CBS, Colbert and Contempt for America

Robert F. Kennedy Center For Justice And Human Rights 2013 Ripple Of Hope Awards DinnerRush Limbaugh and other conservatives have expressed bewilderment over CBS’s abandonment of the “American Heartland” by choosing Colbert to replace Letterman.

Ed Driscoll has contrasted the pick with the Letterman and Leno succession battle. But the real lesson of that battle is that while Leno won on performance, beating Letterman in the ratings, Letterman won on image, retiring as an honored figure, despite his abusive behavior, while Leno was booed out the door

Leno is no conservative, but he left with the baffled bewilderment familiar to many on the right of being the better man who is despised for his success, while his rival who failed miserably as a boss, a human being and a comedian, is leaving with a media ticker tape parade.

The issue wasn’t The Late Shift or Conan’s nervous breakdown; it was cultural. Leno appealed to a more middle class audience, while Letterman, like Conan, was the darling of a trendy wealthy liberal crowd.

NBC entertainment president Warren Littlefield picked Leno over Letterman after asking the guys he played basketball with which of the men they wanted to watch. It was a practical move that wouldn’t be repeated today.

Nobody would ask the basketball guys if they would rather watch Colbert or someone funny, because they don’t matter.

And that’s why Colbert was picked.

The number of people who watch a TV show stopped mattering years ago. If it did, Murder She Wrote, a show that had an older audience and high ratings, wouldn’t have been canceled. Instead there’s talk of rebooting it with younger multicultural leads in a different setting.

Network television doesn’t just fail to count older viewers; it tries to drive them away. A show with an older viewership is dead air. Advertisers have been pushed by ad agencies into an obsession with associating their product with a youthful brand.

The demo rating, 18-49, is the only rating that matters. Viewers younger than that can still pay off. Just ask the CW. Older viewers however are unwanted.

A network television show would much rather have 5 million viewers in the demo than 15 million older viewers. A cable show would rather have 1 million viewers in the demo than 10 million viewers outside the demo.

Colbert and Stewart have the top late night talk shows in the demo. That means 1 million ‘young’ viewers. That’s barely what Letterman was pulling in on a top network.

Networks, which already have high median ages, are doing everything possible to bring them down. CBS has a median age of 58 and is the oldest network. Colbert is supposed to lower their average.

Letterman’s show had a median age of 56. Colbert’s show has a median age of 39. That a 49-year-old comedian with an audience whose median age is 39 is considered a draw for younger audiences reveals just how thoroughly younger viewers are abandoning television.

But it’s only part of the story.

Emphasizing the demo took apart television’s family hour and turned prime time programming dark and adult to cater to younger viewers. The values of Middle America vanished from prime time and were replaced with an emphasis on liberal values and shock culture.

The demo however wasn’t good enough. Leno still beat Letterman in the demo. But the demo is just one piece of the puzzle. Younger viewers weren’t good enough. They had to be trendy and wealthy too.

The new “ideal” viewer combined youth with disposable income. These viewers were supposedly trendsetters. Television was remade on the Friends model full of cheerful consumption shows that showed young, wealthy and white urbanites socializing in an urban setting.

And there’s no real doubt that the Friends cast, unlike the basketball players, would have picked Letterman over Leno. Or that they would pick Colbert today.

The ideal television viewer is now in his twenties or thirties, lives in a city, has plenty of disposable income and is highly active on social media so that his or her brand choices influence their peers. He bought a new smartphone in the last 12 months and the next gaming console, he goes to bars and night clubs, spends $400 on video games and $300 on music. He is more likely to do these things than to become a parent, invest in stocks or buy a home.

It goes without saying that he is also an enthusiastic supporter of gay marriage, gun control and Obama. And that he hates anyone who isn’t.

CBS does not want Middle America to watch. Chasing away older and conservative viewers by picking Colbert is not a bug, it’s a feature. CBS would like Colbert to ‘upscale’ its brand by turning its dying late night show into a low rated program watched by wealthy liberal urbanites whom advertisers will pay much more, per person, to reach.

Television networks aren’t being foolish by driving away older viewers. They’re working closely with ad agencies that want the same thing.

CBS’s Hawaii Five-O may be highly rated, but it skews to older audiences, which is why it costs $58,000 to advertise on it, while Grimm, which has a smaller audience, charged $82,000. Both shows are about even in the demo,  but Grimm’s viewers are valued more. Blue Bloods may have fantastic ratings, but its audience is old, so it’s also down at the $58,000 level.

Unlike Mad Men, real ad agencies aren’t bastions of corporate patriarchy; they’re places where humanities majors get to advance a radical narrative. Advertising has been radical for some time now under the influence of creatives who always insist on pushing the limits. The creatives in ad agencies allied with television programmers, tugged clients at staid corporate firms into doing it their way.

And now advertising, for even mainstream brands, has become much edgier.

The Olympics multicultural Coca Cola ad and the gay rights cereal ads have courted controversy as an advertising strategy. That used to be something that marginal dot com brands did by firing a gerbil out of a cannon during the Super Bowl.

Now deliberately setting out to offend mainstream audiences is something that established brands do in a desperate race to show how youthful, how postmodern and how liberal they are.

Like CBS, they are increasing their brand value by demonstrating their contempt for Middle America.

If you can convince Coca Cola and Kraft to reject Middle America, CBS is an easy sell. The left has won by convincing the biggest companies in the country to build their brand by dumping American values.

Forget Kansas and Iowa; it’s San Francisco and Manhattan that matter.

It’s a terrible strategy for companies like Coca Cola and Kraft, but like Wal-Mart with its embrace of environmentalism and organic food, corporate leadership has trended to the left. And you can see why.

When looking back at the Letterman and Leno matchup. Leno won on performance, but Letterman ended up with the better brand. And corporations put the brand first. They assume that more sales will follow from having a hip brand, than a good product.

The marketplace has been artificially shifted to value some viewers over others. The ideal viewer has become a Frankenstein’s monster of youth, wealth, social media activity and geography put together so that liberal audiences matter and other audiences don’t.

Companies are no longer being polite about it. Coca Cola, Kraft and CBS are actively courting liberal audiences by mocking and rejecting Middle America.

Stephen Colbert, a man whose sole talent is raising one eyebrow while saying nasty things about conservatives, is the perfect face for the new programming of corporate contempt for America.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • truebearing

    This was not only a great analysis but an important topic that isn’t frequently discussed. Ad agencies, like Hollywood, are warping our culture and destroying traditional American values. Why would we expect anything else from an ad agency culture that is driven by greed, riddled with cocaine, bloated with hubris, dominated by gay creative types, and narcissistic to the core? This is the Left’s playground.

    One of the best indicators of the political/racial bias of this mutant media culture is the pervasive portrayal of the white guy as the clod, the fool, the dork, the sluggard, the hopelessly uncool. Women are cool. Blacks are cool. Smart-mouthed little punks are cool, but white guys never are. White guys can’t drive, they can’t think, they can’t pound a nail straight, thet can’t get a date. It is a racist/sexist all-out assault on white men…unless they are gay. It is no coincidence that white men are more likely to vote conservatively, which is why they are being lampooned mercilessly in ads. Advertising has been weaponized.

    Having been around ad agency types during a period in my life, I can say without hesitation that they are some of the most arrogant, narcissistic, and unethical people I have ever met. They are more interested in winning awards than serving the needs of clients, and the clients are stupid enough to keep hiring them. What an independent writer or artist charges $2000.00 for, the agency that hired them charges their client one hundred times that amount. There is very little real accountablity when it comes to measurable results from most ad campaigns. Big budgets, nebulous results. Sounds like the guy living in that big white house on Pennsylvania Avenue.

    These are children who never grew up, and never will. Of course they like Obama. He’s a pathological narcissist who has no accountability and hates white men, too. And best of all, he throws like a girl.

    • BagLady

      Ad agencies, like Hollywood, are warping our culture and destroying traditional American values”

      They’ve been doing this since cameras were invented. I never saw a Hollywood movie that didn’t depict everyone living in abject luxury regardless of status. The world saw this American Dream and believed it.

      • Headed4TheHills

        Grapes of Wrath

        • Doobee

          The messege in the Grapes of Wrath was that the government is your friend. You can always count on the government to save you from destitution. People saw that American dream and believed it. Sadly, many, if not most, still do.

          • Headed4TheHills

            I know, but that wasn’t the reason for my post. Read BagLady’s post then mine, gives it a bit more context.

        • tagalog

          The movie would never have been allowed to end the way the novel does, though, with the Joad family living in a train car on some railroad tracks somewhere in California.

          • bigfred41

            with the Joad daughter breastfeeding an adult guy, because of the “oversoul”… that we are supposedly all one. Weird stuff, very ultra-liberal.

      • Ray Zacek

        It’s a Wonderful Life.

        • http://europa-antiqua-arca.blogspot.com/ clavdivs

          The Hollywood of Frank Capra is long gone. As he said himself:

          “The winds of change blew through the dream factories of make-believe, tore at its crinoline tatters…. The hedonists, the homosexuals, the hemophiliac bleeding hearts, the God-haters, the quick-buck artists who substituted shock for talent, all cried: “Shake ‘em! Rattle ‘em! God is dead. Long live pleasure! Nudity? Yea! Wife-swapping? Yea! Liberate the world from prudery. Emancipate our films from morality!”…. Kill for thrill – shock! Shock! To hell with the good in man, Dredge up his evil – shock! Shock!”

          And, “practically all the Hollywood film-making of today is stooping to cheap salacious pornography in a crazy bastardization of a great art to compete for the ‘patronage’ of deviates and masturbators.”

          • tagalog

            And lest anyone say that Frank Capra was a sweetness-and-light moviemaker, don’t forget that Capra was one of the founding fathers of the Why We Fight series of films and he didn’t flinch from confronting the worst evils of his time.

      • tagalog

        A Raisin In the Sun
        A Tree Grows in Brooklyn
        Meet John Doe
        lots of others.

        • http://europa-antiqua-arca.blogspot.com/ clavdivs

          Any made after 1968 or so?

          • tagalog

            I’d say Elvira Madigan, but I think that one is Swedish, not Hollywood.

          • Seek

            Don’t make me laugh. By the way, “Trainspotting,” which was a British film from 1996, and which I saw, is a truly great and fierce film. It was directed by Danny Boyle, who went on to do “The Beach,” “Sunshine,” “Slumdog Millionaire,” “127 Hours” and “Trance.”

          • tagalog

            Laugh about what? Trainspotting? I didn’t see it; I said that.

          • bigfred41

            “Waterboy” with Bobby Boucher. That was before Adam Sandler decided to be a pig character in his movies.

          • Seek

            Prisoners, Rush, Ender’s Game, Gravity, Nebraska, 47 Ronin, The Secret Life of Walter Mitty, Captain Phillips, and Saving Mr. Banks — and those are just a few excellent choices from last fall. Do any people here actually see movies or are they content to make absurd generalizations?

          • tagalog

            I didn’t think Prisoners was about poverty; the characters and the setting are middle-class and the central theme is vigilantism.

            A movie about phony poverty is The Hunger Games. The Secret Life of Walter Mitty is about upper-middle-class workers.

          • DB1954

            No one will ever convince me that the majority of today’s movie makers are conservatives. I don’t care who or what you cite. You can never make that case creditably.

        • BagLady

          Read it over a couple of times. If you’re quoting a writer, please give him credit for his intellectual property, otherwise talk me through it, line by line since I’m not sure the message.

