Who exactly is conservative news programs aimed at?

[chris_brown207]

I have noticed a trend, and it could totally be my imagination. I get my news from a variety of news sources. When I hear breaking news, I will usually switch over to a number of different channels so I can get their take on it. And I share work space with work mates who are avid conservative radio listeners.

One easy way I have found to determine who the demographics of any TV or radio program is by listening to the commercials. For example, if you watch golf on TV, you will be exposed to commercials for Mercedes, luxury condos, quality watches etc. because their demographic is older wealthier Americans.

If you watch Jerry Springer or Maury Povich, you will see commercials for Tax Attorneys, get rich quick schemes, buy gold now, and even sexual supplements. I would take this to mean that their demographic are less wealthy, or under educated Americans.

So, my question is why does it seem that conservative radio, such as Fox News Radio, or conservative TV such as Fox News carry a lot of the same advertising as daytime scandal talk TV programs? (Or is it just my imagination)

If is not my imagination, who is the demographic?

[East of Eden]

I have noticed a trend, and it could totally be my imagination. I get my news from a variety of news sources. When I hear breaking news, I will usually switch over to a number of different channels so I can get their take on it. And I share work space with work mates who are avid conservative radio listeners.

One easy way I have found to determine who the demographics of any TV or radio program is by listening to the commercials. For example, if you watch golf on TV, you will be exposed to commercials for Mercedes, luxury condos, quality watches etc. because their demographic is older wealthier Americans.

If you watch Jerry Springer or Maury Povich, you will see commercials for Tax Attorneys, get rich quick schemes, buy gold now, and even sexual supplements. I would take this to mean that their demographic are less wealthy, or under educated Americans.

So, my question is why does it seem that conservative radio, such as Fox News Radio, or conservative TV such as Fox News carry a lot of the same advertising as daytime scandal talk TV programs? (Or is it just my imagination)

If is not my imagination, who is the demographic?

Here's a survey that shows FOX viewers are slightly more educated and wealthier than CNN viewers:

http://www.nationaltvspots.com/ntvs-networks

BTW, do you really think those buying gold are less educated and wealthy? Maybe the ones selling gold.

[chris_brown207]

Here's a survey that shows FOX viewers are slightly more educated and wealthier than CNN viewers:

http://www.nationaltvspots.com/ntvs-networks

BTW, do you really think those buying gold are less educated and wealthy? Maybe the ones selling gold.

While your source does show Fox news to have more watchers who have attended a college by 1 percentile point, it also shows that CNN has more watchers that have an income of $75K or greater by two percentile points - so I would say that there is a stronger case to show CNN watchers being wealthier than Fox viewers being more educated (especially since it does not indicate whether a degree was obtained - just whether college was attended). The almost exact same results can be found for MSNBC.

However, it does not change my original question - which is why Fox Radio and certain conservative news programs seem to share the same type of advertising as scandal TV?

(BTW, I don't think people are less educated because they are buying gold... IF they were buying it 5 years ago. Often you can trace a trend about to form by where the majority of the advertising dollars are being spent. Seeing as how the great majority is being focused on getting people to invest in gold - I would be willing to bet we are going to see something in the next year or two that will erase what many economists see as inflation in the gold market. The same type advertising was evident leading up to the housing crash - "Buy houses now, or miss out on an incredible investment..." As one investor once told me - "The Smart Investor, when he sees everyone running towards an investment, will be the one running away from it." The greatest money is made not by following trends, but by predicting new ones.)

[East of Eden]

Here's a survey that shows FOX viewers are slightly more educated and wealthier than CNN viewers:

http://www.nationaltvspots.com/ntvs-networks

BTW, do you really think those buying gold are less educated and wealthy? Maybe the ones selling gold.

While your source does show Fox news to have more watchers who have attended a college by 1 percentile point, it also shows that CNN has more watchers that have an income of $75K or greater by two percentile points - so I would say that there is a stronger case to show CNN watchers being wealthier than Fox viewers being more educated (especially since it does not indicate whether a degree was obtained - just whether college was attended). The almost exact same results can be found for MSNBC.

Again, the results showed FOX viewers as slightly wealthier and better educated.

However, it does not change my original question - which is why Fox Radio and certain conservative news programs seem to share the same type of advertising as scandal TV?

I haven't notices that, I suspect it has to do with the time of day. I have noticed on the CBS evening news for instance, the ads seem to be for dentures, wheelchairs and other items reflecting an older audience.

