posted March 10, 2006 01:44 PM            

Neither is foregoing reports based on forged documents in an attempt to throw an election to their favored candidate.

Jon Stewart to replace Andy Rooney? Hehe, 20% of young people get their NEWS from Jon Stewart's show. Well, that sure as hell explains a lot

Friday, March 10, 2006 11:19 a.m. EST
Dan Rather: 'Real News' Market Not Dead

Could Jon Stewart, host of a satirical cable news show, ever replace CBS' "60 Minutes" commentator Andy Rooney? That was the hypothetical scenario presented to former anchorman Dan Rather at a Harvard University forum.

Rather, 74, is a correspondent for "60 Minutes." He stepped down as the anchor of "CBS Evening News" last year, after 24 years.

"Satire is particularly valuable in a country like ours," said Rather, in response to a question Thursday from moderator Alex S. Jones, director of the John F. Kennedy School of Government's Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy.

"One can imagine a national news editor saying, 'We are losing money during this time period,"' and bringing in Stewart to boost demographics, said Rather, adding that he had no knowledge of actual discussions to lure Stewart, host of "The Daily Show" on Comedy Central, to CBS.

Surveys have shown that as many as 20 percent of young people get their news from Stewart's show.

Rather said that regardless of Stewart's popularity and potential, the market for substantive journalism still exists.

"I think there is going to be a place for serious news - real news - and somebody is going to do it and make money at it," he said. "My core belief is it isn't over. It's in danger, but it isn't over."

Rooney, 87, has given his wry commentaries at the end of "60 Minutes" broadcasts since 1978.

The 43-year-old Stewart hosted the Oscars in Los Angeles on Sunday.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/3/10/112144.shtml?s=ic

posted March 10, 2006 02:29 PM            

quote:

---

That is not so, says Comedy Central who broadcast Stewart's The Daily Show. According to independent Neilson Media Research, Stewart's audience is better educated than O'Reilly's and Stewart's audience earns more than O'Reilly's. http://www.undercover.com.au/news/2004/oct04/20041001_jonstewart.html

---

quote:

---

On top of that, "Daily Show" viewers know more about election issues than people who regularly read newspapers or watch television news, according to the National Annenberg Election Survey. http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/28/comedy.politics/

---

quote:

---

Viewers of Jon Stewart's show are more likely to have completed four years of college than people who watch "The O'Reilly Factor," according to Nielsen Media Research. http://www.boston.com/ae/tv/articles/2004/09/27/so_who_are_the_stoned_slackers_watching_jon_stewart/

---

posted March 10, 2006 02:49 PM            

Well, I guess that shows the true value of a degree in America these days.

Is Comedy Central the source of your hard news too acoustic? I only ask because you seem to get your misconceptions from the print media and phony polls.

posted March 10, 2006 03:01 PM              

It's funnier than heck....

Olbermann refers to O'Reilly, as "Ted Baxter."

(remember the clueless egomaniac newsman from THE MARY
TYLER MOORE SHOW? )

....and O'Reilly is trying to get Olbermann fired.

O'Reilly also has FOX SECURITY POLICE ready to hop on
anybody who mentions Olbermann's name on his show...a guy called
up the other day, and mentioned Olbermann's name and O'Reilly
immediately cut him off, and threatned him with the Fox Security Police...

"We've got your number! Believe it!" O'Reilly said with such seriousness
that it made me shudder.....

Olbermann had a tape of the whole thing....

posted March 10, 2006 03:18 PM              

Keith Olbermann is a newsman on cable's MSNBC.....

Bill O'Reilly is the same on cable's Faux
News....Opps, I meaan Fox News...

I watch them both....

Keith for his insight...

posted March 10, 2006 03:53 PM            

A better informed audience tends to watch Jon Stewart's show, yes. Do we have to get our news from them? Have you ever watched the show? No. They're on at 11:00 at night. They literally NEVER break a story. People like myself tune in just to see the commentary on the news.

You saw that stuff I put in the other thread about how Democrats are upset with the news for being too lenient with regard to their reporting on this administration? Some of that likely stems from Jon Stewart. One of their favorite things is catching the administration in double speak. You'd be surprised at the self-effacement of the left by him, though. He, like the rest of us, realizes where the left is going wrong.

Last night he had on former Reagan administration official Bruce Bartlett who considers himself a Libertarian, and who's written a book entitled, "Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy." Don't suppose you would be willing to tune into a Libertarian Reaganite would you?

quote:

---

Is Comedy Central the source of your hard news too acoustic? I only ask because you seem to get your misconceptions from the print media and phony polls.

