Nimrod2005
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-08-06 09:24 AM
Original message |
Updating you on my viewing habits, hint, no Tweetie for 2 weeks |
|
Edited on Wed Feb-08-06 09:24 AM by Nimrod2005
My blood pressure is down, I am sleeping better, and I find myself smiling more often...I AM NOT KIDDING either.
|
Lerkfish
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-08-06 09:34 AM
Response to Original message |
1. the ONLY way I know what goes on with punditwhores is what I read here |
|
its much easier form: in short baggets, appropriately surrounded by a platinum setting of derision and contempt.
:)
|
BobRossi
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-08-06 09:37 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Gave up ALL TV "news" long time ago. |
|
I don't watch any of it. I grew up watching Cronkite. There is no journalism today, "news" reporting is dead. If you want the truth you must see it first hand.
|
MrPrax
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-08-06 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
8. You sound closer to my age... |
|
Edited on Wed Feb-08-06 11:06 AM by MrPrax
I have notice this tendency among the 'younger' addicts that seem to feel that 'maybe' the next time they watch "fill_in_your_fav_pol_program" it will improve. I, like you, realized long ago that that 'truth moment' will never happen and it is propaganda (these days more obviously so).
People are made to believe that they are 'missing' something if they don't watch. People are made to think that their initial reaction to an issue (probably right) needs to be 're-valued' in light of what the experts have to say on the subject.
This is of course a marketing tactic; that is how they 'sell' their information products and create demand/viewership.
I believe folks arrive at this conclusion from the 'accumulative' effect of watching TV over different periods of time...it won't ever be a reliable source, it can't be a reliable source.
These media companies are legally bound to promote the interests of shareholders; there is NO mandate to provide public information, unless the owners of the company see it as a revenue stream.
Really bizarre why anyone with access to the internet would even bother with these shows when they can be their own editor and read about things, they choose--not things, assholes like Mathews and his production staff, think will please people in power.
My TV viewing is strictly entertainment.
|
Daphne08
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-08-06 09:43 AM
Response to Original message |
3. I gave up on Hardball Friday, January 20, 2006 |
|
Sent my last email to them on January 31, 2006.
I'm too old to give Chris Matthews and "Hardball" one more minute of my time.
|
Dr.Phool
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-08-06 09:52 AM
Response to Original message |
|
The ONLY time I've ever watched him was during the early 2004 campaign, and Howard Dean was on. That was enough for me.
Why does he even have guests? They never get to talk.
|
karynnj
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-08-06 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
7. One interesting idea of Democrats getting the upper hand |
|
When Kerry was on in November, Matthews was very polite and actually asked some tough but very good questions. Matthews does not particularly like Kerry - given how Matthews acted in 2004, so it's not that. I think the difference is that Kerry had him broadcast from his Senate office.
I suspect the setting reminded him that Kerry was a serious high level person in the government. Maybe seeing the staff (his and others) being respectful had some impact. (It worked to a slightly lesser degree with Blitzer and even seemed to have a residual effect. Blitzer was fine (very unusual)when Kerry was interviewed from Israel and Iraq. Even with the filibuster, Blitzer showed footage of Kerry at Davos - leaving a meeting, smiling, returning waves from others, shaking hands - nothing drastic, but the mental image was a leader meeting other leaders and getting a good reception from them, without a ski slope in sight.
It's almost like an attempt was made (by Kerry) to bring the press in to see that this is not a game and that they are doing serious work. (In the Senate and Israel and Iraq - there was mention of the other countries he visited.) I hadn't completely realized how far our media has sunk, until I saw the Indian and European news reports on that trip.
|
badgolfer
(153 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-08-06 10:14 AM
Response to Original message |
|
Everyone here at DU should just ignore this guy. Quit watching and emailing him about his comments. I think he is just trying to be another O'Reilly by making stupid statements thereby agitating everyone to respond in some manner to his comments. His ratings are low for a reason, he is an idiot. So, why respond to this idiots comments?
|
Nimrod2005
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-08-06 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
6. Good point...And he gets about 300K viewers a day, O'Leilly |
|
gets around 2-3 million...I guess he is no O'Reilley!!! We should remind him...
|
tibbiit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-08-06 11:24 AM
Response to Original message |
9. I was a tweety addict until |
|
April 9, 2003.. the day they pulled down saddams statue. (I watched the huge crowd in the CNN version then happened to see the real version... 20 or so soldiers in the square pulling down the statue on the BBC... that was it for me) I havent watched one smidgen of corporate news or the whore pundits since then. Turn that shit off. tib
|
Uncle Joe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-08-06 01:25 PM
Response to Original message |
10. And because you are the one millionth viewer |
|
to turn off T-Ball, you win a brand new car!:)
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 02:15 PM
Response to Original message |