Weekend Links & Open Thread
Sunday cable news links [6:50 pm]:
Cablers fed.
Estrich: year of the sweetie?
Red Eye website unveils Keith fan club.
Glenn Beck ordnance oration.
Bill McCuddy resurfaces.
Blame Fox!
Hillary ad attacks...MSNBC!
Sunday talkers.
Video: Matthews berates conservative. Reax: Cole confusion; evisceration; cheap; unprofessional? MSNBC on Obama's team?
King continues.
Profile: Fox & Friends (via ICN)
Laura Ingraham lambastes Olbermann, Mark Levin piles on, Dennis Prager analyzes.
Rosen review.
Where's Coop? What happened to Olbermann's essays?
Cable quotables.
Matthews's monologue.
Today's firing demand.
Use our valuable bandwidth to post your comments on any and all cable news topics in this weekend's open thread. Standard rules apply. foxnews cablenews
david smawley
K0 K0'd by LI, I like it! Hope folks send message to GE regarding what they think of the latest disgusting rant from messnbc's biggest clown.
May 17, 2008, 12:55:17 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
Ingraham unloading was excellent.
I say let's keep Olbermann's essays off the air. His SEK novels are enough on "Countdown."
Oh, so that's what Mary Katharine Ham and Townhall are mad at Huck about. Now, I understand. That's going overboard. I wouldn't fire him, though. Neither he nor Sue Simmons (I think I've made the first mention of her here all week) should be fired.
Re: F&F Profile: Uh, Paul Levinson? This is the Fox/BOR hater that filibustered and excessively bloviated on "The Radio Factor" back in October. That's the end of my reading of that profile.
May 17, 2008, 12:56:21 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
Re: Sunday talkers (Webb on "Meet the Press"): BOR had a hand in introducing the updated G.I. bill, and so did Peter King in the House. Let's not give credit solely to Sen. Webb.
May 17, 2008, 2:31:01 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Gen Escape Goat- Old Style Dry
Haha, that's right, Bill's writing and submitting legislation now. Kerry and Webb had nothing to do with it.
May 17, 2008, 2:42:44 AM EDT – Like – Reply
mickey mac
Gen Escape Goat, you have no idea what you're talking about. I happen to know it's true because I read it in the Paris Business Review!
May 17, 2008, 8:43:56 AM EDT – Like – Reply
cee
I think the lack of Olbermann essays on the nigthly NBC broadcast is because of his radicalism. The latest Special Comment on COUNTDOWN was way over the top and reflective of an increasing shrillness and bias not condusive to the serious product, NBC Nightly News. The ratings benefit seen by COUNTDOWN since the shift to the left would not happen on normal TV and in fact, I think the powers of NBC NEWS know Olbermann would hurt Williams and Russert. Olbermann is damaged goods and will remain a pathetic second or third place pundit on a forth rate cable network.
May 17, 2008, 10:29:03 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Grammie
Goat, although I haven't followed the news about this particular bill I can think of many bills that owe a great deal to citizen input and work such as The Amber Alert, pedophile registration with local police etc.
I don't think that anyone suggested that BOR wrote a bill all by himself.
Also, I was quite taken aback by what you said a few days ago b/c it smacks of what progressives always insist is an exclusive trait of conservatives, stereotypical prejudice against groups of people. I suspect you may have missed it so let me repeat it here:
"Whether you realize it or not this statement from you bears witness to the charges leveled against NH here:
"I will admit that Grammie was reasonable, however when you are seen as one of the same group as Tony, Dan Tana, steve and olbysucks, you're going to be pigeon holed as one of them. "
To illustrate what I mean do you judge all black men by Willy Horton or do you judge them as individuals? Do you judge all southerners by James Earl Ray or do you judge them by individuals? Do you judge Greta of FNC as Ilsa the She Wolf of the SS or do you judge her as an individual?
Grammie | 05.16.08 - 8:13 pm | # "
May 17, 2008, 11:05:43 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
On "Red Eye" last night, they showed the pinnacle of Olby's SEK and reacted to it. When setting up the clip, Greg Gutfeld referred to Keith as "Frank Olbermann."
