So you think media concerns attune their offer to that person that live in denser population areas?
Isn’t that capitalism? Isn’t it more profitable to cover a small land area with lots of people? Remember that stations used to go out over the air with Terrestrial Antennas. It’s been less than a generation since we broke from that.
If those people tend to be more liberal, wouldn’t you expect the coverage to reflect that?
I’m not saying it’s right, I’m just saying that it makes sense.
Actually the concerns can only consider the average viewer’s demands if they deal capitalistically. Even if liberals live in denser regions and conservatives scattered: The total amount of liberal viewers would not be higher be higher.
You are forgetting that media didn’t happen in the internet age, it’s only been the last 15 years that national, highly selective media has even existed.
Before that, we had cable and newspapers. Where were the most influential newspapers? In big cities.
The result over the past 15 years has been highly specialized media, but the culture that existed prior to the 2000’s still shows its influence.
I think as time goes by liberal and conservative media will become increasingly biased, but I also think it will level out.
The 20 somethings of today don’t watch CNN for news and a tiny fraction have ever held an actual newspaper never mind read one, though newspapers are increasingly going digital.
I think capitalism created the landscape we see today, but I suspect that landscape will change quite a bit over the next several years.
Remember that Sinclar Group, a highly conservative media company now owns more local stations than any other single group and they are using that influence to push stories that Conservatives will find interesting.
We’ll see how that plays out…