Thoughts and opinions from the Rocky Mountains
Yep, that’s CBS’s Nora O’Donnell lamenting that they, “…gave them everything they wanted, and we got nothing.” Seems Ms. O’Donnell has forgotten that the job of the media is to report the facts, not promote an agenda.
Television’s days are numbered, and TV news cannot survive if reporters choose propaganda over journalism. Something else will take their place, and I’m curious to see what it is.
HT: Breitbart
Lamborn presents a really good case. However, the measure failed. Two problems here:
This can, and should, pass, but it won’t until sometime next year. Even then, I’d expect the Senate and the President to stop it. Government shouldn’t fund the media, but it’s an uphill battle to fix that
LA Times has the story here.
My $.02: I don’t think it will work. It’s always been my experience that, unless it’s someone you spend very little time around, it’s easy to figure out which of your friends/coworkers/family/etc. will drink enough while out at a bar or whatever to be legally drunk, and it’s also easy to figure out which of those people will try to drive themselves home. This means there’s no “shame” to be had, as there’s no shock in it. There might be a handful of business contacts that look down on you, but that’s about it. I don’t see it producing enough shame to keep anyone from becoming a repeat offender.
That being said, I’m not sure Palin has a chance in 2012. Her base followers love her, but those that hate her REALLY hate her. I think the Republican candidate with the best chance of winning is someone not on the national scene right now. They’re probably big in state politics somewhere, but I suspect they’ll show up out of the blue and really rev people up…sort of like Obama did in 2008.
Bonus: Did you catch Erin Burnett’s statement, “…is there anything good about drinking a full-calorie soda…?” Now, I realize the segment dealt with sugary drinks, but any dietitian I’ve ever seen talking on the subject has said that regular soda is safer than diet soda, as the diet version is just a can of chemicals. However, Ms. Burnett’s question very subtly clears diet soda of any health risk. Inadvertent, or is this anchor a diet soda drinker?
According to Sean Paige, this ad by Citizens Against Government Waste is being rejected by major media outlets. Check it out and let me know what you think. Are they overreacting, or has CAGW taken their campaign a step too far?
Glenn Beck, among others, has been reporting on Virginia Ironside’s recent comments about smothering suffering children on the BBC:
Needless to say, the outrage is pretty widespread. I always figured a mom would want her kid CURED to end the suffering, not dead. Seems I’m not alone.
However, something else in the Guardian’s article about this controversy caught my eye:
Her latest comments were made as doctors prepared to lobby for a change in the law to allow people to help the terminally ill to die.
Well, a quick google search yielded this: “Doctors and nurses launch campaign for right to help terminally ill to end their lives”. Basically, a doctors’ group in the UK wants to legalize assisted suicide. Now, it could be argued that a person deserves the right to decide when to end their own life. I’m not denying that. I’m just a little scared as to what doors this will lead us to open next.
I’m no conspiracy theorist, but I do find myself wondering why such a big deal is being made of Swine Flu when it’s no more dangerous than the plain ol’ seasonal flu.
From CBS:
It’s not “press coverage” that bothers President Obama. It’s “cable chatter.”
Basically, he’s griping that the complaints of cable pundits don’t amount to “honest debate,” but are nothing more than “nitpicking.”
I’m not concerned about him being bothered; let’s face it, any public figure is going to get criticism ranging from legitimate debate to the absolute “so-and-so is an idiot” statements of opinion that come from people who just like to espouse their opinions. It comes with the job.
My bigger concern is where he goes from here. If his annoyance ends here, excellent. If he tries to silence the chatter, that’d be one of the worst moves he could make. I guess I’ll just sit back and watch!
From CQ Politics:
A bill that would delay the digital television transition until summer is expected to clear the House on Tuesday.
Why? The TV stations have done their job getting the word out, the percentage of people that are aware of the change is about 90 (which is unheard of!). Why?
Oh, it’s because the government dropped its end of the deal and needs more time. Never mind the cost to the stations…
I have an easier answer, by the way: people without the voucher for a converter buy the thing at full price & keep the receipt. When the voucher arrives, treat it like a mail-in rebate. Way smarter than screwing an already-hurting industry out of millions more dollars.
Admittedly, he caught Nora off guard. However, this should’ve been said a looong time ago:
HT: Copious Dissent
So, there’s a bit of a phishing scam going on over at Twitter right now, and I’m pretty sure Fox News has become a victim:
In the world of television programming, sex sells — perhaps a little too well with young viewers, a new study suggests.
The gist of this article is that teens who watch a lot of sex-filled shows on television are more likely to get pregnant.
Like it or not, television plays a part in shaping the way you view the world. When you’re young and impressionable, it can only be worse.
I remember watching Dan Rather covering the 2000 Presidential Elections, and let’s face it, there was a point sometime that night where Dan seemed to lose his mind. He busted out all of the similes, metaphors, and old country sayings he could. Some didn’t see to make sense, but all were pretty darn entertaining.
Well, one of those saying has never made any sense at all to me: if a frog had side pockets, he’d carry a gun. I wrote that one off to Dan having been on the air for several hours straight, but it turns out he left out part of the saying!
Courtesy of Bob Schieffer’s most recent column over at CBS News
If it comes down to one of those “what if” situations, try the old bullfrog parable: “If bull frogs had side pockets they’d carry six shooters and wouldn’t be afraid of snakes.”
I don’t remember Dan’s context to know if he used the saying correctly, but it’s nice to know I didn’t sit there watching the guy slip off into insanity that night 8 years ago.
Anyway, check out Schieffer’s article. It’s a fun read from one of the more genuine people in network news.
Democratic Convention ratings tepid
By Michele Greppi and Andrew KrukowskiPreliminary national television ratings data from Nielsen Media Research indicate that interest in the first night of the Democratic convention as covered by the three major broadcast networks was tepid, to say the least.
Article Continues… (Crain’s New York Business)
Don’t get me wrong, as a registered Republican who leans Libertarian (mmmmm, small government), I’d love to say this means nobody cares about the Democratic Party. Love to.
However, I simply can’t. For starters, this is a preliminary rating, and those often change once more information comes in. In addition, this article doesn’t yet contain cable ratings, which could significantly increase the numbers of viewers. That’s most likely the biggest problem with a boat-load of networks carrying the same event; data collection on viewership requires more math.
Second, even though most polls say the majority of people still get their information from television, the number that find their news online is slowly growing. Let’s face it, why should I sit through an hour or more of network coverage when I can get a summary online almost immediately after it happens?
Third, I suspect that most casual viewers/voters won’t tune in until Thursday. Why listen to a bunch of filler when Barack is the main event?
While I’d love to say “nobody cares about the Democratic Party,” truthfully, I’d much rather see both the Democratic and Republican National Conventions kick some Olympic booty when it comes to ratings. Why? Because that would mean people cared more about the welfare of others and the direction this country is headed than about trivial entertainment. That would be a great day, indeed!
Scott McClellan Originally Planned to Attack Media, Defend Bush
By Matthew SheffieldAlthough today his book is being touted by left-wing reporters and pundits, his initial plans for the project show former White House press secretary Scott McClellan intended to take a much different approach, one that was more sympathetic to President Bush but also quite hard on the “liberal elites” of the Washington press corps and their “hostility” toward the administration.
Article Continues… (Newsbusters)
I have to be honest, I’m not quite sure what to make of this. Is the advance on a book deal sweet enough to sell out your own values? Does someone have some dirt on McClellan? I eagerly wait to see if the ‘busters can find anything else on this.
HT: LGF