May 17, 2008, 3:00:23 PM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
Aha! I'm off to my DVR. Thanks much!
May 17, 2008, 3:04:13 PM EDT – Like – Reply
SteveMG
IIRC, Olbermann did present one essay on the Barry Bonds issue and steroids in baseball. That was, again if I recall, last year.
None since then.
Sir.
May 17, 2008, 3:21:22 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Aeris Gainsborough
Good piece on John Gibson, he doesn't deserve time on TV:
http://www.newshounds.us/2008/05/16/two_minutes_of_john_gibson_is_more_than_enough_on_fox_election_hq.php
Also, I hope Ted Kennedy will recover quickly, from his stroke.
May 17, 2008, 3:45:02 PM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
I'm going to let that stand this time. The article is pointless, and hence harmless. The writer has been exposed as a serial liar so it's also worthless. But in the future, be aware that we will enforce the rules on posting links.
May 17, 2008, 3:53:58 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
>Aha! I'm off to my DVR. Thanks much!<
You're welcome. And Alan wasn't even on. It was Patti Anne Browne, Jamie Lissow, Andrew Breitbart, and Greg/Bill. Plus, James Van Praagh and halftime/postgame from Andy Levy.
Obama continues to confuse me. He appears on FNS/F&F, yet is blaming them for negative stuff? This is why I have serious doubts about him ever coming on "The Factor," despite him promising BOR he would. Along those lines, speaking of that G.I. Bill, John Kerry appeared on "The Radio Factor" when the bill was announced and hasn't been on since. I wanted to believe I could trust him in getting the updated bill passed and that he would appear monthly with BOR on "The Factor," but I think he lied to BOR and his audience. I've tried to be fair to the Senator, but I don't trust him.
Okay, bad tangent, back to cable news.
May 17, 2008, 4:05:16 PM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
> And Alan wasn't even on.
No, the Red Eye regulars were on Alan's radio program for two hours last night.
May 17, 2008, 4:08:34 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
Oh, okay. I misunderstood yesterday's link.
May 17, 2008, 5:00:52 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Missy
So Obama is blaming Fox for his loss in WV, because of "rumors" they spread? Nice that he was able to substantiate them.
And re: Ted Kennedy? Just in case anyone wonders, I've had Fox on on and off today, and both the anchors and invited guests were simply fawning over Kennedy all day. I just wanted to bring this up because I KNOW the left will find fault with their coverage. But Fox couldn't have been nicer in their coverage of this ultra-liberal.
May 17, 2008, 6:25:06 PM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
I'm still around. The reason the links post hasn't been updated since 4 pm is that i haven't found anything worth linking to! Hope I find something before the night is out, but then there's always tomorrow.
May 17, 2008, 8:08:36 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
I had no idea about what happened to Sen. Kennedy until an hour ago when I found my DVR recording of "Fox News Watch" didn't have "Fox News Watch" on it. I disagree monumentally with him, but I'm very sorry to hear about he suffered a seizure. I hope he recovers fully.
May 17, 2008, 8:16:24 PM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
I see Huckabee is one of the guests on Geraldo tonight. Maybe his gig with MSNBC was just a one-shot.
May 17, 2008, 8:21:32 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
It probably was, in the same way Lanny Davis was a one-shot at CNN the Tuesday before. If so, that's a huge relief.
May 17, 2008, 8:42:21 PM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
In regards to Kennedy, the dog pound was all braced up for and expecting 'hate' posts from 'trolls.' Guess what, there wasn't a single one, last I checked. Shocker!
May 17, 2008, 9:11:54 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
I'm a day late, but I want to respond to the HuffPo link of Rachel Sklar promoting Keith. Those vidcaps were hilarious. Just go to yesterday's thread and click on the link I'm talking about. You'll laugh your butt off. I'd love to see them in future recaps or montages at OlbyWatch.
May 17, 2008, 9:21:05 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Missy
Mike, I'm not real familiar w/Rachael Sklar. When she said KO was ready to "impartially" anchor the Kentucky primary, was she serious or not?