          • tagalog

            You said, “I never saw a Hollywood movie that didn’t depict everyone living in abject luxury regardless of status.”

            The short list of movies I posted are movies expressly about living life in poverty that don’t depict everyone living in abject luxury (an interesting use of words) regardless of status.

            I don’t understand how you could think I’m quoting a writer in making a list, but perhaps you could explain that.

          • BagLady

            Ah so. Sorry I thought it was a poem!!!

    • bigfred41

      Yep, the tv commercials are even more egregious than the shows themselves in the constant tearing down of the straight white man (aka the oppressor). And most white men are oblivious to that fact while being addicted to and big fans of the crap that is tv.

      • Doobee

        The white male is routinely depicted as a stupid, incompetent moron, a bumbling doofus, a racist, a misogynist, an uneducated rube, a rich and therefore greedy businessman, a “homophobic” lout … the media left has a seeminly endless supply of memes and roles.

        • lyndaaquarius

          but,aren’t most of the major film stars virile,sexy,save the day white men? So, they are presented in some venues as very desirable and heroic.

          • truebearing

            When they aren’t anti-heroes, or cartoon characters, or psychopathic assassins, etc., but when are they relatively normal people with distinct character flaws, who ultimately rise above themselves — known in screenwriting as “character arc” — and act in ways that aren’t supremely narcissistic?

            Movies used to require character arc if they hoped to be successful. “Rick” (Humphrey Bogarte) in “Casablanca” overcame his bitterness over “Ilsa”s” no-show at the train station and his still strong desire for her, yet helped her and her husband escape from Casablanca…sacrificing his only way of escaping himself. That is heroic altruism, but we don’t see much of that today in Hollywood’s monuments to narcissism and leftist propaganda.

            Yes, Hollywood wants to make money, so they don’t attack their own stars, but they attack white males constantly with revisionist history and propaganda.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Hollywood is anti-gun culture, yet uses and glamorizes gun culture, explosions, car chases in most movies.

          • truebearing

            Yes, aren’t they quite the hypocrites.

          • Doobee

            In movies alone, that’s perhaps true, although I think it is increasingly less true. In any case, all, or nearly all Hollywood screen actors are liberals, if not radical leftists. Probably more than a few are homosexual, but feel they have to remain closeted. Movie actors know that they have to appear offscreen as “cool” and as “hip” as the characters they play onscreen. I suspect that most can read between the lines: “conservative” is neither hip nor cool in Hollywood. Of course there are or were a few exceptions, but they make the rule. Liberal actors get movie roles. Unless you’re Bruce Willis or Clint Eastwood, you better not go around Hollywood saying how much you admire Milton Friedman, Ronald Reagan, or Mitt Romney.

          • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

            Those liberal actors also tend to be more talented than right-leaning actors.

          • DB1954

            So what if they are more talented? They’re also more liberal, more wrong, and more hypocritical.

            None of them, by the way, will ever amount to the unique talent and one and only, Jimmy Stuart, a Hollywood conservative.

    • Randy Townsend

      Unfortunately, these ad agencies simply mirror what’s occurring in society at large: They couldn’t sell it if people really didn’t want it. I’m 54 and I never thought I’d see homosexual marriage feted and celebrated, but it is. This generation has been reared without the teachings of God in many instances, no church to teach them right from wrong. If you’re a Christian and have studied prophesy, you understand what is coming for America and it’s not pretty. As bad as things are, they’re going to get worse. Colbert is merely a symptom of a sick society that doesn’t even realize how in need of help it is.

      • Doobee

        You needn’t be a Christian or religious to understand that “same-sex marriage” is the Pandora’s Box of our times. The political left, especially the gay left, insisted on opening that box, but even now, some of them are beginning to see what happens when a society tampers with its foundations.

        • nimbii

          “Marketing of Evil” is the blueprint used to mainstream that.

        • Nuff said

          It helps one understand the agenda if you do have a relationship with God. I’ve been trying to understand the gay marriage agenda, and how it has become such a rallying cry for the justice industry. They have almost been successful in redefining what the work marriage means. This seems part and parcel of liberal politics. That way, they can lie while telling us, with a straight face that they aren’t lying, because they have deemed a word to,mean something other than what it means.

          In their world, marriage is simply a word that means beings cohabitation and getting some tax advantages and rights due to this word being attached to their relationship. True understanding (always frowned upon by the left, the right is more about willful ignorance) tells one that marriage is strictly a religious concept, defined by God himself as a covenant between one man and one woman, for a lifetime. The Bible goes into exhaustive detail.about what is proper behavior and what is sinful (aka, against God) behavior. That many Christians don’t adhere 100% is a red herring argument in the context of this discussion. If this was the yardstick for legitimacy applied to all liberal causes, every single,one would collapse at the altar of,hypocrisy. So, marriage, to the thinking, moral, not,buying the liberal lie types means one man, one woman. Simple and to the point. The problem is that this viewpoint is held by a demographic that is allowed to be ridiculed into oblivion by the lbgt, libs and press as almost a right of passage. I believe marriage is what it actually is, not what someone with a personal axe to grind says it is. If this was about equality, why is my right to marriage allowed to be destroyed by those who don’t understand history and don’t share my personal religious views? Why does a tiny, vocal minority get to wield the cudgel of the state to diminish what I have with my wife and try and equate it with sinful, unnatural behavior? If one wants to the the champion of minority rights, the individual is the smallest minority. If you can’t stand for the smallest minority, then you have shown yourself to be the opportunistic whore that you are.

      • kasandra

        Unfortunately, I think they’re pushing society as well. Ever notice the constant meme in commercials where the white male is an idiot and acts silly and the black person or white female is responsible, wise, has the solution, etc. Look especially at insurance company ads. Obviously, they’re marginalizing males and particularly white males. Females just happen to be the most susceptible to advertising so they’re going for them in these ads. Plus leftist white males especially hate white males in an orgy of disparagement. Can’t figure that one out.

        • Judahlevi

          This angst about “white males” is foolish. Only if you buy into the identity politics of multiculturalism will you identify yourself as such a person.

          One is not defined by their skin color or gender – only racists and sexists believe this (most of the Democratic party). As a conservative, you are an individual who is defined by your mind, not your body. Don’t allow anyone to define you like they would a barnyard animal.

          The advertising agencies (and Democrats) are only revealing their own prejudices whey they select people by skin color or gender. They are collectivists, we are not.

          • popseal

            I choose to be a righteous man, rather than the sissy pants girly boys so common in pop culture. No man hugs thank you very much. Eye contact and a hearty hand shake only.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            popseal AKBAR!

          • bigbubbatadsworth

            Well righteous man, speaking of sissy pants and girly boys, here’s a group of them, on the right. The right doesn’t have a big tent, buy it has a big closet. Gay Preacher Ted Haggard, Gay Bishop Eddie Long, Gay Rep Mark Foley, Gay Senator Larry Craig, Gay Sheriff Paul Babeau, Gay Attorney General Troy King, Gay Rep Robert Arango, Gay Rep Jim McCrey, George (Rentboy) Rekers, and last but not least, Gay Former RNC Chairman, Ken Mehlman. Why is the right so immoral, that it produces a large number of, closet queens?

          • kasandra

            Given the symbol you use aren’t you identifying yourself as a member of a group. We’re all individuals and members of larger groups. While I view myself primarily as an individual I do get chapped when groups I am a member of are attacked or marginalized.

          • Judahlevi

            This is because you feel that just because someone may share your skin color or gender, what happens to them reflects on you. It doesn’t.

            It is very hard to switch from thinking as a collectivist to thinking as an individualist. Most people in the country think of people as groups – they aren’t groups – there are no groups. Grouping people is an abstract creation by the mind, but does not exist in reality.

          • truebearing

            Groups survived because they had common interests and defended each other against other hostile groups. Individuals don’t last long when an enemy decides to eradicate “his kind.” Collectivism can only be defeated through collective effort. An individual can’t defeat a large mob.

            Acting collectively is not the same thing as collectivism. One is group cooperation to achieve a specific goal too large for one person. Collectivism is an ideology created by power mongers who saw the power of collective effort and desired to harness people to it, not for the gain of the individual or the group, but for the person(s) directing them.

          • Judahlevi

            Collectivism as I use the term is different than collective action. Collectivism is assigning values to people based on a collective/group you can put them into. Yes, there are legitimate uses of collective action. There are never legitimate uses for collective judgments of individuals because you would always be wrong to do so.

          • truebearing

            I agree with you again, with one exception. When collectivism is based on an evil goal, such as Nazism, Communism, or, in my opinion, Islam, you are more or less forced to judge them collectively.

            One can argue that there were lukewarm Nazis who didn’t participate in the worst behaviors of the Holocaust, or Communists who never starved Ukrainians or sent dissidents to the gulag, but they joined with evil and are therefore morally responsible for that choice. Muslims who aren’t devout may be peaceful, but do they oppose the evil of the devout jihadists? They must shoulder their moral load as well, and if that means being judged for their continued adherence to Islam, they are the ones that made it so.

            There is a fundamental difference between judging groups who intend to destroy and those who simply have beliefs.

          • Judahlevi

            I agree that we are ALL individually responsible for our moral actions and this includes participating directly or indirectly in evil actions. A Muslim who does not repudiate violence and discrimination is one who is participating in it.

            Silence is an affirmative.

          • truebearing

            Well and wisely said.

            Then we agree completely. I enjoyed discussing this with you.

          • Judahlevi

            I did as well. I enjoy your posts – keep it up.

          • truebearing

            Thanks. I enjoy yours as well. Have a good night.

          • DB1954

            Judahlevi chooses to employ that symbol. That’s his choice and right to make.

          • truebearing

            Allowing any group of bullies to pick on you only encourages more of the same. In the case of the attack on white males, it goes far beyond just advertising. It is in movies TV shows, and becoming accepted as common truth. Allowing it to succeed debases the conservative majority of this nation. It is also morally wrong, which alone is justification enough to fight it.

            The issue isn’t whether an adult can maintains a healthy identity in the face of this insidious racist/sexist hypocrisy from the Left. It is the damage it does to young boys and girls who aren’t secure in their identities. It is a form of psychological oppression that deserves to be crushed.

            I’m surprised you see it this way given Jewish history. Even today, whenever anything goes wrong, Jews are the go-to people to blame, regardless of how insane it is. Israel is surrounded by psychopathic Muslims intent on genocide and the rest of the world is at best indifferent about it. There were too many years of Jews being made the scapegoat. No one should have to put up with it.

          • Judahlevi

            It is precisely because I am Jewish that it is my wish for people to be considered as individuals, not groups. The Jewish people have suffered enough (such as the recent shooting in Kansas) by being targeted as a group.

            The truth is that each of us is an individual human being, not a group. What I do reflects only on myself, not other Jews or anyone else.

            I recognize that this is an ‘ideal’ standard which is very difficult for anyone to achieve, but it is a far better standard than multiculturalism. It is better to think of people as individuals first and, abstractly, as groups later if they must do so. What they should never do is to assign values to an individual because of an arbitrary grouping.

          • truebearing

            I agree with you that it is far better to act as individuals, with the attendant moral responsibility, and deal with others as individuals, not judging them by what others in their group may have done. It’s not alway easy, and sometimes it is extremely difficult, but ideal.

            We are all individual moral agents. We can’t pawn off our failures onto others and maintain integrity or self-respect. That is a personal resposibility all people should accept, but unfortunately, many don’t, or won’t.

