Mick Jagger
Dedicated LVC Member
57% approve of the job the president is doing and the same percentage now want a public option included in the national health care bill.
Push back hard against news stories that are either inaccurate or unflattering.
- Thread starter Mick Jagger
- Start date
Mick Jagger
Dedicated LVC Member
It's my personal estimate. I'm perfectly in tune with the people.
so, you simply make up numbers and assert them as fact...
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
I have to agree with Shag. That was pure PWNAGE by Cal.
So, we won't go with an ex-attorney for the RNC (my source) on the numbers for the 9-12 protest - that is fine... we will continue to disagree on this Cal - but certainly the pictures also show about 70,000-100,000 people...
9-12 was a protest - just because it was people who don't normally protest, should it get extra coverage - you seem to think it should, I don't think that should elevate them above others... you would, because you agree with them - your opinion gets in the way.
And if they treated all things equal than a tiny protest (100 people) about children singing songs about the president - 1 month after the children sang the song, that wasn't even happening by the time the reporters for Fox got there, wouldn't have gotten 3 times the air time as the gay protest - Fox skews.
You can put your head in the sand about this Cal - but all those people are conservative/right - they aren't middle of the road... and it does color the perception you get on their newscasts.
And yes - some of the news is interesting, and I think fair - but, the surrounding atmosphere colors the broadcast cal - i will watch Brian Williams any day of the week over Fox News... I don't need to be bombarded with right wing commercials, I'd rather look at Crest...
Ah - now you say 'cable news networks' you didn't state that before - and no longer does cable live in a vacuum - you have to compare all news against each other - broadcast included... I thought you knew that..
All your charts show is that there is sliding numbers for everyone but fox - and the reason for most of that slide - the internet and dvr type recording - not Fox... Fox is rising, yes, how long will the trend last - hard to tell - but they won't hit even the number of the lowest broadcast, CBS, for years. Everyone who looks at numbers now combines cable with broadcast - it is how America is now viewing TV...
And Cal - you haven't a clue on how to look at numbers - it is my job. MSNBC and CNN and Headline don't get viewership because they take from broadcast news - they are the same skew. Fox doesn't take much from broadcast news - it isn't their skew.
You can't compare just msnbc, cnn, and headline against Fox - because it doesn't work that way - especially with the nightly news - which is what we have been talking about - the nightly news.
Commentary you could compare - and that does show that Fox is fairing much better - not surprising with the amount of PR they put behind their commentary - and the fact the right does support this - they have shown this same tendency with talk radio - it is what the right does... actively support their media outlets. Good for them... It keeps their viewpoint front and center.
Where does America still go for it's nightly news - it isn't Fox... That is what we were comparing numbers for cal - suddenly you threw in all the commentators - we want to throw those out - don't we?
In one instance you want to keep the commentators, and the next instance you want to throw them out. In one place you want to include the big boys, in the next breath, you don't include them...
Cal, I know the numbers, i know what them mean, and I know how to compare Fox's nightly news with the rest.
Not that much greater Cal - as i pointed out with my ESPN example - cable does draw numbers as big as broadcast - and it is being included in the mix when looking at ratings. Alternate TV is getting close enough in market penetration that the numbers are weighted only lightly - if at all.
And the big 3 don't say they are liberal - once again, and I say this over and over again - they should. I can't make them Cal, sorry...
I know how all of TV is trending - and I know why Cal - it is my job. Alternate, internet and dvr is changing how we watch TV. Fox will rise a little - I expect them too - but they won't come close to liberal TV News sources for a long, long time.
Because they are a loud voice - they are very, very good at PR - look at the 9-12 protest - not big - but lots of noise... it is very good PR, but it is nonetheless PR...
I don't think that the white house wants to destroy Fox News - they want to point out how their commentators should be viewed as opinion - I am not sure how they are going to do this Cal - they haven't shown how they are going to go about this - once I see how then I will have a better idea if they are out to target and destroy just fox - or if it is a genuine desire to stand up for their side of the issues.
I haven't seen what Emanuel and Axlerod talked about this weekend - I don't watch everything Cal - I don't have time... I'll try to catch it - but, all news and no syfy makes for a boring dinner date... And I have to find time to actually go out and make a difference in my community... what a concept.
That is again what I have stated in the past - the white house has the right to challenge anyone on their facts, and their opinions. Let's see how they do this, unless Cal, you have some insider info on how they plan on handling this, or can see into the future.
And Cal, you continue to point at me as though I have some amazing inside information on how the white house works with this administration - I don't. But, if Fox's commentators put forth wrong information - or just 'opinion' then the white house certainly can challenge them...
I will stand up for the white house going out publicly against media that misrepresents their policies and agenda - I wouldn't be for them going blanket-ly against any media source. If they really go after Fox like that - I would be against it.
Well welcome to my psyche Cal - I am glad I have been so revealing...
It will be much easier to say hi to Ann McLaughlin Korologos when I see her next month... I haven't seen Rudd in years, he probably wouldn't even remember me, and I certainly don't think I'll see him in the foreseeable future... But I have a variety of dinner companions that are far more interesting, who do know my name... Should I give you a list Cal - since you seem to be very interested in who my friends are.
Perhaps you are living vicariously through me - that is fine...Want menus too? A short rundown of what we discussed? Type of hostess gifts? Wine list? Cigars smoked?
9-12 was a protest - just because it was people who don't normally protest, should it get extra coverage - you seem to think it should, I don't think that should elevate them above others... you would, because you agree with them - your opinion gets in the way.
