It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

MSNBC loses another 1/4 of its viewers... is the Mainstream Media in decline?

page: 2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:02 PM
reply to post by madmac5150

Your quoted source is talking about figures for 2013, not 2014. Election year good, non-election year (and non-Christie scandal year) bad.

And please name your source, if I knew it was Minuteman News I wouldn't have clicked on it, and got caught in the anti-Hillary ad blitz (I have to remember to check, repeat to myself 100 times, have to remember to check the link):

2013 was another year of decline for cable news, with MSNBC losing almost a quarter of its viewers after similar declines the previous year, according to a new Pew Research study. “The Nielsen Media Research data show that the biggest decline came at MSNBC, which lost nearly a quarter (24%) of its prime-time audience. CNN, under new management, ended its fourth year in third place, with a 13% decline in prime time,” states the report. In total, the combined viewership of all three major cable news channels, Fox News, CNN and MSNBC, dropped 11% to its smallest audience since 2007. Not by coincidence, the disapproval rating of President Barack Obama, for whom the likes of CNN and MSNBC have been dutiful water carriers in the midst of numerous scandals, hit a new record high of 59% this week.

edit on 27-3-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:03 PM
Yes to all five of your questions.

Because they seek to be "mass" and "mainstream" they have succumbed to the problem of "playing it safe" in their reporting...saying nothing that might offend anyone, nothing provocative, nothing ironic, nothing cheeky, nothing amazing or fascinating. Its all "safe play" news which is just outmoded and no longer satisfies people who have access to much more information on the Internet.

Furthermore, stations such as MSNBC and Foxnews don't report news or practice journalism. Instead they sift through news agencies stuff and choose only what furthers their particular political ideology. How boring is it that you can predict the stance these stations will take on every single issue?

The future of media is the Internet. Mainstream media will still be useful in the future, as a place to get some basic orientation on various subjects, but that's just about the extent of their usefulness.

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:06 PM
reply to post by Skyfloating

Yea, the age of the 24 hour news cycle is coming to an end. The internet is just too easy a source to debunk and research these networks' claims. People are probably getting fed up with being lied to or the news not reporting what they think matters adequately enough.

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:08 PM
24 hour cable news has been in decline for awhile. For that reason FOX and MSNBC became political channels while CNN remained the Breaking News station. Most people, in particular younger people have no interest in watching a 24 news stations, they get news online, from the nightly news, from pod casts etc. Sure CNN still gets big bumps in the ratings while things like the missing plane but, they can only milk those events as they come. While FOX and MSNBC milk the election cycles.

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:09 PM

reply to post by madmac5150

Here's the problem.
People despise MSM.
It is biased.
It portrays an uneven aspect to the news.
It has an agenda.
That's all a given.
So people are going to social media.
Where people take what they saw on MSM and regurgitate it onto a social media site. Where proponents of any given agenda support it ad nauseum
Similar to what goes on here. Really.
We applaud ourselves and pat each other on the back because we are "critical thinkers" who don't watch cable news. Yet we bandy back and forth over the same issues.
Bottom line?
Everyone has an agenda. Don't let them tell you different.
Whether it is for bigger government or less.
Higher taxes or less.
More freedoms or less.
Abortion or not.
Healthcare or not.
Religion or not.
blah blah blah. . . .
Everyone has some sort of skin in the game. They will obviously gravitate towards a market that feeds and supports that individual agenda.
The truth?
Want the truth?
The sun will rise in the morning.
The sun will set at night.
Everything else is pretty much up for grabs.

The Post of the Day Award goes to..........Beezzer

Well said my friend.

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:19 PM
reply to post by Aleister

So you are saying NOT to quote alternate media sources with regards to the mainstream media? Would the MSM ever publish a story with regards to its own decline? I am gonna take a wild guess and say "no" (MSM outlets bashing each other's ratings not withstanding... they do love to gloat over numbers, after all).

Alternate progressive news sites won't carry this story either... the MSM has been pushing the progressive agenda for a very long time. To admit the defeat of the MSM is to also admit defeat of the agenda...

edit on 27-3-2014 by madmac5150 because: Diahhrea of the keyboard...

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:29 PM
reply to post by madmac5150

No, I said none of that. But please name your source when posting a source (at least I try to do that). I don't like clicking on every link, and I knew yours, once I got to it and got the ad bombardment, would also be adding on things to my computer and using my cookies to feed on. I should (talking to myself) stick to a few sites and remember not to click on every link.

Anyway, as I said, the source was quoting figures from 2013, a non-election year. And that's all I was saying, nothing implied in any direction except that I'm sure the networks knew viewership would decline.

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:40 PM
Biggest reason for me is on twitter or social media, you get much faster updates on what is happening and are given facts. They aren't always correct and sometimes are backed by an agenda, but you can quickly skim through if you want, weigh all the information yourself and come to your own conclusion. Social media puts eyes and ears everywhere with immediate reporting. It cuts out the story lines.

