The average age of Fox News viewers is 68 and a majority of them...

[doxydad]

.... are politically conservative and white. 1.1 percent are non - white.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2550377/The-average-age-Fox-Viewers-68-majority-politically-conservative-white.html


Fair and balanced, ya know

[Jemon]

1. MSNBC's average age is only 60 nt

[Xipe Totec]

3. Link? - Never mind - same article. nt

[UTUSN]

64. My e-mail exchange with the local radio wingnut talkshow host:

I sent him the O.P. article with my comment: Not to mention that it’s staffed with has-been/failures from the real networks: O’LOOFAH, Brit HUME, Bernie GOLDBERG, Dennis MILLER, Adam CAROLLA, STOSSEL, on and on.

To which he replied: ********QUOTE*****

What's funny is that, if their listeners are so old and white and Fox is ,thus so irrelevant, how do they have the power its opponents say it has and so much influence and, if it is a dying business, as its aging audience suggests, why do other journalists, networks and opinion mongers care?*******UNQUOTE***

To which I replied:

So your solace is that criticism of Faux means it's NOT irrelevant and IS influential.

Fact: If every eligible voter really would vote, there would be NO wingnut office holders anywhere. Your real voter suppression is the SELF suppression of the Left constituents. The rest of your wingnut dirty tricks, like dividing Left constituencies against one another (old vs young) are stop gap and superficial.

Fact: Issues are not where it’s at. It’s competing world views, and the wingnut world view is just wrong in toto, with the window dressing of High Principles coupled with the actual core values of greed, racism, and all manner of Regression.

It’s what you said when I mocked your fandom for spy novels, (paraphrasing: ), they’re just not for you; you’re not their audience. So, opposing world views RANKLE each other, which is a separate issue from how much “influence” they have or don’t have.

What *I* think is funny is how LIMBOsevic’s life work has been defeated: His entire mission was to revive and gain respectability for Wingnuttiness from its post-McCARTHY demise, and now the TeaBaggers and Gunnutters have given new life to the actual core: BIRCHERs, nutcase Fundamentalists, anti-intellectuals, KKK/Skinheads/Nazis.

When I send you stuff, I don’t do it with the illusion that you will surrender. Apparently you *do* have the illusion that you can win.

[Xipe Totec]

2. Their audience consists primarily of people physically unable to switch channels. nt

[mdbl]

4. Or are too mentally weak to figure out the channel changer

[Ikonoklast]

33. They believe that those things are possessed by demons and work by witchcraft.

Just keep it on Faux Snooze so the Debbil won't git 'em.

[Scuba]

5. In a weird coincidence, their average IQ is also 68.

[mdbl]

7. LOL

[malaise]

8. DUzy

[deutsey]

22. lol

[Half-Century Man]

24. Syncronicity takes a bow.

[Paladin]

37. +1. Thread winner. (nt)

[dotymed]

6. Get Off My Yard !! n/t

[Android3.14]

9. Where do younger people find their news?

Seriously, 60 years old for the others is an alarm bell for the First Amendment people. Are the 20s-50s age people simply not reading or viewing news sources that at least attempt to bring objectivity to the craft? Do they truly find their news with social media?

[RedCappedBandit]

11. Everyone I know reads.

The "news" on TV is worthless.

[sendero]

14. And even some of us older folks...

... figured that out, a decade ago

[Ex Lurker]

62. BBC and Al Jazeera are all right most of the time

but why bother watching the news when it's all there on the internet in real time?

[Victor_c3]

16. I'm 34 so I'm not exactly young young

but I get all of my news from various internet sources and from reading. I have a TV in my house, but other than putting on cartoons for my kids occasionally, I personally never watch TV and I would never turn it on to get news. I use my computer and one of those nifty E-readers (i.e. a Kindle) for all of my entertainment and information. I'm sure I'm not far off from typical for my age and demographic.

