Fox News Big Losers From New Hampshire; Frank Luntz and Murdoch in the bag for Rubio

[Jackson]

Dick Morris: Rubio, Fox News Big Losers From New Hampshire

[With conservative blogs calling Fox News "the unofficial Super Pac of Marco Rubio," the network may join the Florida senator as one of the big losers Tuesday night.

Fox has come under sharp criticism for its after debate spin discussions, especially its focus groups that have had seemingly ordinary voters strongly favor Rubio.


After the last debate in Iowa, Breitbart reported that "pollster Frank Luntz got significant airtime to direct a post-debate focus group that unsurprisingly was very favorable to Rubio, the GOP establishment pick in the primary race."


Breitbart said neither Fox nor Luntz disclosed the pollster’s close ties with Rubio.

According to the conservative online news service, Rubio had paid Luntz more than $250,000 for political work completed in Florida.

Morris said Fox has been frequently giving positive air time to Rubio after reporting on Trump, to the detriment of other candidates.

Breaking News at Newsmax.comhttp://www.newsmax.com/Headline/dick-morris-fox-news-marco-rubio/2016/02/09/id/713557/#ixzz3zn7wLtbl


Well, it appears the truth will come out in time with Fox. It is in the bag for Rubio. Rupert Murdoch backs the candidacy for him and Frank Luntz was paid $250,000 for political work for Rubio. Neither Fox News or Frank Luntz disclosed that. Fox has been giving positive air time to Rubio when it wasn’t warranted.


After Rubio had a devastating loss in last night’s primary, Fox was still trumpeting the virtues of Rubio. The close ties may reveal why, after the first debate with Megyn Kelly the “focus group” appeared to be anti-Trump when the polls the next day proved the opposite.

So much for unbiased and unafraid. At least Charles Krauthammer didn’t get the memo and appeared to say what he thought.

 

[S.J.]

First they were in the tank for Bush, now it's Rubio. I expect to see some lopsided positive airtime for Kasich next.

 

[Siete]

First they were in the tank for Bush, now it's Rubio. I expect to see some lopsided positive airtime for Kasich next.

Trump and Rafael are losers so why not? ... Those three ^^^^^^^^^ are in a log jam, look for Dennis to break it up and beat them both.

 

[Jackson]

Could be!

 

[Jackson]

First they were in the tank for Bush, now it's Rubio. I expect to see some lopsided positive airtime for Kasich next.

Trump and Rafael are losers so why not? ... Those three ^^^^^^^^^ are in a log jam, look for Dennis to break it up and beat them both.

Trump the loser???lol! Dennis Kucinich??

Siete, you really have to pay more attention to politics.

 

[Siete]

First they were in the tank for Bush, now it's Rubio. I expect to see some lopsided positive airtime for Kasich next.

Trump and Rafael are losers so why not? ... Those three ^^^^^^^^^ are in a log jam, look for Dennis to break it up and beat them both.

Trump the loser???lol! Dennis Kucinich??

Siete, you really have to pay more attention to politics.

Trump won't get the nomination.... write that down.

Dennis will surge ahead of Jeb, and MMarco ... write that down.

 

[S.J.]

First they were in the tank for Bush, now it's Rubio. I expect to see some lopsided positive airtime for Kasich next.

Trump and Rafael are losers so why not? ... Those three ^^^^^^^^^ are in a log jam, look for Dennis to break it up and beat them both.

Trump the loser???lol! Dennis Kucinich??

Siete, you really have to pay more attention to politics.

Trump won't get the nomination.... write that down.

Dennis will surge ahead of Jeb, and MMarco ... write that down.

Dennis the Menace?

 

[Rustic]

Poach more Rinos

 

[Foxfyre]

Dick Morris: Rubio, Fox News Big Losers From New Hampshire

[With conservative blogs calling Fox News "the unofficial Super Pac of Marco Rubio," the network may join the Florida senator as one of the big losers Tuesday night.

Fox has come under sharp criticism for its after debate spin discussions, especially its focus groups that have had seemingly ordinary voters strongly favor Rubio.


After the last debate in Iowa, Breitbart reported that "pollster Frank Luntz got significant airtime to direct a post-debate focus group that unsurprisingly was very favorable to Rubio, the GOP establishment pick in the primary race."


Breitbart said neither Fox nor Luntz disclosed the pollster’s close ties with Rubio.

