1/6/09 12:39 PM

Monday Links & Open Thread

Latest cable news links [updated through the day]:

Cable news? Everything stinks!

Baghdad's Lost and Found.

Chris Wallace's autographs.

Olbermann: Russert backed me!
Hal Turner: Me too!

From Glick, to Russert.

Thursday's numbers. Friday's numbers.

Fox hires Lanny Davis (via ICN).

Meet the Press specularama: New York Times, Hollywood Reporter, Reuters, Variety, Jossip, Viewpoint.

Janice Dean's news surprise.

Cable's cash cow.

Brokaw doesn't heart Olbermann?

Alan's hate mail.

Use our valuable bandwidth to post your comments on any and all cable news topics in today's open thread. Standard rules apply.




Missy
A FReeper has posted lyrics to some song/parody that sounds like it might be referring to someone we're not real fond of around here. I didn't think it was hilarious or anything, but apparently whoever wrote it did.
 
J$, delete/edit if you want. You know my situation w/Outlook!
 
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2031654/posts
June 16, 2008, 1:16:30 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Vince P
I found this on Greta's blog:
 
Obama is telling Iraq not to listen to his campaign rhetoric:
 
http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/59f60d7a-f682-4fde-b247-e8ea80906d7b
 
The Middle East Media Research Institute, citing the London edition of Al- Hayat, had this interesting tidbit:
 
Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said that U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s campaign managers had reassured Baghdad that if Obama is elected he will not dramatically change Washington’s policy towards Iraq and will take into account the opinions of the commanders in the field.
 
So what’s the story? Is the Obama campaign telling its leftist constituents one thing — that we will “immediately begin to remove” our troops from Iraq — but then whispering something completely different to the Iraqi government?
 
And if so, haven’t we seen this movie before, with the whole Obama-Canada-Nafta debacle? On the one hand, the Obama team tells the left what it wants to hear; on the other, the Obama team tells the countries that would be affected by his purported policies just to pay him no mind.
 
Way to “rebuild” our credibility abroad, right? After all, one can fault George W. for some things, but being two-faced and unclear about where America stands on any given issue certainly isn’t one of them
June 16, 2008, 1:40:14 AM EDT – Like – Reply


cee
The cash cow link shows those (OTM) writing premature obituaries are ill advised.
 
FOX won the demo easily with MSNBC (after years of showing their planned shift to being the left's echo chamber) still trailing in third.
 
I still believe that most normal people do not want partisans delivering the news, and while CNN and FOX still remain committed to this value, NBC NEWS has decided to inject their leftist bomb-throwers into their hard news delivery.....
 
It will be a decision they will eventually regret.
 
And Vince P....that is the big lie of the American left (whether it comes from the cowards of the Washington democrat ruling class or their radical base)....they always tell people what they want to hear. That is an easy assessment of a leader...one who never displays character in opposing the popular will at great personal cost is a warning sign...one SNOBamessiah has in abundance.
June 16, 2008, 7:54:29 AM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
Thomas Friedman has an interesting take on how Obama might effect America's foreign relations and "credibility abroad".  
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/11/opinion/11friedman.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
 
"This column will probably get Barack Obama in trouble"
June 16, 2008, 7:57:19 AM EDT – Like – Reply


cee
I am confused about Mr. Friedman's gross simplification, "That’s the America that got swallowed by the war on terrorism. And it’s the America that many people want back." I am assuming he means America before 9/11?
 
Then why did 9/11 happen? If America was loved and regarded positively by the Muslim world prior to 9/11, why did it, along with all of the other attacks, occur?
 
Oh and one other point. If many Muslims believe, "Obama would be much better because he is dark-skinned," does this not assume that the white candidate (HRC then, McCain now) is deficient based only on their racial makeup and so the conclusion is a racist conclusion that is as wrong as a white person believing the same about a black candidate? Should we not be as equally indignant over such assumptions and claim they are a result of ignorance and intolerance?
 
No, of course not.....because we are reflecting on SNOBamessiah! Hinting that having a "dark skinned" President will automatically garner credibility with some in the world is a sad commentary on the mind and value system of America's elite intelligentsia.
June 16, 2008, 8:15:15 AM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
The New Yorker piece is, indeed, a very, very important analysis of the current state of cable news, and I would encourage everyone to read it. Like any New Yorker piece, reading it is an undertaking of the first order. Length and style make it a challenge. No talking point does the piece justice, and I think the link headline above is a nice teaser for the more rabid Olbermann haters, but misses key points of the article which include:
 
#1 The growing importance of commentary as opposed to hard news on cable news. FNC recognized this early on or was, in some measure, instrumental in creating this market. That explains its justified success in large measure. Even now, hard news is a proportionately significant portion of the FNC day. That's no criticism, by the way, but a recognition of the trend.
 
#2 The dynamic between MSNBC and NBC. CNN and FNC are not tied to or joined with a broadcast network. The fact that MSNBC and NBC are creates a tension. NBC has long been straight, serious news, resisting the fluff far longer than CBS and almost as long as ABC. In the eyes of some traditional newsmen, like Brokaw, MSNBC must be an abomination (as is FNC, but in the sense of some distant cousin, living in a remote area). In part craft, in part generational and in part simple taste, the differences are real and substantial. This tension will have to be resolved over time.
 
#3 Whether commentary will continue to remain marketable. To some extent, it will. But, what of the quality? In my view, Becks, Dobbs, Hannity, Olbermann and O'Reilly are not really offering commentary. They're just offerning anger. That will get an audience for a time, but will it continue? My hunch is, at some point, people tire of being angry. That remains to be seen.
 
As to Johnny's specific link, I have no doubt Brokaw holds Olbermann in low regard, as well he should. I suspect he holds Beck, Dobbs, Hannity and O'Reilly in low regard as well, for the same reasons. There is simply a less immediate threat for him.
 
Excellent link, Johnnie, and a wonderful article.
June 16, 2008, 8:44:41 AM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Friedman's article is not relevant to cable news.
June 16, 2008, 9:03:01 AM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
Lanny Davis?
 
I fail to understand the programming value in that. He repulses a good portion of all Democrats and virtually all liberal Democrats. I can't imagine he has much appeal to any Republicans or conservatives, except in the occossional, gratuitous barb he is likely to throw at Senator Obama. And, I always feel I need to bathe after seeing him.
 
Lanny Davis?
June 16, 2008, 10:12:08 AM EDT – Like – Reply


cee
A certain demograpohic enjoys an echochamber. To each their own and whether it is a show on radio or TV (or an entire network) cable news networks can choose to commit their time and resources to play to a certain ideological strain in the country....freedom is wonderful.
 
What is not mentioned by some in their analysis of THE NEW YORKER article here is the tension created in abandoning journalistic integrity (it is a matter of generational differences or simple taste....journalistic values are above such silliness). The overt decision to hold ratings as more important than journalism standards was shown in NBC NEWS placing partisans in positions of delivering the news....especially primary and general election results....or what I would call the anchor chair.  
 