[eridani]

68. You're describing me except I don't have kids of cartoon-watching age

I'm 67

[doxydad]

30. Yep.

Kids do not care AT ALL about anything that they cannot see in front of them at the moment. I asked a couple nephews ( ages 34 and 38) who the Sect of State was. No clue. Who ran against Obama? Not a clue.... and WHY? They do not care....and that is sad.

[Blue_Adept]

34. It's because their parents don't care.

Kids that grow up in households where politics, the world and current events aren't talked about don't get involved themselves.

[PeaceNikki]

60. You need to reign that in to speak of them. I am 41 and surrounded by politically aware and active

peers.

Also, 34 & 38 are not 'kids'.

[FailureToCommunicate]

32. 'Younger people' get their news on DU...

The smarter ones anyway.

[The_Commonist]

35. I've got these 2 little button thingies in my web browser.

One is called "Google News" and the other is called "Democratic Underground."

With those 2 little buttons, I can access ALL THE NEWS IN THE WORLD, and it's faster and easier than turning on the television and switching channels. That's similar to how most "20s-50s age people" do it these days. Nobody watches news on television. That's for dinosaurs. And it's not even news.

[Ikonoklast]

36. The web is now the paramount source for news for those younger.

I don't know anyone under the age of thirty that watches any form of nightly news from any of the larger media sources.

Anecdotally, my three kids all subscribe to different news sources on the web, and they all think the conglomerated domestic news providers are near useless.

[KurtNYC]

41. Cable news isn't journalism -- it is issue framing and affirmation of the previously held beliefs of

its audience. That's how all three of the cable news nets fill their 24 hours without much research or investigation.

A new study suggests that viewers worldwide turn to particular broadcasters to affirm — rather than inform — their opinions. It’s a notion familiar to those dismayed by the paths blazed by cable news networks Fox and MSNBC — although the study finds one (perhaps unlikely) network may actually foster greater intellectual openness.

http://www.psmag.com/media/the-age-of-affirmation-6594/

Statistically, the younger you are the less TV you watch.

Teens between 12 and 17 – the group that watches the least amount of TV - watch a staggering 23 hours and 24 minutes of TV a week. That works out to 3.3 hours daily – so basically 13.9%, or more than 1/8th of their life watching TV.

Adults 65 and older watch the most TV averaging 47 hours and 21 minutes per week. That works out to 6.7 hours of TV per day, or 28.1%, more than 1/4 of their life watching TV – more than double the lowest age group.

http://thefuturebuzz.com/2011/02/03/tv-viewing-trend/#sthash.Z0rV5oCe.dpuf

[Yavin4]

44. American corporate news is pure propaganda worse than anything that the USSR or Cuba puts out

They pretend to be "objective" journalists. In reality, they're pushing the corporate and M.I.C. agenda onto the American people on a daily basis.

[PasadenaTrudy]

46. I'm 50

No longer own a TV. I get my info and news online, like a normal person

[johnlucas]

58. I grew up a major TV fan. Now my TV is only for my videogames

I got rid of cable a couple of years ago because it was a stupid expense.
The reasons I got cable—pro wrestling & cartoons—were both disappointing me with the declining quality.
And the other stuff I came to love on cable was disappointing me as shows got lamer & everything became "reality TV".
One day I'm like "Why do I need this useless bill anyhow?"
"It keeps going up every year anyway & all these channels hardly had nothing good on to begin with"
I found myself watching a handful of channels with hundreds available.

Cable news's ignorance started pissing me off too as the cherry on top so one day I said 'F*** it' & cut the cable cord.
Should have done it years before but I was locked in by habit.
Used to buy TV Guides & used to keep up with the fall schedules growing up.

Now my TV is only used to play my videogames & watch DVDs.
Everything else I go to my computer for.
Young Turks replaced cable news. YouTube replaced everything else.
And then I read the rest in forums like these or out of the way blogs.

The current internet was what TV was originally intended to be.
Active not passive.
Videogames were preparing us for the internet age.
Ralph Baer, creator of the first videogame console Magnavox Odyssey, always wanted television to be an interactive medium from the beginning.
It was actually a mistake to have TV as a passive medium.