---

posted March 10, 2006 03:59 PM              

By Greg Szymanski
3-10-6

The winds of war and political dissent are heating up as the media lap
dogs from FOX News whipping up Bush propaganda are getting 20 lashes
of their own from prime time critics like David Letterman and Keith Olbermann.

Letterman recently said half of what comes out of the mouths of neo con
commentators Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity are outright lies and Bush
propaganda. And MSNBC host Keith Olbermann agreed, saying O'Reilly is
the "worst of the worst."

So, as the prime town crew is beginning to rip apart the media propaganda
machine, it will be interesting to see how far they really go before their bosses
start reigning them in. For example, will the day come when Letterman or
Olbermann call 9/11 an "inside job" while presenting solid evidence suppressed
by their nightly news counterparts?

Fat chance under today's state of the media, but still it's a hopeful thought.
It's also impressive to see George Clooney put a foot in the Patriot camp,
although the second foot would be nice, considering 3,000 of his fellow
Americans were killed by the government, the same government profiting
off his hard earned acting money.

Also, besides Clooney, where are the other voices of Hollywood?

posted March 10, 2006 07:05 PM            

I see your problem is systemic acoustic. You really do have a problem with definitions, don't you. If those well educated viewers of Jon Stewart...your interpretation...are watching and thinking they're getting news, then their degrees are devalued.

Calling commentary NEWS is unfortunate. Commentary is opinion about the news. To the degree the actual NEWS is accurate and that's by no means certain, given the sorry state of journalism these days, then and only then, a commentary on the news "might" be useful. However, even then, it's still opinion, interpretation and delivered from whatever bias the commentator possesses.

I know it's escaped your notice, as MOST things do acoustic but many of the articles on NewsMax and many which I post here ARE AP stories and identified as such.

posted March 10, 2006 07:16 PM            

quote:

---

You really do have a problem with definitions, don't you. If those well educated viewers of Jon Stewart...your interpretation...are watching and thinking they're getting news, then their degrees are devalued.

---

I didn't define them. Someone else did.

quote:

---

Calling commentary NEWS is unfortunate. Commentary is opinion about the news. To the degree the actual NEWS is accurate and that's by no means certain, given the sorry state of journalism these days, then and only then, a commentary on the news "might" be useful. However, even then, it's still opinion, interpretation and delivered from whatever bias the commentator possesses.

---

Who's calling commentary news? No one. It's entertainment. Entertainment that has made Jon Stewart a household name.

quote:

---

You are establishing a fine record for consistency acoustic..if being consistently wrong is your goal.

---

posted March 10, 2006 08:47 PM            

quote:

---

Surveys have shown that as many as 20 percent of young people get their news from Stewart's show.....Associated Press

---

quote:

---

A better informed audience tends to watch Jon Stewart's show, yes. Do we have to get our news from them?...acoustic

---

Hehe, and in the same post acoustic, you managed to get a dig in against NewsMax without realizing the article I posted....from NewsMax IS an AP story.

posted March 11, 2006 01:10 AM              

HARASSMENT AND INTIMIDATION IN BROWNSHIRT NEO-CONNED
AMERICA

Joseph Watson - March 11, 2006

Bill O'Reilly's on-air threat to callers who disagreed with him that they
would receive a visit from Fox security and that their information would
be turned over to local law enforcement at first seemed like another sick
gimmick, but the stunt became a whole lot more serious when it was
revealed that at least two terrified victims had received threatening calls.

Countdown's Keith Olbermann, subject of a mud-slinging match with O'Reilly,
highlighted two cases where callers who irked O'Reilly later received actual
phone calls from Fox Security at his behest. One of the individuals appeared
under silhouette and said that Fox security left a message on his answer phone
regarding the following exchange with Bill O'Reilly on the March 2nd edition
his nationally syndicated talk show.

O'REILLY: Orlando, Florida, Mike, go.

CALLER: Hey Bill, I appreciate you taking my call.

O'REILLY: Sure.

CALLER: I like to listen to you during the day, I think Keith Olbermann's show --

O'REILLY: There ya go, Mike is -- he's a gone guy. You know, we have his --
we have your phone numbers, by the way. So, if you're listening, Mike,
we have your phone number, and we're going to
turn it over to Fox security, and you'll be getting a little visit.

HILL: Maybe Mike is from the mothership.