That is where the values and principles of journalism as a profession come into play and where damage can be wrought on our democracy. Claiming unbiased coverage at the anchor chair is important and NBC NEWS has crossed a line with using both the left's recent demogogues, Matthews and Olbermann, in simple calculations of ratings. FOX has not done this. If they had done this O'Reilly would be the anchor during election night coverage and I am sure many of his echochamber fans would be delighted. I would not because he is an advocate for right of center ideology, for the most part, and should remain seperated from the role of objective journalist.
 
So the article gives the right side of this argument (Brokaw's) some light....thank goodness....I would hope NBC NEWS would consider more than MSNBC's poor ratings in their decision regarding the people placed in the anchor chair during hard news events and programming. It is important to keep the labels true and clear to the viewer. The blurring of the line is the worse part of what NBC NEWS has done as of late.
June 16, 2008, 10:33:35 AM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
I suspect he holds Beck, Dobbs, Hannity and O'Reilly in low regard as well,
 
by otm
 
I often wonder what makes people say things like this. No basis, whatsoever.
June 16, 2008, 10:34:28 AM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
cee | 06.16.08 - 10:38 am |
 
I'm curious.Who on Fox fits in your criteria as an unbiased journalist?
 
I don't watch a lot of Fox,but over the years I have seen snippets of most of their news shows,excepting Hannity and O'reilly.I have heard some terribly ideological reporting on Fox and Friends,Gibson (he's gone now,right),Shepherd,Cavuto,and Hume(perhaps excepting the first half-hour.)
 
KO seems to be the ideological mirror image of most of the programming I've seen on Fox.Certainly there will be exceptions.The recent polemic from the judge is certainly one,but this does not prove a lack of bias.If it did,then MSNBC giving Pat Buchanon a platform would negate all trace of bias on MSNBC.
 
So in your opinion,if I was looking for straight news reporting on Fox,what should I watch?
June 16, 2008, 10:55:31 AM EDT – Like – Reply


sharm
"KO seems to be the ideological mirror image of most of the programming I've seen on Fox.Certainly there will be exceptions.The recent polemic from the judge is certainly one,but this does not prove a lack of bias.If it did,then MSNBC giving Pat Buchanon a platform would negate all trace of bias on MSNBC."
 
KO never allows another viewpoint so the mirror image point fails. I think Fox News slants right, but allows for dissenting views. The Judge has been a contributor for some time now and has always spoken out concerning what he believes to be are constitutional violations; this is not new.
 
Pat Buchanan has been a critic of the war from the beginning. He has also criticized Bush time and again for his policies. Of course he is welcome.
June 16, 2008, 11:08:20 AM EDT – Like – Reply


sharm
Bio from Fox News website:
 
Andrew P. Napolitano joined FOX News Channel (FNC) in January 1998, and currently serves as a senior judicial analyst. He provides legal analysis every day on “The Big Story with John Gibson” and co-hosts “Fox & Friends” once a week. He also serves as a regular on “The O’Reilly Factor” and co-hosts FOX News Radio’s “Brian and The Judge.”
 
"Constitutional Chaos: What Happens When the Government Breaks Its Own Laws," and the New York Times bestseller, "The Constitution in Exile: How the Federal Government Has Seized Power by Rewriting the Supreme Law of the Land."
June 16, 2008, 11:11:35 AM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
I wonder why it is that Lanny Davis signing up with FNC has gotten headlines and articles at the major cable news sites. But when Marc Lamont Hill was signed a few weeks ago, only one site (this one) reported it.
June 16, 2008, 11:20:48 AM EDT – Like – Reply


sharm
Let's direct that question to OTM and NVH.
June 16, 2008, 11:26:24 AM EDT – Like – Reply


cee
NVH, my point is partisans advocate for certain candidates and parties and both Matthews and Olbermann have made it clear who they support. They are co-hosts during MSNBC's election night coverage. This was, as Olbermann said himself in the article, a good choice to make regarding ratings.
 
The dust-up between him and Brokaw live on air is more than just "generational" or "taste differences." It is an example of someone interjecting his opinion during the presentation of hard news and an ethical journalist correcting him because that someone is in the anchor chair and should be acting neutral.
 
Olbermann's excuses are simply poor and rationalizations for the abandonment of journalistic integrity. He is not a journalist and should not be reporting news.
 
With regard to FOX, all I know is that O'Relliy, Colmes, or Hannity are not sitting in the anchor chair during election night because of their blatent political leanings...and this shows sound judgement on the part of FOX....ratings are not more important than standards.....MSNBC?....Well the article lays it out rather nicely in my opinion with Brokaw being the remaining bright spot since Russert's tragic passing. Too bad he is emeritus status and his replacement, Brian Williams, is allowing NBC NEWS to market the leftist echochamber with it's partisan anchors. Partisanship is the cancer that is growing at the once respectable NBC NEWS.
June 16, 2008, 11:30:11 AM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
I can't really answer your question, sharm. I have no idea why some cable news sites pick up on one story and not another. Davis engenders strong feelings within the party, and he has long been a stage hog in the party. Feelings are so strong that I know people who would not support Senator Clinton's quest for the nomination, simply because of her campaign team, including Davis (who I believe is/was ex-officio), McAullife, Penn. My wife, mother and sisters would also pick up on someone named Kiki, but I am not sure who that is. For me, I have seen far too much of Davis, on the tune and at party events, and I just find him repugnant (despite the fact that we are often on the same ideological side). Maybe that explains the issue Johnny has raised, maybe it doesn't.
June 16, 2008, 11:50:51 AM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
Lanny Davis?
 
I fail to understand the programming value in that. He repulses a good portion of all Democrats and virtually all liberal Democrats.  
 
by otm
 
More comments with absolutely no basis.
June 16, 2008, 12:17:39 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Missy
Leave it to Keith to interject himself into the Russert story.  
 
The LAST thing any decent fan of Tim Russert would want to know is that he supported Olbermann's horrific tactics in ANY WAY!  
 
Sorry; I don't believe it.
June 16, 2008, 12:31:23 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Missy there's a famous legal maxim:
 
You cannot libel the dead.
June 16, 2008, 12:32:45 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike C.
So much off-topic stuff here, especially early on. And considering how frustrated I am because I want Rocco Mediate to win the U.S. Open, but I know he'll lose badly because he's playing with Tiger Woods, the off-topic direction doesn't make me feel any better. But I'll get back on topic now:
I may disagree with Lanny and he may be very annoying at times, but I welcome him aboard as a Fox News Contributor (or Analyst). It's about time.
I'm glad Keith lost in the demo Thursday night. And he has some nerve invoking Russert to pump up his credibility...or whatever he was doing at Daily Kos.
When I watch my DVR of "F&F," I usually skip through the headlines, but I still think Janice was great today. I'm just sorry that Alisyn hasn't gotten better yet.
June 16, 2008, 12:39:34 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike C.
I said this last week, but has anyone noticed that FBN reporter Sandra Smith is the spitting image of Laurie Dhue?
June 16, 2008, 12:44:59 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike C.
That was a touching piece by Alexis Glick.
June 16, 2008, 1:24:10 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Missy
J$, I missed the announcement on Lamont.  
 
