With each passing day the Fox News Channel and its various hosts come under more and more fire from the Left.
Democrats and their media minions have actually accused FNC of stirring up hatred in the nation that could result in violence against President Obama.
With this in mind, Fox's leading personality Bill O'Reilly on Tuesday invited media analyst and former CBSer Bernie Goldberg to discuss these criticisms of the cable news leader and to see if they had any merit.
What ensued was a marvelous discussion about what Fox does well compared to its liberal competitors, as well as what opportunities exist for even better news coverage.
Although Fox's detractors will jump on this segment as evidence the cable news network is indeed far too conservative given some of Goldberg's criticisms, those that can be impartial will see this as an organization refreshingly willing to examine itself while cameras are rolling (video embedded below the fold with transcript, h/t Mediaite, file photo):
BILL O'REILLY, HOST: In the "Weekdays with Bernie" segment tonight, lots going on, including a big loss for Dan Rather. So let's bring in FOX News analyst Bernie Goldberg, who is in North Carolina today.
I'm going to ask you the question that I asked Lanny and Leslie. I don't really think they answered very well.
BERNARD GOLDBERG, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: No, they didn't.
O'REILLY: My opinion. My opinion. Never in the history of broadcasting in this country has one network, FOX News Channel, been attacked so relent -- unrelentingly, okay, as this one has. Why?
GOLDBERG: Three reasons, I think. The first one is that FOX is more conservative than any other major news organization.
But the second reason -- that would only come into play because of the second reason. You're successful. If you weren't successful, number one wouldn't matter.
And number three is FOX is provocative. And the combination of conservative, successful, and provocative creates an explosive mix where they come after you. We could talk about whether it's legitimate or not, because by and large I think it's not legitimate. I think by and large, they're throwing spit balls at a battleship. I think a lot of it is simply because as I say, you're conservative and successful.
I'll give you a couple of examples. You go out and do a story about judges who are soft on child molesters. And who does the media get angry at? The judges? No. They get angry at you.
O'REILLY: Right.
GOLDBERG: That's a little crazy.
O'REILLY: And we have one tomorrow, by the way. A new one tomorrow. Go ahead.
GOLDBERG: Right. You know, there are other examples like that, where FOX uncovers stories that the so-called mainstream media should be uncovering. So what does the so-called mainstream media do? They get angry at FOX.
This is wrong. This is the spit balls at the battleship argument. But sometimes Bill, and I -- whether you acknowledge it or not, I'm going to state it, sometimes FOX brings on the criticism itself. There are some programs on FOX that are not only fair and balanced, they're commentary shows. They don't have to be. But they brag about how fair and balanced they are. They don't cover rallies and tea parties. They cheer lead for rallies and tea parties. And as a journalist, I am totally against that.
O'REILLY: All right.
GOLDBERG: And to that extent, the criticism is legitimate. But by and large, it's not.
O'REILLY: The problem there, though is.
GOLDBERG: By and large, it's not.
O'REILLY: .that all editorial pages cheer lead for their crew. So if you read any newspaper, "The Chicago Tribune," "The Los Angeles Times," any newspaper in the country, they'll be cheerleading for global warming.
GOLDBERG: Right.
O'REILLY: And they'll be saying, hey, get out on Earth Day.
GOLDBERG: Right.
O'REILLY: Do this, do that.
GOLDBERG: Right.
O'REILLY: Okay, and I don't have any problem with that. Wait, wait, Bernie. Wait. I don't have any problem with get out on Earth Day and be environmentally correct. No problem. They all do it.
But if you then take a commentary program, clearly labeled as such, and then they say hey, you know, you tea party people, go on out there and show them that you don't like this big government intrusion. What's the difference between Earth Day and tea party? What's the difference?
GOLDBERG: Well, the difference, I don't want to get too.
O'REILLY: Come on, that's a good question, Bernie.
GOLDBERG: Okay.
O'REILLY: What's the difference?
GOLDBERG: Here's a good answer. Don't pretend that you're being objective. Don't go on air, and I don't mean you, I mean others on this network. Don't go on the air and say these tea parties are a cross section of America. They are not a cross section. Don't pretend to be a journalist if you're not a journalist. If you want to be a commentator and comment.