O'REILLY: No, Maybe Mike is going to get into big trouble, because we're not
going to play around. When you call us, ladies and gentleman, just so you
know, we do have your phone number, and if you say anything untoward,
obscene, or anything like that, Fox security then will contact your local
authorities, and you will be held accountable. Fair?

HILL: That's fair.

O'REILLY: So, just -- all you guys who do this kind of a thing, you know,
I know some shock jocks. Whatever. You will be held accountable. Believe it.

We'll be right back.

Another case was highlighted where a woman who had called into O'Reilly's
show and disagreed also received a call from Fox Security while in her car
with her daughter. The woman burst into tears and was frightened by the
intimidation tactic

Attention wh0res like O'Reilly and Ann Coulter are known for saying anything
to cause a wave and we would normally gloss over this and focus on more
pressing matters. But the fact that Fox
security actually followed through and left threatening messages with at
least two different people makes O'Reilly guilty of harassment of a nature
not too dissimilar to the lawsuit he was hit with in 2004.
Readers probably don't wish to be reminded of so-called conservative
O'Reilly's sordid Caribbean shower fantasies, threesomes and vibrators.
All of which he enthusiastically shared with Fox intern Andrea Mackris who
recorded the phone conversations and then turned them over to her lawyer.
O'Reilly has previously called for everyone held at Guantanamo Bay to be executed.
Last week's release of the names of Guantanamo Bay detainees identified
a sizeable portion to be no more than delivery drivers, chicken farmers,
sack makers, taxi drivers and students.

The fact that O'Reilly's insane megalomania would be enough to convince
Fox to follow through on his madcap threats, in the knowledge that they
were committing at least a misdemeanor and breaking the law, gives us
an insight into the rampant delirium that has taken a foothold at Fox News.

Perhaps O'Reilly should push for a bill to be introduced that re-introduces
the East German Stasi. That way we can all inform on our neighbors if they
display disloyal tendencies to the government. After all, the terrorists
attacked us because they hate our freedom!

O'Reilly's attitude betrays the true sentiment of the statist apologists
and witch
hunters that have hypnotized a jackbooted army of once conservative
Americans (during the Clinton years) and turned them loose to feed on
the very core of what the Constitution and the founding fathers are
supposed to represent, eternal vigilance and questioning of one's own
government.

Thankfully it's a shrinking minority. Rating trends show that O'Reilly has
lost 21% of his audience in the past year.

At the very least, we demand a full apology and an end to this browbeating.
Otherwise, Fox and O'Reilly's actions need to be the subject of an FCC
investigation and intimidation and harassment charges need to be filed by
the victims of these brownshirt America-hating thugs.

posted March 11, 2006 11:39 AM              

Jwhop,

Do you really have that hard of a time believing that intelligent people would choose to watch Jon Stewart over O'Reilly? Seriously?

O'Reilly is a moron and a twit... and not all that cute, I might add. Jon Stewart is smart, funny, and a CUTIE PIE!

People looking to O'Reilly are looking to be TOLD what to think... poorly, I might add... and well, not honestly either.

Yes it is a comedy show, but it is an intelligent comedy show. A lot of the jokes would go WAY over a stupid person's head.

posted March 11, 2006 11:55 AM              

Go Jon Stewart! I hope he gets to move his business to 60 Minutes.

I was watching 60 Minutes a few weeks ago... Andy Rooney came on and was talking about The Middle East. I felt like he thought he was talking to a bunch of retarded idiots! It was obnoxious!

(Although, perhaps he was aiming his commentary at O'Reilly viewers? In which case... it may have been too smart. )

He said things like, "First, you should understand that the Middle East isn’t really in the middle of anything."
Durrr... really?

Here's another quote from his brilliant commentary (if you like condescending A-holes, you'll love this one):

"The two countries we're most deeply involved with are Iran and Iraq, and their confusing. One reason for that confusion is the two countries sound so much alike. Just one letter difference. It's as if we had two states - one called Utah and the other called Utaq."

Let's read that again, in case you didn't catch the stupidity of the comment."... we're most deeply involved with Iran and Iraq, and their confusing." - I really hope he didn't wirte this up himself.

... and yet another brilliant tid bit from Andy Rooney on Iraq:

"Iraq is only two-thirds the size of Texas, even though it has more people – and that accounts for why Iraq is crowded and Texas is not.
Another difference between Iraq and Texas is, President Bush doesn't go to Iraq on vacation."

Whoa, really Andy? Really... the president doesn't vacation in war torn countries?!

Watching 60 Minutes, it seems, will kill off your brain cells, making you dumb enough to need commentary like Andy Rooney's.