That guy talks SO FAST; it's as if he strives to confuse the hosts or other guests so they don't know how to respond. I guess that's his tactic.
June 16, 2008, 2:02:46 PM EDT – Like – Reply


cee
Limbaugh is currently replaying an interview he conducted with Tim Russert in 2004. It is an excellent tribute because it is Russert himself, talking about his father and the pride he had for him (Russert's joy is palpable).
 
And Russert talked to Rush as he talked to anyone else....left or right....first name basis and friendly, like they have been friends forever.
 
He was a good guy.
June 16, 2008, 2:22:25 PM EDT – Like – Reply


danny
Here is a clip that illustrates much of what I said on the previous thread. http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html
 
Laura was right when she emphasized the importance of the oil crises issue.
 
The clip illustrated the differences between the two camps.
 
[off-topic portion edited]

Edited By Siteowner
June 16, 2008, 2:24:40 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Grammie
As an added fillip Rush spent the last segment of the previous hour taking Tweety and Krazy Legs apart.
June 16, 2008, 2:34:36 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike C.
Danny, that has nothing to do with cable news! Nothing! Please, for the love of God, stay on topic! That goes for all of you!
Like I said, I'm having a very bad day. I'm sorry to let it out here, but I have no one else to vent to and make myself feel better.
June 16, 2008, 2:55:23 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
Just reading the Hollywood Reporter piece on the possible replacements for Tim Russert, I'm sadden that for one reason or another, we're losing this breed of reporter/men.
 
Whether it's David Gregory replacing Russert or his replacing Chris Matthews, I'm just sadden that the old style Democratic liberals seem to be a vanishing breed. The Russerts, the Nachmans, the Matthews, the Barnicles.  
 
It's not myth-making here to say that you do get the working class ethos with these guys. The feeling that they've around the block a bit, have known people of all walks of life, not just as interesting specimens or focus group fodder, but as people. They're streetwise. They've been around. While they're liberal, they are old style Dems , so the pull of their faith and community (as opposed to political aggregates or factions), and the vision of American exceptionalism is strong on them enough that there is a comfortable meeting ground between us as fellow citizens.
 
These journalists don't condescend to conservatives, usually. They may feel the pride of the self-made man and fully approve of the invisible fish thread boundaries separating those who have achieved a place through hard work and will, from peers who have remained stationary, but they stayed connected to where they came from, at least as a marker, if not strictly as a touchstone.
 
That's all it takes for the smallest meeting of the minds between them and conservatives of ANY socio-economic background.
 
These men just seem to be different to me in a way that all the new deological pretty faced jounos, with the right bland backgrounds, coming from the right (and same) colleges, with the right amount of irony, and the right politically-oriented noblesse oblige, and the right political beliefs.
 
Maybe it's because they remind me of the men of my father's generation and of my husband, who had to quit school and go to work as a teenager after his father left his mother and nine siblings, and who went on to put himself through college and help six siblings and his wife get there too.
 
Frankly, I think you can color them vanishing-- this sort of man and experiience as journalist. I'm going to miss the hell out of them.
June 16, 2008, 3:12:16 PM EDT – Like – Reply


danny
mark C,
 
I thought it did. I was mainly reporting on what was said on a cable news show. I interjected a few of my own opinions, but not that much.
 
To say that it had nothing to do with cable news is a huge, huge overstatement.
June 16, 2008, 3:25:35 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike C.
Mike, not Mark. And I thought you were linking to what you were linking to because of Vince's initial link. He was off topic.
Also, I was not in a good mood at the time. My mood is currently cautiously optimistic with Rocco Mediate leading by one shot in the 18-hole playoff at the U.S. Open with three holes to play, but it's far from over, especially with Tiger Woods.
June 16, 2008, 3:28:31 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike C.
And I'm off topic by saying all that. So, I'd better get back on: Speaking of Dr. Hill, he'll be on "The Factor" tonight. I might have to skip his segment.
June 16, 2008, 3:29:24 PM EDT – Like – Reply


danny
sorry,
 
mark = mike
June 16, 2008, 3:30:02 PM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
NEW YORK magazine had an excellent article by John Heilemann, some of which is devoted to the Clintons' paranoia (my word, not his) about the media, notably MSNBC and especially Chris Matthews. Matthews is described as Hillary's Ken Starr. Nothing new there .... What is interesting is how martyrdom (and, I suppose, playing the victim) has always served the Clintons well. It does seem Bill emerged from the Starr "confrontation" with the role of the prince, and Starr the toad. I'm not sure what that means for the Davis "acquisition," or anything else for that matter, but it is an interesting jumping off place for a good discussion.
June 16, 2008, 4:00:45 PM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
Hold on everyone! I agree with what you said in your 3:17 post, Cecelia. I think we need to layer that with one thin veneer. The class of people you describe in your post is disappearing not just from cable news and journalism, but from our national experience as well. That demographic is functionally vanishing. Because of that, the Democratic party, more affected at least initially by this change than the Republican, is changing as well. The core demographic for Democrats now has much more to do with upper middle and lower upper class White and Ethnic Americans in professional and semi-professional positions, and Ethnic Americans in the labor and service sectors than it does with the virtually vanishing White working class. I am not sure we have absorbed that concept yet, but it is moving towards us a rapid speed now.
 
Politically, Senator Clinton built a strong coalition, but it is one which weakens each year.
 
Journalistically, MSNBC has been portrayed as radical, particularly by the people here and at similar conservative sites. But, I think in many of the personages, Brzezinski Gregory, O'Donnell, Mitchell, Todd, and the like, MSNBC is reflective and responsive. I don't include Olbermann because he is more of the Chuckles the Clown sort, never in, but never out.
 
CNN has been somewhat resposnive, as well, particularly in the persons of (Campbell) Brown and Cooper.
 
My prognosis, although I certainly can't back this up at the moment, is that FNC is finally in on the demographic change in the country, still responsive, but pushed out to almost reactive. Smith almost embodies that demographic, although I suspect FNC is still looking for the authentic break-out.
June 16, 2008, 4:17:08 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Missy
NVH, re: FNC and neutrality.
 
Shep and Greta have pretty well proven themselves to be quite unbiased. Bill Hemmer seems to be as well, as are many program hosts and reporters. But Greta and Shep are the prime time, major program hosts who seem to go out of their way to avoid favoritism or partiality to one side or another.
June 16, 2008, 4:31:04 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
I fail to understand the programming value in that. He (Davis) repulses a good portion of all Democrats and virtually [all liberal Democrats.]  
 
by otm
 
Just curious how you came up with this.
June 16, 2008, 4:42:04 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
O'Reilly has no horse in the race, either.
June 16, 2008, 4:45:00 PM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
Lanny Davis v Marc Lamont Hill
 
Maybe because Mr Davis is widely known,having been part of the Clinton WH, and again became widely seen as a surrogate for Hillary Clinton,and most people have never heard of Marc Lamont Hill.
 
sharm,I'm glad to see you acknowledge that Fox leans right.They even set themselves apart.This morning on F&F,they twice (7 and 8) covered one sentence of an Obama statement about,roughly,bringing a knife to a gunfight,and twice played a clip of Sean Connery saying roughly the same thing (I guess to set up the suggestion that Obama plagerized??).They then said,roughly,imagine if the Main Stream Media had picked this up and the speaker had been John Mccain.So they are even describing themselves as different from the MSM.
 