            My point is that when attacked by a collectivist mob, you are no longer dealing with an individual. The individuals who make up that mob have forfeited their individuality and moral responsibility. They are acting as a mob, and when “justified” by a dangerous ideology that sees both individuals and groups as expendable, people are required to fight back collectively or the evil mob will destroy all of the individuals, one by one.

          • Judahlevi

            I agree that there are legitimate times to act collectively. After all, I am a former Marine. We don’t attack the enemy only by ourselves.

            Nonetheless, we should also not make judgments about people by grouping them and assigning values. As an individualist, one cannot be a racist or sexist. This is because you have to be a collectivist (a person who defines people by which group they are in) to be a racist or sexist. You don’t assign any values to anyone until you get to know them. This is how you fight multiculturalism.

          • simplynotred

            Love this guy – Great thought processing here. The world needs more like you Judahlevi

          • DB1954

            Excellent analysis. Collectivism in its many and varied manifestations is the enemy.

          • DDDDDuane

            WHAT A JEW IMBECILE!!!!
            This jew screams it’s a jew and then wants to be identified as an individual….Then the jew cites the “shooting” where a drunk psycho shoots a Catholic and 2 Presbyterians….
            (Poor jews always victimized….)

          • DB1954

            Fool, Duane. The shooter intended to kill Jews.

          • lyndaaquarius

            very true. When did we start having to check off “ethnicity” on most forms? What’s the cover story as to why we are encouraged to do this?

          • Judahlevi

            The government is wrong to require this. It should never have happened.

          • simplynotred

            Well said.

      • antioli

        Gay marriage is a top down revolution by judges and other old folks who rot in the seats of power. It is the some what older generation that installed gay marriage into the country.
        The younger did not resist there for an easy job to do it.

        • DB1954

          The somewhat older generation? You mean baby-boomers? That’s probably true, but not all of us sit rotting in seats of power, and gay marriage isn’t a revolution; it’s the rot (decay or decadence) itself.

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      Very often, I don’t need to comment because you’ve beat me to it. Very good, my friend …

      • truebearing

        You’ve beaten me to it more than a few times yourself. Thanks.

    • simplynotred

      One particular thing that many white men who deprived of their value by this so-call world of media and marketing is their very own acquired “Actual-Can-Do-Ability” when dealing with a world of real limitless boundaries. What is TRULY obvious regarding such pathological narcissist who wouldn’t know how to fix a tire, or take down a thief who entered his abode is this real life experience. Sad but true, to sustain such narcissist in their ivory towers of power requires a support system that in fact IS a house of cards. The two questions that remains in the minds of many white men is: “When will the cards begin to fall?” What will I have to do with and to the Narcissistic jerks when that time comes.

    • Dookert

      Your last sentences, minus the throws like a girl part, sums up why I can’t take people like you seriously. “Obama is a pathological narcissist who hates white men”. It’s like you write a semi-intelligent post, although I don’t agree with all of it, making salient points about the ad agencies etc, only to sum up your whole statement by sabotaging it with that line.

      • DB1954

        Is there something about the charge that “Obama is a pathological narcissist” that you find inaccurate? If so please specify.

        For my part, I think that Obama is a pathological liar, a racist, a (closeted) homosexual, and a malignant narcissist. I take all that quite seriously, as do the mental health professionals on whom I rely for my description of him.

  • wileyvet

    Well I don’t have TV so I won’t be watching. When I did, I stopped watching Leno and Letterman a long time ago, when I found out what big Libs they were. Their whole shtick for 8 years was George Bush jokes. Both hosts were intellectually bankrupt when they would let Bette Midler, Alec Baldwin, Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon or Gore Vidal say the most outrageous crap, and never challenge them on their mendacity. I always thought that Libs were too sophisticated and intellectual to watch TV.
    And as far as the new Hawaii Five-O goes, that’s not Five-O. Jack Lord was the man. The ensemble cast of James MacArthur, Kam Fong and Zulu as Kono was awesome. And who could ever forget McGarret’s arch foe Wo Fat played by Khigh Dheigh. The theme song and the big wave that resembled Jack Lord’s hair and the way he turned around on the balcony in the opening. Fine TV. Aloha

    • bigfred41

      Sorry to say, but Jack Lord was one of the biggest gun banners of his time: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0520437/bio

      The thing that stands out in the new Five-O is that it is one of the very, very few that does not have the biggest most muscular guy being black.

    • kasandra

      I always get it confused. Was it Zulu as Kono or Kono as Zulu. In any case, it certainly was Woe to Wo Fat.

  • JR Kipling

    Behind Greenfield’s narrative is an almost pathological cowardice. He takes something so insubstantial as the TV viewing habits of brainwashed droids and elevates them into an unstoppable force.. A battle is won on the battlefield. Not by a fake statistical survey designed to give overwhelming force to an enemy before he is even engaged. . What happened to resolve? Defiance? Courage in battle?
    How about analyzing these Colbert watchers as weaklings and going after their weak spots? Instead Greenfield surrenders with a whimper before the fight is on

    • A Z

      Know thy enemy and know thyself. Isn’t that what Sun Tzu said?

      Well if the Left keeps hamstring us or tying one hand behind our back that makes them a 5th column. It would behoove us to understand them. Thus the analysis.

    • The March Hare

      He is just exposing them for who they are, what they are doing and what their objectives are.

    • DogmaelJones1

      Because the news and “entertainment” media place such importance on ratings and “branding,” Greenfield decided to examine the subject. Why is that “pathological”? You could also call a desire for truth “pathological,” or a fear of Islam “pathological.” Greenfield is fighting in the war of ideas, a far harder and merciless war than actual combat. Remember that the American Revolution was made possible by taking ideas seriously, first, and when the Crown wouldn’t listen to those ideas, it came down to fisticuffs.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      If you don’t want to know why things work and what’s really going on, no one is forcing you to read it.

      “What happened to resolve? Defiance? Courage in battle?”

      Why don’t you show us some of that?

  • Steeloak

    The networks may “Win” the “Demo” but lose the war. Viewership is rapidly dwindling on all TV networks. The internet has made them redundant. People today are watching only the content they want on the device of their choice. Markets are micro-segmenting and delivering specific content to specific markets. It is easy to find the content you want and to ignore what you don’t want – this is the future of entertainment. The number of content providers is expanding exponentially to serve the segmenting markets.
    Content geared to mainstream tastes is winning big in the internet era, liberal content will always have it’s niche market but will never be dominant again like in the past.

    • A Z

      I dropped cable. A few days ago someone posted about FireTV in a internet forum. Lo & behold I saw a advertisement for it on an over the air broadcast.

      Yes, you are right, the market will segment.

      I was a little skeptical of BlazeTV, PjMediaTV and all the others, but now i think it is the future.

      I am not sorry that Hollywood has to work harder, be less smarmy or work not at all.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Indeed.

      Network TV is dying. The parasites will kill the host in every area of the economy.

      The battle has already moved on to the net.

      • SCREW SOCIALISM

        I used to LOVE watching Letterman – at NBC – and was able to attend one taping at NBC.

        At CBS Letterman became lazy and too left of center for my tastes. Now I only watch his show if I see he has some interesting guest.

        The young Letterman was GREAT. The old Letterman is right to retire to the sunset.

        The guys who are his competition SUCK. I could not care less for Conan, Jimmy F. Jimmy X.

        I wish Adam Carolla had a talkshow at night.

        He is GREAT and right of center and funny.

    • truebearing

      Well said.

      The problem I see is that while the Left has destroyed the networks, they have control of the new media as well. Radicals run Google. Gates is pretty far left. YouTube, Twitter, Facebook…all liberal. The only answer is for conservatives is to keep pace and gain control of a sizeable percentage of the new media and pop culture. When you control the media you control the message and at this point, conservatives are relying heavily on passive methods of getting out their message.

      • Steeloak

        While the tech giants of the new media age are mostly owned by leftists, they do not control the content on their websites to any significant degree. YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and the rest have user generated content. Every viewpoint under the sun is represented. They are as close as we are going to get to a free market in ideas.

        • truebearing

          Yes, for now, but there is a concerted effort to harness the new media by the power parasites. Obama’s relinquishing control of the internet is an ominous start in that direction.

          The Left is never satisfied until they have total control. They also hate free markets of any kind, and they desperately need to stop the beating they are taking because of the internet. They don’t do well when facts can be checked nearly instantly and debates are open and honest. Alinsky warned the Left to avoid open debate, and we can all see why. Exposed lies destroy credibility and the Left lives by the lie. They want control of the internet, and any other medium that enhances free thought.

          • Steeloak

            Molon Labe!

          • truebearing

            They’ll try.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            The Left does fail.

            Air America, the alternative to regular Talk Radio, was a failure.

            Pacifica is dying. Good/GREAT news.

  • johnlac

    I noticed a number of years ago that many network tv shows were skewing violently towards a leftist perspective. Females were taking over many traditionally males roles (cops, judges, scientists, etc.) to the point that you’d think if they made a tv series about the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, females would be doing most of the fighting. And the males on most of the shows were mostly sniveling wimps. As an example NCIS had several male co-stars who acted more like frat boys than leos. The females were either scientists, exceptionally mature and tougher than the males officers, or the bosses of the frat boys. So it’s sports, reality shows, and old movies for me as far as my tv viewing.

    • A Z

      In the past few years I have fired 2 cable companies. Now I watch over the air HDTV or read a book.
      Cable TV is pay per view for movies except for a handful of movies. Those were duds, so widely circulated in earlier years that they cannot be monetized or are loss leaders. There is no reason to gt a basic cable subscription because with it you will get very few movies. So what is the point?

      Some reality TV is good, But it has crowded out shows that one expects on TLC and the History channel. A show I like was Ice Road Truckers. It looks like a documentary and is very interesting. but after 3 or 4 episodes or by season 2 it turns into a soap opera like many reality TV shows.What is the point?

      I hear yah about how the shows are skewing. It is better to watch fewer shows, but watch them in conjunction with a lot of reading.

      • SCREW SOCIALISM

        Go to your library. My library loans DVDs of MadMen and other shows.

        Borrowing a DVD of a 6 month old movie is cheaper than going to a movie theater to see some Socialist crap.

        • A Z

          That is what we have always have done, but are doing more of. Although some DVDs skip or repeat due to poor handling. You would think some people have paws instead of hands.

          Wikipedia or the IMDB is useful to look up movies before one wastes even their time on a movies.

          Borrowing from a library has the added bonus of not being counted in their statistics or bottom line

      • Drakken

        Get Direct TV, more bang for the buck and is a very nice eff you to Comcast and company.

        • A Z

          Went from Comcast to DirecTV to broadcast. If I went back to Comcast there would be an insurrection in my house. They give to the wrong people.

          History Channel has too many reality TV shows. Counting cars a fine show, but it is not what I watch. what I am saying there is very little History on the History channel unless you buy a more expensive package and get History Channel 2.

          Beside I don;t want to pay for MSNBC, LOGO, Oprah’s channel, FSTV, AL Jazeera and others. There are some things I might watch occasionally on FSTV, but i just don;t want to feed the beast.

    • BagLady

      Females were taking over many traditionally males roles (cops, judges, scientists, etc.)”

      Yes, but at what percentage? I see the British Government boasted 4 female front-benchers last week but now have only 3. I think women have a long way to go to get even let alone take over.

      • SCREW SOCIALISM

        Your West Pakistan is a failed country.

        • randy63ism

          Lol!

