Beck's Ratings Crater

weeelllll... I respectfully disagree and that in no way implies I'm a fan of 'Faux'. I'd define Maddow's derogatory segment on Beck to be just about the same thing. For that matter, Jon Stewart (who I adore) and O'Reilly (who I do not) sniping back & forth also qualifies under that umbrella IMO. It's like they've all resorted to eating their own 'tribe' (Buz' description is also very apt!).

Entertainment, for some, perhaps... but NOT news (on numerous 'news' programs/stations).

You're missing the point: You don't see correspondents on MSNBC or CBS or NBC or ABC or CNN interview each other. On these networks, the correspondents convey the news. They don't consider themselves the news. On Faux, they have a bunch of windbags that seem to think their opinion is the news. Can you say douchebags?

While I do enjoy watching the idiots get called out, I could definitely do with less "news" about other pundits on the shows.

Granted, it's a comedy treasure trove and you need to call BS on them, but it seems like more and more of the "news" is about what other "news" organizations are saying.

You're missing the point: You don't see correspondents on MSNBC or CBS or NBC or ABC or CNN interview each other. On these networks, the correspondents convey the news. They don't consider themselves the news. On Faux, they have a bunch of windbags that seem to think their opinion is the news. Can you say douchebags?

s/convey/distort/

30ashopper, it is convenient for some to ignore the fact that all networks, not just Fox (the right term) more often than not, report controversial news with their network's particular bias. Being retired and pretty much a homebody, I watch a lot of news and opinion programs. Sadly, they all have a point they wish to make and have accepted.

Yes, it is impossible to not have some sort of perspective/bias when reporting or commenting on the news/events/politics.

The difference lies in HOW it is done, how much editing/control there is, and whether the opposing viewpoint is welcomed or even allowed to be heard.

Bias becomes a non-issue when the show welcomes guests of all political parties/opinions to debate topics and airs unedited interviews and segments.

Bias is a huge issue when only one opinion is ever allowed to be heard and the pundit will only debate something when they have total control over the final product.

My favorite news show has a diverse guest list that reads as a who's who of national and international figures from all parties - maybe even mostly Republicans.

They keep asking Beck to come on and have an unedited discussion - he won't.

Did anyone catch the O'Reilly Factor about a week ago when Bill O'Reilly interviewed Glenn Beck. Interesting...
YouTube - Glenn Beck on Bill O'Reilly (January 31, 2011)

.
Politifact check on Beck's claim that "the Muslim Brotherhood wants to declare war on Israel" ...

PolitiFact | Glenn Beck says Muslim Brotherhood wants to declare war on Israel

"Beck informed viewers that "a top official in the Muslim Brotherhood has just said that ? ?The people should be prepared for war against Israel.?"

Who was that top official? Beck?s website pointed to a Feb. 1, 2011, item in the Jerusalem Post that had a "leading member" of the Brotherhood, Muhammad Ghannem, declaring that "the people should be prepared for war against Israel." The next day a Washington Times editorial picked up the quote, saying it "succinctly summed up" the Muslim Brotherhood's foreign policy. Then Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., repeated the fiery words in a floor speech.

The Jerusalem Post piece cited an interview Ghannem gave to an Arabic-language Iranian network, Al-Alam. With deft use of Google Translate we were able to verify that Ghannem was quoted saying something along those lines in a Jan. 31, 2011, piece on Al-Alam?s website. The key question then becomes whether Ghannem can speak for the sprawling Muslim Brotherhood.

"I have never heard of him," said Dr. Jason Brownlee, a scholar with the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington, D.C. "It?s a big organization, and there may be people who say things like that, but that doesn?t mean it?s policy. It doesn?t jibe with my experience visiting Egypt and doing research on the Muslim Brotherhood for over a decade."

Three other experts on the Muslim Brotherhood all agreed. "The MB is a massive organization with many different ideological trends within it," explained Dr. Joshua Stacher, a political scientist at Kent State. "I have never heard anyone on or off the record say they ?wish to declare war on Israel.? " None were familiar with Ghannem, who we confirmed is not among the the Brotherhood?s policy elite, the 16-member Guidance Bureau."


.

30ashopper, it is convenient for some to ignore the fact that all networks, not just Fox (the right term) more often than not, report controversial news with their network's particular bias. Being retired and pretty much a homebody, I watch a lot of news and opinion programs. Sadly, they all have a point they wish to make and have accepted.

I know, and it's all so obvious. I guess we're just a little more sensitive to it thanks to all the experience we've had over the years. 😀

People have always been interested in more than the facts surrounding world events. They are looking to form opinions, make moral judgments, and trying to predict future events. This is human nature. The only difference is that today, more people have time to do this because there are so many news sources and so many means of fact checking. We are all on a much more equal footing as far as getting the facts of a particular news story. This frees us up to dig deeper into the philosophical and moral implications of a particular news story. This has become an obsession and an addiction.

The diversity of opinion NOT expressed here is amazing!

You say that a lot. I don't see it. If this was true it wouldn't be possible to get into arguments so easily.

I posted a dissertation on another thread refuting your claim that this forum is biased. I laid out an argument for why I believe it is quite balanced. I even included references to members by their screennames along with commentary on where they live on the political continuum. No one challenged my point that we pretty much have a yin for every yang.

But yet- we still hear how this "place" lacks diversity of opinion.

:roll:

Whining about bias is easier than forming a coherent argument and defending your ideas.

One I hear the bias excuse, I then assume they have nothing of note to add or cannot defend what they are saying.

SB44 and Geo, count the number of people making consrvative responses on this thread and then get back to me. SB44, I don't "whine" about bias and many choose to ignore the "experience" 30ashopper and I express. I am glad you are all willing to learn on your own. My day is over and I thank God every day that He saw fit to give me the strength to learn and accept that education. As I said on another thread recently, it has made me comfortable in my own skin. I hope all can say the same. Oh, and Geo, I was not talking about this "place" lacking diversity, I was talking about this thread. But since you mention it, maybe it is true. Also, I missed your thread about the "ying" and "yang" but you're right, I would not have responded. Why respond to the obvious...just learn to accept it, or in some cases attempt to change it. Sometimes that is not possible. The sobriety prayer comes to mind. Please excuse me now, I am missing Glen Beck.

What the hell is a "conservative" response?

You are WAY too caught up in labels.

I specifically mentioned Huckabee as one of those on the right whose criticism/call for civility was possibly causing a decrease in Beck's ratings.

He's a Republican. He said it on Faux to Beck's target audience. Is he too "liberal" to count? :roll:

What the hell is a "conservative" response?

You are WAY too caught up in labels.

I specifically mentioned Huckabee as one of those on the right whose criticism/call for civility was possibly causing a decrease in Beck's ratings.

He's a Republican. He said it on Faux to Beck's target audience. Is he too "liberal" to count? :roll:

I guess I did not make myself clear. I am sorry. The conservative response was meant to apply for those of us who are conservative on this board and posted a comment and how few of us there are. Regardless of what you say, they are few and far between and that is fine with me. I am probably, as you say, into labels too much but it is just one of the ways to determine where people stand on important issues. I am not so uninformed as to not realize there are many other determinations of one's philosophies and beliefs. Beck will do just fine without any help from me and, yes, there are many things he says that I disagree with as well as many where I think he is dead on. Huckabee is anything but a liberal. This may come as a surprise to you but Conservatives are quite capable of disagreeing with one another and quite often do. Glenda recently told me to quit reading things into her posts. If the shoe fits....at times we all do it.

You say that a lot. I don't see it. If this was true it wouldn't be possible to get into arguments so easily.

I posted a dissertation on another thread refuting your claim that this forum is biased. I laid out an argument for why I believe it is quite balanced. I even included references to members by their screennames along with commentary on where they live on the political continuum. No one challenged my point that we pretty much have a yin for every yang.

But yet- we still hear how this "place" lacks diversity of opinion.

:roll:

How'd I miss that? What thread? Did I get any time in the lime light? 😀