O'REILLY: See, I don't - I disagree, look.
GOLDBERG: .be my guest. But don't pretend to be a journalist.
O'REILLY: I think we clearly label here - I think we clearly label at the FOX News Channel, this is a good discussion. Glenn Beck comes on. And Glenn Beck is now in the target. He's the big target. He's coming up later on in the program. So let's get Glenn Beck.
But what does Glenn Beck do? Glenn Beck comes on. And he basically says look, I'm every man. I'm not a journalist. He says he's not a journalist. I'm every man. And I'm worried about the country. And this is why I'm worried. And he has the blackboard and he has this. And this is who I like, tea party guys. And this is who I don't like, whoever Beck doesn't like that day.
GOLDBERG: Right, right.
O'REILLY: I don't see any subterfuge there at all.
GOLDBERG: Okay, I'll.
O'REILLY: Sean Hannity comes on right after "The Factor". And Sean Hannity says look, I'm a Reagan Republican. That's who I am. Sean Hannity. He's not trying to fool anybody. Not trying to say anything like that. He says I'm a Reagan Republican. So this is how I see the world. I mean, come on, Bernie, these are legitimate distances. Every man Reagan Republican. What's the beef?
GOLDBERG: No -- the commentary part of it is totally legitimate, but to give false information just because you're a commentator.
O'REILLY: If it's false.
GOLDBERG: .is unacceptable.
O'REILLY: If it's false information, I agree, but I haven't seen a lot of that.
GOLDBERG: Are you telling me -- wait a second. Are you telling me that you think those people at the tea parties were a cross section of America? There were as many liberal Democrats as conservatives? There are as many people who voted pro Obama as.
O'REILLY: I didn't here anybody say they wasn't liberal Democrats.
GOLDBERG: Oh, I did. I did. Do you want a few names?
O'REILLY: No, I don't.
GOLDBERG: Do you want a few names?
O'REILLY: Because then I have to go back and research it. But I said there weren't very many black people there.
GOLDBERG: Well, you don't have to research it. If I would go on your air and tell you a name, you can go to the bank on it. I'm not going to do it out of respect to you.
O'REILLY: Okay, that's wrong. And that's legitimate criticism.
GOLDBERG: Those people pretend, they pretend to be journalists at the same time that they're saying I'm not a journalist. Well, if you're not a journalist, don't pretend to be one.
O'REILLY: I don't know how you can.
GOLDBERG: Just give us your.
O'REILLY: Bernie, I don't know how you can pretend to be a journalist if you say you're not. I don't, I mean.
GOLDBERG: Because.
O'REILLY: .how do you do that?
GOLDBERG: .well, I just told you they go on the air, after they give their opinions, which is fine with me. They then state as facts things that aren't.
O'REILLY: Facts?
GOLDBERG: ..,facts at all.
O'REILLY: Okay, well fact -- that's legitimate and that should be criticized, but not personal attacks. Not trying to tear somebody's throat out. And that's what you get.
O'REILLY: I totally agree. I totally agree with that.
Exit question: how many news outlets are willing to do such a high-profile self-examination?
Reminds one of what Brit Hume used to say at the end of his "Special Report" newscasts: Fair, balanced, and unafraid.
Nice job, gentlemen. Interesting discussion.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Cross section of America
September 30, 2009 - 10:23 ET by onewiseguyNot sure why Bernie had a problem with that statement. He makes the assumption that the statement "cross section of America" means equal split between Democrats and Republicans. I find that interesting. To me the statement MORE means finding people from different walks of like (economic classes, blue/white collar), different races/ethnicities, in addition to the various political beliefs (i.e. conservative, independent, liberal), etc. Based on that I think it could be safely stated that teh DC demomstration presented a cross section of America. It may not have had many liberals but that one thing alone would not disqualify the statement. Bottom line is that I think Bernie is making a false assertion that the statement was wrong.
Agreed
September 30, 2009 - 10:27 ET by mbs6I had the same thought when I watched the video. I like Goldberg, but he is wrong here.