As for the "mirror image" statement I made.Yes,it's not accurate in the sense of the structure of the shows.But in terms of conveyance of information,Fox slants their news from the R,and KO from the left.
 
The argument segments on Fox are IMO,a complete waste of time.I don't think anyone learns much from watching 2 partisans snark at each other for 5 minutes.It's like duelling talking points.After the first few exposures,I stopped watching "Crossfire",and for the same reason avoid H&C.It's like political Jerry Springer.
 
One would learn alot more about both sides of an issue if a journalist would do an in-depth interview with each participant.Though I suspect that elucidation of the audience is not really the intent.
June 16, 2008, 4:46:41 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
nvh, could you please post a link from your local paper that's "by no means liberal" that was calling out fox news for the 'fist jab' nonsense? I would like to read it myself.
June 16, 2008, 4:48:58 PM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
Very good point about Hemmer, Missy. He is in a time slot that doesn't work for me, so I tend to forget about him. He was good, solid at CNN and is at FNC. I'd like to see him in a more time-prominent slot. I agree with you about Smith, as I believe I may have already indicated and VanSustern as well. I just don't much care for the latter, but only as a matter of taste.
June 16, 2008, 4:56:00 PM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
You are right, nvh, Hill is much more low-profile. Davis has been around, at least in Democratic circles, since Hoover beat Smith.
June 16, 2008, 4:58:59 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
> This morning on F&F,they twice...
 
NVH, did you see those segments?
June 16, 2008, 5:00:20 PM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
When is Hemmer on,same with Smith.And doesn't Greta (who I remember from CNN) generally do legal analysis?
June 16, 2008, 5:00:51 PM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
johnny dollar | Homepage | 06.16.08 - 5:05 pm |  
 
Yes.I can't say they occupied all my attention.And the second time through even less so.
June 16, 2008, 5:03:25 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
Sounds like a back pedal......
June 16, 2008, 5:04:25 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike C.
I wish this place was an echo chamber where we always talked about cable news and never strayed. And I'm saying this as a moderate, not a hardcore right-winger. Keep that in mind, OTM and NVH. I'm trying hard not to mean either of you disrespect.
June 16, 2008, 5:07:08 PM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
Because you said please.
 
Lancaster Intelligencer Journal
June 16, 2008, 5:07:28 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
Well, working class people are not a dying breed where I live, they just don't work at news outlets. And they are generally conservative.
 
The "socio" part of the word socioeconomic is a much bigger chuck of this particular ethos and culture, far surpassing the economic element.
It encompasses the attorney or the psychologist who eat along the side the plumbers and truckers and who go deer hunting and fishing with the builders and bait shop owners.
 
The racial demarcations in off-work play times and Sunday worship may be more pronounced than the socio ones within the same racial set, but far less than the stereotype and no different from those among working class ethnic groups in other parts of the country.
 
Too bad J-schools and large media outlets aren't engaged in supporting scholarship programs for recruitment into the ranks of people who offer this sort of diversity, rather than just the standard focuses.  
 
I would think that news papers and television organizations would want a few Tennessee boys and girls who are also Iraq War vets and Montanan kids who rode the range. How about some Mississippians who drove to high school in pick-up trucks with gun racks in the back?
 
If Howard Dean could consider them useful, at least for a vote, surely the New York Times and NBC, etc... might find in them a needed perspective that is useful too.
June 16, 2008, 5:11:14 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike C.
And to get back on topic, I lasted about a minute with "Just In." Laura is just so hard for me to tolerate. With this new show and considering the slot it's in, she is essentially the female John Gibson. And since it's her show, no tabloid stuff, but lots of conservative stuff.
I'd be in a better mood, but I wasted emotion yesterday and today thinking Choke-o Mediate would win the U.S. Open. What a fool I was. I can't watch any sport anymore without getting stressed out, angry, and depressed. And I thought golf would be the one sport I could watch; no Phillies, no Braves, no Patriots, no Cowboys, no Spurs. Nope. Tiger Woods is all of those rolled up in one. Now, he just needs Harry Kalas, Skip Caray, Pete Van Wieren, Gil Santos, and Brad Sham to do homer (cheerleader for team/player) play-by-play.
Yes, I went off topic, too, but therein lies the Mike C. double standard.
June 16, 2008, 5:14:16 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike C.
And I have no idea what to say to get back on topic other than to say this: Besides Dr. Hill, Kinky Friedman will be on "The Factor" tonight. That should be fun.
June 16, 2008, 5:16:26 PM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
Kinky Friedman on the Factor.He should do "The Ballad of Charles Joseph Whitman" for a segment on gun control.I'd even watch that.
June 16, 2008, 5:25:45 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
MikeC., you don't have a "double standard". You have one standard, but it's so high even you can't completely adhere to it. :D
 
As long as things are on the up-and-up, relax and let Johnny steer the boat if it starts to float out of his boundaries.
 
You might enjoy the ride a bit more, baby boy.
June 16, 2008, 5:30:13 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Vince
Mike: You need to relax. We're HUMAN BEINGS .. We are not robots.. We are not programs..
June 16, 2008, 5:31:40 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
He's aware of that, Vince, understanding the difference between a little leeway and chaos is all that's needed.
June 16, 2008, 5:34:17 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
Where's the 'chaos?'
June 16, 2008, 5:56:43 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
put the "Baby Mama"controversy on the back page top left.Doesn't look good.
notveryhow | 06.15.08 - 12:16 pm | # 
 
I found the article, nvh. It was very critical of Mathews, Schuster and others as well. It wasn't just about Fox.
June 16, 2008, 6:02:48 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
Great show, Laura!
June 16, 2008, 6:03:28 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
Well, I have a trouble understanding the logic that would argue that FNC is to the right when they feature Obama (more than McCain. Every other network does too and the consenus in the media is that this is so because (in so many words) that ihe is the new, exciting and energizing Brand X. 
 
I buy that to a great extent.
 
So why is their a problem when FNC features Obama quoting something similar to a line out of the Untouchables that sounds ironically like the not-the-same-ole-politics candidate is extolling the virtues of the old political "Chicago way" machine? That they ran it several times, the way other networks ran McCain saying "Al Qaeda" rather than "insurgents"?
 
Well, if one play means one network swings to the right, then s similar play towards the other pole on the politicial line must mean that one swings to the left.
 
If it's tilting to the right for anchors at one network to act as though gun control laws just might not be an indisputable virtue unto themselves, and to broadcast the basis for that argument, then it tilts to the left for other networks to act as though they are indisputably virtuous.
 
