatives.

Millions in a year is chump change when compared to the resources these oligarchs and countries have access to. A Saudi prince reportedly has a personal wealth of up to $1.4 Trillion. The pharmaceutical industry is worth $1.3 Trillion. That's millions of millions of dollars. The defense industry is worth hundreds of billions of dollars. So, again losing millions to protect your billions or trillions has no end. It's just a prudent investment and the cost of doing the business of controlling the masses.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/05/04/has-china-compromised-every-major-mainstream-media-entity/

2
Hayride 2 points ago +2 / -0

What happens when a controlled op outfit stops providing the "opposition" part of the equation? What they're peddling is becoming what you can get anywhere else only the other places are drawing more eyes now. They went for the kill shot and blew their cover.

2
Equality72521 2 points ago +2 / -0

Granted Fox showed their hand too early. This should have been done more slowly over time. Some heads may even roll for that decision but it's desirable to have multiple outlets that support the uni-party. There's always room for one more. It gives it the appearance of fairness or balance. They are free to stir the pot on social issues that inflame the population and keep them fighting one another rather than focusing on the thieves that hold the real power.

While Fox's base is leaving in droves they are gaining new followers slowly. My mother, for example, who is a flaming lib now watches Neil Cavuto. She's convinced that he is at least one voice on Fox that is not biased. Hahaha...

So, it will go. Fox wants to compete to take over the "middle" space that CNN used to occupy 20 years ago. Their political stance moves left but the CNN has moved so far left that they are now nearly at the edge of the scatter plot. Fox wants to be the network that you see when you go to the airport. That's where their business model is heading anyway. More Establishment types. More Neil Cavuto's! More Paul Ryan's. More Mitt Romney's.

OAN and Newsmax are well-positioned to handle us Trump supporters. They are showing tremendous growth.