I would guess not, because Keith's entire network is in the tank for Obama.
May 17, 2008, 9:41:01 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
I think Rachel Sklar is moderate-to-not-quite-far-left. So, keep that in mind when you read her. I merely wanted you to see the funny stills of KO.
May 17, 2008, 10:25:51 PM EDT – Like – Reply
gayle
It seems to me that F&F weekend would learn from F&F weekdays...They change host like some people change underwear...I have a feeling if they don't get some stability they will end up at the bottom as far as ratings.
May 18, 2008, 12:19:29 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Melissa
Obama was correct. Fox News' morning hosts lied to Fox's viewers about Obama's religion, falsely claiming that he was raised in a "Madrassa" and that he was a Muslim, and then naturally tried to pawn the story off on Clinton.
So, yeah, I think blaming Fox is fairly accurate, especially when you have news organizations quoting WV and Kentucky voters as saying they thought Obama was a Muslim.
"So Obama is blaming Fox for his loss in WV, because of "rumors" they spread? Nice that he was able to substantiate them."
You're joking right? Are you that stupid? Do you have any idea how quick it would take someone to prove Fox was spreading rumors about Obama's religion. Try google.
May 18, 2008, 12:58:51 AM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
I'm sorry Melissa but you shouldn't spread such falsehoods. Ask yourself where you heard this, and then mark that source down as unreliable and untruthful.
You can see video from that segment right here on this site. 1. They did not say he is a muslim. B. They repeatedly said he was a Christian. III. They did not "pawn off" the story on Clinton. The published story that they were referencing SAID it came from the Clinton campaign, and that has never been disproved.
> Try google.
Right. Because what you read on Google is far more accurate and reliable than actual video from the segment.
May 18, 2008, 1:02:54 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Melissa
"1. They did not say he is a muslim."
They suggested he was a Muslim on multiple occasions and did not correct guests or listeners who called in and said that he was.
"They did not "pawn off" the story on Clinton. The published story that they were referencing SAID it came from the Clinton campaign, and that has never been disproved."
They said it as though it were fact and never brought on any guests who disputed that the story came from Clinton. John Gibson stated that, as a matter of fact, it came from Clinton. He also stated, as a matter of fact, that Obama "was raised" in a Madrassa--a "radical" Madrassa. When CNN debunked him, he never disproved their reporting, he simply went on his radio show and cried and ranted like a spoiled brat that CNN was sticking up for Obama by pointing out that he lied.
Thirdly, the very fact that people like you and other conservatives across the blogosphere are defending Fox basically proves Obama's point. Why do you have such a interest in sticking up for Fox, if Fox supposedly isn't in the tank for you? Do you see any websites set up by liberals designed entirely to debunk claims of bias by conservatives against their favorite channel, whether it be CNN/MSNBC/CBS/etc...
Why isn't Fox challenging Obama? I don't see anything on Fox's website, and I haven't seen anything on air on Fox News.
And if I'm supposedly wrong, why did a Fox News channel executive have to issue a memo correcting misinformation from John Gibson and the Fox & Friends crew, and stating that they were wrongheaded in how they approached the story?
Answer, because Fox realized ti was quickly losing credibility.
May 18, 2008, 1:12:56 AM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
Let me guess, melissa. Deborah told you it was true?
May 18, 2008, 1:13:20 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Melissa
I'll leave you with this, Johnny, to dwell on.
This is one of your (presumably) favorite bloggers, Allah Pundit, in a moment of Zen, noting the peculiar idea of balance Fox News has when it invited conservative Republican blogger Amanda Carpenter to debate conservative Republican blogger Mary Katherine Ham, whom O'Reilly no longer identifies as a conservative but simply as "an internet expert".
"Whats stranger, the idea of a fair and balanced segment featuring one star Townhall blogger against another?"
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/05/09/video-mary-katharine-ham-vs-amanda-carpenter-on-the-factor/
Indeed, a guest list stacked overwhelmingly with Republicans. A fairly strange idea when contrasted against a motto of supposed "fairness" and "balance".
