Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

SPEECHLESS....

frontrangeclone said:
Notice in my post I said RADIO, I don't recall hearing that Nancy Grace, Harpo, Dr. Cullen or that walking corps L King having a radio show. DSM does not have an Air America affiliate, and Big Eddie is not on in DSM. My point is, you have your Limbaughs, Hannitys, Reagans, Savages, Medveds, Dr. Laura's, O'Reillys, etc... blasting the right wing agenda over the clear channel AM stations in the US.

I must pimp Ed Schultz here for a moment. The dude is as down-the-middle common sense american as you'll find. He calls a turd a turd whether it's dem or republican. He's out of N Dakota and is someone I think Iowans can relate with. He talks agriculture, unions, blue collar labor, as well as the usual topics like Iraqistan, border security etc...

The fact that you mention Dr. Heidi Cullen cracks me up.... I have a feeling the hot Doc (hot for a phd in climatology anyway) knows a wee bit more about atmospheric physics than Rush Limbaugh does, yet every time I turn past the dial, he sounds like the world's foremost expert!
Click to expand...

Well, guess what... I don't live in Des Moines. And from your profile, neither do you. So in the grand scheme of things, who really cares? The point is the media has its fair share of both conservative and liberal nut jobs, so the liberals of the world can get off their high horse because they have their fair share of hosts that distort the news as badly as O'Reilley and Limbaugh.
 
I've never heard him on any radio stations in Iowa either, I just knew he got his foot in the door to TV via the radio. Much like Howard Stern has done.
 
as I sit in Portland, log in and see this..............give me a break.... this is an Iowa post..........the conseratives are looking for CORN or .....Bill O'riely porn. Ok that was out of bounds. FOX is not a news source..never will never be. If you wanr News.......well Imus is gone....................
 
isucyclone4 said:
I was not talking about a politician...I was talking about a "supposed" reliable news source.
Click to expand...

Do the commentators on NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC not wear nice suits?

Sounds like a pretty simplistic reason to not like someone.

Another example would be John "the Two Americas" Edwards, who made tens of millions of $$ suing doctors (99% of whom are trying their best to help patients). Then after retiring from politics, he goes to work for a freaking hedge fund. It doesn't get more exclusive than that........ I think I know which one of the "two Americas" John Edwards spends his time in.
 
acgclone said:
Do the commentators on NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC not wear nice suits?

Sounds like a pretty simplistic reason to not like someone.

Another example would be John "the Two Americas" Edwards, who made tens of millions of $$ suing doctors (99% of whom are trying their best to help patients). Then after retiring from politics, he goes to work for a freaking hedge fund. It doesn't get more exclusive than that........ I think I know which one of the "two Americas" John Edwards spends his time in.
Click to expand...

Ok...this is getting ridiculous really fast - plz bear with me and stay on topic ppl. I didn't say commentators on other networks don't wear nice suits. Not the point I was trying to make, plz LISTEN. They don't all align themselves with the working class like Bill O'Reilly does - and that doesn't mean that is the only reason I don't like him. I could go on for hours about why I hate him...but it's easier to let Maddox do it for me:

Bill O'Reilly is big blubbering vagina.
 
I also think this is an accurate description of what is happening to commercial news. Also done by the PEW Research Center.

http://www.stateofthenewsmedia.com/2007/narrative_overview_eight.asp?cat=2&media=1
The Argument Culture is giving way to something new, the Answer Culture. Critics used to bemoan what author Michael Crichton once called the “Crossfire Syndrome,†the tendency of journalists to stage mock debates about issues on TV and in print. Such debates, critics lamented, tended to polarize, oversimplify and flatten issues to the point that Americans in the middle of the spectrum felt left out. That era of argument —R.W. Apple Jr. the gifted New York Times Reporter who died in 2006, called it “pie throwing†— appears to be evolving. The program “Crossfire†has been canceled. A growing pattern has news outlets, programs and journalists offering up solutions, crusades, certainty and the impression of putting all the blur of information in clear order for people. The tone may be just as extreme as before, but now the other side is not given equal play. In a sense, the debate in many venues is settled — at least for the host. This is something that was once more confined to talk radio, but it is spreading as it draws an audience elsewhere and in more nuanced ways. The most popular show in cable has shifted from the questions of Larry King to the answers of Bill O’Reilly. On CNN his rival Anderson Cooper becomes personally involved in stories. Lou Dobbs, also on CNN, rails against job exportation. Dateline goes after child predators. Even less controversial figures have causes: ABC weatherman Sam Campion champions green consumerism. The Answer Culture in journalism, which is part of the new branding, represents an appeal more idiosyncratic and less ideological than pure partisan journalism.
Click to expand...
 