A conservative believes in putting his money where his mouth is. A liberal believes in putting your money where his mouth is. -- mbs6
I caught this segment last night
September 30, 2009 - 10:37 ET by cjbreischI went to the store last night and caught this segment on XM Radio. I actually caught the beginning of the segment, and the length of the segment was just about the length of my trip.
Bernie makes some false assumptions. Onewiseguy correctly points out one.
But even if he were correct on that, he also appears to suffer from the delusion that no other commentators dress up opinion as fact. Watch Hardball sometime. Read Eric Alterman. I could go on and on, but the simple truth is that people presenting their opinions generally represent them as simple truth.
Even me, above. :)
When you watch a commentary show or read an editorial, you have to understand what you're getting.
On a mostly unrelated note, I miss Brit Hume.
And the claims of a
September 30, 2009 - 11:59 ET by deerjerkydaveAnd the claims of a cross-section of America come in response to the claims on the left that tea-party protestors are a bunch of Klan members. Which claim is closer to the truth?
I had the same question in
September 30, 2009 - 12:13 ET by jistincaseI had the same question in my mind when I heard Goldberg. How many millions more people showing up in DC will it take to convince him that this is how the majority of people really feel. By the way what the hell did he have done to his eyes? Looks like he had surgery or something. Every time I hear him anymore it seems like he is tilting more to the left all the time.
Cross-section vs. Sample
September 30, 2009 - 16:43 ET by Joe C.Goldberg is confusing cross-section with a representative sample. Just because a cross-section isn't proportional to the population as a whole, it doesn't delegitimize the group. I'm sure there were Blacks there - just not 12%; and liberals - just not 20%; etc. You're not going to find enough people from these groups to take up a cause against Doh!-bama.
Goldberg Off-Base
September 30, 2009 - 10:24 ET by slickwillie2001I generally agree with Goldberg, but in this segment he really had something sticking in his craw that he couldn't get out. I assume he was talking about Beck, perhaps Hannity, but I've never seen either of those guys present themselves as 'fair and balanced'. There is an attempt to make their shows fair and balanced by presenting opposing viewpoints and equal numbers of talking heads, but no one thinks Beck or Hannity want to be seen as unbiased journalists.
I say Goldberg was off-base on this, in the absence of clarification.
So FOX is the cheerleader
September 30, 2009 - 10:25 ET by black47211So FOX is the cheerleader for any Conservative movement or expression in our America...good. Good for them.
Bernie just didn't get that Beck is NOT a journalist, but a guy who simply points things out about our corrupt government. The MSM makes no bones about their worship and adoration of Obama and his progressive lapdogs, so if Beck takes a certain amount of glee in Americans protesting things they feel are wrong about the government, so what. If this means that FOX will lose its "Fair and Balanced" slogan, what of it? The ratings only show that America is glad that FOX does what it does.
Americans are thirsty for the other side of news regarding Obama Nation, and as long as the MSM won't give us the truth, then FOX will be my well, and I will happily drink from it.
Bernie, I don't know you personally, but I like you. However, you were off-base last night about this issue.
http://www.pelicanmarsh68.blogspot.com
Citizen Commentators Unite!
And today--and this is a shocker!
September 30, 2009 - 10:35 ET by StarAZToday you can listen to Tom Friedman at the NYT say disrespect of The One from the right is setting up a situation like the one that got Rabin murdered. No hyperbole there. Just standard solid Nobel thinking. I know Bernie will get right on it. And speaking of Bernie, why is he on The Factor almost every night? We pretty much get him by now. He has CBS grudges, etc.
Gasp! Ohmygosh! Someone
September 30, 2009 - 10:43 ET by black47211Gasp! Ohmygosh! Someone get Bernie right now and have him retort! How can we take the NYT seriously when they have such, such,...glee...in defending The One?
Bernie? Are you listening?
Nice one, StarAZ! Good catch!
http://www.pelicanmarsh68.blogspot.com
Citizen Commentators Unite!
Fox is a Cheerleader?
September 30, 2009 - 11:14 ET by allanfAs O'Reilly rightly pointed out NBC is a cheerleader on Global Warming. It's parent GE produces wind turbines and solar panels. Isn't it so nice to see Ann Curry emote over global warming?
I did think that..