May 18, 2008, 1:18:43 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
A little late night infiltration going on. I'll be back tomorrow. Good night.
May 18, 2008, 1:21:10 AM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
melissa, you're desperation is showing.....
May 18, 2008, 1:25:30 AM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
> They suggested he was a Muslim on multiple occasions and did not correct guests or listeners who called in and said that he was.
Well that's just false, or in your words, a lie, and the video proves it.
> stated, as a matter of fact, that Obama "was raised" in a Madrassa--a "radical" Madrassa.
Another, shall we say, incorrection. You're two for two.
> Do you see any websites set up by liberals designed entirely to debunk claims of bias by conservatives
Media Matters, for one.
> This is one of your (presumably) favorite bloggers, Allah Pundit
Oh, really? If I pick a number between 1 and 100 can you tell me that too?
> Indeed, a guest list stacked overwhelmingly with Republicans.
The people in one segment constitute a guest list? Did you complain when in another segment O'Reilly's guest list consisted of two Barack Obama supporters? Or doesn't that count?
Your parlor tricks are old and stale, and everybody here sees through them.
May 18, 2008, 1:27:13 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Melissa
"The people in one segment constitute a guest list? Did you complain when in another segment O'Reilly's guest list consisted of two Barack Obama supporters? Or doesn't that count?"
First of all, it rarely happens. Secondly, when it does, the subject of the segment is never a negative attack against a Republican. For example, if there is a new controversy on the Democratic side, that will be the only realistic circumstance in which O'Reilly will allow two Democrats on. But when he brings 2 Republicans on, most of the time it is so the three of them can tag-team a Democrat/liberal who is in the news.
Secondly, you reference a video, but don't provide any links, and something makes me doubt you have a video that compiles everything that has been said about Barack Obama's supposed madrassa connection on Fox News. That would be quite a long video. It would literally be hours long.
"> Do you see any websites set up by liberals designed entirely to debunk claims of bias by conservatives
Media Matters, for one."
Nope. Wrong. Media Matters does not post articles defending the networks or cable channels against conservative bias very often. They don't try to rebuff conservative criticisms, they simply offer their own. Very rarely do they do this.
Brent Bozell and his whining little lapdogs over at Newsbusters defend Fox practically once a day, if defend is the word. They don't really offer anything substantiative, they basically just whine that it's not fair.
So, no, you're wrong. Newsbusters routinely, along with most conservative bloggers, DEFENDS Fox. MM rarely spends time trying to debunk paranoid Republican fantasies about the media.
"Oh, really? If I pick a number between 1 and 100 can you tell me that too?"
So sensitive. Considering how often you link to Hot Air and Hot Air links to you, seemed like a reasonable statement. But if you prefer to act like a spoiled brat, have it your way.
It amazes me how pathetic this has gotten. I mean, seriously. Most Republicans know Fox is in the tank for them, and admit it frequently. A lot of prominent ones too. I won't bother listing them because it'll send Johnny into a hissyfit, because there's nothing conservatives hate more than other conservatives who betray the golden rule of surrendering any point in a debate to liberals.
The fact is this. Whenever people are polled about Fox News, more people say Fox is BIASED, then say it is balanced.
And I'm curious, Johnny, I've never seen you offer a rebuttal to the studies taken out on Brit Hume's program in 2004 illustrating that his program was negative against John Kerry by a 83% margin and positive about Bush by a 60% one.
May 18, 2008, 1:40:19 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Melissa
Johnny's reaction to any posts on this website also tend to prove my point.
Republicans in this country live in a ideological bubble, and so does Fox News. Their fragile conservative beliefs are never challenged.
It also amazes me that they're own personalities manage to embarass them so often. The mere fact that Republicans consider Chris Wallace's performance on Fox & Friends a while back some sort of challenge to its bias actually proves the point. You had the hosts of Fox & Friends spending 2 hours attacking Obama over the "typical white person comment". Did Fox & Friends ever spend 2 hours bashing Bush on anything. Not even Mark Foley got 2 straight, non-stop hours of bashing on Fox & Friends, because they were in damage-control mood.
Good night.