(BTW, I don't think people are less educated because they are buying gold... IF they were buying it 5 years ago. Often you can trace a trend about to form by where the majority of the advertising dollars are being spent. Seeing as how the great majority is being focused on getting people to invest in gold - I would be willing to bet we are going to see something in the next year or two that will erase what many economists see as inflation in the gold market. The same type advertising was evident leading up to the housing crash - "Buy houses now, or miss out on an incredible investment..." As one investor once told me - "The Smart Investor, when he sees everyone running towards an investment, will be the one running away from it." The greatest money is made not by following trends, but by predicting new ones.)

The gold situation is not comparable to the housing boom, when everybody was involved and the government was pushing banks to loan money to people so they could buy a house. I would say less than 3% of Americans are into gold to a significant degree, so 'everyone' is not doing it. The talking heads on the cable business channels aren't promoting gold, they are stock market perma bulls despite their miserable track record the last ten years. The last ten years those guys have been saying gold has peaked, it will crash, 'you have to be crazy to buy $1,000 gold', etc. None of the factors that have caused the gold rise have changed. IMHO we are in a long term gold bull market and a long term stock bear market. Fighting the trend is not wise. I agree the gold bull market will end when prosperity returns, but that is years away. There is no limit to how low the dollar can sink. Think about this: In 1913 if you had a $20 gold piece it would be worth about $1800 today, if you had a $20 bill in 1913 it would be worth about $1 in purchasing power compared to 1913. I don't see that trend changing. I don't see holding gold as a way to get rich, but as a way to preserve what assets I have. Short of default, the only way the government can deal with our $15 trillion debt is by printing money, which is ultimately inflationary. Gold has always been money, I predict the fiat money experiment will end badly, followed by some kind of gold standard. This isn't just a US issue, we are just 8% of world gold demand. What is going on is a worldwide rejection of fiat currency.

[chris_brown207]

Again, the results showed FOX viewers as slightly wealthier and better educated.

I am not quite sure where the difficulty in understanding is coming from. Once again, using your source, the results show that Fox viewers are more likely to have attended college by only 1 percentile point, while CNN and MSNBC viewers are more likely to have incomes over $75K by 2 percentile points. So, no Fox viewers are not wealthier.

The gold situation is not comparable to the housing boom, when everybody was involved and the government was pushing banks to loan money to people so they could buy a house. I would say less than 3% of Americans are into gold to a significant degree, so 'everyone' is not doing it. The talking heads on the cable business channels aren't promoting gold, they are stock market perma bulls despite their miserable track record the last ten years. The last ten years those guys have been saying gold has peaked, it will crash, 'you have to be crazy to buy $1,000 gold', etc. None of the factors that have caused the gold rise have changed. IMHO we are in a long term gold bull market and a long term stock bear market. Fighting the trend is not wise. I agree the gold bull market will end when prosperity returns, but that is years away. There is no limit to how low the dollar can sink. Think about this: In 1913 if you had a $20 gold piece it would be worth about $1800 today, if you had a $20 bill in 1913 it would be worth about $1 in purchasing power compared to 1913. I don't see that trend changing. I don't see holding gold as a way to get rich, but as a way to preserve what assets I have. Short of default, the only way the government can deal with our $15 trillion debt is by printing money, which is ultimately inflationary. Gold has always been money, I predict the fiat money experiment will end badly, followed by some kind of gold standard. This isn't just a US issue, we are just 8% of world gold demand. What is going on is a worldwide rejection of fiat currency.

This is a matter of opinion. I find that the current gold situation to have many similarities with the housing crash. I have heard the same arguments about how housing was a foolproof investment, right up until the day that the dominoes started falling. Matter of fact, it is usually right after people start crowing about how the "Titanic cannot sink" that the guy in the crows nest starts screaming something about "ice" and "ahead".

I think there is very strong reason why those holding gold right now are paying for so much advertising to entice people to buy it - they can see what is coming around the corner. The gold market is already starting to flatten out, and soften even. The only reason it hasn't crashed is that the Federal Reserve is still pushing such extremely low interest rates. At some point the Fed will HAVE to increase interest rates to entice investors back to T-Bonds (especially since this latest conflagration has further demonstrated our inability to balance our own checkbook and put into question our reliability in repaying our debts). The moment interest rates increase - investors will jump back on T-bonds as they are considered safer then most other global investments at the moment (including gold, as many feel there is much speculation involved in the pricing). The bottom will fall out on gold - probably not as spectacular a fall as the housing market, but a noticeable depreciation all the same.

But, as I said, that is just my opinion on the matter. I think I will continue looking for other investments, as IMHO gold has lost most if not all of its sheen.

[dianaiad]

I have noticed a trend, and it could totally be my imagination.

