PDA

View Full Version : HCR = Good 4 CNN


uncle ebeneezer
03-24-2010, 02:52 PM
This (http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2010/03/who-watches-the-congressmen.php) was interesting. I didn't realize that Socialist CNN was still such a dominant force when stuff is actually happening.

bjkeefe
03-24-2010, 03:25 PM
This (http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2010/03/who-watches-the-congressmen.php) was interesting. I didn't realize that Socialist CNN was still such a dominant force when stuff is actually happening.

Huh. I wonder how much of that could be explained by this guess: a certain type of person doesn't much watch teevee, particularly cable news, except when something big is happening. If that's true, I wonder how much of the channel selection choice is based on the brand "CNN" still being implanted in such people's minds. It might be a bit of a comfort to CNN, if so, in the sense that they could see this as their name still carrying trust in some people's minds.

JonIrenicus
03-25-2010, 02:24 AM
I want to see Anderson Coopers ratings when he is darting to A-B disaster area in Y part of the world.


My guess is it is pretty low.

listener
04-05-2010, 05:08 AM
Didn't know where else to post this, but it is CNN related.

Ross Douthat wrote this NYT column titled "Can CNN Be Saved? (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/05/opinion/05douthat.html?hp)", to which my response is: Ross, are you nuts? Screw Glenn Beck. What you are looking for is bloggingheads.tv!!

TwinSwords
04-05-2010, 07:32 AM
Didn't know where else to post this, but it is CNN related.

Ross Douthat wrote this NYT column titled "Can CNN Be Saved? (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/05/opinion/05douthat.html?hp)", to which my response is: Ross, are you nuts? Screw Glenn Beck. What you are looking for is bloggingheads.tv!!

Thanks for that. Interesting piece by the former Blogginghead. It's interesting to consider that CNN's collapse might be due to its straight news approach. I can definitely believe it, though personally I stopped watching CNN after witnessing the extraordinary lengths they went to during the 2000 campaign to defeat Gore and get Bush elected. Prior to that, I was something of a CNN loyalist. Once they turned their network over to the Republicans, I decided they could get their ratings from other people.

I want to take issue, though, with the Douthat's claim that "conservatives are only invited on Rachel Maddow’s show when they have something nasty to say about Republicans." Maddow is constantly trying to get conservative guests on her show, and while many refuse to appear with her, more than a few do show up.

If Douthat had made the same point about Olbermann, he would have had a point. I don't think I've ever seen a conservative on Keith's show. It's an editorial decision I support; the media is already dominated by far right voices -- they have a whole network, for heaven's sake -- so there's no real compelling need to give them a slice of Keith's show, too. Let them spread their misinformation on the other 99% of broadcast news. Having 1% reserved for an undiluted liberal point of view is fine with me.

But Keith's show is the ONLY show on MSNBC that can be accurately described as excluding conservatives. Every show on MSNBC, from Willie Geist's pre-dawn program to Hardball at 7:00 PM, features conservative panelists or guests every single day. These include the highly effective Pat Buchanan, Matt Lewis, Jonathan Capehart, and many others. There is a constant parade of Republican Party strategists and operatives who appear on MSNBC all through the day. The only exceptions are Keith's show, and Maddow's. Keith never has conservatives, but Maddow does occasionally.

TwinSwords
04-05-2010, 08:57 AM
Interesting piece by Jay Rosen on What CNN Should Do With Itself in Prime-Time (http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2010/03/31/what_cnn_should.html).

bjkeefe
04-05-2010, 09:48 AM
Interesting piece by Jay Rosen on What CNN Should Do With Itself in Prime-Time (http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2010/03/31/what_cnn_should.html).

Not bad ideas at all. Thanks for the link, though I doubt CNN will take any of these suggestions to heart.

My own disenchantment with CNN was driven more by their move towards fluff. It seemed as though every time I turned it on, they were covering some baby-trapped-in-a-hole type of story or a "news you can use!!!" piece of tripe, like "Are the toxins in your burritos killing you???"

And as far as their political coverage went, they struck me as the worst of the lazy "balanced" approach. Jon Stewart was dead right (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2007/11/hard-to-believe-anyone-would-pony-up.html) about Crossfire, but that was far from the only problem area.

I'd like to see CNN try really hard to get back to a serious news approach, and accept lower ratings until they rebuild their credibility. Seems like Ted Turner or some other billionaire could foot the bill for a five-year experiment along those lines.

bjkeefe
04-05-2010, 01:48 PM
Didn't know where else to post this, but it is CNN related.

Ross Douthat wrote this NYT column titled "Can CNN Be Saved? (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/05/opinion/05douthat.html?hp)", to which my response is: Ross, are you nuts? Screw Glenn Beck. What you are looking for is bloggingheads.tv!!