Frankly, one of the elements that has been left out in the discussion of what is "objectivity" and how far the networks have gone in crossing those boundaries, and is the future of news, etc--- is the one about where the middle truly is in the country, did Uncle Walter, Aunt Barbara and obnoxious cousin Peter ever fit that bill, has the small line they crossed been moved a mile now into areas that are different from social stands of the past, and how did the term "extremism" come to include some pretty garden variety majority beliefs.
June 16, 2008, 6:03:33 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
So on my Comcast FNC went out in the last minutes of Laura's show and still isn't back. Anyone else having that problem?
 
In desperation I checked MSNBC and was startled to find that David Gregory's substitute host on Race for the White House was Rachel Maddow.
June 16, 2008, 6:05:09 PM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
The first time she did "Countdown," it was disastrous, Johnny, as you probably know. Fast. Breathless. Obvious nervousness. Like her philosophy or not (and I am presuming neither), Ms. Maddow has found for what is to me a pleasant pace and delivery.
June 16, 2008, 6:11:50 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Only now she is seen fit by NBC News to substitute not only for a propagandist, but also for a supposedly impartial reporter. I just note it as an interesting turn of events.
June 16, 2008, 6:12:49 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
I fail to understand the programming value in that. He (Davis) repulses a good portion of all Democrats and virtually [all liberal Democrats.] 
 
by otm
 
Just curious how you came up with this.
I need a good laugh...
June 16, 2008, 6:15:09 PM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
My keyboard instructor always said versatility makes the person and the bucks.
June 16, 2008, 6:15:56 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
Well, Johnny, where...oh...where... in the corporate media outlets of news, news analysis, and the television and motion picture entertainment mediums, would any of us ever hear the near silenced message that it's alright to be gay, intelligent, female, and against the corporate media/military/industrial complex?...
 
Free at last...
June 16, 2008, 6:17:32 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
David Gregory is "supposedly impartial?" Now, that is a turn of events!!
June 16, 2008, 6:18:04 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
OTM, and your grift-master sensei was probably even more explicit...
June 16, 2008, 6:19:39 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
One would think Lanny Davis repulsing "all liberal democrats" would have gotten a mention SOMEWHERE in the news. Right?
 
I'm surprised the newshounds, at least, would have given this HUGE story a mention......
June 16, 2008, 6:25:34 PM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
Cecelia | 06.16.08 - 6:08 pm |
 
There was stupid enough from all sides in that segment.First,it was rather stupid of Obama to mention guns and knives in an off-the-cuff remark about brawling Philadelphians.Secondly,F&F didn't even make that point,instead focusing on the remarks similarity to a Sean Connery line,as if the saying "bringing a knife to a gun fight" hasn't been around as long as...well,as long as guns and knives.But then to repeat it,almost verbatim.How is this even news.
 
But my intent in even mentioning this was not to complain about bias,but to provide an example of Fox setting themselves up as different from the Main Stream Media.I've heard 2 other examples of this recently from F&F,having to do with an Iraq news story that "you won't hear that in the Main Stream Media".My point was,why would they actively try to present themselves as different than other outlets if they were not trying to present that distinction as a selling point,that they are RW, different than the (liberal) MSM.
June 16, 2008, 6:27:47 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
Olby sucks, I found Lanny repulsive when finding Lanny repulsive wasn't cool.... :D
June 16, 2008, 6:28:35 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
Me, too. I had no idea he repulsed all liberal democrats, though. Shocking!
June 16, 2008, 6:30:39 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
We heard the remarks differently then, nvh, because I heard the program via Fox News radio on XM while driving out to the market this morning.
 
I think FNC would most certainly say that they distinguish themselves from other networks by saying that they are fair and balanced. Other networks distinguish themselves from each other in other ways, and from FNC in that particular way, all the time.
June 16, 2008, 6:32:39 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
nvh, knock on your head and ask otm why she won't answer me.
June 16, 2008, 6:35:28 PM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
olby sucks | Homepage | 06.16.08 - 6:40 pm |
 
BTW,Oblio,are you going to apologize for calling me a liar?
 
Cecilia,what do you think Fox means when thet distinguish themselves from "the Main Stream Media"?
June 16, 2008, 6:42:27 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
I don't think I did, nvh. Although, your analysis of the article was false as I stated above.
June 16, 2008, 6:45:19 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
Now, pop another pill and drag out otm.
June 16, 2008, 6:46:39 PM EDT – Like – Reply


cee
Lanny Davis only became repulsive because he supported the wrong candidate for president.
 
When he was the 24/7 cable news defender of the defunct first gentleman over his adolescent lying over adulterous sodomy, the left had altars of candles surrounding Saint Lanny.....
 
Now the messiah has come and those altars are there for the candidate of hope and change.....I hope he does not continue the quote to its actual end (a la Jim Malone): "He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. That's the Chicago way".
June 16, 2008, 6:47:56 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
I know exactly why Lanny Davis repulses otm. She is an obama lover. I want to know when Lanny started repulsing "all liberal democrats" though. Is there a poll that says so much? Did orangy say this? Kos? Huffy puf?
June 16, 2008, 6:52:57 PM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
nvh, I'll assume you are lying, again.
olby sucks | Homepage | 06.15.08 - 5:09 pm |
 
I did not do an analysis of the article,which would have had nothing to do with my post.I mentioned it because the article mentioning "baby mama" even appeared in my hometown newspaper,which frankly had suprised me.
 
And while we're on insults,why do you refer to otm as "she",when I've seen otm's gender pointed out to you.Do you think calling someone a woman is an insult?
June 16, 2008, 6:53:21 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
My local small town paper(by no means liberal media) put the "Baby Mama"controversy on the back page top left.Doesn't look good.
notveryhow | 06.15.08 - 12:16 pm | # 
 
You forgot to mention the article hammered Mathews, Slippery Schuster and others. Not veryfair.
June 16, 2008, 6:57:56 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
nvh, I think FNC means -- watch us.
 
Just I think that's what CNN is saying when they say "The Most Trusted News Source".
June 16, 2008, 7:01:00 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
notveryfair........LOL!!!
June 16, 2008, 7:01:14 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
This flooding seems to be MUCH worse than what Katrina caused. Where's all the liberal finger pointing? More proof Katrina "outrage" was PURE politics and race driven.
June 16, 2008, 7:09:48 PM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
Cecelia | 06.16.08 - 7:06 pm |
 
IMO,"The Most Trusted Name in News" or whatever,seems to be qualitatively different. It is purely a slogan,like "Fair and Balanced".
 
During story coverage,as in the Obama remarks,to say "imagine what would happen if this was John McCain,and the Main Stream Media picked up on it",this was not tooting their own horn,but criticizing all (or most) of the other media as well as setting themselves apart.
 