If I've upset your tender conservative feelings, I apologize. I suggest you stay tuned for the rerun of Hannity & Colmes tonight. It'll make you feel better. Fox News set it up, just for you. They stacked the guest list overwhelmingly with Republicans again. Frank Luntz and former GOP congressman John Kasich tag-teaming a non-liberal who Fox hopes its viewers are dumb enough to believe is a liberal.
May 18, 2008, 1:46:55 AM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
> First of all, it rarely happens.
Because you say so? I prefer a more reliable source.
> a video that compiles everything that has been said
Oh, now we've switched from a specific segment on F&F to "everything ever said"? Gee, do you think you can vague that up a little more?
> they don't try to rebuff conservative criticisms
Read what Brock and others say their site does: rebuts the claim that the media are biased toward the left by "proving" they are biased toward the right. You want a site that does it even more specifically? Try "What Liberal Media?"
> Considering how often you link to Hot Air
Oh? Tell me, how often do I link to HotAir? Maybe Huffington Post is one of my favorite sites too.
> more people say Fox is BIASED, then say it is balanced.
Is that something like 5 out of 10 doctors recommend Chesterfields?
> It amazes me how pathetic this has gotten
Yet you seem to keep returning, under one name or another. I suppose it must get boring to sit around all day figuring out new "facts" to insert in Fox's Wiki pages.
May 18, 2008, 1:49:04 AM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
> You had the hosts of Fox & Friends spending 2 hours attacking Obama over the "typical white person comment"
Gee, that's, like, not true. In "Melissa's" terms, a lie. Do you suppose "she" never saw F&F that day? Ya think?
> I suggest you stay tuned for the rerun of Hannity & Colmes tonight.
Man this guy really knows his Fox News. H&C reruns on a weekend night? do you suppose he has no idea what he's talking about? Ya think?
> Frank Luntz and former GOP congressman John Kasich tag-teaming a non-liberal
Oh that explains it. He just read what the newsliars wrote, and is so uninformed about Fox that he thought the program airs on a Saturday! Too bad they didn't say anything about the other segments on the show. If they had, "Meslissa" would have known who was on them. And "she" wouldn't have swallowed the lie about the "non-liberal". The "non-liberal", Caroline Heldman, was a Democratic party activist in Washington state, campaigned for and then was hired by Rep Jolene Unsoeld, whose American Conservative Union rating was: 4%. See, this is what happens when you don't know what you're talking about and get your "facts" from an unreliable source.
In this world there are people who think for themselves, there are people who don't criticize things they haven't seen... and then there are people who believe what they read from a kennel of serial liars. They'll swear it's true... in fact, they're willing to bet their deed to the Brooklyn Bridge that it is.
May 18, 2008, 1:54:43 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Damail
Remove Mike Huckabee from TV for a supposed assassination joke? Tell that yahoo that they should then remove Randi Rhodes from TV for her REAL kill-Bush jokes on her show. I would tell that on Huffpo, but they banned me a long time ago.
May 18, 2008, 2:09:35 AM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
Brit Hume's program in 2004 illustrating that his program was negative against John Kerry by a 83% margin and positive about Bush by a 60% one.
Melissa | 05.18.08 - 1:45 am | #
As opposed to msm 100% against conservatives, i.e msnbc, cnn, nbc? Where did you get your '04 stats? Just curious...
May 18, 2008, 11:35:21 AM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
So, my original hunch was right. 'melissa' is from the dog pound. Shocker!
May 18, 2008, 11:38:53 AM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
Re Brit Hume "study":
"Melissa's" claim was an inaccurate twisting of a study done by the Center for Media & Public Affairs. He went back all the way to 2004 to find something to misrepresent.
Ask yourself why he went back to 2004 when there's a much more recent CMPA study he could have cited:
http://www.cmpa.com/Studies/Election08/07_12_21_Election_Study.pdf
May 18, 2008, 11:42:22 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Grammie
"Ask yourself why he went back to 2004 when there's a much more recent CMPA study he could have cited:"
Duh, could it be b/c he had to search a really long time to find some report that could be cherry picked to match his dialogue?