You and TBogg (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2010/04/04/a-spoonful-of-crazy-makes-the-ratings-go-up/) think alike! Maybe!

uncle ebeneezer
04-05-2010, 01:58 PM
Great piece by Rosen. I hope we see him again on bhTv soon.

bjkeefe
04-05-2010, 02:00 PM
You and TBogg (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2010/04/04/a-spoonful-of-crazy-makes-the-ratings-go-up/) think alike! Maybe!

Meanwhile, CNN continues to put (http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/cnn-joins-great-american-tea-party-express) the "so-called" in "so-called liberal media."

(h/t: marindenver (http://www.rumproast.com/index.php/site/comments/today_in_tea_party_news_._._/))

TwinSwords
04-05-2010, 03:31 PM
Meanwhile, CNN continues to put (http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/cnn-joins-great-american-tea-party-express) the "so-called" in "so-called liberal media."

From your link:

CNN pimps Great American Tea Party Express PR and Propaganda Tour

If you gave a Tea Party and no one came, would it still be news? If, on the other hand, Koch Industries and the RNC gave a Tea Party and a handful of people came, would it still be news? Or would reporting it three or four times a day make it news?

Since the kickoff of the TeaParty Express Tour, CNN has embedded a small press corps in their custom-painted "CNN Express" press bus for the sole purpose of following teabaggers around the country , reporting 3-4 times daily on the activities of the corporate-funded, RNC-connected Tea Party Express.

This clip from Wednesday boggled my mind. You can see how few there are at this rally, but watch as Ali Velshi and Ed Lavandera turn it into a "movement."

So, this is a corporate-sponsored, corporate-planned, and corporate-managed faux-grassroots "movement," it only draws tiny handfuls of people at each event, and yet is given massive, around the clock promotion and coverage on Fox News and, apparently, CNN.

There is an axis of (1) wealthy special interests, (2) their media enablers, and (3) angry, highly activated, far-right conservatives. Together this team is busy creating an alternate reality that on television is supposed to look like a massive popular uprising in opposition to Obama and the Democrats.

If you look at Memeorandum today (http://www.memeorandum.com/100405/h1520)*, the entire page is filled with links to stories about how the tea party movement is not a far right movement of Republicans upset at being out of power, but a "mainstream" movement, "generally representative of the public at large," despite the actual data in the poll on which the entire fraud is based.

— JUST AS WE THOUGHT: TEABAGGERS ARE REPUBLICANS (http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2010/04/just-as-we-thought-teabaggers-are.html)





*Note: Link shows a snapshot of memeorandum at 3:20 PM ET, April 5, 2010.

bjkeefe
04-05-2010, 04:00 PM
Didn't know where else to post this, but it is CNN related.

Ross Douthat wrote this NYT column titled "Can CNN Be Saved? (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/05/opinion/05douthat.html?hp)", to which my response is: Ross, are you nuts? Screw Glenn Beck. What you are looking for is bloggingheads.tv!!

In Ross's defense, Mona reminds me of a CNN hire almost as full of win (http://highclearing.com/index.php/archives/2010/03/29/10943).

bjkeefe
04-05-2010, 05:32 PM
Meanwhile, CNN continues to put (http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/cnn-joins-great-american-tea-party-express) the "so-called" in "so-called liberal media."

Also on the SCLM front, TWiBbing B'head Bill Scher takes the NY Times to task (http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010041405/nyt-still-wont-report-obamas-reform-agenda-would-cut-deficit). Righteous.

listener
04-05-2010, 06:23 PM
Also on the SCLM front, TWiBbing B'head Bill Scher takes the NY Times to task (http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010041405/nyt-still-wont-report-obamas-reform-agenda-would-cut-deficit). Righteous.

Go, Bill!

listener
04-05-2010, 06:28 PM
In Ross's defense, Mona reminds me of a CNN hire almost as full of win (http://highclearing.com/index.php/archives/2010/03/29/10943).

Heh. So that's who the "goat fvcking" meme originated with? It keeps cropping up in things I read and hear, and I always wondered what that was all about.

bjkeefe
04-05-2010, 06:38 PM
Heh. So that's who the "goat fvcking" meme originated with? It keeps cropping up in things I read and hear, and I always wondered what that was all about.

No, it predated him (e.g. (http://www.google.com/search?q=kaus+goats)) but I think the GHEMRotRSTF was the first person ever to use it without speaking tongue in cheek.

listener
04-05-2010, 08:40 PM
No, it predated him (e.g. (http://www.google.com/search?q=kaus+goats)) but I think the GHEMRotRSTF was the first person ever to use it without speaking tongue in cheek.

Oh, so the phrase was originally intended as a parody of a certain brand of over-the-top political slander, currently associated with one political party's tactics more than the other?

"GHEMRotRSTF"?? WTF?? Okay, Brendan, now you're just toying with me.

(post-googling) ...ah, I think I see now. Grand High Exalted Mystic Ruler of the RedState Trike Force -- is that a special pet nickname that you devised for Mr. Erickson?

bjkeefe
04-05-2010, 11:15 PM
Oh, so the phrase was originally intended as a parody of a certain brand of over-the-top political slander, currently associated with one political party's tactics more than the other?

More or less. It has connections, or at least resonance, with an old Lyndon Johnson story (http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/07/31/new-tactic-make-the-target-of-a-smear-prove-its-not-true/#comment-57424).

"GHEMRotRSTF"?? WTF?? Okay, Brendan, now you're just toying with me.

(post-googling) ...ah, I think I see now. Grand High Exalted Mystic Ruler of the RedState Trike Force -- is that a special pet nickname that you devised for Mr. Erickson?

Yep. I had this notion (fantasy) he'd come across it somehow and wonder what it meant, and it would eat at him and eat at him. But now the secret is out. Oh, well.

If you're interested, the first part of the name comes from here (http://www.freemasonry.bcy.ca/fiction/fraternities/raccoons.html) and the second part comes from here (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/01/watch-out-liberals.html).

listener
04-06-2010, 12:20 AM
More or less. It has connections, or at least resonance, with an old Lyndon Johnson story (http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/07/31/new-tactic-make-the-target-of-a-smear-prove-its-not-true/#comment-57424).

HA! Thanks for the history lesson. I actually recently watched the PBS documentary on LBJ, which I thought was very well done. What a complex, and ultimately tragic character. He was responsible for so much good, and so much evil. I was among those crowds that shouted, "hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?" Yet watching that documentary, I came to have a greater appreciation of this man who came of age in the segregated South of the 1930s, yet became a champion of civil rights, who struggled in his conscience about the Vietnam war, yet came to make tragically wrong decisions about it, and who, in the end, had such a difficult time coming to terms with it that he drank himself to death. I'd recommend seeing the entire documentary, but if you at least take a look at this 5-minute excerpt (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents/video/lbj_26_wm.html#v251)about his final days, including his final address in 1972 on the topic of civil rights, I think you will find it well worth your time.



Yep. I had this notion (fantasy) he'd come across it somehow and wonder what it meant, and it would eat at him and eat at him. But now the secret is out. Oh, well.

If you're interested, the first part of the name comes from here (http://www.freemasonry.bcy.ca/fiction/fraternities/raccoons.html) and the second part comes from here (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/01/watch-out-liberals.html).

Long live the Raccoon Lodge! Woo-woo!! [official Raccoon salute]

And the second photo was hilarious -- loved the square wheel (where on earth did you find that?).

bjkeefe
04-06-2010, 09:42 AM
In Ross's defense, Mona reminds me of a CNN hire almost as full of win (http://highclearing.com/index.php/archives/2010/03/29/10943).

And how could I forget Mr. "Whitey Tape" himself? From the No Quarter sidebar:

Larry Johnson's recent TV appearances, with videos: CNN's CNN Newsroom, January 8, 2010 * CNN's CNN Newsroom, January 4, 2010 * Larry King Live, December 31, 2009 * CNN's American Morning, December 30, 2009 * CNN's CNN Newsroom, December 29, 2009 * CNN's Larry King Live, December 29, 2009 * PBS's Newshour, December 28, 2009 * CNN's CNN Tonight, December 28, 2009

(Kevin K. (http://www.rumproast.com/index.php/site/comments/if_this_is_a_a_new_vision_of_feminism/)'s post on an associated topic reminded me.)

(? (http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=larry_johnsons_strange_trip))

bjkeefe
04-06-2010, 01:04 PM
In Ross's defense, Mona reminds me of a CNN hire almost as full of win (http://highclearing.com/index.php/archives/2010/03/29/10943).

And speaking of Ross, here is some important analysis (http://wonkette.com/414671/ross-douthats-imaginary-cnn-should-feature-people-from-the-right-and-left-debating-news-topics) of his vision for CNN, in the form of a "text diavlog," from two of your Wonkettes. Bonus: one of the best Wolf Blitzer pictures ever.

Also, I wonder what David Shuster (http://wonkette.com/414674/msnbcs-david-shuster-in-super-big-trouble-for-secret-cnn-show) is thinking right now. Hope that pilot was a killer, for his sake (http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2010/04/msnbc-is-more-annoyed-than-ever-by-david-shuster.html)!

listener
04-06-2010, 02:48 PM
And speaking of Ross, here is some important analysis (http://wonkette.com/414671/ross-douthats-imaginary-cnn-should-feature-people-from-the-right-and-left-debating-news-topics) of his vision for CNN, in the form of a "text diavlog," from two of your Wonkettes. Bonus: one of the best Wolf Blitzer pictures ever.