September 30, 2009 - 10:43 ET by cjbreischI did think that FNC's coverage of the 9/12 Tea Parties was a bit over-the-top. Even for commentary shows like Beck. Right or wrong, it gave ammo to the people who say that FNC is nothing but a tool for conservatives.
I would've preferred just to see some straight interviews with people who were there, and analysis of why and estimates of crowd sizes rather than reporters running through the crowd grinning like a teenager who just got laid.
I think their show on the parties would've been looked better if done by Wallace or Hume than by Beck. I had to TiVo it and skim because most of the coverage was nauseating.
And I support the movement. I've been to local tea parties and will be going to another in October.
Just Askin'
September 30, 2009 - 11:37 ET by okiehawk44You say "Right or wrong, it gave ammo to the people who say that FNC is nothing but a tool for conservatives."
Aren't Leftists going to say that no matter what? They have us apologizing for things we believe in and they do not. Do you think they care about the difference in journalism and commentary?
We are never (NEVER) going to live up to what these phony moralists want us to do and why do we even care what they think of us?
Want me to tell you what I think of them? Do they care? NO!
Okie....
September 30, 2009 - 11:43 ET by Timothy HThe concern is not in what they say.......the concern is in making them right.
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe. - Albert Einstein
→ Cross section
September 30, 2009 - 10:43 ET by Cool ArrowI was fine with the exchange.
I agree with Bernie. Tea Partiers are NOT a cross section of America.
It's downright silly to believe there is a significant representation of entitlement nitwits protesting government spending as there are working Americans trying to hold on to what little they have left.
Bernie makes a good point, O'Reilly makes a good point.
But...
September 30, 2009 - 10:55 ET by onewiseguy...a large portion of the "entitlement nitwits" are illegal aliens and they aren't Americans so they don't count. In any event, you make the same mistake Bernie does in assuming incorrectly but your assumption is that "cross section of America" boils down to working amercians vs. entitlement nitwits......simply put, it does not.
→ You are assuming
September 30, 2009 - 11:18 ET by Cool ArrowYou are mistakenly assuming I have codified the situation into workers and beggars.
All you may safely assume from my post is that I believe it is at least one of the divisive factors defining tea partiers.
I didn't feel like pointing out the myriad of other demographics that might define "who is a tea Partier?" Give it a shot, yourself. There will definitely be those examples you forget or overlook.
If there's something wrong with the one example I gave, let's hear it. But you're entirely mistaken if you think I'm trying to break America's differences down into one disagreement.
Cool
September 30, 2009 - 11:37 ET by RESTLESS 1So does that mean that each and every niche in the country has to be represented equally to qualify as a "cross-section" of America?
I mean, we're not building Noah's Ark here, are we?
"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest
→ Restless
September 30, 2009 - 11:48 ET by Cool Arrowevery niche in the country has to be represented equally to qualify as a "cross-section" of America?
Strictly speaking, the answer is yes. "Cross-section" immediately lends itself to attack as the user is immediately subject to questions such as, "Oh yeah? Where are the Hindu Transexual Environmentalists in your cross-section?"
Cross-section nullified.
I don't think we should be looking for a "cross section" anyway.
Cool
September 30, 2009 - 12:02 ET by RESTLESS 1Now we have to protect ourselves from hyper-exagerrated questions about representation? I don't think so.
I'm not worried about the "cross-section" either, but if liberals want to dither on about the reference, let them.
"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest
Right Restless
September 30, 2009 - 12:11 ET by Cool ArrowHence, my answer to onewiseguy.
I think "cross-section" is in ill-chosen word. My impression of the Tea Party Movement is that it's a collection of people who want less government intrusion into their lives. Such a singleness of purpose does not promote a cross-section (see also "representative sample"), of America.
Clarification
September 30, 2009 - 12:52 ET by onewiseguyThanks for the clarification. I think our disagreement is centered around the term cross-section. I had no problem with the statement because I'm fairly certain (without having actually conducted any type of interview of attendees) that there were people there from various cultures/races/ethnicities, as well as both blue, white collar and self-employed workers, as well as conservatives, independents and possibly even some liberals (probably few though). To me that represents a cross-section of America. The fact that there was low representation by liberals or "entitlement nitwits" does not invalidate the crowd as a cross-section of America.
