CNN Reporter: 'I Don't Want to Hear About Environmental Causes from Pussycat Dolls'

Photo of Matthew Balan.

Here's another sign that Al Gore's Live Earth was probably a bust. CNN entertainment correspondent Lola Ogunnaike (pictured at right) gave a great one-liner with regards to the celebrity component of Live Earth: "Frankly, I don't want to hear about environmental causes from the Pussycat Dolls."

Co-host John Roberts and Ogunnaike discussed the concert's lackluster ratings in the first hour of Monday's "American Morning." Ogunnaike blamed the ratings situation on "benefit fatigue" and people actually wanting to be out in the environment instead of sitting at home watching celebrities rant about saving it.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓
The most interesting exchange of the segment came when Roberts asked about the celebrities' motivation for appearing at Live Earth.

Video (1:11): Real (1.94 MB) or Windows (2.20 MB), plus MP3 audio (529 kB).

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

ROBERTS: Do these people really care about this, or do you think it's just there to boost their image? Some of the criticism of this whole thing was that these don't -- these people really aren't invested. They just want to make sure their name is attached to the cause.

OGUNNAIKE: A lot of people think it's a bit hypocritical. I mean, celebrities are some of the least eco-friendly people on the face of the planet. They say that they are interested in the environment, but you also have tours that not only guzzle a huge amount of electricity, but the gas, the tour buses, the entourages, the private jets, that all contributes to, you know, the carbon consciousness that everyone is so obsessed with right now. And they are some of the least eco-friendly people on the planet. So, to have them say, ‘People, you know, recycle,' use electricity -- you know, electricity-efficient light bulbs. People aren't really trying to hear that from Madonna when she's got a fleet of cars sitting in her driveway.

Ogunnaike was basically making the point that many conservative commentators have made about celebrities' involvement in environmental causes. That's something you wouldn't expect to hear on CNN.

—Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

people actually wanting to be

people actually wanting to be out in the environment instead of sitting at home watching celebrities rant about saving it.

Wow, you mean people actually enjoy being outside, frolicking in the sun, rather than being subjected to other people whining about how we're all going to die? Who'da thunk it?

Mother nature is a bitch - Ninth Corollary of Murphy's Law

The force is strong in young

The force is strong in young Ogunnaike, we can turn her to the dark side.  Perhaps Darth O'Reilly could send a memo to Emperor Murdock.

Pussycat Dolls were there for

Pussycat Dolls were there for the exposure, plain and simple. As were a large portion of those performers, no doubt. Just say "We care about the environment," then get on the stage so (alleged) millions can see you perform and hopefully buy your CD.

If this concert wasn't televised, I doubt they would've gotten half as many to perform. And most of the other half would've only done it out of guilt... similar to how employees are often encouraged to garnish their wages to support the United Way.

*****

"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown

I agree. Celebrities are some

I agree. Celebrities are some of the most hypocritical people on this planet.

So how is this an example o

So how is this an example of liberal bias or an exposure of it?

sanskritg,Are you intellectua

sanskritg,

Are you intellectually comfortable with that question?

Help Fred defeat the RINOs, along with the Hitllary-Obama Axis, & win the White House in '08.

Read the Lame Cherry sanskritg

Greetings sanskritg,

To answer your question as how Lola O is an example of liberal bias and the exposure of it follows:

Lola O by degrading the Pussycat Dolls and all these rockers reflects their "fly over country" bigotry which all liberals have for anyone who does not look like them, have a job like them and does not get invited to David Letterman cocktail parties.

You must understand that here you have a black woman who is a bigot, not because she is black but because she is a liberal. She is inflicting the same stereotypes and condescending bias which liberal democrats have inflicted on blacks since their liberation in 1865.

Lola O is exhibiting the same "be seen and used" but not heard from in the halls of power which democrats view all of their "hyphenated groups". Barak Obama is the perfect example of a person who accomplished nothing in life, but somehow got a million dollar book deal which no one has investigated yet. Any author knows how impossible it is to get published for simple royalties and yet here was Obama created and given a million dollar signing.

Obama without serving one day in the Senate was on Letterman being asked, "When are you running for president". That alone tells the world Obama was created, promoted and designed as one factor to make blacks believe democrats were promoting a minority, but the cruel reality is the bigots and racists which run the DNC have set up Al Gore to be their nominee and Bill Richardson to be the "minority who gets let into the main house" so they can glean hispanic votes. Richardson though has reached his ceiling though and is only "acceptable" as Joe Biden would say as he "looks white".