According to the conservative online news service, Rubio had paid Luntz more than $250,000 for political work completed in Florida.

Morris said Fox has been frequently giving positive air time to Rubio after reporting on Trump, to the detriment of other candidates.

Breaking News at Newsmax.comhttp://www.newsmax.com/Headline/dick-morris-fox-news-marco-rubio/2016/02/09/id/713557/#ixzz3zn7wLtbl


Well, it appears the truth will come out in time with Fox. It is in the bag for Rubio. Rupert Murdoch backs the candidacy for him and Frank Luntz was paid $250,000 for political work for Rubio. Neither Fox News or Frank Luntz disclosed that. Fox has been giving positive air time to Rubio when it wasn’t warranted.


After Rubio had a devastating loss in last night’s primary, Fox was still trumpeting the virtues of Rubio. The close ties may reveal why, after the first debate with Megyn Kelly the “focus group” appeared to be anti-Trump when the polls the next day proved the opposite.

So much for unbiased and unafraid. At least Charles Krauthammer didn’t get the memo and appeared to say what he thought.

I am a former member of the media and have been a dedicated media watcher and critic for decades now. And because I was trained in an era in which any teensy bit of detectable bias would get you a good knuckle rapping from the journalism prof or city editor, I believe I am super sensitive to deliberate and inadvertent bias demonstrated by the media.

And, because it is the ONLY national news sources in which you get all the national news, I do watch Fox News quite a bit including last night for the election returns. I wasn't picking up on all that bias.
It seems to me that all the Fox 'magazine' hosts as well as all the straight new reporting has included everybody with pretty much equal time extended. If anybody is getting extra time or attention, it is Trump because he is central to every election news story no matter what the subject or purpose of the content. He is the one everybody talks about which just about forces a media source to follow him. And if anybody got extra time last night, it seemed to me that it was Kasich because he did so much better than the polls indicated he would.

Certainly those who favor a candidate that they feel isn't getting sufficient face time or discussion is going to believe his/her candidate is being shortchanged. That has become crystal clear to me during the debates in the perception that this person or that person was ignored, when the final tally showed they got many more minutes to participate than it 'felt' like they did.

I won't believe Luntz did anything underhanded without more evidence than one news source that may or may not be biased in their opinion about that. (And I am NOT a Rubio supporter, at least not yet.)

 

[Jackson]

First they were in the tank for Bush, now it's Rubio. I expect to see some lopsided positive airtime for Kasich next.

Trump and Rafael are losers so why not? ... Those three ^^^^^^^^^ are in a log jam, look for Dennis to break it up and beat them both.

Trump the loser???lol! Dennis Kucinich??

Siete, you really have to pay more attention to politics.

Trump won't get the nomination.... write that down.

Dennis will surge ahead of Jeb, and MMarco ... write that down.

Dennis who?

 

[blackhawk]

FOX is in the tank for Rubio I find that pretty funny given how much free air time they give Trump along with pretty much everyone else in the media.

 

[whitehall]

Did they hug Rubio? At least one media type and alleged impartial moderator at the democrat debate hugged Hillary.

 

[S.J.]

Frank Luntz has been trying to talk Trump's numbers down for some time now with his fake "random panel". I don't buy his BS for one minute.

 

[Jackson]

Dick Morris: Rubio, Fox News Big Losers From New Hampshire

[With conservative blogs calling Fox News "the unofficial Super Pac of Marco Rubio," the network may join the Florida senator as one of the big losers Tuesday night.

Fox has come under sharp criticism for its after debate spin discussions, especially its focus groups that have had seemingly ordinary voters strongly favor Rubio.


After the last debate in Iowa, Breitbart reported that "pollster Frank Luntz got significant airtime to direct a post-debate focus group that unsurprisingly was very favorable to Rubio, the GOP establishment pick in the primary race."


Breitbart said neither Fox nor Luntz disclosed the pollster’s close ties with Rubio.

According to the conservative online news service, Rubio had paid Luntz more than $250,000 for political work completed in Florida.

Morris said Fox has been frequently giving positive air time to Rubio after reporting on Trump, to the detriment of other candidates.