May 18, 2008, 3:19:42 PM EDT – Like – Reply
mickey mac
As opposed to msm 100% against conservatives, i.e msnbc, cnn, nbc? Where did you get your '04 stats? Just curious...
olby sucks | Homepage | 05.18.08 - 11:40 am | # -
-----------
hah - and where did you get yours?????
May 18, 2008, 3:33:15 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
I love the [anti-]Keith fan club at Activity Pit. Thank you, Damian.
May 18, 2008, 3:40:07 PM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
mickey mouse, are you denying that msnbc and cnn are 100% against conservatism? Give me ONE example of either one of those praising convervatism or a conservatist. I'll give you countless examples to the contrary. Can't wait to hear you cry scarborough!
May 18, 2008, 3:54:45 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Damian G.
Just doin' my job, Mike.
May 18, 2008, 5:20:49 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Grammie
Re Susan Estrich, would these women get over themselves, PLEASE!
I, like any other woman who was in the workforce esp, in the 1950s and 1960s, know that a certain percentage of men always look down on and belittle women in the work place. I suspect that those type of men don't treat their mothers, wives, daughters and social contacts much different or better.
But Obama's use of "Sweetie", esp in the audio, has nothing to do with women's rights or misogyny at all. It was a simple very informal form of address and anyone who takes offense from it to make it a national issue may have a wee bit of paranoia.
May 18, 2008, 6:39:41 PM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
It was definately over rated. Keep in mind, he was THE ONE that felt the need to apologise......
May 18, 2008, 6:45:11 PM EDT – Like – Reply
mickey mac
mickey mouse, are you denying that msnbc and cnn are 100% against conservatism? olby sucks | Homepage | 05.18.08 - 3:59 pm | #
-----------
You used a statistic. Prove it.
May 18, 2008, 7:51:39 PM EDT – Like – Reply
tony
mickey mouse, are you denying that msnbc and cnn are 100% against conservatism? Give me ONE example of either one of those praising convervatism or a conservatist. I'll give you countless examples to the contrary. Can't wait to hear you cry scarborough!
olby sucks | Homepage | 05.18.08 - 3:59 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You used a statistic. Prove it.
mickey mac | 05.18.08 - 7:56 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mickey mac: stop being a coward. By using the term "100% it was a figure of speech. Now that I solved that, why dont you move on to his origonal offer.
Lets see some examples.
May 18, 2008, 8:18:02 PM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
Democrats are not only favored in the tone of the coverage. They get more coverage period. This is particularly evident on morning news shows, which produced almost twice as many stories (51% to 27%) focused on Democratic candidates than on Republicans.
The most flagrant bias, however, was found in newspapers. In reviewing front-page coverage in 11 newspapers, the study found the tone positive in nearly six times as many stories about Democrats as it was negative.
http://www.bloggernews.net/111450
It took .3 seconds to find this.....
May 18, 2008, 9:21:15 PM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
Oh, no! You got the dog pound all riled, again, JD!
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/newshounds/14496/
May 18, 2008, 9:32:13 PM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
Unfortunately, our YouTube account was taken down by them, allegedly because of clips from The Daily Show. We're still working to have it reiinstated.
Please feel free to contact YouTube and ask that we be reinstated. We have not uploaded anything from TDS in quite some time and have offered to take down the offending clips.
Ellen | Homepage | 05.18.08 - 8:05 pm | #
They were banned! Oh, the irony.....one more thing, Shocker!
May 18, 2008, 9:36:16 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
I don't see the riled up part, OS. Did they already remove all evidence?
Poor NHs, apparently they can dish it out but they can't take it.
May 18, 2008, 9:42:23 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Cecelia
This "sweety" controversy has to be the stupidest bit of feigned outrage in the past year.
May 18, 2008, 9:51:31 PM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
I may have gotten a little frothy and overstated, ff. I was referring to this:
Ellen...I was on Youtube yesterday and typed in "Newshounds" just for the hell of it. The vast majority of the results that came up for "Newshounds" were from none other than "johnny dollar". The clips were by and large nonsensical, and in a vain attempt to prove his tags of "Newshounds...why do they lie?".