I hope this helps explain this as sometimes things in plain site the Conservatives consider everyone can see what Lola O was about in her bias and bigotry. She though in being a shill for the globalist agenda has not figured out she is implementing the same Jim Crow tactics she claims "others in Republican form" are doing.

That is why Lola O was featured here. She is the prime example of the poison progressive liberalism or regressives as they are rightly termed are in skewing people into thinking they are gods and superior to others.

Have a wonderful day sanskritg:)

*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS

Lame Cherry,No offense, but t

Lame Cherry,

No offense, but this post makes absolutely zero sense. 

I genuinely have no idea what you are trying to say.

I'd suggest in the future, you slow down and think of your presentation.  Perhaps use an outline because this disjointed, nonsensical writing style of yours isn't going to endear you to the regular posters on this site.

You're welcome.

The exception proves the rule

Sanskritg, this is a case of the exception proving the rule.  This site notes when an unexpectedly conservative, or conservative-like, comment comes from a usually reliable liberal media outlet.  It stands out because it is not liberal spin.

When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.

Ogunnaike needs a name like Cher

Ogunnaike apparently hasn't got it figured out that worldwide almost 75% of the people after EXAMINING THE EVIDENCE and utilizing God given common sense judgment have figured out that the SUN IS WARMING THE PLANET and man has nothing to do with it.

It has nothing to do with boredom. It has nothing to do with self serving hot air artists or soul selling GlobAL Gore. It has to do with the world tuned out BS and all of your power grabbing globalist propaganda has been wasted as people are wising up to the bogus "science" you are churning out to enslave them.

I usually do not get catty, but when you have an oddball name like
Ogunnaike which makes you sound goofy in an English speaking culture maybe you could just be like other wacko women on the left like Cher and Madonna as the dolts you are aiming at can usually figure that kind of infor out.

So unless you want to be Lola the showgirl from a Barry Manilow tune try Lola GUN as that is a nice powerful name and it's virtue might rub off on you like John Wayne or Pat Boone, because all you got right now is Pussycat Dolls and they are the only ones listening.....Lola Gun. Wonderful name or Cher Guns, that is even better.

*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS

Hey Lame Cherry,An oddball na

Hey Lame Cherry,

An oddball name?  Are you serious?  Last time I checked people don't generally get to choose their last names.  And I'm fairly certain it's of an African origin.  You find African names to be oddball? 

You didn't get catty, you just got ingnorant.

Wow.  Her last name sounds goofy in an English speaking culture?  Are you proposing that people from 'non-english' ethinicites Americanize their last names?  What is your point exactly? 

I'm not sure where you were going with this last part of your incoherent ramblings, but if your intent was to look narrow-minded, consider it mission accomplished!

Three Bags Full

Three Bags Full

Derka Derka!! "There

Derka Derka!!

"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...

L.C. got the first paragraph

L.C. got the first paragraph right, anyway. Kinda lost me after that.

*****

"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown

Yeah, minus the completely in

Yeah, minus the completely incorrect 75% statistic.

I guess you're right. Certain

I guess you're right. Certainly, more than 75% of people realize the sun is warming the planet.

*****

"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown

Check the British Polls

For those who did not check the British polls the almost 75% polling statisic is quite correct in their worldwide poll of people believe global warming is natural and not man created.

As for the charge against me by those who are so engulfed in PC, the satire was perfect in exposing those like the bloggers and Lola O who decided that the Pussycat Dolls are inferior. It is that narrow mindedness which is liberalism and it is those types of attacks which are ignorant as only a liberal can understand the simple. Those stating the obvious that Lola O is African cement the point in SHE IS AMERICAN and not African, so her name means nothing except to Affirmative Action or liberals who can only remember names like Cher and Madonna.

Phonetics are what stick in the simple minds of the masses. That is why John Mellencamp (which is an oddball name too) started out as John Cougar. None of that should have to be explained.

That is why racism is used by liberals and is the tool used by the various bloggers in attacks.

I hope this explains this to all of the ignorant attacks. It was quite obvious except to those who do not have a debatable point and have to resort to racism. All that exposes are the people who are exactly like Lola O.