      • Daniel Greenfield

        In reality yes, in media it’s another unreal world.

        • tagalog

          The disturbing thing is that there’s a significant population of young women who will buy the idea from the media that if they learn some martial arts or get to be good shooters or something, they can beat the men physically. And there will be a tiny number of outlier Brunhildes who achieve that. But most won’t. Their biology, their psychology, and their physical makeup work against them. And they won’t beat five against one.

          The average skilled man couldn’t beat five determined men who attack him at once. The five would make mince meat out of him. As a rule men know that, but not women who have brainwashed themselves.

          The TV shows five men attacking, one at a time; that always makes me laugh. They NEVER show the reality, where two men hold you while the other three are punching and kicking you, preferably in the head, while they dislocate your shoulders and break your legs.

          Those TV shows NEVER show the viewer how much practice and skill it takes to be able to beat attackers, nor do they make it clear that you have to remain unusually fit and up-to-date in your skills. That means exercises and sparring, target shooting and runnin’ and gunnin’ a couple of times a week or more if you can get the time in.

          It’s like the guys who go out and buy a gun, shoot it a few times, then put it in the night stand and think they know how to shoot it a year later.

          The kind of people who will attack you also get in their practice, and a lot of the time their practice is practical, from attacking other people, so they’re likely to be better prepared than you are.

          • Drakken

            There it is, you hit the nail squarely into complete reality, bravo Sir!

        • Doobee

          A Mennonite (I believe) author named Jerry Mandel wrote a book decades ago called Four Arguments for the Abolition of Television. He made this exact point some years ago. Hollywood, television, movies, the media create images. It’s what they do, and images aren’t reality.

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        Judges, scientists, etc., are just fine. But it’s the “woman warrior” types that bother me.

        One of my favorite shows is Person of Interest. Literally, the smallest character on the show is a woman referred to as Ms. Shaw. A couple of weeks, ago, she was surrounded by five men at least 2 to 2.5 times larger than her, and she had them on the ground writhing in pain within 3 seconds.

        Things like this aren’t logical, and they don’t work in real life.

        The worst thing about Ms. Shaw is that she’s not even attractive. She might be attractive to the demographics mentioned in the article, but I don’t see her that way.

        My brother … who shares my views … has stopped watching the show. I watch it because of Jim Caviezel … period.

        • Drakken

          Just wait until they get women into the combat infantry, then you will really see things get up close and really personal.

    • bigfred41

      It’s generally only the white males that are portrayed as wimps. The blacks are portrayed as the big macho heroes. E.g.: almost every single bodybuilder on tv is black (e.g. the Geico one directing traffic). The only time that I can recall white bodybuilders are in the Planet Fitness commercials, where they are portrayed as brainless idiots. No blacks are portrayed as brainless idiots in the two Planet Fitness commercials.

      • BagLady

        That’s as maybe, but look at athletes as a genre and you will find that black people are physically better built for some sports. I haven’t noticed any bias towards any particular colour when viewing programmes.

        • bigfred41

          Then you haven’t seen much American tv.

          You probably also haven’t noticed that black guys are paired up with white women constantly on tv ,but rarely the opposite.

          • justquitnow

            You think maybe you notice this kind of thing a little too hard?

          • Doobee

            Maybe he does, maybe he doesn’t. But some think that the media elites have an agenda, and the heart of that agenda, which lies at the heart of the Obama agenda it seems, is to “prove” that white Americans are every bit as racist as many were 100 to 200 years ago.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            You think maybe you ignore this kind of thing a little too hard?

            Do you really like the emperors new clothes?

          • skf1999

            Pisses you off, doesn’t it? LMAO!!!!!

          • Drakken

            That is why we call them mudsharks, bottom feeders to those who don’t watch animal planet.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Pisses you off that Obamas mother was white?

            Obamas not black. He’s biracial.

            Tiger Woods doesn’t claim to be black.

            Is that OK?

          • bigfred41

            Hey, it’s Uptown Steve, the black racist who posts from his affirmative action job while the whites and Asians do his work for him. (That’s true even though he was given all the easy accounts anyway.)

            Steve, I’ve told you before, it’s only the skanks that would hang around with you. So that’s funny, it’s not in the “pissing off” category.

            I hope you’re doing well, Steve. Lt Cmdr Johnson said he misses you. Heard any good jokes lately?

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          There could be something to that. White men might not be able to jump, but black men can’t swim.

          Also, many black men descend from slaves who were bred for fighting for the entertainment of their slavemasters. But yet, one of the leaders in Ukraine was Heavyweight World Boxing Champion, but I had never heard of him until the crisis, in that country.

          That might demonstrate something about biases in what athletes get covered by the sports news media. In years past, watching the Master’s gave one the impression that no one but Tiger Woods was playing, on any given day.

          • Drakken

            Ever see them play hockey?? They are the easiest to taunt since they have almost zero impulse control, and pile on penalty minutes.

  • Texas Patriot

    Television is junk food for the brain-dead. The only reason Colbert and Stewart have any audience at all is that they make fun of anything and everything, including themselves, which at this point in the history of America is the only rational perspective at all.

    • BagLady

      A sweeping statement.

      I am watching the Oscar Pistorius trial and it’s riveting. The South African justice system is getting an huge boost from this sad case.

      • Daniel Greenfield

        Consider what the odds of prosecution would be if it had been another poor black woman, of the many murdered in SA, and usually unprosecuted.

      • SCREW SOCIALISM

        I don’t understand the focus on some murder in South Africa. WGAS?

        Maybe the fact that he has no legs makes it a Freak Show – and everyone likes a freak show.

        • BagLady

          The man is known as The Blade Runner, the fastest man on no legs. I believe everyone has forgotten the loss of his appendages and, as an handsome young celebrity, and the nations darling , I doubt ‘freak’ comes into it. It is the high standards in the courtroom that are impressing me.

          I wonder if they will give the same focus to the case of the wealthy British Indian, Shrien Devani, as he is returned to South Africa to face the charge that he did pay people to murder his new wife on their honeymoon.

    • bigfred41

      I doubt that they make fun of blacks and the endless blacks cries about “racism”. I doubt they make fun of Muslims.

      • Texas Patriot

        If they haven’t already, they’ll get around to it.

        • bigfred41

          The reason that conservative whites are losing the culture war is because of being ignorant of what is actually going on. They will NEVER make fun of blacks and black racism, or of Muslims. They only thing that comes close is when they might make fun of personal foibles now and again, but never of their politics.

          • Texas Patriot

            BF41: The reason that conservative whites are losing the culture war is because of being ignorant of what is actually going on.

            I agree. But Colbert and Stewart are not the problem, and Rush Limbaugh and Fox News are not the solution. They are both flip sides of the same coin and the same problem, which is that the American people have stopped thinking for themselves and, instead, have turned over the hard work of democracy based truth to circus clowns in the disguise of “newsmen” who are only out to make a buck and could care less about the health, wealth, and happiness of the American people. The redeeming grace of Colbert and Matthews is that they intentionally make a joke of themselves, whereas Rush Limbaugh and Fox News actually want people to take them seriously.

          • bigfred41

            I’m not a fan of any of them, but I do despise Matthews (whose leg shivers over Obama).

            Yep, the founding fathers would shudder over what Americans have become. The only thing that makes people straighten up and fly right is when there is an external enemy to galvanize them out of their moral sloth. meanwhile, the country rots from within.

          • bigfred41

            I do make a point of reading Starnes, because he is about the only writer at Fox who continuously exposes politically-correct bigotry. And watching Gutfield, because he does the same and is funny at the same time.

          • bigfred41

            I do make a point of reading Starnes, because he is about the only writer at Fox who continuously exposes politically-correct bigotry. And watching Gutfield, because he does the same and is funny at the same time.

          • Gislef

            Could you give some evidence that Matthews intentionally makes a joke of himself? You started with Stewart, but then switched to (Chris) Matthews.

          • Texas Patriot

            My mistake. I meant Stewart. Thanks.

      • justquitnow

        Yeah…where is some stuff for you to laugh at?

        • bigfred41

          Hey, there’s the obligatory reverse-racist deviant.

          • justquitnow

            Hey big fred….did you complain to the site admin to get my posts pulled down? That’s really petty. Don’t engage if you’re going to get your feelings hurt and go crying to the moderator.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Huh? Aren’t you complaining that your posts are getting deleted?

            Are you high?

          • bigfred41

            jqn, you have really got to be the world’s biggest a-hole to make up something like that. Now crawl back under your rock, weirdo.

          • bigfred41

            Stop making up stories and go crawl back under your rock like a good boy.

        • Gislef

          Cries of racism and Musllims are no less worthy of parody and ridicule than anything else.

          • bigfred41

            He (justquitnow) is just a knee-jerk liberal bigot (and likely gay). They all say the same things. Anyone who criticizes black racism is immediately called a “racist”. They can’t think, they just repeat what they’re been taught.

  • Jonathan Cohen

    This critique is reminiscent of the works of C Wright Mills and Vance Packard in the 1950s, political and social theories that heavily influenced the new left of the 60s. Unfortunately, the more democratic elements of the new left were pushed aside by individuals who had their own agendas whether psychological, economic, political or ideological. The democratic elements were pushed out by a combination of identity politics, old left parties, cultural nihilists and elements of the Democratic Party that saw them as a perennial supportive demographic.

    The left in America is made up of fools. They talk about ideological hegemony but they can’t see what should be right before their eyes. There is a new class of extremely wealthy people who make their money off exactly the kinds of considerations discussed in this article.

    Not all wealthy people make their money off the “hip”, young wealthy demographic. The energy companies make money off of selling a product that everyone needs and uses rather equally. These people tend to be more conservative about the culture.

    On some issues all elements of the economically powerful agree. In those cases it is very difficult to get change. Affirmative action is extremely unpopular, not because people are bigots but because it is unfair and counter-productive to all concerned, minorities included. Yet virtually every main stream media outlet, university faculty, main stream religious leaders and most political figures including Republicans support it. To put it in crude Marxist terms, “affirmative action is the policy of the ruling class.”

    The last twenty years has given rise to a new powerful class of entrepreneurs in the entertainment, computer and media world. Whereas in the past, the left critiques of the culture were that the creators of information were owned by the rich through interlocking Boards of Directors, social institutions such as country clubs and as dominating the Boards of Trustees of universities. The economic titans of the past made their money from manufacturing, producing products that were used by all. Today’s new rich make their money directly through the production and control of information and entertainment. They make decisions as this article points out, by what builds the bottom line. And you can be sure that their trendy politics is supporting the bottom line.

    If Bill Gates wanted to share the wealth and support American workers he could sell his software at a fraction of the price and hire the more expensive Americans. If equalizing income distribution were the main interest of entertainers they could work for less money, support cheaper tickets for concerts and sports events and allow the free downloading of popular music. It is not tax policy that is causing the increasingly skewed distribution of income in America. It is that the direction of economic growth in America which is concentrated in software development, social media, entertainment, academia (yes there is a huge amount of money made in academia in terms of entertainment, technology, publishing, construction) and traditional media. These new sources of growth allow for vast accumulations of wealth that go virtually untaxed because it is all unrealized capital gains. Leftists who complain about the profits in the oil business are silent about the massive increase in wealth from Facebook or Google. Someone goes from a worth of virtually nothing to tens of billions of dollars and the left has nothing to say about this but a 9% profit margin in the oil business in a good year arouses indignation.

