cjcdaman Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 On to the next scenario...how did CNN cover the ACORN problem? And on and on and on and on.. Long story short, what are CNN's ratings? What are Fox's? What will it mean at the polls? The polls matter the most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IHOPSkins Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 ......Either have some fun with it, change your strategy, or look uptight and let the jokesters get under your skin.Or don't draw attention to it since its not part of the storyOr let Anderson "TEA BAGGER" Cooper show the world......that he might be good at Something after all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyBird Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Rick Sanchez should check the ratings because Fox is handing CNN their ass and have been for a long time. ETA : And if you are a "Teabagger" the joke is not on you, it's on the person you "Teabagged". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsTerps26 Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 ratings matter to the networks, i understand. but does that show who is providing the best coverage of the news? everyone knows the hypocrisy of fox news' slogan of "fair and balanced" the funny part in all this is the fact that fox news has better ratings with a democrat controlled legislative body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjcdaman Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 ratings matter to the networks, i understand. but does that show who is providing the best coverage of the news?everyone knows the hypocrisy of fox news' slogan of "fair and balanced" the funny part in all this is the fact that fox news has better ratings with a democrat controlled legislative body. Shhhhhhhh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 The most recent ratings...FOX beats cnn and msnbc combined. So much for that "left saturation" theory. To me, this is like the comparison between Coke and Carrot Juice. Sure, Coke sales are way bigger than Carrot juice, but does that mean it's better for you and a part of a healthier lifestyle? The argument that ratings equal merit just doesn't wash. FOX is popular because it is spectacular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoot Point Really Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 So does Fox beat all other news media combined at any given hour? ~Bang Only proof is in TV & Radio... I'm pretty sure Fox trumps all other TV news organizations combined. Radio is also dominated by conservatives. Not sure why you wanted to go there. It doesn't really matter. People watch what fuels their arguments on both sides. All news orgs pander to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Rick Sanchez should check the ratings because Fox is handing CNN their ass and have been for a long time. Yeah, because we all know that having high ratings means you run a better journalistic institution. :doh: Jerry Springer had high ratings so I guess that means he was an example of excellence in broadcasting. As Americans we love nothing more than to watch a good house-fire, or rubber-neck a bad car accident scene, so should it really surprise anyone that the train wreck of Faux News attracts viewers? "Tea Bagging" is known in some circles as a sexual techniqueThe Liberal Media thought it was funny and "Journalists" like Anderson Cooper had fun with it at the expense of the protestors.....in what I would say was unprofessional (and revealing) Yeah, and the worst part of it all is that the "tea baggers" got mad at others for using the term when it was the "tea baggers" themselves who referred to their groups as such first. Nice try painting the "MSM" again, but when you call yourself a "tea bagger" then please try hard to not be offended when someone uses the name you chose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 hahahaha they used CNN's picture to say CNN didn't cover the event I can understand why the guy is pissed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmySmith Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Fox used CNN's shotI agree that CNN covered the event, but the tower cam line is not exactly true. That camera shot is from the top of the Newseum (I have been up there). I seriously doubt that CNN has the only camera up there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskins59 Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Fox News is popular than CNN only in America. CNN is basically popular ALL over the world. This is just a fact. When you think of "world" channel, you think of BBC and CNN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 hahahaha they used CNN's picture to say CNN didn't cover the eventI can understand why the guy is pissed. A pic from a permanent cam. I find it funny he has to protest that they DID cover it to those that watch CNN....Maybe Oreily will let him on as a guest to get his message out to the public;) CNN's coverage sucked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ax Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Funny, what I saw in the paper was how did CNN "Miss" this story. In other words, why did everybody besides FOX slant the story closer to the, "They're mostly just an angry, Hitler worshiping, nut-job mob", therefore missing the "point" of the event, which FOX believes, only they reported correctly. The "We cover every story" statement was separate. Yes, the inference is there. And yes, stupid people will buy it as intended. Just like stupid people will buy the little Sanchez infomercial. Sachez's rant seemed pathetically desperate. FOX, one on one, is more biased to their point of view than most. But when you take into account that it is FOX vs. ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, etc..., then, they have to be. THAT, is the closest thing to balance you'll ever get from our media. And by the way, if you exclusively accept any one source, while mindlessly dismissing one or all others, you are a ****ing moron. Please, do not reproduce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 I was at the National Press Club for a meet and greet about a week ago. They were trying to convince me to join. They also had a few producers and reporters from FOX and their Washington division. FOX really does know how to pick attractive people. Even their off-camera people were beautiful. I wonder which network is best at producing eye candy. I suspect it's FOX. Anywho, this doesn't have much to do with anything, but I just thought I'd share. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskins59 Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Funny, what I saw in the paper was how did CNN "Miss" this story. In other words, why did everybody besides FOX slant the story closer to the, "They're mostly just an angry, Hitler worshiping, nut-job mob", therefore missing the "point" of the event, which FOX believes, only they reported correctly. The "We cover every story" statement was separate. Yes, the inference is there. And yes, stupid people will buy it as intended. Just like stupid people will buy the little Sanchez infomercial. Sachez's rant seemed pathetically desperate. FOX, one on one, is more biased to their point of view than most. But when you take into account that it is FOX vs. ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, etc..., then, they have to be. THAT, is the closest thing to balance you'll ever get from our media. And by the way, if you exclusively accept any one source, while mindlessly dismissing one or all others, you are a ****ing moron. Please, do not reproduce. What a load of crock. There is only one channel that is as slanted as Fox News : MSNBC. The rest try to be fair and balanced because all they do is report the news. As far as I can tell, CNN has only one guy whose opinion is slanted. He goes by the name of Lou Dubbs, and he is a paleoconservative. I seldom see Anderson Cooper, Katie Couric, etc taking any side. Essentially speaking, Fox News is turning into a talk show channel. Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Glen Beck are the three most popular shows on Fox News. I don't think Fox News is even news and should not be mentioned in the same breath as CNN or BBC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Funny, what I saw in the paper was how did CNN "Miss" this story. In other words, why did everybody besides FOX slant the story closer to the, "They're mostly just an angry, Hitler worshiping, nut-job mob", therefore missing the "point" of the event, which FOX believes, only they reported correctly. The "We cover every story" statement was separate. Yes, the inference is there. And yes, stupid people will buy it as intended. Just like stupid people will buy the little Sanchez infomercial. Sachez's rant seemed pathetically desperate. Are you going to tell me what the definition of 'is' is now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 A pic from a permanent cam.I find it funny he has to protest that they DID cover it to those that watch CNN....Maybe Oreily will let him on as a guest to get his message out to the public;) CNN's coverage sucked well for one, I almost never watch CNN, nor Fox News, but I did see the video. Why? Because the rhetorical ability of the author allowed it to go viral on the internet. It might be funny though, because CNN is obviously institutionally insecure about their position. I understand their frustration. I would be frustrated too if I succeeded into going into journalism (a highly competitive field) to find out that it's mostly just about political bs, and the biggest BSer is top dog. Especially when liberals in places like CNN (though not MSNBC) have to buffer their ideology so much while conservatives can pretty much say whatever the **** crosses their mind on Fox. CNN is probably a frustrating place to work at right now. I think it's also a little funny how the Fox News watchers refer to rating as a barometer for quality. It's kind of like arguing American Idol is the highest quality tv show because it has the highest rating. Sure you can believe that, but that's just ****ing stupid, especially from the point of view of the consumer, and not from the point of view of the media executive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 FOX, one on one, is more biased to their point of view than most. But when you take into account that it is FOX vs. ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, etc..., then, they have to be. THAT, is the closest thing to balance you'll ever get from our media. Sorry, but that's a sad view if you think this is how "balance" has to be achieved. "Fox has to be more biased in order to compensate for the opposition bias." That's pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Well TV news is rather pathetic overall , it is about sensationalism rather than journalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Judges Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 LOL @ defending pure falsehoods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qdeathstar Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 I was actually watching live when this went down..I was just like, damn!http://www.thrfeed.com/2009/09/cnn-rick-sanchez-fox-news-video-.html Meh. I watched it live and he sounded retarded. I mean, isn't CNN supposed to be a news organization? They dedicated like 15 minutes to this bull****? I mean, that was some long drawn out bull****... Why give Fox news more coverage...? Secondly, in his examples of "coverage" he didn't show Anderson Cooper or Wolfblitzer, or that blow hard son of a ***** Lou Dobbs covering it in prime time, they had a whole bunch of junior anchors covering it. So Fox news was half right, which is really the best you can hope for from them. Cover the news, not your ego CNN. v.v Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Meh. I watched it live and he sounded retarded. I mean, isn't CNN supposed to be a news organization? They dedicated like 15 minutes to this bull****? I mean, that was some long drawn out bull****... v.v Maybe he is bucking to be Olberwienies replacement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Did I mention that both networks suck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselPwr44 Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Nm................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselPwr44 Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 nm....................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.