And if they treated all things equal than a tiny protest (100 people) about children singing songs about the president - 1 month after the children sang the song, that wasn't even happening by the time the reporters for Fox got there, wouldn't have gotten 3 times the air time as the gay protest - Fox skews.
Beck is conservative/right - he doesn't have to be GOP - he is conservative/right... O'Reilly - conservative/right, Hannity - conservative/right, Van Sustren - conservative/right, so - about 4 to 1... sorry, I was wrong - but their news is surrounded by right wing commentators...
You can put your head in the sand about this Cal - but all those people are conservative/right - they aren't middle of the road... and it does color the perception you get on their newscasts.
And yes - some of the news is interesting, and I think fair - but, the surrounding atmosphere colors the broadcast cal - i will watch Brian Williams any day of the week over Fox News... I don't need to be bombarded with right wing commercials, I'd rather look at Crest...
Ah - now you say 'cable news networks' you didn't state that before - and no longer does cable live in a vacuum - you have to compare all news against each other - broadcast included... I thought you knew that..
All your charts show is that there is sliding numbers for everyone but fox - and the reason for most of that slide - the internet and dvr type recording - not Fox... Fox is rising, yes, how long will the trend last - hard to tell - but they won't hit even the number of the lowest broadcast, CBS, for years. Everyone who looks at numbers now combines cable with broadcast - it is how America is now viewing TV...
And Cal - you haven't a clue on how to look at numbers - it is my job. MSNBC and CNN and Headline don't get viewership because they take from broadcast news - they are the same skew. Fox doesn't take much from broadcast news - it isn't their skew.
You can't compare just msnbc, cnn, and headline against Fox - because it doesn't work that way - especially with the nightly news - which is what we have been talking about - the nightly news.
Commentary you could compare - and that does show that Fox is fairing much better - not surprising with the amount of PR they put behind their commentary - and the fact the right does support this - they have shown this same tendency with talk radio - it is what the right does... actively support their media outlets. Good for them... It keeps their viewpoint front and center.
Where does America still go for it's nightly news - it isn't Fox... That is what we were comparing numbers for cal - suddenly you threw in all the commentators - we want to throw those out - don't we?
In one instance you want to keep the commentators, and the next instance you want to throw them out. In one place you want to include the big boys, in the next breath, you don't include them...
Cal, I know the numbers, i know what them mean, and I know how to compare Fox's nightly news with the rest.
Not that much greater Cal - as i pointed out with my ESPN example - cable does draw numbers as big as broadcast - and it is being included in the mix when looking at ratings. Alternate TV is getting close enough in market penetration that the numbers are weighted only lightly - if at all.
And the big 3 don't say they are liberal - once again, and I say this over and over again - they should. I can't make them Cal, sorry...
I know how all of TV is trending - and I know why Cal - it is my job. Alternate, internet and dvr is changing how we watch TV. Fox will rise a little - I expect them too - but they won't come close to liberal TV News sources for a long, long time.
Because they are a loud voice - they are very, very good at PR - look at the 9-12 protest - not big - but lots of noise... it is very good PR, but it is nonetheless PR...
I don't think that the white house wants to destroy Fox News - they want to point out how their commentators should be viewed as opinion - I am not sure how they are going to do this Cal - they haven't shown how they are going to go about this - once I see how then I will have a better idea if they are out to target and destroy just fox - or if it is a genuine desire to stand up for their side of the issues.
I haven't seen what Emanuel and Axlerod talked about this weekend - I don't watch everything Cal - I don't have time... I'll try to catch it - but, all news and no syfy makes for a boring dinner date... And I have to find time to actually go out and make a difference in my community... what a concept.
That is again what I have stated in the past - the white house has the right to challenge anyone on their facts, and their opinions. Let's see how they do this, unless Cal, you have some insider info on how they plan on handling this, or can see into the future.
And Cal, you continue to point at me as though I have some amazing inside information on how the white house works with this administration - I don't. But, if Fox's commentators put forth wrong information - or just 'opinion' then the white house certainly can challenge them...
I will stand up for the white house going out publicly against media that misrepresents their policies and agenda - I wouldn't be for them going blanket-ly against any media source. If they really go after Fox like that - I would be against it.
Well welcome to my psyche Cal - I am glad I have been so revealing...
It will be much easier to say hi to Ann McLaughlin Korologos when I see her next month... I haven't seen Rudd in years, he probably wouldn't even remember me, and I certainly don't think I'll see him in the foreseeable future... But I have a variety of dinner companions that are far more interesting, who do know my name... Should I give you a list Cal - since you seem to be very interested in who my friends are.
Perhaps you are living vicariously through me - that is fine...Want menus too? A short rundown of what we discussed? Type of hostess gifts? Wine list? Cigars smoked?
I don't have any interest in what you do with a cigar around a person like Rudd.
Does he smoke - I don't know Cal... again I met him at a couple of gallery shows...
Your interest in Rudd fascinates me though - He is an old man, and didn't seem very interesting. I would have liked to find out more about him, his past - but 'hi, isn't this piece interesting, and how do you know the artist' doesn't really lend itself to 'how do you feel about bombing innocent Americans', over cheese and crackers...
Your interest in Rudd fascinates me though - He is an old man, and didn't seem very interesting. I would have liked to find out more about him, his past - but 'hi, isn't this piece interesting, and how do you know the artist' doesn't really lend itself to 'how do you feel about bombing innocent Americans', over cheese and crackers...