Monday Links & Open Thread
Monday cable news links [updated through the day]:
Video: (news)man's best friend.
Promotion: "Clay" Hinchman.
Progress report: Peter Herridge.
Friday's numbers.
The package is crashing!
Pix: Gitmo, behind the scenes.
The logical move. Hitchens: media immoderation?
J.C. Watts faces obstacles.
Big Beck blurb.
Did Coop slander Africa? Greta feels sorry for Anderson.
Video: plagiarist kills dog.
(Some) networks abandon Iraq.
Hot & Not.
iron Maiden at Madison Square Garden.
J$P Poll results:
Use our valuable bandwidth to post your comments on any and all cable news topics in today's open thread. Standard rules apply. fox news cable news
Damian G.
So, Bill O'Reilly won the poll?
June 23, 2008, 2:58:16 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
So, E.D. Hill and Page Six are not hot? ICN is a bit at odds with this site on those points. E.D. is smokin' hot and Page Six is hilarious in its Olby tirades!
June 23, 2008, 7:10:24 AM EDT – Like – Reply
On The Mark
The piece on Cooper raises some significant issues. I am not willing to go as far as the author in ascribing malicious intent to Cooper, but I do think that the reporting from Africa is error-laden. I believe this to be a combination of:
#1
A desire to evoke an emotional response, rather than a reasoned one when it comes to the very real African crises. Emotional responses are easy. They require no research, no reasoned analysis. The do, however, build audience numbers quickly.
#2
Related somewhat to this, Cooper's "It's About Me" approach to stories. The focus seldom strays from Cooper. Solid reporting might shift the focus, and that can't be allowed to happen.
#3
A lack of skill and experience as a hard news reporter.
#4
More than a bit of laziness. Reporting is hard work, and it requires a great deal of preparation.
I have to applaud CNN on the concept. We get precious little news about Africa, a vitally important place in the world. What is particularly tragic is that Cooper has been given a wonderful opportunity. He is squandering it.
June 23, 2008, 7:41:29 AM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
Is he still you're "must see" tv?
June 23, 2008, 10:58:25 AM EDT – Like – Reply
On The Mark
Indeed, of the options offered, he is. But, I know how to view analytically and judiciously.
June 23, 2008, 11:02:36 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike C.
I'm here to preemptively stop topic drift. OS and Cecelia, stop bothering OTM. It doesn't matter if he went under a million aliases elsewhere. Here, he goes by one. And although, he's a dissenter that leaves dissertations for comments, he's tolerable. That changes when you play gotcha with him.
Now, to get back on the topic of this thread: "The Live Desk" was a good choice for What's Hot.
June 23, 2008, 12:22:51 PM EDT – Like – Reply
cornycob
What is up with the Zimbabwe Times anyways. Are they even based in Zimbabwe? Cause their server is in the U.S. and that guy that wrote the article lives in the U.S.
June 23, 2008, 12:27:30 PM EDT – Like – Reply
HaggisFarmer
What has happened to the poll?...looks like those dastardly left wingers hijacked it...I never even voted.
keith, keep up the good work your doing...Fox are well and truly rattled.
June 23, 2008, 12:49:54 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike C.
The only reason it's quiet here is because everyone is in the "Caution: Geniuses at Work" comment thread and the Weekend Open Thread. Maybe that's a good thing: no topic drifting, no links to irrelevant stuff, no playing gotcha with tolerant dissenters by calling them aliases. I doubt it'll last. But I'm quitting commenting anyway, as I stated in the "Caution..." open thread. Goodbye.
June 23, 2008, 3:14:31 PM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
"According to data compiled by Andrew Tyndall, a television consultant who monitors the three network evening newscasts, coverage of Iraq has been massively scaled back this year. Almost halfway into 2008, the three newscasts have shown 181 weekday minutes of Iraq coverage, compared with 1,157 minutes for all of 2007. The CBS Evening News has devoted the fewest minutes to Iraq, 51, versus 55 minutes on ABCs World News and 74 minutes on NBC Nightly News. (The average evening newscast is 22 minutes long.)
More evidence the surge is working. The msm won't tell you that, though. The proof is in the puddin.'