Although it is probably older than my point of reference,I remember Nixon,and bumper stickers on Republican's cars saying "I don't believe the liberal media".It appears to me that Fox is just carrying on this anti-MSM tradition by highlighting their coverage as different from the MSM,for the sake of keeping/building their target audience.
June 16, 2008, 7:14:43 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
Cecelia | 06.16.08 - 5:35 pm | #
 
That last line gave me the same feeling Chris Matthews gets when he hears Obama speak! 
 
johnny dollar | Homepage | 06.16.08 - 6:10 pm | #
 
johnny, I thought you had dish with TiVo? Do you have Comcast too or did you switch?
 
olby sucks | Homepage | 06.16.08 - 7:14 pm | #
 
100% true OS, and they're still standing with outstretched palms.
June 16, 2008, 7:23:03 PM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
Mr. Sucks, I would appreciate it if you would stop harranguing me with absurd questions. How do I know Lanny repulses a large number of Democrats? I have attended 21 state Democratic conventions. I have attended 11 national Democratic conventions. I have attended more SDC's and DNC's than I can count. I have been a precinct judge for a number of years. I have met Mr. Davis. I have spoke with Mr. Davis over the years. I have spoken with people who have spoken with Mr. Davis. He repulsed me from the moment we met him. He repulsed me when we were both supporting Bill Clinton. He has repulsed others who have loudly and openly discussed their repulsion.
 
Does that suffice, or should I link to some inane site than proves nothing? Experience counts for something, my friend. Moreover, if you didn't hear the constant complaints about Mr. Davis during the primary just concluded (along with praise from the conservative Democrats), then you watch far less cable news than you claim. There is only so much help I can offer. You can lead the cat to the tuna, but you can't always get him to eat it.
June 16, 2008, 7:24:22 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
That did nothing to help, either. All I wanted to prove was that you can't prove that "ALL LIBERAL DEMOCRATS"are repulsed by Lanny Davis. For future reference, think before you post, teach!
 
I like how you spun from "All" to "a large number." LOL!!!!
June 16, 2008, 7:33:21 PM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
All I can offer, Mr. Sucks is that it isn't always the teacher's fault.
June 16, 2008, 7:48:45 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
I have attended 21 state Democratic conventions. I have attended 11 national Democratic conventions. I have attended more SDC's and DNC's than I can count. I have been a precinct judge for a number of years. I have met Mr. Davis. I have spoke with Mr. Davis over the years. I have spoken with people who have spoken with Mr. Davis.
 
by philby
 
You've done all this and you got nothing on me! Since you seem to have Lanny's number on speed dial, maybe you should inform him of your most recent revelation.
June 16, 2008, 7:51:32 PM EDT – Like – Reply


cee
Great news regarding Baghdad Airport having a lost and found....I wonder if we can find the democrats' courage there.
 
In addition to discussing the Chicago Way silliness and noting the brilliant opinion that fathers are important, SNOBamessiah was also seen wearing a flag pin today saying the surge is working and there is reason to HOPE! in Iraq.....and he had nice words about PRESIDENT MALIKI.....
 
Yes, President Maliki.....another gaffe from the neophyte community organizer from Chicago armed with a gun....not a knife.....
 
I wonder if The President of Canada has an opinion on this?
June 16, 2008, 7:54:56 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
Cee, with current gas prices, I don't even think liberal Democrats of the sort who consider the Peace Corp a stealth effort at colonialism, are stupid enough to think we should abandon all efforts for a stable Iraq govt and a friendly and stable relationship between it and the U.S.
June 16, 2008, 8:02:46 PM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
Canada doesn't have a president.
June 16, 2008, 8:02:51 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
Oops, Johnny...ehhh... topic drift?... (gulp)...
June 16, 2008, 8:04:53 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
I thought Jennifer Granholm was the President of Canada.
June 16, 2008, 8:07:23 PM EDT – Like – Reply


cee
Canada doesn't have a president.
On The Mark | 06.16.08 - 8:07 pm |
 
Tell that to your candidate for president, OTM.....that was the joke (over your head obviously).....
 
"I would immediately call the president of Mexico, the president of Canada, to try to amend NAFTA, because I think that we can get labor agreements in that agreement right now"
 
SNOBamessiah 8/8/07
 
###
And Cecelia, I agree....the democrats have come around to basically supporting the Bush policy despite predicting the surge would fail.....Another example of their astute leadership. There will be US Troops in Iraq for MANY years to come.
 
(Sorry J$.....I'm done with off topic posting)
June 16, 2008, 8:13:48 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
nvh, I think CNN and MSNBC do say--- we'll cover the story in a way the other guys can't and won't-- because follow their corporate masters....they like the easy path...etc... They don't think out of the box.... 
 
That is separating themselves.
 
It's only especially concerning and almost...pejorative...when FNC says -- "we'll tell you what the rest of the media won't tell you" because they are indeed talking about a particular side that is somehow supposed to come in a plain brown wrapper or held in one latex gloved hand, examined superficially and gingerly, and then thrown out while your other hand holds your nose.
 
Examine your own preconceptions here.
June 16, 2008, 8:16:51 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
cee | Homepage | 06.16.08 - 8:18 pm | #
 
I think off topic posting is sometimes required in order to explain an inside story or joke, to clarify a point, to correct a lie, etc. Sometimes it takes several OT posts to get a point straight as is evidenced every day here. The uber-standard is impossible, as Cece put forth earlier.
June 16, 2008, 8:19:46 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
I wasn't defending topic drift at all, FF. We're here at this blog at the pleasure of our host.
June 16, 2008, 8:26:17 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
I know you weren't defending it, you apologised for it. I was defending it as an occasional necessary evil. As our two comments here are to us, to explain to each other our intentions.
June 16, 2008, 8:29:57 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
FF, I'm glad you understand. My concern was that Mike not worry so much.
 
I'm going to say this to you with out elaboration. To use a sexual analogy in a non-sexual way when it comes to the issue of broadening the scope of this blog, I've no doubt that Johnny is savvy enough to recognize "flirty seduction" when he sees it, I hope you are as well.
June 16, 2008, 8:33:40 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike C.
I get the feeling we won't be seeing Kinky on "The Factor" for a long time. And considering the way tonight's interview went, good.
It may be safe to say that Dr. Hill is the Gene Robinson of FNC.
June 16, 2008, 8:39:44 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
I spotted some topic drift up thread. I'm watching closely now. Don't make me do it!
June 16, 2008, 8:46:02 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike C.
Is Oralmann back to normal tonight, Johnny?
June 16, 2008, 8:54:41 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
I had to make philby prove that she was making comments she couldn't prove. In order to do that, we drifted, slightly. Mission accomplished!
June 16, 2008, 8:54:43 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
Cecelia | 06.16.08 - 8:38 pm | #
 
Did you take offense to my Chris Matthews comment Cece? Very sorry, I thought it was humorous in a Red Eye sort of way...
 
Mike C. | Homepage | 06.16.08 - 8:44 pm | #
 
Why do you think Kinky won't be back on O'Reilly Mike? The interview went well, especially considering that I'm not a fan of Kinky.
June 16, 2008, 8:58:07 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
> Is Oralmann back to normal tonight, Johnny?
 