It's totally your imagination. I read this thread, and since I couldn't sleep well (waaaay too much turkey yesterday) I decided to do a little actual research. First, I looked into the statistics someone else posted here regarding the comparative demographics between CNN and FOX news. The demographics are a statistical dead heat--y'all are arguing about 1 or 2 percentage points? Really?

As to your perception that Fox News is aiming at the same audience as daily soap opera watchers and scandal programing folks, well, yes, there is some truth in that. THOSE ARE THE FOLKS WHO ARE HOME WATCHING TV at the time. CNN aims at the same folks at that same time.

So what I did is to find the folks who purchase advertising on the two networks, and here is where I discovered your own perceptual bias.

I hope that you will agree that you will only see commercials from people who actually buy time on the network, right?

OK, then..CNN and FOX share many of the same sponsors; Hyundai, for instance. However, Infiniti, Mercedes Benz and other luxury car folks seem to like Fox better. FOX does have 'buy gold' people---and so does CNN. CNN also has oil company sponsorship, and FOX doesn't seem to have a single "Exxon" type sponsor on the list.

In fact, from looking at this list (which is easily found online...just look up 'boycott Fox News'--sorry that haven't provided the links, but I got so involved in actually compiling the list that I missed it. I do have that list in a doc.file if you want it, though) I see that there are very few cleaning products, some food products, medical products...and mostly stuff aimed at high end buyers. Nowhere near as many 'buy gold' folks as you think, ALL the luxury automobile companies, cell phone providers, vacation/travel providers,

In fact, your assumption is both false AND with a definite perceptual bias. Sorry about that.

[East of Eden]

I am not quite sure where the difficulty in understanding is coming from. Once again, using your source, the results show that Fox viewers are more likely to have attended college by only 1 percentile point, while CNN and MSNBC viewers are more likely to have incomes over $75K by 2 percentile points. So, no Fox viewers are not wealthier.

I must have misread it, FOX viewers are 1 percentile more educated, CNN viewers are 1 percentile more wealthy. Pretty insignificant differences. It is interesting that 36% of Rush listeners make over $100K a year, 50% have attended college and 21% have attended grad school. Anyway, dianaiad above this post has pretty much disproved your attempted smear of conservative news.

This is a matter of opinion. I find that the current gold situation to have many similarities with the housing crash. I have heard the same arguments about how housing was a foolproof investment, right up until the day that the dominoes started falling. Matter of fact, it is usually right after people start crowing about how the "Titanic cannot sink" that the guy in the crows nest starts screaming something about "ice" and "ahead".

I think there is very strong reason why those holding gold right now are paying for so much advertising to entice people to buy it - they can see what is coming around the corner. The gold market is already starting to flatten out, and soften even. The only reason it hasn't crashed is that the Federal Reserve is still pushing such extremely low interest rates. At some point the Fed will HAVE to increase interest rates to entice investors back to T-Bonds (especially since this latest conflagration has further demonstrated our inability to balance our own checkbook and put into question our reliability in repaying our debts). The moment interest rates increase - investors will jump back on T-bonds as they are considered safer then most other global investments at the moment (including gold, as many feel there is much speculation involved in the pricing). The bottom will fall out on gold - probably not as spectacular a fall as the housing market, but a noticeable depreciation all the same.

The flaw in the housing boom argument was the idea that housing prices would keep going up, the flaw in the dollar situation is the assumption that interest rates will remain low. When they do go up, how will the government service the $15 trillion debt other than printing more money and devaluing the currency? Its a Catch 22 situation. The recent decline in gold prices is due to the crash in the stock market, people are probably selling gold assets because they are getting hammered in the stock market. The same thing happened in 2008 when the market crashed, gold fell 30% from $1,000 to $700, but it bounced back much quicker and since then is up over 100%. Since 2001 the stock market has been flat, and adjusted for inflation is down about 20%.

When it is time to get out of gold, it will be a quick and simple process, unlike selling a house. I hope that day does arrive, as it will mean things have improved. Little chance of that under Obama. If he gets re-elected it will take a long time to unwind the damage.

But, as I said, that is just my opinion on the matter. I think I will continue looking for other investments, as IMHO gold has lost most if not all of its sheen.

Gold is up 20% for the year, and the last decade has had a better return than Warren Buffet has gotten in every year but one. Are you a better investor than he? Again, none of the factors behind the gold rise have changed, and IMHO are only accelerating. I think QEIII is coming to artificially pump up the disastrous stock market before the election, which will only be good for gold.