Breaking News at Newsmax.comhttp://www.newsmax.com/Headline/dick-morris-fox-news-marco-rubio/2016/02/09/id/713557/#ixzz3zn7wLtbl


Well, it appears the truth will come out in time with Fox. It is in the bag for Rubio. Rupert Murdoch backs the candidacy for him and Frank Luntz was paid $250,000 for political work for Rubio. Neither Fox News or Frank Luntz disclosed that. Fox has been giving positive air time to Rubio when it wasn’t warranted.


After Rubio had a devastating loss in last night’s primary, Fox was still trumpeting the virtues of Rubio. The close ties may reveal why, after the first debate with Megyn Kelly the “focus group” appeared to be anti-Trump when the polls the next day proved the opposite.

So much for unbiased and unafraid. At least Charles Krauthammer didn’t get the memo and appeared to say what he thought.

I am a former member of the media and have been a dedicated media watcher and critic for decades now. And because I was trained in an era in which any teensy bit of detectable bias would get you a good knuckle rapping from the journalism prof or city editor, I believe I am super sensitive to deliberate and inadvertent bias demonstrated by the media.

And, because it is the ONLY national news sources in which you get all the national news, I do watch Fox News quite a bit including last night for the election returns. I wasn't picking up on all that bias.
It seems to me that all the Fox 'magazine' hosts as well as all the straight new reporting has included everybody with pretty much equal time extended. If anybody is getting extra time or attention, it is Trump because he is central to every election news story no matter what the subject or purpose of the content. He is the one everybody talks about which just about forces a media source to follow him. And if anybody got extra time last night, it seemed to me that it was Kasich because he did so much better than the polls indicated he would.

Certainly those who favor a candidate that they feel isn't getting sufficient face time or discussion is going to believe his/her candidate is being shortchanged. That has become crystal clear to me during the debates in the perception that this person or that person was ignored, when the final tally showed they got many more minutes to participate than it 'felt' like they did.

I won't believe Luntz did anything underhanded without more evidence than one news source that may or may not be biased in their opinion about that. (And I am NOT a Rubio supporter, at least not yet.)

Thank you, foxfyre! I would go along with what you say, except I do think Luntz should have thought twice about working for Rubio, receiving $250,000 for it. George Stephanopolous got into some hot water when he didn't disclose his donations to the Democratic party. Why would he be held responsible for a tie when Luntz is not?

I cannot attest to the partisanship for rubio, for after the first GOP debate, I never watched Fox again. However, that night, the "Focus Group" were anti Trump when the polls showed something quite the opposite the next day. That did make me wonder about the unbiased focus groups from that point on.

Thank you for sharing your experiences and thoughts.

 

[Jackson]

FOX is in the tank for Rubio I find that pretty funny given how much free air time they give Trump along with pretty much everyone else in the media.

That is what I thought, too. It does say that the hosts of the shows do have some discretion to who they try to get for their own show. They know who brings in the viewers! I think Kelly is the only one that refused to have him on her show again...of course that was mutual.
Thanks blackhawk.

 

[BlueGin]

First they were in the tank for Bush, now it's Rubio. I expect to see some lopsided positive airtime for Kasich next.

Trump and Rafael are losers so why not? ... Those three ^^^^^^^^^ are in a log jam, look for Dennis to break it up and beat them both.

Trump the loser???lol! Dennis Kucinich??

Siete, you really have to pay more attention to politics.

Trump won't get the nomination.... write that down.

Dennis will surge ahead of Jeb, and MMarco ... write that down.

Dennis who? The left wing loon? That Dennis?

 

[BlueGin]

FOX is in the tank for Rubio I find that pretty funny given how much free air time they give Trump along with pretty much everyone else in the media.

Exactly. Media is in Trump overload and has been.

 

[Missourian]

Dennis? Who the F is Dennis? Your imaginary friend? "Dennis" would literally have to come out of nowhere to "break it up and beat them both".

Another "well-informed" liberal voter. Gooooo Dennis!

 

[Siete]

lab rats don't even know who the candidates are..

 

[Foxfyre]

Dick Morris: Rubio, Fox News Big Losers From New Hampshire

[With conservative blogs calling Fox News "the unofficial Super Pac of Marco Rubio," the network may join the Florida senator as one of the big losers Tuesday night.

Fox has come under sharp criticism for its after debate spin discussions, especially its focus groups that have had seemingly ordinary voters strongly favor Rubio.


After the last debate in Iowa, Breitbart reported that "pollster Frank Luntz got significant airtime to direct a post-debate focus group that unsurprisingly was very favorable to Rubio, the GOP establishment pick in the primary race."