Is he ever! He just told a whopper about Fox coverage of Russert. He lied about the content (easy to do when you don't show clips or even read any quotes from what was said), but at OlbyWatch we posted the actual video. Another Olbermann Lie nailed again.
June 16, 2008, 9:12:02 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike C.
I don't know. It seemed to end without warning, that Kinky wanted to say more, and that BOR was dismissive. Maybe I'll feel differently about it at second glance, but that's what I saw in my initial viewing.
June 16, 2008, 9:14:12 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike C.
I was responding to Fox Fan. I'll head to OlbyWatch right now.
June 16, 2008, 9:15:20 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
Mike C. | Homepage | 06.16.08 - 9:19 pm | #
 
That happens every night at the end of interviews due to time constraints. I didn't sense any ill feelings between O'Reilly and Kinky.
June 16, 2008, 9:19:09 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Grammie
Mike, I plan on taking Cecelia's advice.
 
I am going to do what seems natural to me and Johnny will let me know if I've erred and I will follow his lead.
 
In other words, put your trust in Johnny to enforce his rules as he wants.
June 16, 2008, 10:30:48 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
Exactly, Grammie. I get edited/moderated here sometimes, and it's fine with me. I'm appreciative of the environment.
June 16, 2008, 11:07:57 PM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
Cecelia | 06.16.08 - 8:21 pm |
 
I try to constantly examine my preconceptions.It's too easy,after you've seen elephants come over a hill all day long,to miss the donkey by just assuming it's another elephant.
 
I think the topic can be boiled down to the use of the term "Main Stream Media".I never hear CNN,NYT,WaPo,or even MSNBC describe themselves as Main Stream Media.The only people I've heard use the term Main Stream Media are Conservatives,and it is often used as a pejorative,conveying bias and inaccuracy.
June 16, 2008, 11:17:27 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fast Eddie
notveryhow | 06.16.08 - 11:22 pm 
 
Bingo! The Main Stream Media is biased to the left.
June 16, 2008, 11:51:00 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
And they don't want to admit it!
June 17, 2008, 12:01:34 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
FF, no, I was just hoping that you aren't being swayed by anyone to ask Johnny to change the focus of this blog.
June 17, 2008, 1:24:24 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
nvh, they don't use that particular term because it connotes that they tilt to the left. (A belief held by a majority of Americans)
 
They've long used other expressions discribing themselves that would imply the opposite of their competition--- "unrestrained", "comprehensive" "courageous", "responsible", "unfettered".
June 17, 2008, 1:37:43 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
Johnny, just when you think you can't be shocked by Keith Olbermann, he tops himself.
 
I can't believe this hideous rat bastard has used the death of his "friend" as just one more vehicle for bashing Fox News.
June 17, 2008, 1:45:20 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
FF, and by "someone" I mean our Lucette/OTM.
June 17, 2008, 2:28:17 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
Cece, I never asked for the focus of the blog to be changed. Even if I did, it wouldn't be at the behest of OTM! 
 
What I said is that occasional OT comments are inevitable, as this one is and your 2:33 is. That's all.
June 17, 2008, 7:08:44 AM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
Off topic, to be sure, but out of weariness of constantly being maligned by Cecelia, I have never, never, never used the name "Lucette", and I would urge you to have Cox do one of his patented IP address searches in which you have so much (misplaced) confidence. And, if you can't prove it, drop it.
June 17, 2008, 8:04:15 AM EDT – Like – Reply


sharm
NVH,
 
My stating that Fox leans left is not to say that the network is a mouthpiece for the administration or that it is not fair and balanced. Leans right is a different approach than outright getting tingles up the leg for a candidate or expending all efforts to get rid of the competition. Someone pointed out the objectivity of Greta. Bill Kristol is not objective, but he is not held out as an objective newscaster who one minute claims a right to violate journalistic standards (hey, how much danger are we really in when someone can publicly tell the President to "shut the hell up") due to a national emergency, and the next claim that "people will criticize no matter what, so why not".
 
8:09, apply your belief in "open season" on the President to yourself. You earned it, In the most tedious way, you earned it.
June 17, 2008, 9:34:35 AM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
otm, clear the air and make a list of ALL of your names. In your defense, I thought 'lucette' was patsy. I still think nvh is you, though.
June 17, 2008, 9:59:47 AM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
sharm | 06.17.08 - 9:39 am |
 
"Leans right" does not equate "Fair and Balanced".If you don't believe me,try it the next time you cross a rope bridge.
 
And whether it is worse or not, anything that KO and Matthews do does not mitigate or excuse anything that Fox does.
 
You speak of Greta,but I thought she did(mostly) legal analysis.What about Hume,Cavuto,or the celebrated Fox and Friends.
 
Speaking of which,I watched the 7 and first 15 minutes of the 8 o'clock hours.Now I may have missed it,but I saw no mention of Vice-President Gore endorsing Sen Oboma.They did however,twice,do a segment on an editorial by Tony Horowitz in the NYT,that jokingly said that Sen Obama should start smoking again in order to appeal to working class voters.
 
They also had on Bill Donahue(sp?) of the Catholic League to comment on the movie "Angels and Demons",based on the book by Dan Brown.I chuckled when I heard Mr Donahue comment that fiction writer Mr Brown is mixing fact and fiction.
 
As for Main Stream Media,at least Fox and Friends doesn't say "Drive By Media".That would be too unsubtle,even for them.
June 17, 2008, 10:08:17 AM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
Why the hatred for Fox and Friends? Have their words ever killed anyone?
June 17, 2008, 10:16:44 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
nvh, what do you mean by saying that "anything that KO and Matthews do does not mitigate or excuse anything F&F does"?
 
No problem.... But what did F&F do, other than not coverage Gore's endorsement during the brief time you watched the show, get a Catholic spokesman to talk about the Vatican being off limits to the filming of a movie critical of the church (in a way you found funny), and talk about a satirical political cartoon (that you did not find funny).
 
Sheesh!
June 17, 2008, 10:32:02 AM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
First off,I do not hate Fox and Friends,I find them unintentionally amusing,particularly with the sound off and the captions on.My youngest watched a few minutes with me one morning,and said"They should be kindergarden teachers,look at the way they smile all the time".But that's just my private entertainment.
 
This morning,I found it amusing that they found about 10 minutes to discuss a NYT editorial(not a cartoon,and I did find it funny),but no time to discuss the Gore endorsement.
 
As for the Donahue quote,doesn't it strike you as humorous that someone would accuse a writer of fictional novels of "mixing fact and fiction"?Of course he's mixing fact and fiction.So did Shara,Mitchner,and any other writer.
 
As to the remark about KO and Matthews,I was responding to sharm's 8:39 post alluding to the sins of KO.
June 17, 2008, 11:02:39 AM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
I doubt anyone hates F&F. I certainly don't. It's just a joke show, sort of like a rather dull "Captain Kangaroo" for people who are not children, but have never really reached adulthood, really more like the Paul O'Grady show in the BBC.
June 17, 2008, 11:30:32 AM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
> but no time to discuss the Gore endorsement.
 