    The left uniformly ridicules Sarah Palin and ignores the fact that her political career was about making sure that the people of Alaska benefited from the resources that could be extracted from her state. And liberals are still laughing at her for suggesting that living on the border of Russia made her more viscerally aware of the threat from Russia but to the people in Georgia or the Ukraine this may not seem so funny.

    This article explains why CBS hired Stephen Colbert, a smug nasty guy who makes a living ridiculing the concerns of ordinary people. And the culture that his sarcasm supports is one that maintains the status quo rather than confronts it. He is a phony playing to other phonies and since his audience buys the products that the new rich want to sell, he is on the air ridiculing ordinary Americans.

    • BagLady

      If Bill Gates wanted to share the wealth and support American workers he
      could sell his software at a fraction of the price and hire the more
      expensive Americans.”

      If he truly wanted to help the ‘third world’ he would sell his software at an affordable price. As it is, a legal Microsoft package costs around 3 months salary. Is it any wonder that fake Microsoft at around $10 is such a big seller. Such packages have no safety net against the onslaught of hackers and the easy access from ‘clone’ to registered user is a piece of cake.

      • bigfred41

        Try open source, like Open Office, instead.

      • SCREW SOCIALISM

        3 months salary?

        Your employer doesn’t think you have much value.

    • Sheik Yerbouti

      I really is amazing the game the left has been playing. And playing so well. They have taken everything we care about as Americans and have twisted it into a joke. Even being with the same employer long enough to retire is seen as an American weakness instead of a serious flaw in our economy. I wonder where the left will go when the SHTF? Even a gated community will become worthless in terms of survival.

    • nimbii

      Very will written.

      Just for a bit of additional background:

      Irving Kristol (Bill’s older and deceased brother) called this “The New Class” in his book “Wealth and Poverty” way back in the 80’s.

      The segments are (surprise!) government, media, arts, academe and high-tech.

      This is where the Peter Pan’s of the world go so they don’t have to grow up.

      • Valentina

        Irving Kristol…Bill’s FATHER….

        • nimbii

          That’s correct, I was thinking of William Kristol.

        • tagalog

          And Bill’s mother is Gertrude Himmelfarb, no intellectual slouch herself.

    • Doobee

      Outstanding analysis, Mr. Cohen.

    • truebearing

      Brilliantly stated.

      “Today’s new rich make their money directly through the production and control of information and entertainment. They make decisions as this article points out, by what builds the bottom line. And you can be sure that their trendy politics is supporting the bottom line.”

      And this is why the Left will never demonize this portion of the wealthy population, unless the trend turns sharply conservative and the information and entertainment begins having a decidedly conservative bent.

      To some extent, our nation is less being led as it is being driven…driven by Nielsen ratings and the like. Polls were originally for determining what people thought, or preferred. Now they think for people. In modern society, the closest thing to a conscience some people have is what the polls tell them is right or wrong. Hence the Left’s obsession with pop culture — a moveable morality.

    • tagalog

      Your analysis is cogent, and it dances around something that a lot of people notice but often can’t quite pin down; that is, the apparent disconnect between “my” wealth, which is a good thing, and someone else’s, which is bad, also the denigration of the accumulation of profit in general while accumulating as much capital as one can for one’s self in particular. I don’t understand how people can suffer from that kind of cognitive disconnect and still remember to breathe. It DOES tend to explain (outside of the issue of competition) why large corporations can support left-wing, expropriative, politicians and continue to work as hard as they do for the largest possible profit.

  • DogmaelJones1

    I think the only Colbert routine I ever enjoyed was when he interviewed two OWS loons (who may have been actors, I’ve never been sure of that) and mocked their stupidity and foolishness. Other than that, I can’t stand the man, just as I could never tolerate Letterman’s snarkyness and air of superiority. But then, I’m way past the acceptable “brand” age anymore. We adults with half a brain and scruples are indeed unwanted and neglected by today’s TV producers and programmers. Fortunately, there’s the Internet and we don’t have to settle for what CBS, NBC, and ABC deign to shovel out. If they have contempt for American values, we can reciprocate with our own contempt for them. I frankly couldn’t have cared less about how anyone’s mother was met, or cared about the ups and downs of “friends.” Seinfeld had some classic moments. But I no longer watch TV, because it’s tooled for impressionable “youth” of the liberal, trust fund class, as Daniel describes.

  • BagLady

    If you can convince Coca Cola and Kraft to reject Middle America”

    I have never known either of these companies reject anyone as a possible customer.

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      It’s not a matter of “should we” measure people by arbitrary standards such as mentality or age and health. It’s more a matter that it’s being done.

      Mercedes markets their products to people who can afford to buy them. It took me 20 years, after college, to be able to own a Mercedes. But this also explains why there is a glut of GM commercials on television, and not too many Mercedes commercials, doesn’t it? The demographic stated in the article demonstrates why there are more GM commercials. Those of us who can afford a Mercedes pay little attention to the GM ads …

      • bigfred41

        Nearly every tv commercial I’ve seen for Toyota this year showed a white girl with da black man. Cause dat be cool.

        • SCREW SOCIALISM

          It’s a hat tip to the heritage of Barack Hussein Obama.

  • pennant8

    I am in the geezer demographic. I remember how happy I was when I got my flat screen TV and Verizon FIOS. I was looking forward to watching all those great informative shows on A&E and the Science Channel in HD. I’m thinking, this is going to be great. Then I discovered that the only thing these so-called education channels carry nowadays is is a steady stream of Duck Dynasty and Duck Dynasty wannabe shows. As for regular network TV, fuggetaboudit. I can’t even stand to watch my local news program. I usually put it on MUTE until the weather comes on.

    In response I have collected a sizable library of DVD movies. It has become somewhat of a hobby searching flea markets and discount stores for some of the great old films. These TV marketing geniuses don’t need me, I don’t need them either.

    • justquitnow

      Get an apple TV or Roku. There is so much good educational TV on demand you can’t possibly watch it all.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Cable has become mostly worthless. You’re better off with your collection and a little selective programming over the internet.

      Cut the cord, don’t subsidize the junkpile.

      • truebearing

        We have about 9000 channels, yet I can’t find anything worth watching except old westerns. Even the wildlife stuff is blatantly filled with propaganda. Every once in awhile, a movie like Casablanca comes on, like a bone thrown to a dog, then back to the garbage heap of pop culture. My wife seems to be able to find things she likes, but her health limits her other options for entertainment, so it’s good she can enjoy TV.

        • Harry_the_Horrible

          After decades of doing without, I got cable along with phone I don’t use, and Internet I need for work.
          I spend only a little time in front of the TV, mostly with my wife. I could easily do without everything but Internet.
          My wife and daughters on the other hand…
          The happiest place I know has no phone, and no connectivity.

          • Doobee

            The Mennonites came to that sort of conclusion long ago. I think they have a point.

          • Harry_the_Horrible

            There are times when I think they do, too.

        • SCREW SOCIALISM

          Watch TCM – Turner Classic Movies.

        • Seek

          You’re not trying very hard, then.

      • tagalog

        Remember the literary image of Doc Sarvis in The Monkey Wrench Gang kicking in the TV screen. It’s one area of likes and dislikes where righties and lefties can agree wholeheartedly.

    • Doobee

      History has all but disappeared from the History Channel. What’s more, the history that’s left there now is largely shallow, thin gruel.

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        I enjoy Vikings, but since it is a dramatization, I wonder how “historical” it is. The emphasis given to “shield-maidens” is a case in point …

        • Doobee

          I see nothing sinister in Vikings. In general, the time frames in History Channel shows which are farther back history are less agenda driven.

          • Tom Servo

            My wife says “Vikings” is Downton Abbey for guys.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            I don’t see anything necessarily a-historical about the show, either. But once again, the shield-maidens give me a problem, because there probably weren’t many of them. However, the show draws younger males to it because of them.

            If young men can learn something about history because of “powerful” shield-maidens, so be it.

        • Drakken

          Actually the shield maidens is fairly accurate, it would be extremely amusing to watch one of those shield maidens of old deal with the effeminate metrosexuals in todays world.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            No doubt!

            There is an account of a defeat in Bulgaria, in 971ad, of the Varangian Guard of the Eastern Empire, in which contemporary accounts tell of finding women among the dead. But it is one of the only reliable sources for this.

            Probably, there were shield-maidens. However, there were likely few of them, and some references might be talking about the Valkyries.

            Geez! Why do I have to give a lecture, every time I talk?

          • Drakken

            No worries, you were a prof at one time so it goes with the territory, besides, history has so much to reveal and tell us.

      • Harald Eigerson

        I used to go to the military channel for my history fix but it is getting to be mighty slim pickings over there at times as well. I pretty much stopped watching the history channel after about the third time I saw them putting out bad info by either distortion or flat out being wrong.

        • tagalog

          You should watch the new PBS series on the Civil War. So far they’ve only showed the first one, about the battle of Shiloh, but in that one they interview university scholars who tell the interviewers huge amounts of baloney about how Americans before the Civil War assumed that the United States was for white people and how Americans were all white supremacists.

          Interestingly (maybe it was the editing), within a sentence or two, they were talking about the debate over slavery going on, on a national mass scale since at least the 1820s, Bleeding Kansas, John Brown, William Lloyd Garrison and the Abolitionist movement, and the hundreds of thousands of white Americans who responded to Lincoln’s call for volunteers to fight to end slavery. I thought that was a little disconnected. From white supremacy and a lily-white America to hundreds of thousands of white Americans falling all over themselves to get actively involved in a six decades-long debate over slavery that they eventually wound up giving their lives for.

          I mean, I know blacks in America didn’t have a picnic here, but white supremacy when the nation was formed? America for white people? I doubt that that view was very widespread based on what people actually did…

          • DB1954

            Those “history scholars” are giving a “presentist” view of history, which is one which retrospectively condemns individuals and whole societies based on the differences between a contemporary moral worldview and the moral world view of those who lived in the past. It’s highly unscholarly, IMO.

  • CurmudgyOne

    Daniel — thanks for another quick education. I’m slowly catching on — I don’t matter anymore.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      You do, but the structure of television has been changed so that you don’t matter to the people running things.

      • SCREW SOCIALISM

        You want to see the failure of current day TV – watch any SNL Saturday Night Live. See how a current show compares to any 1970’s era SNL.

        • WW4

          1970s era SNL doesn’t hold up quite as well as you might think, and has its share of duds, even with that mostly brilliant cast. The show always had its ups and downs, hitting rock bottom right after that original cast era ended, only recovering with Eddie Murphy. The most consistent quality probably came from the Dana Carvey/Mike Meyers/Phil Hartman era.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          Or how current SNL compares

  • Johnny

    Only about half true. The people who run networks have to at least pretend to be trying to turn a profit, and so of course they are going to grasp at whatever excuse they can find to put on what they like, rather than the best profit driver.

    There is a market out there for family friendly sitcoms and they do not serve it.
    The last one was The Cosby Show and it was a huge success. But the only reason it got put on was Bill Cosby’s star power. The networks idea of a family sitcom is an acerbic, fat, dominating wife married to a passive fat man, the Roseanne show. There is a big, big market out there for family friendly sitcoms and they do not serve it. (Old example because I watch little TV these days)

    The same with network news. Fox blows the rest of them away in ratings by putting on a sort-of neutral news show. The rest go far left and get few viewers.

    They do this for profit? No way. What they are doing is using corporate funds to promote a personal agenda, which is portraying the world the way they like to see it, rather than the way it is. As is so often the case with the far left, their efforts have to be funded by somebody else or they do not go through.

