'I watched Fox and MSNBC during the election cycle because they told me the worst possible elements that could be found about President Obama and Governor Romney,' he wrote. 'Both networks work so hard at branding every possible negative issue about the other side that it's very interesting to look at it as an exercise in branding and marketing. Neither truly was reporting the news.'
Cuban explained that both networks engaged in 'negative branding' of the less-favored candidate: '[N]ot only did they tell us how negative the other brand was, they were relentless in trying to create confirmation of that negative brand by bringing in 'experts' to confirm their brand bias.'
The billionaire said all of MSNBC's and Fox's shows reminded him of the old paranormal-themed AM radio program Coast to Coast with Art Bell:
Every night Art Bell would bring in what were essentially crackpots talking about life on Mars, alien abductions (except for the true ones of course), Black Helicopter operations, pretty much crazy thinking across the board. What made Art Bell masterful was that he interviewed them and talked to them like there was absolutely no doubt in his and his listeners mind that everything the interviewee said was true.
Cuban likened such coverage to how MSNBC and Fox treat their particular subjects, writing that:
Both MSNBC and Fox News do the same thing with their branding efforts. No matter what the story, true or not, they were going to pull out every stop to make you think its true. Facts be damned. Governor Romney lies about everything. Here are three people to confirm it. President Obama is running the dirtiest campaign ever, here are three people to confirm it. For every attempt to create a negative brand association for the other side, there were three experts confirming it multiple times a day.
Like Art Bell's persistance in proving the paranormal to be true, Cuban wrote, Fox News featured GOP analysts like Dick Morris to make 'you believe that a Romney win was all but assured. In the last couple days it was all they focused on. We got this. Here is the proof. Here are people you trust telling you that its the truth.'
The businessman then suggested Fox News should have learned from the ABC reality dancing program in which he once starred:
Fox and as a result Governor Romney' didn't know the Dancing with the Stars bottom two principle. You would think that when one of the couples on DWTS is in the bottom two, thats a horrible sign. It must mean they are close to elimination. Not for couples with a large voting base. When you have a large voting base and find yourself in the bottom two, your voting base recognizes that you are at risk of losing. Because they want you to stay on the show and voting counts as much as the dancing, they will step up and vote and keep you on the show until you find yourself up against couples that have a bigger voting base than you.
So what does this have to do with Fox and the presidential election ?
I truly believe that supporters of Romney that watched Fox News thought it was a no-brainer and that Governor Romney would win. Living in Texas I was around a lot of Romney supporters on Tuesday night who had no doubt that Governor Romney would win. None.
Meanwhile, he wrote, the Obama campaign conveyed to their base of 'minorities, women and others who felt threatened' that they were the underdogs.
Read the full blog post here.
' '
>> Follow Andrew Kirell (@AndrewKirell) on Twitter
-
Mark Cuban: Good guy. Has money and doesn't brag about it or complain about taxes and Communism. Class act.
Trump should take a lesson.
-
I like Cuban, but if he thinks MSNBC and Fox are at equal points away from neutrality he is delusional.
-
Which do you think is worse?
-
Cuban's bottom two theory has some merit. You want to convince your supporters that you don't have it in the bag, but that you have a very realistic chance of winning so long as you get all of your supporters out to vote. It does the candidate a disservice to say, we've got this in the bag. We're going to win by a landslide.
-
Both networks are for committed politcal hacks. Of course Fox News and its viewers are more in denial about it with their fair and balanced slogan.
-
Based solely on accuracy MSNBC is better. Fox and its pundits live in some alternate universe where facts don't matter and science is opinion. That said if either of these channels are your only source of information you are not helping yourself become educated on the political process.
-
MSNBC has a lot of bullsh**, I think, but Maddow is mostly accurate. What's more, MSNBC may exaggerate but they are exaggerating facts, in most cases, whereas Fox will create some 'scandal' whole cloth out of nothing. Take the New Black Panther stuff' That was literally two guys hanging out in front of a Philly polling station in a mostly black neighborhood, for about 30 minutes. Fox ran with a fabricated 'voter intimidation' story for 2 years, as if (a) it was really voter intimidation (b) it was widespread and (c) as if it would have made a difference, since Obama won in a landslide. What's even more disgusting, they implied that Holder was shielding this tiny unimportant group from prosecution because they were black. No one else picked up that story because it wasn't a story. Fox made it up, and it did similar things dozens of times over the course of the last four years.
-
Doesnt Cuban own HD network where dan rather worked?
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar