Cable News: Who covered what?

AndyMarquisLIVE

New Member
This study shows MSNBC had more Decision 2008 coverage and Iraq war coverage than either FOX News or CNN, despite being live for fewer hours.

FOX News had the most coverage of Anna Nicole Smith.
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
AndyMarquisLIVE said:
This study shows MSNBC had more Decision 2008 coverage and Iraq war coverage than either FOX News or CNN, despite being live for fewer hours.

FOX News had the most coverage of Anna Nicole Smith.
I'm on to this also. I've been complaining to my wife about how tabloid Fox has been getting lately, and I'm quite sick of it! O'Reilly and Gretta are the worst when it comes to this.
 

AndyMarquisLIVE

New Member
awpitt said:
According to what ratings? Just wondering. I try to watch'm all to ballence out the bias.
But all you need if FOX News - fair and balanced. :lmao:

I try to watch FOX and MSNBC - but these commentators on FOX are loony right-wing neocon whack jobs. :jameo:
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
AndyMarquisLIVE said:
But all you need if FOX News - fair and balanced. :lmao:

I try to watch FOX and MSNBC - but these commentators on FOX are loony right-wing neocon whack jobs. :jameo:
You mean as apposed to the left-wing looney whack jobs on MSNBC?
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
AndyMarquisLIVE said:
but these commentators on FOX are loony right-wing neocon whack jobs.
Yeah, that Susan Estrich - what a right-winger that babe is.

And Al Sharpton - woof! I can't hardly watch him when he gets all neocon and like.

Not to mention that crazy right-wing loony, Bob Beckel.

Get a clue, Andy.
 

AndyMarquisLIVE

New Member
PsyOps said:
You mean as apposed to the left-wing looney whack jobs on MSNBC?
We've been over the MSNBC lineup.

Joe Scarborough (6-9am, 9pm)
Tucker Carlson (4pm, 6pm)

The only other evening anchors are Matthews (5pm and 7pm) and Olbermann (8pm).

As you can see, Scarborough has more air time than Matthews and Olbermann combined.

Anything else is documentaries.
 

AndyMarquisLIVE

New Member
PsyOps said:
I'm on to this also. I've been complaining to my wife about how tabloid Fox has been getting lately, and I'm quite sick of it! O'Reilly and Gretta are the worst when it comes to this.
O'reilly does 3 celebirty segments and then at the end of the show bashes MSNBC for covering celebirty news and not Iraq. :killingme
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
AndyMarquisLIVE said:
O'reilly does 3 celebirty segments and then at the end of the show bashes MSNBC for covering celebirty news and not Iraq. :killingme
I really stasrted loving O'Reilly but he just seems to be getting more and more attached to these tabloid stories. But he still have a more informed show than any other out there, tabloid aside.
 

hvp05

Methodically disorganized
PsyOps said:
I really stasrted loving O'Reilly but he just seems to be getting more and more attached to these tabloid stories.
Well, even a "tabloid" story can have value; it's all in how it's covered. For example, even the Paris case is interesting in a way... just not the way the masses tend to gobble it up.

You were right about Greta. Disappointing too, because I think she's intelligent, but she seems to become obsessed. Case in point, the Laci Peterson case; she covered it virtually non-stop from day 1 through the husband's conviction. Just Van Susteren's coverage drove me away from the case altogether.

Then, a few nights ago while covering the Kelsey Smith story, Van Susteren was talking with Smith's parents as they held a memorial 'celebration'. She asked a few questions about Smith, then she asked the father something like, "So this guy Edwin Hall... what a monster he is, huh?" There was a pause and the mother answered, "We'd really like to keep our focus on remembering Kelsey tonight." So Greta said, "I'll take that cue to close out." :rolleyes:
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
hvp05 said:
Well, even a "tabloid" story can have value; it's all in how it's covered. For example, even the Paris case is interesting in a way... just not the way the masses tend to gobble it up.

I realize everyone has their own taste for “news”. I found the Paris story ridiculously stupid. Watching all those vultures climb all over the police car that was transporting her to jail, nearly getting run over, just to get a stupid picture of her is indicative of a culture that is obsessed and addicted to Hollywood.