→ Entitlement nitwits
September 30, 2009 - 13:06 ET by Cool ArrowBut I don't want a "cross-section". I want to be on the side of Americans proud to be self-sufficient, and wary of government entitlement programs.
True
September 30, 2009 - 14:09 ET by onewiseguy" I want to be on the side of Americans proud to be self-sufficient, and wary of government entitlement programs."
That is certainly my philosophy as well but I also don't see the term "cross-section" as necessarily legitimizing or inclusive of the "entitlement nitwits". I see it more as a reference to Americans in general and representative of the nation as a whole. I see the term as a positive rather than a perjorative...which is one reason I never use the term when referring to left-wing rallies...they are anything BUT a cross-section of Americans.
"I think "cross-section"
September 30, 2009 - 14:42 ET by MikeB"I think "cross-section" is in ill-chosen word." Right you are, as it is ambiguous: it can mean different things to different people. There were blacks, whites, hispanics, aboriginal Americans, white collar workers, blue collarworders, Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, and Independents in the crowds, both in DC and in the local Tea Parties. In that respect, one could say it was a "cross-section". However, like was brought up earlier, there were probably very few (if any) welfare hounds or others dependent on the public teat in the crowds ... no pro-abortion lesbian nun bikers, etc.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Wiat just a sec
September 30, 2009 - 12:45 ET by onewiseguyI would hazard a guess that we basically approach politics from a similar viewpoint but I do have issues with your current response. You state unequivocally in your first post:
"Tea Partiers are NOT a cross section of America."
You make your claim that Bernie was correct by stating the following:
"It's downright silly to believe there is a significant representation
of entitlement nitwits protesting government spending as there are
working Americans trying to hold on to what little they have left."
If your intent was to make the claim that " it is at least one of the divisive factors defining tea partiers" then you really should have stated that to begin with. You may not have specifically stated that the sole reason for the invalidation of the "cross-section" was the lack of significant representation by entitlement nitwits but by not specifically stating that it was at least one of the reasons, you imply the following:
1. The absence of entitlement nitwits invalidates the statement of there being a cross-section of America present at the Tea Parties.
The bottom line is that your statement clearly implies what you did not specifically state. I do agree that there are a myriad of demographics that define "cross-section of America" so anyone making the statement that the Tea Parties do not define a cross-section of America are making an assertion they cannot back up (unless they conducted an interview of at least several hundred people to more accurately gauge the makeup of the crowd) and are therefore making a mistake.
→ Cross-section
September 30, 2009 - 12:57 ET by Cool ArrowAs I've stated elsewhere, "cross-section" is a claim easily dismantled.
Whoever represented Tea Parties as a cross-section of America, was wrong. In that regard I agree with Bernie.
Do I think the movement is primarily divided along lines of:
I could go on, but there's just no way I could include all the divisive questions.
I think you're restating what I've already said, but my pointing to one glaring division does not necessarily mean I think it's the only division.
Didn't mean to confuse you.
Commentators vs. Journalists
September 30, 2009 - 10:46 ET by Secret ConservativeOnce again, the only way libs can criticize Fox News is to pretend that Hannity, O'Reilly, Beck, et al., present themselves as JOURNALISTS, which they do not. None of them pretends for a moment that they are anything other than who they are - political commentators. UNLIKE the MSM, BSNBC, the NYT, the Post... but the one thing that Fox does is bring in guest commentators (and regular contributors like Juan Williams and Mara Liasson) who are liberal and make no secret of the fact that they are liberal. with Fox News I know what I am getting, and they don't pretend to be anything else. You can't say that about ANY other news source out there.
with Fox News I know what I
September 30, 2009 - 10:50 ET by black47211with Fox News I know what I am getting, and they don't pretend to be
anything else. You can't say that about ANY other news source out
there.
------------------------
Spot-on,SC, spot-on!
http://www.pelicanmarsh68.blogspot.com
Citizen Commentators Unite!
" with Fox News I know
September 30, 2009 - 14:47 ET by MikeB" with Fox News I know what I am getting, and they don't pretend to be anything else. You can't say that about ANY other news source out there."
