Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How does Fox vs. CNN compare in topic/event coverage over the last week?

topdown.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 126 posts

Re: How does Fox vs. CNN compare in topic/event coverage over the last week?

#111

Post by NaturalPhallacy »

Volundr wrote: post #104
NaturalPhallacy wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's a story then? People in this thread are arguing that it isn't.

No, they are arguing that's it's not a story this week. The first pig->human heart transplant took place earlier this year. Is Fox ignoring it because they haven't covered it this week? Or is it not news because there are no new developments?

No, they're literally arguing it isn't a story, right in this same thread:

>It should be noted that the four stories that CNN didn't cover aren't actually real stories, but are bordering on conspiracy theories.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32514411

Re: How does Fox vs. CNN compare in topic/event coverage over the last week?

#112

Post by raydev »

timbit42 wrote: post #77
ziddoap wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 60% of Republicans turn to Fox News for political news and 53% of Democrats turn to CNN It'd be nice to see comparisons of all the news networks, but if you're going to start somewhere it seems like the two which have the majority of viewers seems appropriate.

It's interesting that CNN's website has more than double the website visits as FoxNews's website does. * CNN.com: 524 million * NYtimes.com: 449.9m * FoxNews.com: 263m * WashingtonPost.com: 156.9m * CNBC.com: 144.5m * NYPost.com: 119.6m * Forbes.com: 85.7m * USAToday.com: 85.5m * BusinessInsider.com: 80.7m * NPR.org: 76.6m Source: SimilarWeb.com

I'll make a wild guess and say that Fox News's audience trends much older.

And as sibling comment says, CNN is well known internationally.

Re: How does Fox vs. CNN compare in topic/event coverage over the last week?

#113

Post by amscanne »

ajross wrote: post #95
amscanne wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Increasing funding for enforcement for the IRS is something that I personally feel is a good thing, but I think it’s fair to cover it in light of the fact that it seems to be colored by politics, like so much else. Why on earth would the Democrats pronounce that it won’t be used to audit anywhere earning less than $400k? As an extension of the anti-rich rhetoric, it’s no longer a simple “bureaucratic funding decision…

I keep bouncing around on how to respond to this. But really you have this exactly backwards: you think we should pay more attention to a subject (i.e. dedicate our limited "news" bandwidth to understanding it) because political actors want us to think it's important. And, no, I think that's exactly backwards. The fact that one side is predicting tax armageddon and the other is explaining that it only soaks the rich…

Nothing in my comment prescribes who or what you should pay attention to.

First you’re bothered by what networks are covering. Then I explain why these topics may be interesting. So then you say I’m backwards because I shouldn’t pay attention to what they are covering. Good grief: why are you bothering to complain about what they’re covering in the first place? Isn’t your first comment backwards for the exact same reason?

Re: How does Fox vs. CNN compare in topic/event coverage over the last week?

#114

Post by BeetleB »

ziddoap wrote: post #67
BeetleB wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't provide much useful info. That one item is much crappier than another crappy item is not very helpful information.

> That one item is much crappier than another crappy item is not very helpful information. How is it not? If my options are crap, crappy, super crap and super-extra-duper crap... It seems helpful to know which one is the least crappy. As an aside, are you willing to share which news station you don't put in the crap bucket?

> How is it not? If my options are crap, crappy, super crap and super-extra-duper crap... It seems helpful to know which one is the least crappy.

It's also helpful to know that they are all crappy, which this didn't show.

This is a relative study. If instead they set up some reasonable objective criteria and ranked each news sources according to it, that would be useful. I may see that CNN scores only 20%, and Fox News scores only 10%. Yes, CNN would be better, but it would also tell me not to waste time on either.

> As an aside, are you willing to share which news station you don't put in the crap bucket?

I was a news junkie a decade ago, and weaned myself off of it. Things have likely changed since those years so it would be hard to suggest some now - I've heard sources like The Guardian have gone downhill, for example.

In general, print sources are way better. Even a mediocre print source tends to be better than almost all video/TV news. Radio is somewhere in between.

McClatchy DC[1] was one resource I would recommend in those days. It's a "general purpose" news organization and one of the few mainstream publications that often covered items neglected by the rest. Most hadn't heard of it, but the parent organization owns several well known print newspapers.

I see they filed for bankruptcy in 2020. I don't know if they've been able to maintain the quality.

As much as I dislike the NY Times, it's still way ahead of CNN/Fox/MSNBC.

[1] https://www.mcclatchydc.com/

Re: How does Fox vs. CNN compare in topic/event coverage over the last week?

#115

Post by BeetleB »

timbit42 wrote: post #89
BeetleB wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's mostly above board, if biased. Above board does not equate with quality. CNN is pretty crap compared to most big print newspapers.

Pretty much all TV news is crap compared to big print newspapers.

Which is why I tell people that if they're getting their news from TV, they're doing it wrong.