May 18, 2008, 10:03:07 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Grammie
Cecelia, I obviously agree with you wholeheartedly.
Yes, it is true there are some men like that still around but I firmly believe that it has nothing to do with sexism per se but that they have very low self esteem and any port in a storm for them to pump themselves up will do. That does not justify going through life hypersensensitive to every conceivable slight that can be raised to a federal case, much less national organizations devoted to ferreting every out every little slight.
May 18, 2008, 10:03:29 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Grammie
OS, I was able to link to the comments but couldn't find the thread that it was related to.
May 18, 2008, 10:04:47 PM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
OS, that was a great find. You are Commenter of the Day!
Adding to the beauty of it is the fact that they're all going to go to youtube now and watch those videos. LOL!
May 18, 2008, 10:12:40 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Cecelia
Well,hell, Johnny! Who am I going to have to kill to ever get Commenter of the Day?!
May 18, 2008, 10:18:29 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
I was thinking the same thing, Cecelia!
Great find, OS.
May 18, 2008, 10:20:54 PM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
> Who am I going to have to kill to ever get Commenter of the Day?!
Well it's almost Monday. So get crackin'!
May 18, 2008, 10:21:24 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Cecelia
Grammie, where I live no one knows anyone else's first name. We're all sweetie, baby boy/boygirl, honey, and darlin'.
May 18, 2008, 10:23:06 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Cecelia
Well it's almost Monday. So get crackin'!
johnny dollar | Homepage | 05.18.08 - 10:26 pm | #
That sounds tiring. I better rest first.
May 18, 2008, 10:25:16 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
Every time I see "NH," I think of New Hampshire.
May 18, 2008, 10:26:47 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
Interesting, Cecelia. Here in Michigan everyone addresses each other as a******, b****, f***stick, and GDMFAHCSer. These are standard terminology in intersections and malls.
May 18, 2008, 10:27:28 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Cecelia
Fox Fan, I wouldn't suggest that Obama use any of those appellations, etiher... :D
May 18, 2008, 10:31:17 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
I wouldn't suggest that ANYONE use any of those names. I am a hypocrite in that respect....unapologetically.
May 18, 2008, 10:36:25 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Grammie
I understand completely, Cecelia. It is the same way here in Gopher Gultch and esp at the Chat 'n Chew when the Mogen David gets flowing and we are staring down those little critters called esgargots.
May 18, 2008, 10:49:59 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
Next time you're at the Chat 'n Chew in Gopher Gultch, look for the balding guy, early '30s, a little rough around the edges. I'll buy you some garlic-butter esgargots!
Ph---tinggg!
May 18, 2008, 11:00:14 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Cecelia
Fox Fan,
I'll settle for a cheeseburger.
May 18, 2008, 11:57:47 PM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
FYI, Howard Kurtz has a big article on the "feud" between O'Reilly and GE. Linked in the Monday thread post that is up now.
May 19, 2008, 12:01:32 AM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
"Ask yourself why he went back to 2004 when there's a much more recent CMPA study he could have cited:"
Why did he go back to 2004 to do an analysis of the coverage of Kerry and Bush? I would assume it ahd something to do with the Presidential race in 2004.Comparing media bias in coverage of Kerry and Bush in 2007 would have been fairly meaningless.
The CMPA study was interesting.Has anyone seen the actual study?All I could find was the press release about the study;not always the best source.
The press release stated that they only considered the first 1/2 hour of Special Report in making their comparisons.Why would this be?What about the second half of a 1 hour program?
The press release then generalized from this 1/2 hour of "Special Report" to state that Fox News displays more balance.What about the other 23 1/2 hours of programming?
May 19, 2008, 7:29:58 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Grammie
I obviously missed something b/c I don't see a link to any study re Special Report much less only on the first half hour.
The only link I could find from Melissa was about one segment of The factor. OS gave a link to a fairly current 11/07) negative vs positive stories for all media and J$ to a another 11/07 study evaluating toal candidate media coverage and positive vs negative for the then contenders.