Breitbart said neither Fox nor Luntz disclosed the pollster’s close ties with Rubio.

According to the conservative online news service, Rubio had paid Luntz more than $250,000 for political work completed in Florida.

Morris said Fox has been frequently giving positive air time to Rubio after reporting on Trump, to the detriment of other candidates.

Breaking News at Newsmax.comhttp://www.newsmax.com/Headline/dick-morris-fox-news-marco-rubio/2016/02/09/id/713557/#ixzz3zn7wLtbl


Well, it appears the truth will come out in time with Fox. It is in the bag for Rubio. Rupert Murdoch backs the candidacy for him and Frank Luntz was paid $250,000 for political work for Rubio. Neither Fox News or Frank Luntz disclosed that. Fox has been giving positive air time to Rubio when it wasn’t warranted.


After Rubio had a devastating loss in last night’s primary, Fox was still trumpeting the virtues of Rubio. The close ties may reveal why, after the first debate with Megyn Kelly the “focus group” appeared to be anti-Trump when the polls the next day proved the opposite.

So much for unbiased and unafraid. At least Charles Krauthammer didn’t get the memo and appeared to say what he thought.

I am a former member of the media and have been a dedicated media watcher and critic for decades now. And because I was trained in an era in which any teensy bit of detectable bias would get you a good knuckle rapping from the journalism prof or city editor, I believe I am super sensitive to deliberate and inadvertent bias demonstrated by the media.

And, because it is the ONLY national news sources in which you get all the national news, I do watch Fox News quite a bit including last night for the election returns. I wasn't picking up on all that bias.
It seems to me that all the Fox 'magazine' hosts as well as all the straight new reporting has included everybody with pretty much equal time extended. If anybody is getting extra time or attention, it is Trump because he is central to every election news story no matter what the subject or purpose of the content. He is the one everybody talks about which just about forces a media source to follow him. And if anybody got extra time last night, it seemed to me that it was Kasich because he did so much better than the polls indicated he would.

Certainly those who favor a candidate that they feel isn't getting sufficient face time or discussion is going to believe his/her candidate is being shortchanged. That has become crystal clear to me during the debates in the perception that this person or that person was ignored, when the final tally showed they got many more minutes to participate than it 'felt' like they did.

I won't believe Luntz did anything underhanded without more evidence than one news source that may or may not be biased in their opinion about that. (And I am NOT a Rubio supporter, at least not yet.)

Thank you, foxfyre! I would go along with what you say, except I do think Luntz should have thought twice about working for Rubio, receiving $250,000 for it. George Stephanopolous got into some hot water when he didn't disclose his donations to the Democratic party. Why would he be held responsible for a tie when Luntz is not?

I cannot attest to the partisanship for rubio, for after the first GOP debate, I never watched Fox again. However, that night, the "Focus Group" were anti Trump when the polls showed something quite the opposite the next day. That did make me wonder about the unbiased focus groups from that point on.

Thank you for sharing your experiences and thoughts.

Thank you for the thread. Interesting discussion.

But Luntz made his living running a polling service which I think he has now sold--seems I read something about that recently. He is to turn down a $250,000 customer? And why would he jeopardize his business by flagrantly showing favoritism to anybody? Do we know if anybody else has utilized his services? Or is it possible that Rubio is scaring those rooting for somebody else and they're doing their dangdest to downplay any success he is having or any momentum in his favor and are grasping at anything they can use to do that?

And it is a fact that Fox News and anybody who works for them full time or as a contributor, which Luntz is, has always been damned and accused by those on the left. Any tiny downtick in their ratings always sends up a chorus of cheers--Fox News is finally over!!! They're on they're way out!!! Yadda yadda. No matter what they do, how they do it, or when they do it, there is always going to be somebody that will accuse them or demonize them about something.

That's why I take these stories that are so often created stories just to have something to report and garner attention for a few days

I have read Luntz's explanation for how focus groups are selected and, while I don't remember the details, I don't recall faulting his criteria for who goes on a focus group. But I remember that debate you so strenuous objected too--so did I. I remember Luntz's group after that debate. Does anybody think Fox News was promoting Donald Trump that night? But Luntz's focus group indicated that a sizable number of the group thought Trump won it and quite a few were favoring him at that time. I didn't but I'm pretty picky about my opinion as to who did the best job.