(To explain to leon who apparently is ignorant of modern culture which Lola O was created. Barry Manilow had a pop hit about Lola who was a showgirl. Lola O is a showgirl for CNN to prove they are not racists. Lola O has in her name the sound of GUN. Liberals hate guns, but guns empower people. Hence John Wayne who changed his name too to Americanize it and make it simple for the masses to remember who happened to utilized guns frequently which is an American culture attribute. Pat Boone who is a Conservative also added the moral understanding Lola O requires.

There was nothing incoherent about any of the above and it should not have needed a paragraph to understand to people who are so busy reacting and jamming on a keyboard they are not taking the time to stop and think before they start throwing charges around and uninformed attacks.)

God bless and have a wonderful day.

*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS

Okaaaaaaaaaaaay. Gotcha. Glad

Okaaaaaaaaaaaay. Gotcha. Glad you cleared that up.

Really...I don't mean to be g

Really...I don't mean to be glib, but I seriously have no idea what you are talking about.

First of all, your explanation of the joke is absurd. How is that funny? That's the longest joke progression I've ever seen. Well, it's this, because of that, and that means this, and so on. I'm excited that you've joined the community.

How does calling her last name goofy show anything about her being american before african american. Can't she be American with an African last name? I just don't get what you're trying to say. I mean, I hear your main thrust: Liberals are racist and use race as a tool. I just don't see how that belief has anything to do with this post.

Nice to meet you Lame Cherry. I look forward to wonderful conversations in the future.

CNN actually ackowledged Live Earth was a bust? Wow.

I'm just surprised that CNN didn't try to cover up the fact that the whole Live Earth thing was a bust by trying to convice us all that it was a huge success, as they tried to do with the Million Mom March, and other such events promoting lefty causes.

I guess this failure was too big even for them to ignore.

Help Fred defeat the RINOs, along with the Hitllary-Obama Axis, & win the White House in '08.

How was it a bust again?Wembl

How was it a bust again?

Wembley Stadium and all of the other stadiums looked pretty packed to me.

Oh yeah, and let's not forget

Oh yeah, and let's not forget the 2 billion people that viewed the shows globally.

Pretty sure that's about 33% of the world. 

2 billion ???

Leon, where did that fabricated number come from? 2 billion viewers...I do not know 1 person that watched any of it.

vrwc as leon "only 2 mil

vrwc as leon "only 2 million viewers watched Live Earth, that's only 3.3% of the earths population."  Gee, it can be fun making up our own facts...per leon's hero...

Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore

Thanks for clearing that up,

Thanks for clearing that up, because I was thinking 33% was stretching the limits of how many people even have television access.

Actually 3.3% makes sense as

Actually 3.3% makes sense as it coincides with this "scientific formula"  -  ass-u-me that 2/3rds (67%) of the earths scientists believe GW is happening x(times) the fact that they could be right just as much as they could be wrong (50%) x(times) the reality that humans are not only the cause but also the solution (versus the Sun, God, normal cycles,  error in measurement, etc.) let's say 10%, so 67% x 50% x 10%  =  3.3%....wow uncanny how facts can be so, well umm, ah logical and um reasonable, and um like factual!

Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore

It can be fun to make fun of

It can be fun to make fun of the facts?

This coming from a Bible nut that bases his entire life on belief, not facts.

Interesting Leon, name me one

Interesting Leon, name me one, just one fact stated in the Blble that has been proven false?

Men stumble over the truth from time to time, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing happened. -Winston Churchill.

Leon has left the building...

Leon has left the building....again

This from a believer in God w

This from a believer in God who is attacking other believers for daring to believe...in God.  The irony meter is pegged!!!

MAKE WAY FOR THE SAN ANTONIO SPURS!!!  THE 1999, 2003, 2005, AND 2007 NBA CHAMPIONS!!!!

Lion King,1)  this has nothi

Lion King,

1)  this has nothing to do with you, but does anyone know why my above posts have been hidden?  Don't seem offensive to me.

2)  The number wasn't fabricated, it's an estimate.  I've read it on several sites, but more recently here

3)  So you don't know one person that watched it and somehow that supposed to be extrapolated to a meaningful stat?  I know a lot of people that watched it (not necessarily b/c they care about GW, but b/c they like music), so what?

I was wondering the same thin

I was wondering the same thing, and for a moment I thought it was a vast right wing conspiracy, but I checked my inbox and there is no memo.  Maybe it is due to the anniversary of Roswell.  I'm just saying.....