It was inevitable TV would fall apart once the Internet Age came about.
TV will still be around but just like radio the programming format will be much different than it was before.
John Lucas

[Hosnon]

51. reddit. nt.

[misterhighwasted]

52. Stephen Colbert & Jon Stewart

and SNL.
I guessing

[AleksS]

55. I think a lot of us are too busy to watch news on TV

Between working multiple jobs to keep families fed, etc. there's not a lot of prime-time viewing time for a 20-30 year old with a family. And what free time we have, I think we'd rather relax and be entertained than watch a news program for an hour which will cover (maybe) half of the news we could have found on the internet in 15-20 minutes.

I don't think huddling around the TV for a family night is altogether that common anymore. I could be wrong. but I know for the families I interact with regularly, that's just a luxury we do without.

And as kids get busier, it's just worse. I mean, between getting my daughter to Girl Scout events, swim practice, soccer practice, getting her homework done, and getting to school functions, we'd be ready to watch TV just about when it's time to put her to bed, and by then, we're too tired to do much more than go to bed ourselves. I can't even remember the last time we turned on the TV. we did Netflix a few shows before falling asleep. But that's about it!

[DireStrike]

59. Cable news is slightly less informative than asking for opinions in a dive bar at 2 AM -nt-

[IronLionZion]

61. online news aggregators

places like google news can link to stories from various types of media outlets. One of the best things is that you can select to read different versions of the same story. It helps accentuate bias in the media.

Then there are the various blogs and message boards like DU. Where popularity of articles increase the likelihood of viewing it. Which increases the amount of news we see from sources we agree with, if you're into that.

There are also wire services that can send you emails every day or based on alerts you set up.

[4_TN_TITANS]

10. But they vote - consistently.

What better demographic to push an agenda with?

[pampango]

20. Great point. I worked the polls Tuesday in a republican suburb. I would say the average age of

primary voters was about 68 if not higher.

[Submariner]

12. Doctors recommend Thorazine for Fox viewers

[DCBob]

13. The ultimate echo chamber!

[TexasProgresive]

15. Anybody else see the new gas pumps with a mini TV screen?

They show sports, ads and Faux Snooze.

[doxydad]

31. then you complain, like I did, and I got it changed!

n/t

[Victor_c3]

17. Wasn't that the age 2 years ago?

I thought I heard that statistic 2 years ago. So wouldn't the average age by closer to 70 now?

[2pooped2pop]

18. it's the Get Off My Lawn, network n/t

[JoePhilly]

19. FOX is the Florida of News.

[Eleanors38]

42. That's why Florida went for Obama. Twice.

[JoePhilly]

43. Missed the joke apparently.

[Eleanors38]

45. Always up for a joke. Good ones.

[JoePhilly]

47. One's sense of humor is personal.

And, not everyone has one.

[Eleanors38]

53. Yeah, got rid of my personal years ago.

[WinkyDink]

21. My 67-yr-old friend fits exactly, and swears that Fox really and truly is balanced. Oh, well!

[Bluenorthwest]

23. People should read the original Frank Rich piece from New York Magazine

from which this is derived. The age of their audience is just one factor in the irrelevance of FoxNews. I highly recommend Rich's piece.
http://nymag.com/news/frank-rich/fox-news-2014-2/index2.html

[1StrongBlackMan]

25. If you want to laugh a little more ...

the pollsters should have used the Mean age of view versus the Average. Averages are unduly sensitive to out-laying data (in this case a couple 100 Fourteen year olds would drag the average age lower ... I suspect that using the median age, the 68 years old would be significantly higher.

But that said ... fox's business model can be seen as what chiefly ill business in this MBA-driven modern business environment ...

They have a business model that clearly cannot continue; but it's making money TODAY, so ... "screw it, press on boys ... get me my Q2 bonus."

[nxylas]

26. Ironic that this comes from the Daily Heil

The British Fox News (though perhaps Murdoch's Sun "news"paper might have a better claim to that title).