Re: How does Fox vs. CNN compare in topic/event coverage over the last week?

#116

Post by BeetleB »

jollybean wrote: post #70
BeetleB wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's mostly above board, if biased. Above board does not equate with quality. CNN is pretty crap compared to most big print newspapers.

Above Board definitely correlates with quality, because it implies truthiness, which is obviously a key consideration. CNN is a broadcast news channel that covers things as they happen, not a newspaper where they write articles as long as they like. So you'd compare it to MSNBC and Fox and possibly Network News, not news papers.

> Above Board definitely correlates with quality, because it implies truthiness, which is obviously a key consideration.

It is one of many factors. You can have a news source that is 100% accurate and virtually useless.

> CNN is a broadcast news channel that covers things as they happen, not a newspaper where they write articles as long as they like.

> So you'd compare it to MSNBC and Fox and possibly Network News, not news papers.

Depends on your goals. If you want relevant and accurate, then print is better. If you want breaking news as soon as it happens and can't wait a day - sure, TV news is better (still worse than radio). In my experience, less than 1% of TV news content is needed by 99% of Americans on the same day it occurs. They're not worse off if they find out the next day.

On top of that, a lot of "breaking news" is riddled with errors and speculation. If you want to know what happened, as opposed to what may have happened, it's simpler to wait. When I was a news addict, I was drowning with too much content. I put limits on myself: Once a month I would catch up with the news feeds (could take over a week to do so), and it quickly became obvious how relatively worthless "early" news was. I'd get all the relevant information by reading a fifth of the articles.

Re: How does Fox vs. CNN compare in topic/event coverage over the last week?

#117

Post by BeetleB »

mywittyname wrote: post #27
s3r3nity wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I’m more intrigued by topics that are suspiciously absent from BOTH sources. E.g. it is surprisingly difficult to find any TV news coverage of the wild macroeconomic trends going on with China’s banking and real-estate sector at the moment. Also: Epstein trial follow-ups; Ghislaine Maxwell living it up after a guilty verdict. Remember when Bill Gates and many other leaders/ politicians were found to have a _p…

I don't think people give a care about China at this point because things are so bad at home. There's really no obvious way that this affects Americans, so why bother talking about it? Plus, the crisis in China has been going on for so long at this point that it's turned into olds. Same with the other stuff you mentioned: there's nothing really new or interesting with that.

> There's really no obvious way that this affects Americans, so why bother talking about it?

Looking at cnn.com right now, I see stuff like:

> Finnish PM says videos of her 'boisterous' partying shouldn't have been made public

> Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie’s 2016 plane incident: FBI report reveals new details

I know nothing about the Chinese real estate market, but somehow I feel confident that it will affect more Americans than these two stories combined will.

> Plus, the crisis in China has been going on for so long at this point that it's turned into olds.

So has the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, yet it still makes big news.

Re: How does Fox vs. CNN compare in topic/event coverage over the last week?

#118

Post by wdr1 »

timbit42 wrote: post #77
ziddoap wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 60% of Republicans turn to Fox News for political news and 53% of Democrats turn to CNN It'd be nice to see comparisons of all the news networks, but if you're going to start somewhere it seems like the two which have the majority of viewers seems appropriate.

It's interesting that CNN's website has more than double the website visits as FoxNews's website does. * CNN.com: 524 million * NYtimes.com: 449.9m * FoxNews.com: 263m * WashingtonPost.com: 156.9m * CNBC.com: 144.5m * NYPost.com: 119.6m * Forbes.com: 85.7m * USAToday.com: 85.5m * BusinessInsider.com: 80.7m * NPR.org: 76.6m Source: SimilarWeb.com

On the other hand, more people watch Fox News than CNN & MSNBC combined.

https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/week-of-june-27-basic-cable-...

Re: How does Fox vs. CNN compare in topic/event coverage over the last week?

#119

Post by blowski »

egberts1 wrote: post #108
blowski wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On websites, CNN is 4th (43%), Fox is 8th (40%). https://today.yougov.com/ratings/media/popularity/news-websi... On TV (amongst the big three news channels), Fox is first, then NBC, then CNN. https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/124-cable-channels-ranke... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Three_(American_television...

YouGov is an opt-in opinion taker. Furthermore, opt-in is not a conservative trait hence its inherent bias in favor of those who participate actively to the YouGov data farm.

What data are you relying on instead?

Re: How does Fox vs. CNN compare in topic/event coverage over the last week?

#120

Post by kaba0 »

kenjackson wrote: post #11
BeetleB wrote: post #5

I know this will come across as a bit of flame-bait, but: What is the point in comparing two crappy news sources? Neither is worth spending time on. Also, more on-point: Are they looking only at news, or are they including opinion?

What are good news sources? I guarantee you that for any news source you pick, there are people who will argue that it is crappy and/or biased.

https://adfontesmedia.com/download-the-media-bias-chart/

It can be measured quite objectively.

Post reply on HN