June 23, 2008, 5:08:27 PM EDT – Like – Reply
HaggisFarmer
Mike C. | Homepage | 06.23.08 - 3:19 pm |
Mike instead of rabbiting on about who should talk with who....And your quitting posting...Let us hear your thoughts on cable news.
June 23, 2008, 5:11:27 PM EDT – Like – Reply
HaggisFarmer
olby sucks | Homepage | 06.23.08 - 5:13 pm |
Check out Afghanistan
June 23, 2008, 5:19:32 PM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
One country at a time, patsy.
June 23, 2008, 5:24:09 PM EDT – Like – Reply
cee
Great behind the scenes pictures of GITMO....I especially liked the journos surroundin the sign....CAMP JUSTICE.....
That says it all for me....a free press covering the justice system constitutionally set-up by the chief executive for individuals who are neither soldiers of an enemy country or criminals committing crimes under the civil law. I am glad Greta decided to post them.
June 23, 2008, 5:28:57 PM EDT – Like – Reply
On The Mark
Afghanistan was first, however, and the cable news stations have been ignoring it for many years.
June 23, 2008, 5:37:34 PM EDT – Like – Reply
danny
I really enjoyed the "best friend" video. I watched it more than once. I don't think that the dog detracted from the story; in fact, I think the dog's antics made the story more fun.
June 23, 2008, 6:47:29 PM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
Afghanistan was first, however, and the cable news stations have been ignoring it for many years.
On The Mark | 06.23.08 - 5:42 pm | #
Search fox/afghanistan. Plenty of coverage.
June 23, 2008, 7:55:16 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Missy
OTM, I agree with your defense of Anderson Cooper. The guy is not perfect, but at least he tries! If I was some kid from a wealthy family, I sure wouldn't go traveling around the world, risking my life in perilous places as he does.
While Shep also goes out when stories are breaking (Iraq, Katrina, other calamities as they occur), AC additionally goes to areas where stories are ongoing (persecution in Africa, climate stories, etc.). And besides he and Shep, NO ONE ELSE, on cable, anyway, ventures out of their studios on a regular basis.
I think he's a decent guy who is doing all he can to bring us great stories. Instead of slamming him, Rev. Ihewulezi should contact him directly and try to clear up some of the problems he found with the story.
June 23, 2008, 8:32:34 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Missy
Ive had on CNN for a while now, and they have been simply outraged about a McCain campaign advisor stating that McCain would benefit if we had another terrorist attack, or something to that affect. Well, Lou Dobbs accurately pointed out that Fortune Magazine actually asked the question as to whether that would occur, and Charlie Black, the McCain advisor, basically just agreed that an attack most likely would benefit McCains campaign.
The usual libs are on now ( 8 p.m. ET w/ Wolf Blitzer), and are all feigning disgust. But the ENTIRE WORLD knows wed rather have McCain in instead of Obama, for defense purposes at least. So what was Black supposed to do, sit there like a moron and lie?
God help us; I HATE these self-righteous leftists. Why ask the question if they are going to act all shocked when the response is given? The media (now I see the story other places, as well) are furious at the McCain campaign for even DREAMING that an attack would benefit McCain. But why not b*tch at the media, for daring to ASK such a question?
I am not a McCain supporter, but believe hes the better of the two candidates. But wow; how much more of this self-righteous media can we take? WHY ASK A QUESTION, ESP. ONE THAT IS LEADING, IF A TRUTHFUL RESPONSE WILL BE SO POORLY RECEIVED?
If I was the McCain campaign, Id just shut the hell up and stay away from as many media outlets as possible. And yes, Im furious once again! Morons.
June 23, 2008, 8:33:40 PM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
I'm surprised that CNN is making such a big deal out of this. Because last year Hillary Clinton said the exact same thing: a terrorist attack would likely benefit McCain's campaign.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/24/clinton.terrorism/
I don't recall a great storm of protest over that, though I don't watch enough CNN to know I suppose. Maybe they did get all up in arms about it, but if they did, I missed it.
June 23, 2008, 8:42:20 PM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
"I sure wouldn't go traveling around the world, risking my life in perilous places as he does."
by misy
Ahh. Memories of his cute little blue flak jacket matching his cute blue eyes. Hmmmmmm.