[muriel_volestrangler]

69. Heh - for reference, the readership age of UK papers in 2008:

For all the chasing after younger readers by newspaper publishers, they remain more elusive than ever. According to the National Readership Survey, the average age of daily newspapers readers ranges from 39 at The Daily Star (the lowest) to 57 at The Daily Telegraph (the highest.) At The Daily Mail the average age of readers is 54, at The Times it is 49, at The Sun it is 43, and The Guardian and The Independent it is 44. There is certainly no correlation between a younger readership and healthy profits.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/opinion/stephen-glover/stephen-glover-on-the-press-852206.html

So, yes, the Mail is pretty high.

[nxylas]

70. It'd be interesting to see similar figures for US papers

It's funny that the oldest average age for a newspaper's readers (you know, that news medium that we're repeatedly told is a dying relic of the past) is 11 years younger than the average age of Fox Noise viewers.

[ecstatic]

27. I loved what Joel McHale said about them

Harsh but funny: “Their key demographic? The corpses of old people who tuned into Fox News and haven’t yet been discovered.”

[mountain grammy]

28. I'm 66, going on 67. We're "talkin bout my generation"

We were going to change the world. Sadly we did, and not for the good..."Hope I die before I get old"

&list=RDqN5zw04WxCc

[antiquie]

40. "Sadly we did, and not for the good."

You don't really believe that, do you?

Growing up, we had no garbage pick-up but we did have an incinerator in the back yard, as did our neighbors.
Abortion was illegal.
Free speech did not apply to all of us.
There was no Medicare.

When I started work (1967) at the same mercantile credit company that once employed Abraham Lincoln, women were not allowed to wear slacks to work, not allowed to talk to the "girl" at the adjoining desk, had to ask permission to use the restroom, and an efficiency expert counted everything I did, including if I looked at the clock (demerit). Women could not smoke at their desks (men could)., etc.

It is sad you feel *your* generation not only failed to improve, but made the world worse. I believe we made significant progress in improving the world for our grandkids. Yes, some advances have been reversed, but two forward and one back is surely better than one forward and two back.

[mountain grammy]

48. Thanks, I needed that, and you're right. Sometimes I lose faith in the "two steps forward

and one step back" philosophy which I've believed in most of my life. It's just depressing to see so many my age sucked into the lies and propaganda of the right.
The 1980 election was many steps backward, and it's been an upward fight ever since, but fight we do. I'm not giving up by any means and progress has been made. We will be involved in several voter registration drives this summer.

Yes, we've made a difference, much of it good, and I'm proud of that. But we're losing the battle on the environment and education and we don't have much time left. If we leave a world that's hostile to life, what good is anything else we've accomplished?

[antiquie]

50. All we can do is just keep fighting the good fight.

Maybe the 1% will be affected while there is still time...

[snooper2]

54. well, you've got airbags and microwaves now

LOL

[riqster]

29. They are providing a product to a market demographic, not broadcasting news.

When they lose enough money doing this, they will rebrand as a liberal network for hipsters.

[lpbk2713]

38. 99% of Faux viewers are willfully ignorant.

While what's left is one percenters checking on Faux to make
sure the flow of raw bullshit remains uninterrupted.

[spanone]

39. 'we report one-side of all news and you decide'

[L0oniX]

49. OOOOO ...look at the pretty colors on this channel.

[Gothmog]

56. People who watch Fox News are less well informed compared to people who do not watch any news

These people are used to be told lies. Only stupid people watch Fox News

[liberal N proud]

57. But they are very well misinformed

Which is the whole idea of FOX.

[LongTomH]

63. I'm actually in the age range for Fox viewers; but, I spend a lot more time online than watching TV.

I like Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert; but, I get more of their wit and wisdom from YouTube than Comedy Central. My favorite TV program? Adventure Time (It's an animated 'kids' series, with a lot of adult viewers.)

[Egnever]

67. Ok you made me look

I only watched a clip but Adventure time was hilarious. You may have got me started on something.

[young_at_heart]

65. I'm 74 and I HATE Fox News!!

I guess I'm a rebel or something!

[grahamhgreen]

66. I thought you were gonna say....

...are hard of hearing!