I don't know, SC, we also know what we are getting with ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, NYT, WaPo, etc.: we're getting the PR arm of the DNC. Although, they absolutely do pretend to be journalists when they are, in fact, editorialists.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
"Exit question: how many
September 30, 2009 - 10:48 ET by cathartic1"Exit question: how many news outlets are willing to do such a high-profile self-examination?"
How bout the New York Times?
Personally
September 30, 2009 - 11:07 ET by katiejaneI'm a little tired of Bernie and BOR whining as if they are the last 2 honorable "journalists" left on the face of the earth. Both of them harp on and on about being disrepected. IMO Bernie is just upset because he doesn't have a show and BOR is upset because he's not getting loved like the media star he thinks he is.
First, I like Bernie. He has
September 30, 2009 - 11:33 ET by d1carterFirst, I like Bernie. He has been very vocal on the media bias for years. He is a product of that very media. I saw this segment last night and there is no doubt in my mind that he was going after Glenn Beck. He may not watch GB but has read all the criticism of him and was sucked into the belief that GB is a "journalist". My question to Bernie is, "Are there any "real journalists" in big media? What makes GB different?
Jounalism and language
September 30, 2009 - 11:34 ET by KC MulvilleThere's a linguistic ambiguity at the heart of this debate. Specifically, you can't express an opinion without asserting that something is true.
The same applies to the other side of the line. Opinion is based on what you believe is true. In the course of supporting your opinion, you inevitably assert some things are true. If you express an opinion and assert some things as true, are you reporting or opinionating? Philosophically, there is no magical difference. They're just two points on the same spectrum; they're not really all that different.
When you assert something to be true, but someone disputes it, does that mean that you're reporting untruths? No. It's just a natural feature of dispute. Goldberg is trying to push the distinction between reporting and opinion too far. That distinction is just convenient to make contrasts; it can't be turned into a law.
Media Myth That FOX has a Conservative Bias
September 30, 2009 - 11:34 ET by John Galt1776Nothing could be further from the truth
The only Conservatives that they have other than Hannity is maybe Cavuto who may be a Libertarian
But for sure Beck, Stossel, Gutfeld, Judge Nepolitano are all Libertarians.
They may be right wing leaning Libertarains but they sure as hell are not Conservatives.
Hannity was the 2nd FOX person within the last couple of weeks, Van Susterna being the first to have a major on-air interview with Jim Traficant ex-con and America's leading poltical anti-Semite.
How about BOR?
September 30, 2009 - 12:13 ET by Kingfish17I'm interested where you would put Bill O'Reily on the spectrum of liberal, libertarian, conservative. I'd put him in the ignorant opportunist populist bucket, but that's just me.
"I've sentenced boys younger then you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it, but I felt I owed it to them." Judge Smails
Spot on, Kingfish
September 30, 2009 - 12:17 ET by BlondeI am so OVER O'Reilley....I wish he'd get over himself.
Look at that transcript provided.....3/4 of it is BOR asking a question and then pontificating. He's in love with his own voice.
I hope he fails, too.
Blonde
September 30, 2009 - 12:49 ET by FeynmanFanYou're right about BOR. He seems to turn every discussion into something about himself. Maybe he needs to make a pit stop and have a couple pounds of air let out of his head.
"Reason and persuasion are the only practical instruments against error. To make way for these, free inquiry must be indulged" - Thomas Jefferson
Or out of his lungs
September 30, 2009 - 12:55 ET by BlondeYou know, I like to watch BOR on Friday nights (or any other night) when Laura Ingraham substitutes. The basic format of the show is really rather good. And Laura positively shines, with her quick wit and never letting the liberal get away with the typical "you'd have to agree with" and other lame framing of their issues.
The show just isn't as good with BOR, and his never-ending pontificating. I really don't watch it much, unless there is absolutely nothing else on (and yay, I made the leap yesterday and dumped my cable in favor of DISH, I am really liking it).
I hope he fails, too.
Re Ingraham
September 30, 2009 - 14:31 ET by slickwillie2001Back when Specter was thinking of jumping to the democratic side, Ingraham asked him what it was like "to be wined and dined by both sides of Congress" for his vote. He came back righteously indignant, starting with "look here young lady", which made him look even more foolish.