June 23, 2008, 9:04:16 PM EDT – Like – Reply
On The Mark
Perhaps, I watch more CNN than you do, Johnny and Missy. Perhaps, not. It is my cable news network of choice. And, I do tend to agree that the "security" comments of Senator Clinton received less coverage than those Senator McCain staffer Charlie Black. There are some differences that may explain that:
A primary campaign is notably different than a general election campaign. Fights between neighbors tend to be personality driven.
CNN reporters who would have been likely reporters, particularly Crowley, while not exactly in the tank for Senator Clinton were soft on her.
A security statement leveled by Senator Clinton is not as potentially damaging as one from the Senator McCain campaign.
Senator Obama's anti-smear machine was not operational at that time. It's feeding these stories as fast as the state of computer technology will allow. I'm pretty low down the food chain, and I had scores of e-mails as soon as Black made the statement. Amazingly fast and thorough.
There are other factors as well. The story is newsworthy. The story when through Clinton surrogates was newsworthy as well. CNN gets no pass on this.
Senator McCain, personally, gets a pass. He was genuinely shocked and dismayed when he heard Black's comments (I think). Black himself needs to hit the road. Not only is he and has he always been a Class "A" jerk, he is too deeply tied to Bush/Rove (for Senator McCain's own good) and his lobbying efforts outside the campaign bring Senator McCain and the campaign no credit.
As for the anti-smear task force, kudos to Senator Obama for this remarkable effort, while, simultaneously, dings to the media for being so easily controlled. Laziness, it would seem.
June 23, 2008, 11:38:07 PM EDT – Like – Reply
On The Mark
Missy:
I do think that Cooper has done some remarkable reporting under some difficult circumstances. He has been a pleasant surprise for me. Coughs and fits, to be sure, a bit quirky in a pleasant sort of way, but solid. He conveys a sense of being vested in the story.
Cooper and his FNC colleague Smith both seemed to capture the passion so many of us felt over Katrina. And while neither may have been completely professional in the Frank Reynolds sort of way, they provided a catharsis we semed to need. We are extremely fortunate to have both.
June 23, 2008, 11:42:23 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Missy
OTM.
The whole point of the question on an attack is "gotcha" in nature. OBVIOUSLY, most people would rather have a very pro-defense guy, such as McCain, in charge if we are attacked again. Why anyone even needs to ask the question is a mystery to me.
So why is it that a truthful answer to that question is such a problem? Are we such a P.C. nation that we can't even speak the truth when vetting our candidates? Isn't there a HUGE DANGER in PRETENDING that Obama would be just as competent; that his ONE YEAR in the U.S. Senate would equip him just as well as McCain's 25 years, PLUS his military service?
I don't give a c**p if Obama's feelings will be hurt or if someone will be offended if the obvious answer, that McCain would be better in the case of an attack, is given. And I see no logical answer why ANYONE cannot be allowed to give a truthful answer to a very serious question.
June 24, 2008, 12:46:35 AM EDT – Like – Reply
On The Mark
Your logic is unassailable, Missy, particularly if you believe Senator McCain is stronger on security/terrorism. I tend to believe just the opposite, so you don't get me all the way there. That's just me.
Moreover, looking at the reality of hours and hours of cable news to try to fill, and the inherent laziness of cable news editors and reporters, we have to recognize this story is going to get hours and hours of additional play. "Morning Joe" was heavy into the Black story this morning, with some Imus discussion, as well. I believe CNN was covering this closely as well. Undoubtedly F&F was covering some cheerleader yell-a-thon in Muncie.
Yesterday, Black completely knocked Senator McCain off message (an expensive, well-planned day devoted to energy) and had Senator McCain looking weak, confused and lost. In purely practical terms, can a sputtering campaign afford many such days? To be sure, this is not a knock-out punch, but this story is likely to go into tomorrow (albeit not as emphasized) and is likely to lead to other Black sidebars (some of his questionable work in the Bush campaigns, his ties to the Swift Boaters, his lobbying work and his wife's lobbying work). Ten (10) years ago, this story would have been over yesterday. Now, with the intensely competitive cable news market, this story goes on for days. So, your logic may break down against the relentless barage of cable news.
June 24, 2008, 7:57:23 AM EDT – Like – Reply
danny
Don't worry about it, Missy. OTM will probably go to another site and say the opposite. It depends on which way the wind is blowing.
June 24, 2008, 1:05:26 PM EDT – Like – Reply