I love Bill O'Reilly - remember those sexual harassment tapes that aired when he was telling the female employee he could pleasure her with a loofa?

LOL - good stuff on FAUX News - they appeal to a certain audience, I guess.

But seriously, how dissapointing is ALL cable news? 24/7 and all we hear about is Anna Nicole for a week straight? Is there no other news in the world?

With all the satellites and correspondents around the world, how can 4 networks put up the same crappy lead stories 96 times a day? What is going on in Russia? What is going on in China? What's going on in Australia? What happened in Germany last night?

The technology that was supposed to "bring us the world" has failed to do so - on every single news or pseudo-news channel.
 
From Merriam-Webster on-line:

News - 1 a: a report of recent events
Report - 2 a: a usually detailed account or statement <a news report>
Account - 8: a description of facts, conditions, or events: REPORT, NARRATIVE <the newspaper account of the fire>

From what I've seen there is very little reporting of facts in TV news anymore. It's all opinion and slant on both sides. That is why every American should be picking up and spending the time to read a newspaper everyday--or at least every weekend. And while it's true even print media has its biased, for the most part their biases are relegated to their opinion sections.

P.S. I don't work for a newspaper
 
frontrangeclone said:
you hit the nail on the head, Fox draws its audience partially based on the entertainment factor. You can't watch O'Reilly or Insanity have a normal, respectful discussion with someone of a different viewpoint. It pretty much turns to juvenile name calling and yelling or a pro-wrestling version of social/political talk. I'll have to admit, when Geraldo and O'Reilly went at it a few weeks ago, it was pretty hilarious.

For those who cry that the media is so far left, name 3 liberal/progressive radio talk show hosts that you hear in the Des Moines area, on WHO etc..
You probably can't. The right dominates the radio airwaves in this country, and I believe this has a lot more in persuading the audience than listening to Katie Couric or Brian Williams.
Click to expand...

You really believe that radio networks have a greator influence on pursuading its audience members? Sorry, don't buy that.

Name me 2 other conservative news networks? I can name you tons of liberal news networks, including magazines and newspapers. Even if we say that conservatives "own the airwaves", that doesn't even compare to how liberals own the written and visual press.

And, as cyclone62 said, the news sucks anyways, arguing over which news is more liberal or conservative is stupid. No matter where you go, you're going to find political slant.
 
So, as the general consensus is that many media outletts tend to suck, where do you get your information from? I'll start...

I typically listen to NPR (640 AM) during my commute. The homepage of my home PC is set to the BBC website. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/). I tend to turn on CNN in the background as I eat breakfast in the morning. I check Strangetalk (StrangeTalk3.5 :: Index) to see what is going on locally. For a while they had a header that said "Doing the Daily's reporting since 19XX." I also do random individual internet research when a topic piques my interest.
 
I typically listen to WHO and Jan Mikkelson during the morning, and just radio in general during the day. Most of my internet news comes through MSNBC by default, since MSN is my home page. So I usually get news from both ends of the political spectrum. If something really catches my interest (global warming, war on Islamic fundamentalism, politics) I will run out to Barnes and Noble and pick up any books I can find on the subject.
 
First I'll ask Mr. Deer, Ms. Fish, Brother Bear and Lady Bluejay to see what's going on. Then when that falls through, I pick up the paper.
 
SouthernHawk said:
You really believe that radio networks have a greator influence on pursuading its audience members? Sorry, don't buy that.

Name me 2 other conservative news networks? I can name you tons of liberal news networks, including magazines and newspapers. Even if we say that conservatives "own the airwaves", that doesn't even compare to how liberals own the written and visual press.

And, as cyclone62 said, the news sucks anyways, arguing over which news is more liberal or conservative is stupid. No matter where you go, you're going to find political slant.
Click to expand...

SouthernHawk- Yes! I believe that listening to Limbaugh or whomever for 3 hours, day in and day out will have more influence on a person's perspective than a 30 minute news broadcast.... I know way too many people take what these idiots say as gospel. They are the ones who label the major networks as "liberal" in the first place. They are obsessed with the buzzword, to a point where it's almost comical. News is news, it's human nature to focus on the sensational events (e.g.- tornadoes ripping up kansas towns, car bombs in Bagdhad). I agree with everyone on here who has stated the news sucks in general. The slop the cable networks try to feed us is absurd (Anna Nichole, Alec Baldwin Don Imus, etc... ). Did anyone hear how many troops we lost in Iraq the day A.N. Smith croaked? probably not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom
Back