On the other side, we have MSM creating story lines and spending much time stating opinion. In this day and age when information comes very quick through social media, far fewer people have the patience to sit there and listen to an opinion based debate between two talking heads on MSM.

I think technology has made this society way too focused on instant gratification. However, this is one upside to it. You can get quick and more accurate updates by skimming through twitter for two minutes than you can watching an hour of an MSM show, whether on CNN, MSNBC or FoxNews. If you notice, those stations rely heavily on tv personalities, attractive female hosts, they cater to a specific target audience and set of values. Social media does none of that, it's the opposite as long as you're looking in the right places. There is no need for a show built around a tv personality, instead you get raw facts/experience in real time. There is no need to build a show around a host like Megan Kelly where here abrasive personality is part of the watching experience. No, social media just spits out facts/live updates. Alternative news doesn't target specific audiences anywhere near the extent a left or right leaning MSM outlet does. There's no need for a target audience in the first place. It's free-flowing information. You're not reliant on pulling in viewers with specific beliefs.

What MSM fails to recognize is social media has cut out all the nonsense you see on MSM tv shows and filters news much quicker, much more efficiently. Instead of completely altering their strategy to keep up with social media and compete with social media, they instead choose to dramatize and over-report various story lines while pushing the personality/persona of a tv host. They haven't figured out yet that in this new age of social media, personality/persona/story lines means far less to the average person than giving he or she quick, unfiltered news.

Really, the MSM is run by dinosaurs who are far too arrogant and stuck in their ways to realize the world around them is changing much quicker than they realize. By the way America, that's a good reason to start employing more young people! Your perspective is stale. You're out of touch in corporate America. I say that as an American. Far too many out of touch baby boomers running everything at the top and while they cut off the younger generation due to the supposed lack of experience they have, they're closing themselves off to the quickly changing world most under the ages of 35-40 now live in. Really, tuning in to MSM is almost like going through a time warp, unless you're a person who still wakes up, goes outside to get today's paper and sits down and reads that with your coffee and toast. I still see that everyday and those people are more than likely the ones still tuning into MSM the most on a regular basis, yet they're a quickly dying breed.
edit on 27-3-2014 by MysticPearl because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:59 PM
The actual answer.
People are simply choosing to become less informed.

Who wants to watch the news for a hour when you could be watching the latest (insert pop culture reference here..typically involving beautiful 19 year olds singing).

News has become not news so much as angry partisan moaning...whats the point in watching that. Just makes the average person feel less in control regardless of where they stand on any, tune out, focus in on just having smiles and a laugh.

I understand the draw...I don't approve of it, but I understand it.
For my mental masochism, I choose to remain somewhat informed and frustrated verses uninformed and happy...but the news isn't for everyone anyhow outside of weather need to be fully informed unless it is time to vote for, I tend to not get too bent out of shape so long as before elections, people stop and do at least a little bit of research into actions and issues. (this is where I do get bent out of shape when they vote for who looks the best verses acts in their interests)

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 02:11 PM
reply to post by madmac5150

Why are the ratings in such a massive decline for MSM news outlets?

I think the reasons you listed are valid, but I think the general shift from tv to interwebz affects viewership the most. Most people I know are running interwebz thru their TV's these days, abandoning dish services and their excessive advertising.
I would like to think the main reason is people are tired of being divided and pitted against one another, but I don't think that has happened on a widespread level yet. I think people have grown desensitized to sensationalism and are starting to recognize hype more.
ess, I am glad to hear this and in the spirit of truth, we should all seek alternative sources and do some cross referencing.
I really like Ben Swann, who was a guest here at ATS some time ago. His site, and ATS are my main sources for news now.

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 02:22 PM
reply to post by madmac5150

As the PTB lose control over the propaganda machine that is mainstream media they will look for new ways to get the message out.

Movies and TV shows.........Websites like this will see a surge in paid posters.......Comments sections will also be flooded.

We will no longer know who is passionate and who is payed. When they lose at this game and you had better believe they will, they will be out of options.

edit on 27-3-2014 by SubTruth because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 02:28 PM
reply to post by madmac5150

Who needs MSM when you have ATS!


posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 02:54 PM
I'll buck the trend and admit that I still watch the news, both national and local, every evening. While I also get news from other sources throughout the day, I think that it is useful to see what the mass media is going on about, and it's generally the same stories (less the crazy stuff, like ziggurats on the moon, or Mars rats,) that you'll see on most interwebs news sites (including this one.) The difference is that they give you the biggest stories (in their judgement, which may be different than yours,) and jettison the stuff that has no relevance for almost everyone.

The media "has been dying" since I was in journalism school in 1980, but they're still around today, and that's because they still provide a useful service. Whether you agree with them or not, the filter that they apply to the vast volumes of information that is competing for your eyeballs is something that most people appreciate.