    And by the way, what would be a very useful cultural move if it could be done would be to point out to all those middle and lower class men just how badly they are treated by popular programming. It my seem strange, but not uncommonly people have to be told they are being treated badly before they will fully grasp it. If the networks continue to put on the kind of programming they are putting on they should lose most of the white male audience, more than they do now.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      As I explained, they are turning a profit because ad agencies have devalued traditional viewers. There’s a market for family friendly sitcoms, but no market for those audiences.

      It doesn’t matter how many people watch, if the ad dollars aren’t there.

  • http://tinatrent.com/ Tina Trent

    “[C]orporate leadership has trended to the Left.”

    This is important. I think it has little to do with appealing to leftists as customers or defending against criticism from the Left. They have trended to the Left because the Democrats and RINOs are promising them huge new consumer markets and dirt-cheap labor through amnesty and increased immigration, both of which only benefit marketers and retailers.

    Grant amnesty and millions of poor households already using your products are suddenly better-financed via increases in American taxpayers’ welfare subsidies for housing, food, children’s needs etc. Grow the population and there is more need for housing, so the big lumber and home products companies profit, also thanks to middle-class taxpayers footing the bill for all that Section 8 and public housing infrastructure.

    Expand Obamacare and amnesty and the government-subsidized overprescribing that goes on in poor communities will find new takers — and customers for those drugs.

    And keep enough people poor and they’ll raise families on the minimum wage you pay them while relying on the taxpayer to foot all the other bills for their households — including for products you sell to them. That’s one critique of corporate culture the Left is right on: having full-time employees who earn so little they subsist on food stamps and housing assistance benefits the poor and the owners of businesses like Walmart while putting the screw to taxpayers.

    Corporate leaders have found that they can reap substantial political benefits with “progressive” views while reaping substantial financial benefits with the same. That explains why the coalition of “free-market” libertarians, RINOs and leftists are singing Kumbaya over open borders.

    Joe Schlub can pay for the extras like schooling and healthcare through his local, state, social security, and federal taxes while the Waltons and other billionaires laugh all the way to the bank.

    • bigfred41

      If you go back 6 or 7 years, nearly every one of the Fortune 500 were officially anointed to be “gay friendly” by the gay radicals. Near every corporation has had a black racist as its “diversity director”, just like universities do. Unfortunately, corporations being liberal is not new.

      But you are 100% correct that corporations will sell out Americans to get illegals as cheap labor. Without an ounce of regret.

      • justquitnow

        Saying corporations are liberal as a blanket statement shows how utterly meaningless this “left vs right” bs has become. Some of you write as if everyone in the world is either left or right and they wake up every morning to fight this battle…it just isn’t helping any of you understand anything.

        • bigfred41

          Corporations are liberal on social issues, because they think that is the way that they will be left unfettered to make as much money and have the lowest taxes possible. I doubt any corporate heads have much by way of real beliefs, or else they wouldn’t be where they are.

        • http://tinatrent.com/ Tina Trent

          Show me one major corporation that is not subsidizing the Chamber of Commerce’s twin agendas to centralize control of education through Common Core and open our borders to ruin through amnesty.

          • justquitnow

            So the Chamber of Commerce is now a liberal bastion? or is it conservative….is it one or the other depending on how it acts on any given day? Like I said…meaningless.

          • http://tinatrent.com/ Tina Trent

            I’m not saying they’re liberal. I’m saying they’re cynical.

            Does that help?

          • justquitnow

            Since we are talking about whether “left vs right” helps anyone understand anything….yes saying they are cynical is much better. It actually means something to everyone that speaks English.

          • http://tinatrent.com/ Tina Trent

            I detect a tone.

          • Doobee

            Meaningless? Kind of like your one sentence or one phrase critiques of D. Horowitz?

        • Doobee

          I see O’Reilly as the chief promoter of the left-right mentality. He’s also a fathead, a misogynist, and definitely NOT a conservative.

          • justquitnow

            You are in cult central right here….Horowitz is grandpappy of this Cult of Freedumb

          • Doobee

            Oh really? Care to explain with details, links, and more than than one sentence? You … uh … can write more than one sentence can’t you?

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            You’ve lost your way stranger

            huffingtonpost is that a way. You’ll be happier in your regressive progressive echo chamber made of peace quilts and peace loving muslims.

    • http://europa-antiqua-arca.blogspot.com/ clavdivs

      Don’t forget the totally fabricated “STEM crisis” — nice debuking of that here: http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/education/the-stem-crisis-is-a-myth

  • http://www.clarespark.com/ Clare Spark

    Stephen Colbert’s sophistry and hypocrisy were evident to this viewer, so I stopped watching. I was especially annoyed that he pretended to be a friend of working people, as I wrote here: http://clarespark.com/2010/09/29/stephen-colbert-goes-to-washington/. “Stephen Colbert doesn’t see Labor.” But he is slick and a good actor.

  • Danny

    The Late Show with Stephan Colbert will quickly go the way of some of MSNBC shows. In a year, Colbert will be a laughing stock, like Keith Olbermann.

    • Doobee

      Or go the way of MSNBC? Perpetually financed failure? Financed by George Soros and his media empire?

  • Petertimber

    What goes around comes around for both earth and its surrounding universe as well as for individuals walking around on Earth. Right now the USA is sowing seeds of its own destruction. We have forgotten that man enters into society for the protection of his property and that wealth is the product of labor not the equal sharing of miseries

    • bigfred41

      I’ll add this: culture is supposed to be a force that raises people up from their baser instincts. But modern culture is all about celebrating and exacerbating base instincts, while abolishing all rules and standards, with rap being the most obvious example.

      Modern culture is a big contributor to the destruction of America, and of the west in general.

  • Janice Woods

    Colbert will host another “most not watched TV show” on CBS and receive all kinds of coverage in the old time media outlets.

    • SCREW SOCIALISM

      Colbert may even get some awards – but lose in the ratings (viewers).

      The awards will fail to bring more viewers – and he get’s booted, crying all the way to the bank.

  • retired

    Much of this is not new.Paddy Chayefsky’s character,Howard Beale,said some similar things back in 1976.If you want to see how many of the basics remain the same 38 years later,watch the movie “Network”
    P.S.The movie ended with these lines “This was the story of Howard Beale.The first known instance of a man who was killed because he had lousy ratings”!

    • Infidel4Ever

      Network is a classic movie which remains very relevant today. It predicted many of the trends we’ve seen in TV programing over the last 40 years or so.

      • SCREW SOCIALISM

        At times Bill O’Reilly does get a bit over the top angry.

    • American1969

      Just watched that again about a week ago. Was that movie ever prescient!
      Wow!

  • Infidel4Ever

    What’s amusing is that the young target audience is the least likely to watch network TV these days.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Which is why it’s only a matter of time until it’s dead.

      • SCREW SOCIALISM

        Network TV will move to InterNetwork TV.

    • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

      That younger audience does watch the same programming on YouTube…which the networks have learned to monetize. The real shows in danger are those watched mostly on TV with older audiences.

    • laura r

      they are on the internet. im not young but i watch youtube, never mainstream TV.

  • Habbgun

    Of course this can’t be about money but developing crony contracts with the government. There is no money in rejecting the middle class. That is where the massive markets exist that allowed corporate clowns to play their corporate games and run their companies into the ground in the first place. Demand was that great. There was a reason they asked will it play in Peoria.

    A lot of this is that they want to shift the young liberals from their tablets to their TV sets rather than work hard at finding an audience. Too bad. Every time a company goes left it goes under.

  • uxcent

    This was a waste of good space. TV is no longer a youthful medium and if big corps want to waste their money chasing an audience that does not exist why should we care?

    • bigfred41

      Because unfortunately (some of) the brainwashed masses vote. How else could an incompetent affirmative action wet-behind-the-ears idiot like Obama have been elected?

      • nimbii

        Got a point there….getting a bit tired of these willfully low-info voters learning the hard way at America’s expense.

        • bigfred41

          I think I’ll use your point some time: “learning the hard way”. When a culture abandons traditional values, they stumble around with what sounds good superficially (the “caring” of hypocritical liberalism) and then we all pay the price.

          • nimbii

            You’ve got it.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            When a culture abandons traditional values…

            They become Eurabia.

  • mtnhikerdude

    Why should American Values matter ? The same Bozos that gave this administration another four years to flush American Values are the targeted demographic of Madison Avenue and the TV execs . Anyone cherishing American Values is looked upon as Racist. Obama and his Alinsky tactics have tainted a once great Nation just as 60 years of corrupt Democratic rule destroyed Detroit a once great city .
    I ask you Daniel , what can we do to take Americans out of the plague of Insanity?

    • A Z

      Values are what people flourish by or perish by.

      If you are promiscuous, you chances or perishing are greater. If you are faithful to your spouse you stand a greater chance of flourishing. And that is just one example. It is so easy but people keep trashing good values, because they have a drug or a pill or a condom or something.

      • mtnhikerdude

        Yes , AZ you are on the money with your opening sentence .

    • Daniel Greenfield

      It’s a complicated issue, but the most basic thing is build strong families and communities based around traditional values.

      In the long run, it’s the only thing that will make the difference.

  • Doobee

    Jay Leno is loved out in the heartland while Colbert is widely despised. But why would conservatives express bewilderment? CBS hates America every bit as much as their demi-god in chief, Obama, and their sycophantic Beelzebubs like Colbert.

    • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

      Leno may be loved in the heartland, but as a percentage of the population, they aren’t seen as monetizable by advertisers…most of whom work with ad agencies with an office in New York City. This may sound ageist, but that is how the TV business model works—with a heavy focus on younger viewers (Duck Dynasty being that rare exception). The problem is that it is hard to create programming that is loved by most of America; one really has to pick-and-choose. Greenfield here provides numbers to drive that point home…and I like the examples he provided. The 10th and the 24th paragraphs really make the point.

      • Doobee

        Oh, I believe you, and I entirely agree.

  • nimbii

    Hadn’t thought about libs in marketing and sub-optimizing dollar value for an interval of time.

    Fox News has put Megan Kelly in Sean Hannity’s slot to capture younger voters.

    Certainly time will tell regarding Colbert.

    • SCREW SOCIALISM

      Megan Kelly is HOT and SMART.

      • nimbii

        No denying that.

  • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

    I wish that this article could be run on NewsBusters or a similar site as well…it puts dollars and sense into the liberal bias. In order to effect change, one needs a long-haul strategy focused primarily at the high-school level, so that students come out with a love of conservatism. After all, they’re the next generation of viewers.

    Nothing in this article is a surprise.

    • bigfred41

      I’d think that students will have a love of conservatism only when it finally becomes seen as rebellion against the liberal establishment that has a stranglehold on everything in society.

      Either that, or the nationalism as in Russia these days.

      • tomhayward

        Students tend to be book smart and reality ignorant. Let them pay taxes for a while and see what they think. The issue is, living at your parents until 30, with everything paid for, allows someone that doesn’t have a rent payment to come up with every month live in an artificial world of little responsibility. So, it’s easy to mock those that have built something, the “wealthy”, and be for socialistic re-distribution schemes that could only benefit them.

        That’s fine. All heat up some popcorn and watch them freak when they actually have to experience the real world.

  • LawReader

    Letterman was a pig. Colbert isn’t much better.

    • SCREW SOCIALISM

      Letterman was better when he was at NBC.

  • tomhayward

    Article is the best I have read in a while, and is spot on.