So you watched the entire program and the Gore endorsement never came up? Is that what you are saying?
June 17, 2008, 11:50:54 AM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
johnny dollar | Homepage | 06.17.08 - 11:55 am |
 
I'm saying that between 7 AM and 8:15 AM,I did not see mention of the Gore endorsement.I also stated that "I may have missed it",which is unlikely,but possible if they did nto have a discussion but did no more than mention it.Then if I am mistaken,someone can correct me and direct me to the transcript without animosity on either side.
June 17, 2008, 12:04:35 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Thank you. I just wanted to make it clear that you based your claim that something wasn't covered on watching less than half of the program.
June 17, 2008, 12:15:20 PM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
I thought I made it clear in my 10:13 post what the parameters of my viewing had been.I've discovered that they often repeat stories in both the 7 and 8 o'clock blocks,and when I saw the Obama smoking story in both the 7 and 8 o'clock slots,I felt they were drifting into repeat land.
June 17, 2008, 12:25:47 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
"Gore 'endorses' obama!!!!!!"
 
There, happy now, 'nvh?' It didn't deserve any more than a mere mention. What's the significance? None.
June 17, 2008, 12:37:19 PM EDT – Like – Reply


sharm
"Leans right" does not equate "Fair and Balanced".If you don't believe me,try it the next time you cross a rope bridge.
 
I didn't explain, then, what I meant very well. Take for instance Hannity and Colmes. (I don't like Hannity for a variety of reasons). He takes the lead most of the time. Yet Colmes is there for counterbalance. O'Reilly's views lean conservative on many issues. Like him or not, there is counterbalance on his show. When I see Doocey, he appears to me to be more of a conservative, yet watching the show is not for me, watching a show like Countdown or Abrahms. The people who take the lead seem to have a conservative perspective, but not to the point of a shout down or to a point of untrustworthiness. Both viewpoints are presented. That may be called fair. I see balance also, and maybe that is the sticking point for you. [Actually, there are probably few personalities on Fox that have the same degree of conservative views as me on the social issues.] 
 
The fact that Gore endorsed Obama is not an event, in my opinion, that requires a segment. I didn't expect him to endorse McCain, maybe you did? Now there would be a story. 
 
So, if I am on a rope bridge yes, leaning right would mean something else. But we are not talking about a rope bridge, are we?
June 17, 2008, 1:19:26 PM EDT – Like – Reply


sharm
"They also had on Bill Donahue(sp?) of the Catholic League to comment on the movie "Angels and Demons",based on the book by Dan Brown.I chuckled when I heard Mr Donahue comment that fiction writer Mr Brown is mixing fact and fiction."
 
The writing of Dan Brown for the Catholic Church is the equivalent of using the Quaran as a target for target practice or flushing the Muslim holy book down the pot. 
 
"You speak of Greta,but I thought she did(mostly) legal analysis."
 
So what if she veers into politics? She certainly has friends on both sides of the
aisle.
June 17, 2008, 1:25:57 PM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
sharm | 06.17.08 - 1:30 pm |
 
You don't find the line, "He's mixing fact and fiction" ,when said about a fiction writer,funny?Well,there is no accounting for taste.
 
As for Fair and Balanced,I don't ahve a lot to draw on without linking to the dreaded Newshounds or Media Matters,which I'm sure would bring out the garlic and Holy Water.So I'll just cite one incident I remember well:Sen Clinton's rendition of the old spiritual,and the overused clip,"I ain't no ways tired.
 
Now this happened on a Friday,I think,so I wasn't suprised that F&F would mention it on Monday,it WAS funny.Stewart got his digs in too.But I was a little taken aback by their vehemence.They took it quite seriously.
 
The rest of the week,they featured the story promenently every morning.They suggested that Sen Clinton was disrespecting African-Americans.They had a body language person on to comment.And they carried on this charade Tuesday,Wednesday,Thursday and Friday.For all I know,they may have kept it up the next week.
 
Now they may have had on a Democrat to defend the Senator,but that misses the point.Why would they do 5 days of coverage of this non-story of a politician trying a rhetorical flourish that went poorly, that would even neccesitate someone defending her?That is bias.
 
Now they have Ms Ingraham to fill the 5 o'clock slot.She is a (very)conservative radio talk show host.Will she be doing "straight news".Or will she be doing straight news in the style of Cavuto?
 
I have to ask again,who on Fox does straight news?Greta dabbles in politics,fine.But she does not do the news.What news person on Fox News can be relied upon to deliver the news straight up,unbiased,and sneer free.
 
Why is there a problem with acknowledging Fox as being "conservative" news,in the same fashion as Matthews or the evil KO is reported to do "liberal"news.
June 17, 2008, 3:20:41 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
> Why is there a problem with acknowledging Fox as being "conservative" news,in the same fashion as Matthews or the evil KO is reported to do "liberal"news.
 
Because it's not true. Nobody on Fox does a program like KO, which never interviews anybody from an opposing perspective. When was the last time you heard KO interview a guest speaking, say, in defense of Bush, or the Iraq war? I can tell you: well over a year ago, and if you go back two or three years, you'll still only find one.
 
> Who on Fox does straight news?
 
Hemmer, Gallagher, Skinner, Faulkner, Scott, Shawn, Smith (most of the time), to name a few.
June 17, 2008, 3:23:56 PM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
johnny dollar | Homepage | 06.17.08 - 3:28 pm | 
 
Thanx.I'll have to check the Fox schedule to see when these folks are on.
June 17, 2008, 3:34:55 PM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
Curiously, JD and NVH:
 
Does Faulkner have a show or does she just do news updates?
 
Don't you find Faulkner adds a lot innuendo, verbally, tonally and facially to her updates? 
 
I may be wrong, but she has always struck me as a bit off. Not offensive, you understand, but I don't have the same problem saying FNC has a conservative slant that you do, Johnny. I have never considered that a condemnation. I don't think that makes FNC less news-oriented.
June 17, 2008, 4:03:24 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
> does she just do news updates?
 
No. 
 
> Don't you find Faulkner adds a lot innuendo, verbally, tonally and facially to her updates? 
 
No.
June 17, 2008, 4:23:36 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
"Don't you find Faulkner adds a lot innuendo, verbally, tonally and facially to her updates?"
 
Do I sense a little racism, here? Are her eyes to bright? Does she smile too much?
June 17, 2008, 4:27:03 PM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
How odd that you, of all people, should think I a racist. Well, it is the nature of this media that we know nothing about one another.
 
I was speaking more along the lines of the Clear Channel approach to radio news where story placement, story length, the voice of the presenter, all convey the Clear Channel ideology. I think Faulkner does that, and I think she does that well. An FNC agenda or a Faulkner agenda, I haven't a clue. I don't really even care. I just don't find her particularly objective.
 
As to the others on JD's list, I am not even sure who "Shawn" is, and I think that Smith sometimes conveys his own feelings or spin. Again, I don't object to that. I am not sure why others find it objectionable. It's actually interesting with Smith since his read tends to the eclectic, conservative on some issues, liberal on some (Katrina, in particular, but others as well) and simply Smith at times. I find it demanding in a pleasant sort of way and interesting. I don't get the same enjoyment with the Faulkner spin. A bit too shrill, I suppose.
June 17, 2008, 4:49:52 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olby sucks
I never knew that a hurricane could be 'liberal' or 'conservative.' You learn something every day.
June 17, 2008, 7:16:29 PM EDT – Like – Reply