You were right about Greta. Disappointing too, because I think she's intelligent, but she seems to become obsessed. Case in point, the Laci Peterson case; she covered it virtually non-stop from day 1 through the husband's conviction. Just Van Susteren's coverage drove me away from the case altogether.

Then, a few nights ago while covering the Kelsey Smith story, Van Susteren was talking with Smith's parents as they held a memorial 'celebration'. She asked a few questions about Smith, then she asked the father something like, "So this guy Edwin Hall... what a monster he is, huh?" There was a pause and the mother answered, "We'd really like to keep our focus on remembering Kelsey tonight." So Greta said, "I'll take that cue to close out."

I don’t really care to watch Greta. She made her mark in the OJ case which explains her venue of reporting (if you really want to call it that). But, deeper than that, is this where FoxNews is headed? Fox and Friends comes off to me as just another tabloid magazine anymore. They are fun to watch and I suppose I take them of the other cable news morning shows, but I just get sick of all the nonsense stories they dredge up. But I guess thet’re not number one for nothing. Just give me the honest-to-goodness news. PLEASE!
 

AndyMarquisLIVE

New Member
hvp05 said:
Well, even a "tabloid" story can have value; it's all in how it's covered. For example, even the Paris case is interesting in a way... just not the way the masses tend to gobble it up.

You were right about Greta. Disappointing too, because I think she's intelligent, but she seems to become obsessed. Case in point, the Laci Peterson case; she covered it virtually non-stop from day 1 through the husband's conviction. Just Van Susteren's coverage drove me away from the case altogether.

Then, a few nights ago while covering the Kelsey Smith story, Van Susteren was talking with Smith's parents as they held a memorial 'celebration'. She asked a few questions about Smith, then she asked the father something like, "So this guy Edwin Hall... what a monster he is, huh?" There was a pause and the mother answered, "We'd really like to keep our focus on remembering Kelsey tonight." So Greta said, "I'll take that cue to close out." :rolleyes:
The Paris Hilton case is actually very big for politics. A lot of interesting questions were brought up about who does and should have control of the jails and all sorts of things.

I see some major changes after Paris gets out over in L.A. County.

I'd like to know what the actual number of those who violate probation that get incarcarated is. We've got two totally different stories going on here.

IF Paris Hilton does have medical needs - there's no excuse for keeping her there. Problem is the Sheriff is refusing to take responsibility for his jail here.
 

awpitt

Main Streeter
AndyMarquisLIVE said:
IF Paris Hilton does have medical needs - there's no excuse for keeping her there.

If <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:smarttags" /><st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Paris</st1:place></st1:City> has medical problems, they can be dealt with by the jail's infirmary as would be the case with any other inmate. If it’s too serious for the infirmary, then she should be transported to a hospital until the condition is under control and then she can be transferred back to the jail.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:eek:ffice" /><o:p></o:p>
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
awpitt said:
If <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:smarttags" /><st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Paris</st1:place></st1:City> has medical problems, they can be dealt with by the jail's infirmary as would be the case with any other inmate. If it’s too serious for the infirmary, then she should be transported to a hospital until the condition is under control and then she can be transferred back to the jail.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:eek:ffice" /><o:p></o:p>
And there you have it!
 

AndyMarquisLIVE

New Member
awpitt said:
If <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:smarttags" /><st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Paris</st1:place></st1:City> has medical problems, they can be dealt with by the jail's infirmary as would be the case with any other inmate. If it’s too serious for the infirmary, then she should be transported to a hospital until the condition is under control and then she can be transferred back to the jail.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:eek:ffice" /><o:p></o:p>
If it's a psycholgical problem, than it's tougher.

But, she should be in a mental hospital, not at home.
 

AndyMarquisLIVE

New Member
PsyOps said:
I really stasrted loving O'Reilly but he just seems to be getting more and more attached to these tabloid stories. But he still have a more informed show than any other out there, tabloid aside.
O'Reilly's show is good entertainment. I love watching it from time to time, because I love to disagree with Bill. It's also great when Hannity and O'Reilly get these stupid morons who have no clue about anything on and slap them down.

Only O'Reilly, Hannity and Scarborough are good at slapping down these idiots. And that's fun to watch. :killingme

That's why O'Reilly's at number 1 though is because people love to watch, even if they hate the guy.
 
Top