    As others have suggested, the best way to fight this is to disengage. And you really don’t have to fight.

    I have not watched network TV since I figured out in Season 3 that “Lost” was being made up as it went along. Not only was I right, but it was the last straw for me in the phoniness and BS of network television.

    I have not watched network news in 20 years. I watch classic movie channels and a mix of cable news and news sites online.

    What have I missed? Let’s see, Trojan dildo commercials, gay-themed commercials, non-reality reality shows, idiotic dancing and singing shows, lousy comedy series, and advertising based on products I could care less about.

    What is the upside of all this? I can create my OWN media, share it though out the world on Youtube, and see videos and information on other things that I am interested, all for free.

    I can now watch via subscription a tremendous cache of shows that I DO like, both newer and vintage, for a modest fee. There are so many alternate venues for entertainment, both on-line and off.

    I don’t care about Miley Cyrus, or Snoop Dog, and I could care less in seeing a walking douche like Colbert interview them. I don’t care about energy drinks, dildos, and erection pills that they advertise.

    Yesterday, TV was a key entertainment venue and it represented a greater demographic of people. Now, for those who are media savvy (an I don’t mean they know about the latest iPhone but rather, know and embrace other venues for information and entertainment) we don’t need TV, nor consider it a major area of interest.

    So have the metrosexuals, wimps, mommy’s basement dwellers, and the like have TV. They can pretend that Colbert and Jon Stewart are providing news or relevant information. Let them live in their dreamworld.

    Meanwhile, the rest of us will gather the real wealth and enjoy quality entertainment elsewhere.

    If that galls some people, let them go take another bong hit and sink further into irrelevance.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Exactly. More people declaring independence from pop culture is the future.

  • Dan Hossley

    Who cares what CBS does? It’s their network after all. If viewers don’t like Colbert, the ratings will go down and CBS will find another host or cancel the show altogether.

    • tomhayward

      There is a good reason, and not covered in my screed below, but mentioned by others.

      TV still is a big influencer. Very easy for those who are interested in Social Engineering to influence through content and commercials that which benefits progressives, socialists, and the like. As another poster mentioned, the use of media got this idiot president elected not once, but twice.

      • laura r

        it will influence the younger people.

        • Drakken

          Let Darwin have is due when the time comes.

      • Dan Hossley

        For every Stephen Colbert, there is one Duck Dynasty, which draws more viewers than David Letterman ever did.

        • justquitnow

          Yeah because niche cable shows always beat broadcast TV in the ratings….derp

        • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

          Duck Dynasty is pretty much the exception. There is no other right-leaning show that registers in the 18-49 top 25.

          • Dan Hossley

            I think “the Five” on FoxNews beats “the View” on ABC.

          • justquitnow

            You have to stop labeling everything left and right…clearly not helping you.

  • American1969

    It’s no surprise, really. Leftists elites have scoffed at traditional values and morals for years. Middle America and anyone conservative are the Great, Unwashed, Unenlightened Masses who need to be taught how to think in the Utopian World View! Put on the rose-colored glasses and rejoice! Utopia!
    Liberalism is a psychotic mental disorder.

  • Tom Servo

    It does explain why I haven’t watched anything on CBS, ABC, or NBC for years now.

    • rubber stamp

      )) They play a classic game of making majority think they are a minority. It won’t fly. I will drink Pepsi going forward. Kraft is no longer my brand. Lets see who wins in couple of years with THAT business strategy )))

  • laura r

    i was an advertising/ communication major close to 50yrs ago. studied storyboards (commericials), copywriting, concepts for selling, some graphic design, sociologoly, etc. studied w/the top people in NYC who were head hochos @ ad agencies. they would come in one 1/2 day a week to give assignments, critique our work. things how changed drasically! ben shapiro spoke about this in relation to hollywood movies. advertising is the same. in the old days, the client was boss. he would meet w/the acct executive, talk about the demographic for the product. based upon that, the creative team would comeup w/a campaign. the bottom line was always the $$$ always the sales. social engineering was only used to enhance the bottom line: sales. for example if they were selling a bra or cigarettes, they may have used a womens “lib” slogan. things have reversed, now the creative team has the power. so tell us, what happened to the bottom line? has the internet replaced TV as entertainment for older conservative america?

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Companies are much more insecure

  • Harry_the_Horrible

    Not a big surprise. To the Left, “bourgeois” has always been a pejorative.
    To us, “bourgeois” are the folks who keep things running…

  • skf1999

    Justice is being served and the unjust are afraid. Colbert rocks!

    • rubber stamp

      you mean – Colbert s..cks. He is a low denominator populist, totally your type of entertainment. Stupid bias rant sold as humor to your stupid bias cult of idiots.

    • SCREW SOCIALISM

      FYI, Colbert isn’t black. Are you angry about that?

  • BRobCleveland

    Contempt for conservatives is not the same as contempt for America. Because conservatives certainly do not represent America, it’s people, or it’s values. If cons did represent this country, then their conservative party would not be the minority! It would be the majority.

    This is a center-left country, with a center-left perspective among the prized TV demographics. And the choice of Colbert reflects that reality. Everything else is just whining about your minority status. Boring . . . .

    • skf1999

      Thank you.

      • BRobCleveland

        This article, and the Ben Shapiro article last week, reflect the same thing as Obama’s re-election being a “surprise” to the conservatives — they do not understand the country they live in. They are cloistered, close minded, and TRULY think “Middle America” thinks like them. Well here’s the thing — it doesn’t.

        Ohio is quintessential “Middle America.” It is a good demographic proxy for the rest of the country, has more people in the urban centers than in the rest of the territory, and in my lifetime, has always picked the winner in the presidential election. Why? Because Ohio reflects the values and mood of this country.

        And who won Ohio?

        • skf1999

          On top of that, Jews like Greenfield and Shapiro should know better. Jews were included on the expanded category of whites and a small minority of them are now engaging in the racism, homophobia and xenophobia of the right. To their own peril. Most Jews realize the hateful ideology that drives contemporary conservatism is the same sentiment that led to the Holocaust. They ought to be ashamed of themselves.

          • American Patriot

            Shut up, you dunce. There is much more anti-Semitism on the radical left than on the right. Learn from facts.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            You forgot Asians in your “expanded category of whites”.

            Your ignorance and simple mindedness is reassuring.

        • SCREW SOCIALISM

          Your hubris will be your downfall.

          Thanks!

    • rubber stamp

      This is a Center Right country. Proof otherwise. Left is 20%. What are you talking about? ))) Indoctrinated much? Most young people don’t watch Cable anymore. Colbert is a temporary fun. Once he moves to CBS, no one will watch this clown, just like Fallon. Both will fade away in their humorless world of Liberal bubble.

    • Zach Smith

      Most Americans self-identify as conservative. The choice of Colbert reflects the liberal bent of the entertainment industry.

    • http://08hayabusa.blogspot.com/ 08hayabusa

      Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S.

      http://www.gallup.com/poll/152021/conservatives-remain-largest-ideological-group.aspx

  • RAS

    I wonder what would happen if all of the stupid, straight, conservative, white guys went on a long protracted strike one day. I bet it would be something to see. My view of the boys and girls on the Left is that they have difficulty changing a light bulb.

    • skf1999

      Puh-leeze. The only thing that would be apparent is that Fox TV ratings would experience a plunge.

      • rubber stamp

        So far, Fox ratings are going up and up. I need you to stay agree and delusional. If Coca Cola is after your money, then let them have it. I will drink Pepsi, or other Sodas on the market.

      • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

        Except that if you’re talking about the Fox broadcast network, they have the youngest viewing audience of the Big 4 networks (considering the CW to be a niche network). As for Fox NEWS, their ratings are going up, but in the wrong demographics (their 18-49 viewership has been plummeting).

      • Drakken

        Always remember kafir, you need us crackers, we don’t need you.

    • Drakken

      The country would quit running and the urban jungle dwellers would have a field day.

  • keyster

    The very demographic they seek to court isn’t even watching TV.
    Because UNCOOL…

  • ratamacue76

    This looks like a grab for premium price advertising time more than anything else.

  • popseal

    The lines of social divide are deep and clear. By my understanding, America is as divided as much as it was in 1860 and we know where that went. Personally, I’ve had to rid myself of a long acquaintance because of his liberal arrogance and attending self righteousness.

  • cacslewisfan

    Interesting. I noticed the extreme contempt a couple of months ago. I was trying to find a movie to watch on Netflix. There were so many movies whose entire story was based on insulting white stereotyped Southerners or mid westerners.

  • De Doc

    I could care less. I stopped watching Letterman and most late night talk shows long ago. CBS is just an old, decrepit dinosaur looking to survive in the new media world that includes stiff competition from cable, satellite, internet, etc.

  • antioli

    Will the companies that advertize on TV leave TV as the groovy younger generation might want to buy groovy younger products. How does the total buying power of the restricted groovy young compare to the total buying power of the fly over people?

    • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

      The buying power of flyover people tends to be static (i.e., they know what they’re buying already).

  • Zach Smith

    Older people have a lot more money than young people, but it’s hard to get them to buy into trends and fads.
    I don’t even watch network television anymore. I just can’t take all the ads. I’m willing to pay more for programs without advertising.

  • SCREW SOCIALISM

    justquityourbubblenowm

    You are confusing wishful thinking with reality.

    Another example of hubris.

  • simplynotred

    The inside secret is that those trendy youngsters in their twenties and thrities, are getting exhausted for working excessive hard these days to make their money, and so instead of watching, their SLEEPING.

    • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

      YouTube views can be monetized as well though…and for the millennials, networks are posting segments on YouTube.

      • simplynotred

        True, but you do have to go out of your way to make the effort. It would imply that people have time (which the diligent – don’t) to muster up an interest, let alone a desire to behave like a couch potato for a segment of entertainment when they could be exercising. However, there is always the sluggards, dumb and dopy crowd who have nothing but time on their hands.

  • WW4

    “Leno is no conservative, but he left with the baffled bewilderment familiar to many on the right of being the better man who is despised for his success, while his rival who failed miserably as a boss, a human being and a comedian, is leaving with a media ticker tape parade.”

    Leno was a placeholder whose play-it-safe-at-all-costs humor put the Geritol set to bed. (No one, ever, said “Hey, did you see that Leno bit last night?”) Letterman, on the other hand, was an innovator who rewrote the rules for the format, (which Leno copied shamelessly). Leno once had the respect of fellow comics who remember him as an indefatigable and note-perfect stand-up. He was one of the best. But his bland show and skeevy behavior during the Conan ordeal made sure he lost that respect. His being “booed out the door” is well-deserved.

    Letterman gets his due as a brilliant guy who, despite this article’s assertion, had a “heartland” ethos that always skewed pretension and belied his absurdist wit. He will be rightly celebrated on par with Carson–while Jay, despite his years in Carson’s chair, will be deservedly forgotten.

    • Texas Patriot

      Well stated. Leno was hospital food for the dead and dying, like a bowl of cottage cheese and pears with a laugh track. Letterman used to be funny, but he lost his edge as well. Jimmy Fallon, now he’s funny. Why isn’t he mentioned in this article? Otherwise, what is WW4? WWIII hasn’t even been declared yet. Surely you can’t count the Cold War as a war. It was all smoke and mirrors and an excuse to run up big budgets on foreign policy boondoggles that had nothing to do with the national security of the United States, right?

