If network and cable television programming were foodstuffs, they'd have to come with warning labels about brain damage.

Lets try and keep this in perspective. The top rated Fox news program was O'Reilly and he got 3.5 million viewers in April of 2009. That was half as many viewers who saw the Grinch in Dec of 2009. Assuming an adult population of 300 million, that about 1/10th of 1 percent who watched O'Reilly.

Not sure if that is good or bad that so few people watch news. I do not know if the rest are looking for their info on line or just do not care at all about world events. Either way, it's a really small small segment of society.

__________________
Sent from an agnostic abacus

2014 C250 21,XXX my new DD ** 2013 GLK 350 18,000 Wife's new DD**

- With out god, life is everything.
- God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller as time moves on..." Neil DeGrasse Tyson
- You can pray for me, I'll think for you.
- When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

I give them 5-10 years to be gone. I don't know anyone under 30 who really watches TV or listens to terrestrial radio, especially news shows. My kids only use the TV to stream online media and watch movies from a hard drive or a DVD. They probably spend twice as much time chatting and gaming online as watching the "idiot box" (that may not be a "good" thing).

Actually, quite a few folks still watch or listen to news, but even FNC adamantly states that "The Factor" is not news, neither is Sean, Glen, or Greta, as they occupy the "infotainment" side of the network.

That would be an interesting social change, where programming becomes so fine tuned and personalized that there will be a diminishing population of people with a "shared experience." For instance, more people knew about the "Yada-Yada" episode of "Seinfeld" than the episode of "Curb Your Enthusiasm" with Stephen Colbert. Broadcast versus cable. As content gets more pinpointed, there may be less of that common experience to discuss.

Exactly, TV news has a very small (and very old) audience. I honestly do not remember the last time I watched a TV news program (not counting the many, many hotel lobbies where I eat about half of my breakfasts).

I think we are already there. I'm 51 and I watch more video podcasts than TV shows by a wide margin. I don't even listen to NPR anymore, I just collect the episodes of the shows I like on podcasts and listen to an ipod while driving. I haven't used my car radio (as a radio) for a couple of years. I get 90% of my news from news websites (I can scam a dozen websites in a few minutes). If I want to watch a current TV series, I just buy the entire season on itunes (without commercials), or watch it on hulu when I have time. I've never watched an entire episode of Seinfeld, but I have all 7 seasons of the Sopranos sitting on a hard drive.

My kids watch/listen to completely separate media from me. I think my daughter watches more video on here phone than on her TV. Most of their "shared experience" comes from various chat rooms. They almost never talk on their phones, in favor of texting and e-mailing. I don't think my kids have any idea who Jay Leno is. They spend a lot more time playing online games and chatting with the other players than watching TV.

The point is that media has already become very focused, the days of everyone watch Ed Sullivan on Sunday nights are long gone.