2) No, the number wasn't fabr

2) No, the number wasn't fabricated. I happen to know that it was generated by the same computer simulation that predicts the human component of global warming influence. 3) I didn't watch it either (and I love polka music) and I think that seals the deal. No one watched.

Okay, okay. I lied about the

Okay, okay. I lied about the polka music.  But the rest is true, no kidding.  Trust me.

Ben,,,,

Funnny isn't it. I question the veracity of an unrealistic number, then, I am told it is not fabricated, but rather, it is an estimate. [Liberal-speak: fabricated]

Also, I just mentioned that no one I knew watched the dumb thing and then I am accused of trying to extrapolate. [Liberal-speak: I assumed you were trying to do what we liberals do.]

If conservatives are RIGHT, then liberals must be WRONG.
Thompson/Rice

2 million, 2 billion, what's the difference?

That number (2 billion) came from this single article in The Star. It is in the text below the photo, and in the actual article. Many on the left are taking this single report of 2 billion as gospel, any lower number is a lie from the neocons.

D


I don't support our liberals or their mission.

Leon, First of all, when C

Leon,

First of all, when CNN (the network that is a major supporter of all things
communistic) calls a gathering of like-minded libs a bust, then it is a
bust. But it wasn't just CNN, it was several other MSM outlets as well, even media outlets in other parts of the world.

Help Fred defeat the RINOs, along with the Hitllary-Obama Axis, & win the White House in '08.

No they didn't. That an &qu

No they didn't. That an "estimated" figure, based on... well guesses. Liken it to the computer models they use to "guess" global temperature rise.

For instance. The UK viewing population is about 55 million.

That is: up to fifty five million (adults and children) people have regular access to a Television set. So they could at any one time be watching something, in theory.

Yet the official viewing figures (not a guess) for Live Earth. Dead Wrong were less than 3 million. That would be about 7% of the total viewing population.

What makes you think that would be any bigger in, say, India?

I'm sure they all tuned into see the slut Madonna simulating sex on stage, in a country that recently went ape shit when Richard Gere merely 'kissed' that hot Indian actress live on TV.

You've seen the spoof. Now see the spoof of the spoof on YouTube: The Clintpranos: Bada Bong

I posted elsewhere an article

I posted elsewhere an article from July 4th that threw out the bogus "2 billion"  number, Jackson.

It's all BS.

2 Billion! It almost seems st

2 Billion! It almost seems stupid to even try to argue with these idiots, facts:

  • China - 1.3 BILLION
  • India - 1.2 BILLION
  • Africa - 0.8 BILLION
  • All children, anywhere less than 15 - 1.6 billion

So some SIMPLE math:

  • subtract out at least 1 BILLION children who did not watch
  • figure generously that 10% of China. India, and Africa watched
  • figure generously that 25% of the rest of the world watched

And you can't even come up with 1 BILLION yet alone TWO!

Makes Al's statement below a prophesy of how these people believe and think (if you can even call it that)...

Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore

Common sense isn't so common anymore.

And the numbers please (an up

And the numbers please (an update)...in the U.S. 16 Million (with an M) watched - about 6%.  And as we are the highest consuming nation in just about everything, including watching TV...so maybe in the world a total of say 3.5% watched or about 0.2 BILLION!

Lets just write it off to a simple mis-placed decimal point.  )  :

Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore

Well, yeah. But reaching

Well, yeah. But reaching the audience at the concert would be akin to preaching to the choir, and Gore was clearly trying to spread the word beyond the stadium walls. While I don't think you can necessarily call it a success or a failure this quickly, I would speculate that not too many minds were changed because some rock stars put on a big concert.

I think the problem with Live Earth vs. Live Aid is that Live Aid's purpose was to raise money to help people in need, and could gauge its success on the amount of aid it could supply to Africa. There was a sense that I could donate money to a legitimate charitable cause and feel that it would make a difference.

Live Earth was just kind of there. You didn't have to really do anything but listen to the bands you liked. You weren't even required to renounce your skepticism in order to participate. So that's going to be really tough to quantify as a success.

Of course, if nothing changes and we continue to live how we wish instead of how a few hypocritical performers think we should live, then it will have failed in its intent, billions of viewers or no. (Did you actually say "billions?")

*****

"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown