Ed Koppel: Olbermann, O'Reilly And The Death Of Re

Ted Koppel: Olbermann, O'Reilly and the death of real news

Perhaps the most succinct and accurate account I have encountered of what happened to news over the last 40 years.
Discuss?
edit: dunno why it cut out the T for the title :/
oh well.

I only clicked on this because it said Ed.

/disappoint.

bump.
wasn't able to talk about this much last night due to impeding zzz's.

Someone posted this url in the OP of another thread a few days ago. Does little more than slander one actual journalist by putting their name in a list full of people everyone already knows is full of partisan hacks whom only the fringe believe have any integrity. Given the attitude of some people on this site trying to justify watching either as a means to become more well informed citizen, this story does little good for most readers on this site. The networks have all the incentive they need to not change everytime someone tells posters to "read between the lines" instead of finding less partisan sources to begin with.

I didn't notice it because Excelior is a noob and didn't put it in hypertext.
but thank you for replying and telling me this...i would have not known otherwise lol.

Aww Vivv thinks just like me. <3

you can call me vivi for short.

I wouldn't have minded a more substantive discussion about that story anyway. I just don't believe most people who post in the political threads understand what an objective opinion is, let alone have one. It's very annoying to me because I respect Rachel Maddow and her name does not belong in a list with others in that story. I'd recommend anyone who believes that because she is on MSNBC she belongs on that list actually watch her show and decide for yourself.

I think she got thrown into the fray more due to her parent network than anything.

/nod

They had more convincing names they didn't use in that article iirc though. Like Ed Schultz (sp?)?

Ted Koppel is getting to be a pretty old fella though.
I wonder if he has a literal ***list...

For those who don't want to read the whole article, here is a summary:

This site is overrun with platitude quoting posters trying to generalize everything at the same time that they pretend they don't want such a polarized government. THAT is humorous. Not to say your funny quote doesn't fit that story well.

People should stop pretending that quoting others is a substantive contribution rather than a demonstration that the media has you absorbing their every word. I'd have rather encouraged some seemingly illiterate bigots (hint: FDA alcohol+caffeine thread) to actually learn to read, and read this half-baked story and learn to like reading. Maybe enough to even read content that doesn't sound like it came straight from Fox News.

The moral of the story: Lock yourself in your house, throw away anything electronic, shut the blinds, crouch in the fetal position in a corner of a room, glue up your ears, duct tape your eyes and just wait for Armageddon. You can get up to pee every once in a while, I suppose.

Moral of the story is: If ever there was a time to notice when the media is posturing itself more for it's own benefit rather than that of its readers, this is it.

This isn't news, this isn't new, this isn't interesting. This IS an early attempt to cash in on non-partisan anti-government sentiment in the wake of the next couple years where we all know already that there will be little more than partisan gridlock in Washington.

Ever since Greed became the fourth branch of our government, we've had experts with axes to grind on both sides. This includes everyone from the higher-ups to the [insert name here] the [insert job title here]s.

And of course, the American public will eat it up like candy, as they have since communication became more than word-of-mouth.

So we can sit here and discuss who's corrupt in each and every single post about politics, but it's all going to point towards the same conclusion.

I've made no hints towards anything other than to say that I am a registered Democrat. Sure, they're just as bad, but at least the Dems seem to have their insane drivel hidden from the rest of the world (unlike the GoP), so I'll take the cliche`d lesser of two evils.

There's nothing wrong with stating which side you're on, it only brings about others' inquisitions as to why. It can reaffirm or shift your position on politics. It's a good thing. I have no problem saying I'm a liberal, a registered Democrat, I'd vote Obama over McCain (and especially Palin) in light of what he has accomplished since taking office. If you have a problem with that let's talk :D

On the contrary. I'd agree with that, actually. I was for Obama since I heard he was running. And he's done a bang-up job for himself. Unfortunately in this country, popularity is everything, and the Big O's points have been bottoming out. It's unfortunate, because I couldn't be prouder of the guy. He's doing way better than High-Blood-Pressure McGee and Little-Miss-Retard ever could, in light of the circumstances.

McCain: RRRRRR! This economy is pissing me the *** off!!!
Palin: Ooh, I know! Let's go shoot some Raccoons! You betcha!

This is how I imagine his presidency would be like. Anyway...

I'm down for another 4 years with Obama, but the numbers are pointing elsewhere. It sucks, but that's the long and short of it.

You forgot to put your flame shield on :(

/equips trollsword+1
You badmouthed Palin!
if you aren't with us you're against us!
liberal! blah blah blah you're killing the ecomony!

Holy ***, there's bias in my news?

I had no idea.

It's good I re-posted this article then!

Vinvv has shown thee the light!
(Btw Vinvv I wasn't taking a shot at you earlier ><)

i know hunny bunny<3