    • DD

      Letterman was a pompous gas bag who appealed to the like minded, which your comments about seniors suggest you are. Maybe Leno must have done something right since he did have higher ratings and no at 56 Letterman was not exactly appealing to the hipster crowd? The prog ability to justify itself in all circumstances strikes again!

      • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

        Letterman’s median viewer age was actually older than that—it was 59. The only thing Leno had going for him was more viewers. Younger viewers preferred Comedy Central or TBS.

        • DD

          or no tv. I don’t really watch tv that much.

    • Enzo

      Oh, I see, so the entire purpose of American TV is to entertain BIGOTS like you??? That’s really funny. CLICK

  • USARetired

    America must kick this @sshole to the curb!

  • Enzo

    He’s just a liberal BIGOT who needs it. CLICK

  • Dookert

    God you people locked in the right wing left wing thing are so sad. “Were victims of liberals, Republicans are chickenhawks, wah wah wah!”. Its not black & white, you don’t check off your democratic/republican party hating ledger sheet, when making social commentary, You’re all like drones. Colbert is funny, PERIOD. His show is funny! He is funny. Stop taking yourselves so seriously. You can bash CBS all you want, they’re a bunch of douche bags over there, and I’m sad to see Colbert go, but bashing him personally and saying he isn’t funny?! You’re just wrong, so blatantly wrong, and obviously satirical humor is beyond you. Obviously you can’t handle Colbert making fun of right wingers, hence the “So they went with Colbert instead of someone funny” line. Learn to take a joke and laugh at yourself you pouting scrooges. Good lord.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Colbert is as funny as any guy whose skill set consists of a monotonous delivery of lame partisan jokes accompanied by a raised eyebrow

  • tagalog

    Hear, hear! Well said.

  • Ted Bman

    I thought that conservatives didn’t play the victim card. Apparently I am wrong.

  • Daniel Greenfield

    He says nasty things about conservatives in the guise of a character playing it straight

    • justquitnow

      Maybe it hurts because there’s truth to it.

      • Daniel Greenfield

        It puts me in mind of the quote about being savaged by a dead sheep. Except in Colbert’s case, it’s more of a dead fish.

        • justquitnow

          It only offends you if you resemble the awful type of person he is making fun of….

  • James Anderson

    Stephen Colbert IS middle America.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Like France is Middle America.

  • Seek

    Middle America, like it or not, is writing all those letters to Penthouse.

  • Seek

    Utterly ridiculous generalization. I could name hundred over the last decade that fit into neither category. In any event, that’s not a political judgment.

    • BagLady

      I think one can safely generalise when 90% of the population is illiterate.

  • lillymckim

    Colbert is a goofy acting grown man & just not funny, just a goof.

    I don’t need another Democratic paid comic/newsman & that depends on who he’s insulting as to which “hat” he puts on its then called satire. Nothing but spewing the far lefts propaganda we already have ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, HLN, & all of Hollywood.

    1. Jimmy Fallon

    2. Bill Maher

    3. Jon Stewart

    Need I say more?

    Won’t be watching.

  • Where’s the Beef?

    HAHAHA HOGWASH. The drive to the bottom of shock TV started when the traitor from Down Under Rupert Murdoch came to America and obtained citizenship under false pretenses. He then ran the multi-outlet empire into the ground seeking the “DEMO” by striving for the abject fear, disgusting and shock value TV. Simpsons, Married with Children, NY Post, all examples of how Murdoch drove your vaunted “Middle America” (read: white, fat and stupid aging population) into Siberia. Do not blame liberals for your empty Ayn Randian perspective driving this push by Murdoch which is only pandering to the Conservative investment class who want to see nothing but shareholder benefit no matter the cost to the company or society. It all plays into the same disgusting Conservative meme of I got mine, screw you. You are disgusting in your unabashed, wholesale attempt at retrofitting history to fit your current meme, which is only the exact same as the shareholders fawning over short term strategy, rather than looking at the long prospect. You are once again showing your true colors by blaming the messenger of the Conservative failing of America. Good job Business class America.

  • Wassup

    Why is Walmart having some organics on the shelves a bad thing?

    On the advertising front, we see this “being trendy” pushed in various industries, not just tv ads. Mostly it is,vendors trying to lure clients to try their ad platforms, social media plug ins, etc… I think the attraction is that performance doesn’t matter as just doing it. Squishy measurements like “engagement” and “reach” that aren’t quantifiable as far as attributing sales to those activities. Basically a system with no,accountability, but companies will pay good money to,try it and hope for positive return. Yes, rambling a bit, I’m not a pro like Mr. Greenberg.

  • bigfred41

    The networks are first and foremost interested in making as much money as possible but they do insert liberal bigotry whenever and wherever they can. The same goes for most directors, producers, actor and especially liberal network news anchors like lowlife Brian Williams.

  • Gislef

    But would they run them if they got viewers and didn’t sell advertising? That’s the core of the article.

  • justquitnow

    Then who pays for it? Who takes the time to produce the show, edit the show, make titles for it, etc. There are two competing powers in the entertainment business…and they represent the starting point or impetus behind every show ever conceived going back to the Greeks….and that is creativity (art) and commerce (ads). If someone doesn’t want to create something for it’s own sake and someone else can’t think of how to profit from it, then nothing gets done.

  • bigfred41

    So you revel in not having any strongly held beliefs about justice. You are correct, that gives you an existence without strife*. Kind of like a cow enjoying standing in his field, chewing his cud and humming “Don’t Worry Be Happy”.

    You’ve got a lot to be proud of.

    *Except for coming to FPM and doing your name calling, of course.

  • justquitnow

    This assumes that the world needs or ought to be parsed the way you do in the language that serves the world view of same. It doesn’t. Also,..I wasn’t even talking about being active in politics…I’m talking about making that judgement on everything, political or not….

    I’m rereading The Republic atm. Justice is actually on my mind.

  • bigfred41

    Yes, being “non-judgmental” is a purported virtue, in modern amoral society. You can have it.

    Also, don’t confuse me with Democrat or Republican. Being conservative means being primarily concerned with individual justice. Being liberal means being totally group based and therefore essentially amoral, as in having marches for murderers like Mumia or the Jena 6 thugs because they are from the supposedly “oppressed’ group.

  • Wolfthatknowsall

    I hope that you have a good translation of the book. One of them was translated to make ancient Athens seems like a progressive paradise (which is an oxymoron) …

    I’m not sure that Socrates would have joined you in praising “justice”, as you understand it …

  • bigfred41

    Who says that I wasn’t poking fun at your reverse-racism? That’s my right, because I have a life of total privilege, right?

  • bigfred41

    Who says that I wasn’t poking fun at your reverse-racism? That’s my right, because I have a life of total privilege, right?

  • justquitnow

    My comment was not racist against you bigfred. You have lost all perspective on what is racist. The rest of your post is in a language I don’t understand. FPM is now going through and deleting harmless posts…what a lame cult outlet.

  • justquitnow

    That’s not at all what I said, but hey the filter’s working as designed right?

  • bigfred41

    Holder saying that he was the victim of “racism” because he was being grilled for obstructing congress… now that’s an example of having lost all perspective. When a white student sued because she was denied entrance to U. Mich in favor of a less qualified black, the press immediately asked her if she was a “racist”. Those instances, plus an almost infinite number of similar, are the backdrop of how reverse-racism dominates everything in this sick country.

    The rest referred to the fantasy of “white privilege” that is now being fomented by blacks and liberals.

  • Wolfthatknowsall

    Since the comment you made, and I replied to, has been removed, I will give you my reply here:

    I don’t know about him (bigfred41), but I was to be a senior in college, inducted into Phi Beta Kappa, with a 4.00 gpa, when I received a notice from the Dept. of Education that my Basic Educational Opportunity Grant (now, the Pell Grant) would not be renewed for the school year 1978-79. The reason given: Affirmative Action.

    And so, I worked my way through college, and into a Ph.D. .

    It worked out fine for me, but it is a “personal anecdote of reverse discrimination” that affected me directly. And note that a Democrat was president, at the time.

  • bigfred41

    South Park wimped out, bowed to Comedy Channel’s *mandate* and didn’t show Mohammed’s picture. Your claim that all is equal is false.

    South Park continued to show Jesus in some really sleazy contexts, with feces often being involved.

    Seinfeld’s buddy did the bit about urinating on the portrait of Jesus.

    Sarah Silverman does her bit about how she’s glad Jesus was crucified and how she’d like to do it again.

    It’s not about what’s funny, it’s about what is censored versus what is glorified. Sounds like you are actually the one with the insular exposure.

  • bigfred41

    You mean like when I was seeing a black girl and would get the want-to-kill you glares from the blacks when I walked holding hands with her in public? (While the same park would be filled with black guys and their white skanks.)

    Or how about switching up just a little (since I really came here to do some Mozilla bashing): when I lost a (gay) client when I wouldn’t proclaim that I was for gay marriage.

  • bigfred41

    It sees that only you are open minded and fair (while repeating the dominant dogma of America: liberalism).

    Meanwhile, try to be more clear if you are being constantly misunderstood.

    (Something funny about you, though. Something doesn’t fit, not quite the usual liberal bigot that comes here.)

  • bigfred41

    No strawman, you simply say the usual things. To wit: “Unless you read FPM or like-minded media, you don’t come front loaded with racial resentment from reverse racism.” Anybody with a newspaper in America sees a tidal wave of black crime, especially but not limited to violent crime. Yet the newspaper writers most everywhere never mention the racial association, while they do run constant stories about how whites are “racist” for being wary of blacks. The same for local tv.

    The same for national tv, which ignored the black racist nature of the knockout game, which blacks themselves called Polar Bear hunting. On and on and on.

    Yet you want to say the slur that FPM makes people think a certain way.

  • justquitnow

    Yeah I’m reading the commie version of Plato’s Republic….double derp.

  • SCREW SOCIALISM

    sarah silverman proves once again that women can not be comedians.

  • Wolfthatknowsall

    JQN, I have taught philosophy at the university level, and for many years. Greek philosophy was an emphasis, and I can tell you that there are numerous translations of Plato’s Republic. Some of them are quite good. Some of them amount to little more than a paraphrase, rather than a translation.

    If you haven’t read Jowett’s translation, you probably haven’t read an accurate Republic.

    I have no knowledge of what a “double derp” is, sir. However, the more modern the translation … and especially if it is little more than a paraphrase … the less likely you are to understand what Plato was saying. And note that paraphrases usually have an agenda.

    A word to the wise is sufficient …

  • trickyblain

    Interesting take. However, couldn’t one argue that when comparing, say, Bloom v. Jowett that they were both biased in translation? Jowett as a Christian Platonist and Bloom, influenced heavily by Strauss, as a Pagan Platonist?

    Wouldn’t the next question be “were the Greeks closer to Christian morality or pagan morality”?

    Finally, what aspects of the later translations (I’m assuming you’re referring to Bloom but may very well be wrong) convey Athens as “paradise”?

  • Wolfthatknowsall

    No doubt, at all, about bias in the translation of ancient texts …

    For example, when I look at the Greek in the Gospel of John, although I am not a Catholic, I can see where some of their cardinal doctrines come from. For example, at the Last Supper, when Jesus says, “This is my Body”, the Greek is “eimi” … present indicative. The Catholics therefore have a strong argument for their doctrine of Transubstantiation.

    At this point, people might say, “But the Greek is a translation of the original language, Aramaic.” That opens up a whole new can of worms.

    The point is that translations reflect the biases of their translators, and the worst are paraphrases of translations.