May 19, 2008, 11:02:58 AM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
Grammie,
The link to which I refered was JD's link to the CMPA study.I believe this was their press release,and in it it states that the comparison was made between the evening news programs of ABC,NBC,CBS and Fox (first 30 minutes of special report).
Sorry if I created any confusion.
May 19, 2008, 2:08:11 PM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
Grammie, here's a more informative link on the Harvard Study rather than the bloggernews.
http://www.journalism.org/node/8187
May 19, 2008, 2:28:14 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Grammie
Thanks, Eeyore, for the link.
This is what stood out to me from that:
"Most of that difference in tone, however, can be attributed to the friendly coverage of Obama (47% positive) and the critical coverage of McCain (just 12% positive.) When those two candidates are removed from the field, the tone of coverage for the two parties is virtually identical. "
Well, duh, if the dem Obama hadn't had 4X the favorable coverage that the Repub McCain had than the imbalance wouldn't have been THAAT bad.
I did miss where the first half hour comment you made came from at the CMPA study. The comparison was between network news and Fox SR's first 1/2 hour. It does seem a bit strange and I guess it was b/c they wanted to give equal to the time spent in the evening news on the nets and SR is an hour show. I looked back to 2004 and there was no study done exactly as this one was. However, three things stood out to me.
1. Kerry had the most positive coverage of any nominee ever.
2. John Edwards' coverage was even more favorable, in the 90% range, ever.
3. The favorable-unfavorable coverage to Kerry/Edwards was much higher than for GWB
4. Fox as a whole had a 5 to 1 unfavorable/favorable of Kerry stories.
I have seen some recent polls and studies that all state that Fox tends to be more balanced and I am sure I and others could look it up for you doubting Thomases.
May 19, 2008, 4:11:51 PM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
I don't see anything "more informative" in the link, philby.
May 19, 2008, 5:22:59 PM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
Grammie | 05.19.08 - 4:16 pm |
I've often wondered how media analysis is structured.The questions one asks can radically change the answers you get.
If the news about a candidate is negative (ie he was caught in bed with an ostrich) does that count as negative coverage.And if all of his opponents give speeches and run ads calling him a "feathervert",does a report about those ads count as negative coverage.
During the early part of the Republican primary,the candidates were rather critical of each other,with Gulliani trashing Mitt and Mitt dumping on Mccain.The democrats seemed almost polite by contrast.Would news reports about what the candidates were saying about each other account for the number of "negative" stories?
Early in the game,when Hillary was way out there in the lead,Obama was the new kid.Also,the media loves a horserace.I've often wondered if the media dumps on the frontrunner out of reflex, to try to keep the race going.In any case,Obama has certainly lost the 'new kid' treatment from the media.
Fifty-seven stars on my flag pin,sweetie.
May 19, 2008, 6:23:45 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Grammie
The studies we were talking about don't have "questions" as such. BTW, I agree totally that the wording, adjectives used, even the order of questions asked can have great influence on the results of polls.
What I have been looking at has been done by assigning a criteria, whatever that criteria is, and applying it to every story about the candidates. As long as it is applied consistently by honest people I think it would be a good guide.
For some newsman rating their reportsit really should be a snap. If it is from KO or Tweety you know it is pro Obama, anti Bush and Clinton.
May 19, 2008, 6:42:31 PM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
Fifty-seven stars on my flag pin,sweetie.
notveryhow | 05.19.08 - 6:28 pm | #
"I've been to 57 states and I have 2 more to go to, Hawaii and Alaska."
I'm obama and vote for me! One more thing, when did Gorbachav threaten to blow any countries off the map?
May 19, 2008, 7:08:01 PM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
Grammie,
I worded that poorly.Criteria is a much better word than quetion,though the same principle applies.One would have to work very hard to have objective criteria.
While we are creating truisms for media coverage,the only fox I really see often is F&F from 6 to 7,with the sound off while I read the captions.From what I have seen,if it's a F&F report,it used to be anti-Clinton,but it is now anti-Obama.
May 19, 2008, 8:25:57 PM EDT – Like – Reply