As a centralist, I have never had any interest in the ridiculously biased views of CNN, MSNBC and FOX News, so I couldn't care less if they fail or not.

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 03:25 PM
reply to post by adjensen

Well the news is the same every year then. It starts off with obesity in january,then smoking i.e in public places,then in february its energy bills-gay rights, steven lawrence case,maddie mcann,march is for celebrity afairs ,peodophiles and injustices. April is smoking again,bit of muslim peodophilia,rapists and plebgate crap,may is when they go on about s.t.d s and sunscreen., june is more celebs marriages,july is climate change and divorces,steven lawrence,maddie mccan and privacy ....... so on etc etc
The same old same old

Its relentless crap

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 03:36 PM
reply to post by madmac5150

I can't speak for anyone else, but as for me, every time I watch MSNBC I feel like my intelligence is being insulted. Not too long ago they had some pundits discussing the gun bans in CT after the Sandy Hook tragedy, and one of them said with a straight face that "strict gun control laws are why people want to move to Connecticut".

As a life long resident of Connecticut, I can tell you with complete confidence there isn't a single person moving to CT because of our gun control laws. People are in fact moving out of Connecticut because of the badly mismanaged economy here. I personally know THREE people who are leaving becuase they literally can't afford to retire here. I would very much like to find that woman so the people of Connecticut could line up to slap the stupid off her face.

Don't get me started on Treyvon Martin. After that happened, MSNBC became the Treyvon Martin Channel, with "All Treyvon Marton reporting, all the time". Literally nothing else was happening in the world to MSNBC, not even weather.
edit on 27-3-2014 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 03:45 PM
reply to post by madmac5150

A quite important thread no matter how often the line is drawn. F&S.
In a more guided redirect Mac (there's a divergence from my irregular sarc) I'll have to agree with 2 through 4 equally as you listed them. Dr. Brezinski gave that speech to the Big Boys a couple of years ago about the global awakening. And in disregard of the Supremes calling it "not illegal" for the mainstream to lie to the viewing/listening public, a lot more of us than ten years ago are doing more digging for ourselves and not getting cranial injections of BS from the big space heater.

I believe the steadily decreasing viewer ratings are a positive sign and a warning to us--
because in the last analysis our being properly informed is the gov's #1 nightmare.
Shut down the Internet, grab the guns, and medicate us into meat sticks hook or crook: everything out there in plain sight lately is indicating Doc Zbignew is dead right.
Keep the faith-- but don't forget to stock up on other stuff too

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 03:53 PM
MSNBCs marketers and execs should be reading this thread and wondering why not a SINGLE poster from left, right or middle sheds a tear over their numbers declining.

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 03:59 PM

reply to post by madmac5150

One of my thoughts, is the loss in viewership may equal the number of people who have transferred their time, that used to be spent watching the parrot networks, over to social media. They are now spending that time getting their news bite input from tweeting, facebook and such, on computers and hand held devices.

I still check in with the boob toob, just to track how far behind they are in reporting what I get first on my computer. It's amusing to watch the MSM , with much fanfare, report a so called *breaking story*, that turns out to be something many a time, I've read online days ago.

Plus, the days of active feet on the ground real reporters is long gone. It's all celebrity faces, reading what is shoved in front of them, acting like they actually know what they are talking about.


edit on 27-3-2014 by Destinyone because: (no reason given)

A good point at the last, among others Des. Those of us mature enough to remember when commentary wasn't the majority of news reporting are in the minority. I had a couple of opportunities to tune into Alex's show (OK flame me now) when Rappaport was filling in. The delivery was different as night and day, and I remember when that guy with the light trench coat and darker hair (didn't we all) was holding a microphone instead of an agenda. He's picked a fight in recent years, and is admirably engaged in exposing childrens' vaccines for the documented poison they really are.

A quote from one of the last good ones: "Suppressing the truth is similar to trying to hold a completely inflated beach ball underwater." Good reason to like him, thanks Des for letting me be your guest.

edit on 27-3-2014 by derfreebie because: Typo A negative, but the Rh in decreasing frequency

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 04:10 PM
It’s the same old politics, politics, politics.

Why don’t they have more on new trends in health, food, spirituality, positive entertainment, new ideas, real art, something that might fire the imagination of people rather than the same old redundant negative political gamesmanship….It gets old and boring after a while so people are turning away from it.

The first MSM outlet that does venture out into something challenging and new may get an edge up but I don’t think it will happen

The MSM outlets are designed for the lowest level of the human mind so they cater to that.

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 04:47 PM

MSNBCs marketers and execs should be reading this thread and wondering why not a SINGLE poster from left, right or middle sheds a tear over their numbers declining.

I think that fact alone is quite telling... why has no one stepped up to defend the MSM? Is this the one thing that most, if not all ATSers agree with... that the MSM needs to either fail completely, or make fundamental changes to stay relevant?

<< 1    3  4 >>

log in