[dianaiad]

I am not quite sure where the difficulty in understanding is coming from. Once again, using your source, the results show that Fox viewers are more likely to have attended college by only 1 percentile point, while CNN and MSNBC viewers are more likely to have incomes over $75K by 2 percentile points. So, no Fox viewers are not wealthier.

I must have misread it, FOX viewers are 1 percentile more educated, CNN viewers are 1 percentile more wealthy. Pretty insignificant differences. It is interesting that 36% of Rush listeners make over $100K a year, 50% have attended college and 21% have attended grad school. Anyway, dianaiad above this post has pretty much disproved your attempted smear of conservative news.

This is a matter of opinion. I find that the current gold situation to have many similarities with the housing crash. I have heard the same arguments about how housing was a foolproof investment, right up until the day that the dominoes started falling. Matter of fact, it is usually right after people start crowing about how the "Titanic cannot sink" that the guy in the crows nest starts screaming something about "ice" and "ahead".

I think there is very strong reason why those holding gold right now are paying for so much advertising to entice people to buy it - they can see what is coming around the corner. The gold market is already starting to flatten out, and soften even. The only reason it hasn't crashed is that the Federal Reserve is still pushing such extremely low interest rates. At some point the Fed will HAVE to increase interest rates to entice investors back to T-Bonds (especially since this latest conflagration has further demonstrated our inability to balance our own checkbook and put into question our reliability in repaying our debts). The moment interest rates increase - investors will jump back on T-bonds as they are considered safer then most other global investments at the moment (including gold, as many feel there is much speculation involved in the pricing). The bottom will fall out on gold - probably not as spectacular a fall as the housing market, but a noticeable depreciation all the same.

The flaw in the housing boom argument was the idea that housing prices would keep going up, the flaw in the dollar situation is the assumption that interest rates will remain low. When they do go up, how will the government service the $15 trillion debt other than printing more money and devaluing the currency? Its a Catch 22 situation. The recent decline in gold prices is due to the crash in the stock market, people are probably selling gold assets because they are getting hammered in the stock market. The same thing happened in 2008 when the market crashed, gold fell 30% from $1,000 to $700, but it bounced back much quicker and since then is up over 100%. Since 2001 the stock market has been flat, and adjusted for inflation is down about 20%.

When it is time to get out of gold, it will be a quick and simple process, unlike selling a house. I hope that day does arrive, as it will mean things have improved. Little chance of that under Obama. If he gets re-elected it will take a long time to unwind the damage.

But, as I said, that is just my opinion on the matter. I think I will continue looking for other investments, as IMHO gold has lost most if not all of its sheen.

Gold is up 20% for the year, and the last decade has had a better return than Warren Buffet has gotten in every year but one. Are you a better investor than he? Again, none of the factors behind the gold rise have changed, and IMHO are only accelerating. I think QEIII is coming to artificially pump up the disastrous stock market before the election, which will only be good for gold.

I"m going to interject an opinion here (like that's news..) and issuing a disclaimer; I'm dyscalculaic. Officially. It's an honest to goodness learning disability, like dyslexia only with numbers. Basically, what it means is that I can't add five and five and get ten three times running. It's frustrating. I need a keeper...and my bank has a specific teller who deals with me and others with similar problems.

From all the jargon filled advice coming at me throughout this economic carnival ride, I get the impression that it comes down to one principle; when money is volitile, buy "things." Gold is a 'thing.' It sticks around. It doesn't evaporate. Doesn't burn down, decay, get eaten or used. It may become a ring, a necklace or coating on electronic contact points, but it doesn't go away. It is, literally, star stuff (well so are we all, but, well....you get the idea).

So when the medium of exchange we all use to substitute for barter goes sideways, having a 'thing' that will remain is generally a good idea, right? At this moment, I have a house. I was lucky enough to buy it three years ago, when the housing market was close to bottomed out, so my house is worth just a little more today than it was when I bought it. I'm not 'upside down.' Nor does it look like I'll be that way. I may not make a lot of money on it, but it's still worth what I paid for it. It's a 'thing.'

I may be wrong (dyscalculaic, remember?) but right now, I would not put money (which, frankly, is 'virtual wealth' anyway you want to look at it) in a stock or savings account. I'd buy the 'things' I need to live, survive, and use to continue to live and survive. Food storage. Good farm land (especially good farm land, right now!) houses. Gold.

Alas, I don't have any virtual wealth to buy 'things.'

[chris_brown207]

It's totally your imagination. I read this thread, and since I couldn't sleep well (waaaay too much turkey yesterday) I decided to do a little actual research. First, I looked into the statistics someone else posted here regarding the comparative demographics between CNN and FOX news. The demographics are a statistical dead heat--y'all are arguing about 1 or 2 percentage points? Really?