Nice picture. When I've seen Douthat speak, he seems reasonably intelligent. In his op-ed columns, though, he does seem to say the darndest things.

And, quoting TwinSwords:
I want to take issue, though, with the Douthat's claim that "conservatives are only invited on Rachel Maddow’s show when they have something nasty to say about Republicans." Maddow is constantly trying to get conservative guests on her show, and while many refuse to appear with her, more than a few do show up.

Yes, I've seen RM repeatedly beg certain conservatives to come on to her show. It's something she does fairly regularly. So, indeed, Douthat pulled that "fact" out of his gluteus maximus (no doubt in the interest of appearing to be "fair and balanced.")

bjkeefe
04-07-2010, 02:25 PM
In Ross's defense, Mona reminds me of a CNN hire almost as full of win (http://highclearing.com/index.php/archives/2010/03/29/10943).

It looks like the CNN brass is now mad (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=158066#post158066) at another of their employees, for quoting this, their newest hire, in asking a question of the White House.

Snark notwithstanding, I think Jim Newell (http://wonkette.com/414697/cnn-wingnuts-furious-at-bill-press) has got it exactly right:

... since CNN MUST NEVER APPEAR too far to either side of the debate, they have now smeared Bill Press.

bjkeefe
04-07-2010, 08:44 PM
Not bad ideas at all. Thanks for the link, though I doubt CNN will take any of these suggestions to heart.

My own disenchantment with CNN was driven more by their move towards fluff. It seemed as though every time I turned it on, they were covering some baby-trapped-in-a-hole type of story or a "news you can use!!!" piece of tripe, like "Are the toxins in your burritos killing you???"

But, oh yes, it can get worse. Lots worse: "In Quest For ‘Hard News,’ CNN Investigates: ‘Homosexuality, Is It A Problem In Need Of A Cure?’ (http://thinkprogress.org/2010/04/06/cnn-gay-cali/)."

Just in case some of you don't feel like clicking the link, I'll take the risk of stepping on TP's thunder by quoting the closing paragraph:

Clearly, “the best political team on television” was just not at its best, proving that CNN can’t be “trusted” to do even the most preliminary background research on its guests. The network provided the self-proclaimed former homosexual with a platform to promote his organization, the International Healing Foundation, without once challenging his credentials or claims of rehabilitation. In reality, [Richard] Cohen has been kicked out of the The American Counseling Association (http://www.alternet.org/rights/144475/rachel_maddow_demolishes_therapist_who_claims_he_c an_make_her_straight/?page=4) and currently operates without any professional license or accreditation. His views on homosexuality have been discredited by every established medical organization and his ideas about gays are apparently only taken seriously by CNN bookers and producers.

Maddow once hoisted this guy with his own petard, if memory serves, back around the time US Christianists were traveling to Uganda to applaud that government's great new idea: the death penalty for being gay. [Added: yep (http://www.towleroad.com/2009/12/rachel-maddow-eviscerates-exgay-richard-cohen-on-uganda.html).] And yet, here is CNN, giving him a platform, and worse, interviewing him uncritically.

(h/t: DougJ (http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/04/07/its-like-a-disease-without-any-cure/))

listener
04-07-2010, 08:59 PM
Oh yeah, I remember seeing him on Maddow (you know, the gal who Douthat says never has any conservative guests). That was pretty good.

Whatfur
04-07-2010, 09:23 PM
Also good for the neighborhood.
86

bjkeefe
04-07-2010, 09:51 PM
Also good for the neighborhood.
86

You know who else (http://twitter.com/bjkeefe/status/11716331035) doesn't pay any federal income tax?

bjkeefe
04-08-2010, 01:29 PM
You know who else (http://twitter.com/bjkeefe/status/11716331035) doesn't pay any federal income tax?

And see also (http://wonkette.com/414706/new-study-on-taxes-shows-old-statistic-that-will-be-misused-again).

The right — and yes, the Heritage Foundation has its insightful quotes all over this — love to take this data and claim, “half the country pays no taxes.” They pay their payroll taxes, and state taxes, and local taxes, and mortgage payments ,and insurance premiums, and whatever else that other people CAN AFFORD WITH ALL OF THEIR MONEY. How much do people primarily earning from large capital gains pay in federal income tax, btw?

All that this statistic shows — and yes, deductions and credits may be over the top at the moment, but it’s a fucking great depression is why — is how wide the wealth gap has become here, because 50% of the country absolutely needs most every cent to maintain the basic consumption levels required to keep this economy propelling forward. Want to spread the tax base more broadly? Spread the wealth, baby!