As a side note, Laura
September 30, 2009 - 14:44 ET by QueenMumAs a side note, Laura Ingraham was the first person I heard talk about MRC. So I wouldn't be here at NB if it hadn't been for her. And everyone is free to consider for themselves whether this was a good or a bad thing. ;) Up until the time I discovered Laura's radio show, I hadn't listened to much talk radio - other than the local stuff. Shocking isn't it that I hadn't listened to Rush before then either?
P.S. I do enjoy The Factor. A nice break from the repetitive news of the day on Fox. Watch the last 20 mins. of Special Report, skip[ Studio B, and then O'Reilly. Laura does do a good job when she fills in.
"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out
of other people's money."
—Margaret Thatcher
Re BOR
September 30, 2009 - 12:43 ET by slickwillie2001Bang-on. A populist to be sure, but his ignorance and stupidity leads to some inconsistency making him hard to label. He's more like Lou Dobbs than anyone else at Fox, but Lou is not quite as dumb.
Conservative bias is when
September 30, 2009 - 11:42 ET by mattmConservative bias is when stories are presented in a fair and balanced way, with all points of view being heard.
When stories are slanted to favor the Liberal point of view, that isn't bias, it's simply journalism.
This is what happens when the terms of the debate are defined by the Left.
Bernie's wandered off the reservation...
September 30, 2009 - 11:59 ET by PrairieSkyon this one...I like Bernie Goldberg and generally agree with his analysis on most things, but I think he's wrong on more than one point here.
He makes the argument that the tea party protesters are not representative of a cross section of America, and I think he couldn't be more wrong. I also think he's way off base about some Fox News personalities misrepresenting themselves as journalists when they're really commentators giving opinion...Does Bernie "get" Fox News? Has he watched it recently? As far as Hannity and Beck are both conerned, neither of them pretend to be journalists without opinions...Hannity has repeatedly identified himself as a Reagan conservative, and Beck has also likewise identified himself as a Libertarian. Even O'Reilly, who identifies himself as an Independent, describes himself as a traditionalist. I can't think of another Fox personality that is in fact a journalist but who clearly espouses a certain political viewpoint...None of their true journalists do that, but Fox's commentators, either their people like Hannity and Beck, or their guest commentators (of which there are many) obviously have a particular point of view (left and right) and say so on the air. That's what their roles are. The reverse however, is true on CNN and especially MSNBC...Both of these networks are awash in "journalists" (I use that term loosely) who constantly proclaim to be objective and balanced (which is laughable), and are clearly anything but...
This is all pretty clear to me...Bernie seems to misunderstand Hannity's and Beck's roles on the network.
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
Don't quite get it--
September 30, 2009 - 12:50 ET by carolina09But if Shepherd thinks this exchange between O'R and Goldberg served some point and made some worthwhile gesture, I'll go along.
Every day Fox is ripped by the childish spokespeople of the WH, the DNC, academia and the perv Hollywood left. Every day Fox ratings get a little higher. The only way that O'R and Bernie can please these people is by being more like them, toeing the progressive party line, and losing market share.
My reaction to the exchange was disappointment that Goldberg seemed to buy into the prevailing conventional wisdom, and issue a perfunctory and vague scolding to the opinion shows on Fox that are so popular. Beck may have a strong POV but he invites people to challenge the facts he's presenting, and he generally makes this challenge several times each show. If he's got his facts wrong, I do not doubt that he'd recognize that on air.
But CNN calls the tea partiers by a vulgar name, and knowingly presents the Lyndon LaRouche demonstrators as conservatives. And WE KNOW that THEY KNOW better, because the tea partiers have told them several times.
Is O'R falling into that classic trap that Republicans and conservatives fall into--selling out to gain the approval of the Popular Kids in the Lunchroom?
If O'R is interested in my opinion, it's that he should stop courting Obama with his silly flattery from his desk. It is totally transparent and embarrassing to watch. Also, keep Jerry Rivers off his show. I don't watch Fox on weekends because that guy is likely to show up.
How much of a complaint do
September 30, 2009 - 13:10 ET by ckc1227How much of a complaint do you really have when you're reduced to micro-analyzing the use of the phrase "cross-section" as criticism?