As to your perception that Fox News is aiming at the same audience as daily soap opera watchers and scandal programing folks, well, yes, there is some truth in that. THOSE ARE THE FOLKS WHO ARE HOME WATCHING TV at the time. CNN aims at the same folks at that same time.

So what I did is to find the folks who purchase advertising on the two networks, and here is where I discovered your own perceptual bias.

I hope that you will agree that you will only see commercials from people who actually buy time on the network, right?

OK, then..CNN and FOX share many of the same sponsors; Hyundai, for instance. However, Infiniti, Mercedes Benz and other luxury car folks seem to like Fox better. FOX does have 'buy gold' people---and so does CNN. CNN also has oil company sponsorship, and FOX doesn't seem to have a single "Exxon" type sponsor on the list.

In fact, from looking at this list (which is easily found online...just look up 'boycott Fox News'--sorry that haven't provided the links, but I got so involved in actually compiling the list that I missed it. I do have that list in a doc.file if you want it, though) I see that there are very few cleaning products, some food products, medical products...and mostly stuff aimed at high end buyers. Nowhere near as many 'buy gold' folks as you think, ALL the luxury automobile companies, cell phone providers, vacation/travel providers,

In fact, your assumption is both false AND with a definite perceptual bias. Sorry about that.

As I said, it could totally be my imagination. However, I listen to Fox Radio almost every day, and I listen to regular radio every day. The commercials are not the same. (Matter of fact, I am not quite sure what commercials are doing on paid satellite radio in the first place.) But there is a definite slant to the commercials. This post was purely anecdotal to see if it was just me or if others had noticed. If it turns out to be just perceptual, I will be more then happy to rescind the premise.

As for TV, I don't watch much TV at all. I don't even have cable, or an antennae at my home. I would be interested to see the study you quoted though. You didn't list any links to look at the data.

[chris_brown207]

I"m going to interject an opinion here (like that's news..) and issuing a disclaimer; I'm dyscalculaic. Officially. It's an honest to goodness learning disability, like dyslexia only with numbers. Basically, what it means is that I can't add five and five and get ten three times running. It's frustrating. I need a keeper...and my bank has a specific teller who deals with me and others with similar problems.

From all the jargon filled advice coming at me throughout this economic carnival ride, I get the impression that it comes down to one principle; when money is volitile, buy "things." Gold is a 'thing.' It sticks around. It doesn't evaporate. Doesn't burn down, decay, get eaten or used. It may become a ring, a necklace or coating on electronic contact points, but it doesn't go away. It is, literally, star stuff (well so are we all, but, well....you get the idea).

So when the medium of exchange we all use to substitute for barter goes sideways, having a 'thing' that will remain is generally a good idea, right? At this moment, I have a house. I was lucky enough to buy it three years ago, when the housing market was close to bottomed out, so my house is worth just a little more today than it was when I bought it. I'm not 'upside down.' Nor does it look like I'll be that way. I may not make a lot of money on it, but it's still worth what I paid for it. It's a 'thing.'

I may be wrong (dyscalculaic, remember?) but right now, I would not put money (which, frankly, is 'virtual wealth' anyway you want to look at it) in a stock or savings account. I'd buy the 'things' I need to live, survive, and use to continue to live and survive. Food storage. Good farm land (especially good farm land, right now!) houses. Gold.

Alas, I don't have any virtual wealth to buy 'things.'

I respect your opinion, and hope your calculative troubles improve with time. You are correct - gold is a "thing". It is a hard asset which can be bought and sold easily at market. However, just like homes, the price for gold can fluctuate depending on market value. There is not much difference in gold and houses as assets - as both can be bought outright with cash or through various "loan" programs. In houses these loan programs are called mortgages, in gold they are called derivatives, futures, shorts, etc. And just like homes, you can be upside down on the value of gold - meaning it was bought for more then it is currently worth.

The value of gold is just as susceptible to speculation as the value of homes were prior to the crash. And there are experts, although probably in the minority (just as the experts who were predicting the housing crash were leading up to the crash) who don't think that gold will continue its meteoric rise, and who think there is a speculative bubble in the gold markets right now. I don't think gold will crash as large as the housing industry did, but I think that most of the profit has already been bled out of it. It will continue to grow over time (just as the value of lands does on average), but as a short term investment I think that it is not a safe bet. As I said before, it is usually right when people start to talk about the infallibility of an investment that it crashes soon after. And most savvy investors, when everyone is running to an investment, are the ones running out of it.

But again, just my opinion - which is of little to no importance in the grand scheme of things.