
Fox on StocksDaniel Gross takes readers' questions about Rupert Murdoch's new business TV channel.
Posted Thursday, Oct. 25, 2007, at 5:30 PM ETSlate columnist Daniel Gross was online at Washingtonpost.com on Thursday, Oct. 25, to discuss the new Fox Business Channel and what its launch signals about the economy. An unedited transcript of the chat follows.
Dan Gross: Hi -- Daniel Gross here. Moneybox columnist at (Washington Post Co. family member) Slate and columnist and senior editor at (Washington Post Co. family member) Newsweek.
Glad to take your questions and discuss the meaning of Fox Business Channel.
_______________________
Appreciate CNBC even more: I have tuned into a few minutes of the Fox Business Channel but could not get its ludicrous commercial out of my head. (Really attractive people like Alexis Glick and Neil Cavuto telling me they will dumb down business news so that idiots like me can understand.) I've never been befuddled by CNBC's jargon, and the Internet can explain business terms quite efficiently. Fox News is a clear alternative to CNN and MSNBC, but what is the point of this business channel?
Dan Gross: Agree generally with your points, though I'd quibble with the inclusion of Neil Cavuto in the category of "really attractive people." Clearly, there's a two- or perhaps three-fold method to Murdoch's madness:
1. Make money. He's got an installed base of advertisers at Fox News Channel, and this should deliver more upscale viewers.
2. Annoy CNBC (high priority for ex-CNBC honcho turned Fox News head Roger Ailes).
3. Provide a new platform to extend the brand of his recent acquisition: the Wall Street Journal. The Journal currently has a partnership with CNBC, but Murdoch is in this for the long haul, and ultimately, if it survives, we'll see a lot more WSJ on FBC.
_______________________
Anonymous: At a media summit hosted by BusinessWeek magazine, Rupert Murdoch was quoted as saying CNBC (Fox Business Network's main competitor) is too "negative towards business." They promise to make Fox Business more "business friendly." I read "business friendly" as Democrat nasty. Nasty to Democrats like New York Governor Elliot Spitzer, who has held dozens of corporations accountable to U.S. laws. With Fox Biz, do you see Murdoch bringing to business news what he did to national news with Fox News -- Republican-friendly/Democrat-nasty politicization?
Dan Gross: Hi. Yes, I do think that Fox Business Channel will Fox-ify news coverage. The irony, of course, is that CNBC -- even well before the advent of the Fox Business Channel -- already provided a Fox-ified version of business and economic coverage, generally friendly to Republicans as business friendly, and generally hostile to Democrats. What's more, as might be expected, the political spectrum represented on CNBC ranges from the center to the far right (economically speaking, at least). Anchors, guest hosts, guests, you name it -- the assumptions are all that free trade is an unabashed good, that the Republicans are always good for business, that Europe is a socialist haven, that tax cuts pay for themselves. Of course, most Americans don't agree with these ideas. But I'd also bet that most of CNBC's audience doesn't agree with them either.
_______________________
Washington: So we all know that the leftist are the poor, bottom third of our country; can you help me understand why Fox wants a business channel to blame the Democrats for the stock market and other world economies?
Dan Gross: I'm sure that if things start to go poorly in the U.S. economy in particular, the Fox Business Channel will be filled with guests who will argue that it has something to do with the Democrats' control of Congress.
_______________________
San:"Saying America needs Fox Business Channel because CNBC isn't sufficiently pro-capitalist is a little like saying Boston needs a new baseball team because the Red Sox aren't a sufficient object of local obsession."
Really? It seems like Gross doesn't understand economics. You don't enter into an area when no one actually cares about the market, but you do when people start to show interest. If the Boston area were demanding baseball, and the Red Sox were doing great because of it, then the sensible thing is to put another baseball team to strike for competition.
Ever hear of that term? It's one of the most important to businesses. Let's say I make sprockets. Sprockets become popular and in demand. Other companies are going to start making sprockets to in order to take some of my profits. It only makes sense. Why wouldn't Fox make a business channel, seeing as how a conservative business channel already is popular? The logic is like saying why is there an Los Angeles Times when the New York Times already is promoting socialistic garbage? It seems that Gross's reality only has monopolies of those who came in and somehow kept all competitors out.
Dan Gross: San -- I take your point about wanting to enter into a hot market where there's a proven audience. My point -- and the point of the analogy to the Red Sox -- is that when the market is basically dominated by a single, massive firm (business news on TV isn't a monopoly. There are plenty of other offerings, it's just that none of them really can take a bite out of CNBC) it's a tough haul.
One might indeed conclude that since Boston loves its Red Sox so much, that it would be welcoming to a new franchise. And if a minor league team were to open up across the river in Cambridge, I'm sure it would draw some fans. But it would take it a long time to dent the Sox' popularity.
_______________________
Dobutsu: Mr. Gross fails to recognize what CNBC's agenda really is -- a shill for short-sellers. The talking heads on CNBC create fear among the viewers by consistently conveying doom-and-gloom scenarios no matter how upbeat a financial guest may be. The MSM are the major culprits in driving the market down. And Ben Stein agrees.












Is Hasan a Terrorist? And Other Great Stories From Slate This Week.
How Sarah Palin Is Dividing the Republican Party
Can We Apply the Lessons of Y2K to Swine Flu?
They Made a Movie About the Wrong Aviatrix
Jamie Foxx's New Single Is Extremely Lewd
The Week's Best Editorial Cartoons