Bernie Goldberg
September 30, 2009 - 13:14 ET by Edward CropperGoldberg is a liberal who got conservative religion and has had his career
literally raised from the dead.
However, scratch a converted liberal and before long some slight liberal
bleeding will begin.
Two things even converted liberals never lose are their arrogance and
elitists symptoms. Goldberg is no exception.
Typical...
September 30, 2009 - 13:55 ET by kengieThe blind leading the blind! You just can't teach stupid!
"Live long and prosper" ~ Obama
→ Kenny G
September 30, 2009 - 13:57 ET by Cool ArrowBut you could write a book on retaining it.
The obvious question
September 30, 2009 - 14:34 ET by slickwillie2001In a Larry King-like moment, when Goldberg claimed that the TEA protests didn't look like a broad cross-section of America, BOR didn't think to ask the obvious question, –did you attend any of the protests?
"Conservative" Bias?
September 30, 2009 - 14:48 ET by sic721If showing both sides of a story, not covering anything up, not glossing over the facts, telling the truth no matter where the chips may fall is 'bias', then I guess Fox is biased. The biggest mistake the msm is making these days is living in the past. A past where the "major" networks and print media could very easily not cover something, or put out false or misleading information and who's to know? They did this for decades, and it worked, up to a point. But nowadays, with the internet especially and 24/7 cable news, that dog won't hunt. And in typical liberal fashion, they just do not learn, and will keep it up until it's too late to save themselves, a point they're rapidly approaching faster and faster each and every day.
Goldberg...
September 30, 2009 - 18:16 ET by shooterBernie sure is one jealous fellow, isn't he?
_________________________________________
"An armed society is a polite society" -- Robert A. Heinlein
Goldberg = typical Liberal,
September 30, 2009 - 22:00 ET by RR GOPGoldberg = typical Liberal, elitist, cosmopolitan, shill for the Leftists.
These are the types who feel they have a moral superiority...rather like listening to the sop from Koppel's Tuesdays With Morrie.
It may have escaped your attention that Dick Morris believes strongly in global warming and that Charles Krauthahammer worked for both Carter and Mondale.
They will rationalize us to death...they will play us like Yehudi Menuhin played the fiddle. They will always have a loyalty outside of the United States, but none dare question their loyalty or else the Sheep will nip at your heels and bleat you loudly into submission until you go back and nibble your urine-soaked grass with the rest of the flock.
They have nothing but disdain for us, but will pat us lovingly on our woolly heads because their custodial view of Humanity teaches them to be kind to dumb animals.
The vision of America by these intellectual Leftists is far different than ours. They didn't make this country...they merely leech off of it. They don't believe in Democracy unless they control it. They believe in Free Enterprise so long as they're the chief beneficiaries.
Don't let them fool you any longer. Those who really have our backs on the national stage are few and far between, and only time will tell who we can truly trust...if it's not too late that is.
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 86% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.
BOR and Bernie
September 30, 2009 - 22:23 ET by TheAssessorThese two were interesting but it seems as if Bernie has a bee under his bonnet. Not sure where he stands these days, and these are important days so I hope he'll pick soon. Woobling isn't a choice. I see the Dems spending mucho money in bills we aren't able to read yet have to PAY for. I feel like I'm being taken prisoner in my own home. Communists LIGHTS on the EMPIRE STATE BUILDING!!! WTF are we celebrating? I was in China a few years ago. They have NOTHING! Many live in caves and are extremely poor. Remember Tiannemen. Why would we be honoring these cruel, rapist country. America wake up to the truth.. our country is being chewed up in little pieces. They'll nip us to death like a duck. He's a bogus, empty headed suit not walking, but RUNNING for the Dear Leader label. And we'll be the ones he mows down with a tank in front of the white house. Nothing will stop him, he believes he's invincible. He's clearly a malignant narcissist (very dangerous type) & will stop at nothing. So sad to see my USA go down the rabbit hole. But it's all going too fast. He's going the confusion game by unloading a lot of heavily written reams of bills that he'll then insist on passing before the public can read it. That's part of his game, confuse, overwhelm and then bring the pitchforks bam bam. I'm totally disgusted with this
The Present-A'int and his crowd should be arrested today!