Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannitty are awesome news reporter

[ShamMol]

That seems to be an unreasonable goal for a media outlet, but how would you know Fox doesn't do that if you are not watching every hour, and taking notes of who is interviewed. The people who are questioned during the shows I have seen are usually just labeled as Rebublican or Democrat. They could be conservatives, moderates, or liberals, but that isn't pointed out. There is some programming that is just news, without commentary.

unreasonable-probably. But that is what fair and balanced truely is. I watch Fox quite a lot for reasons that escape me. They are labeled as such and that creates an automatic divide on any station that does not foster any sort of conversation. My idea is the only true way to get a fair and balanced coversation, whether it be reasonable or not. There is programming everywhere that is just news-and that is what i tend to listen to/watch/read so that I can make an informed decision. Once they start talking outside the script-it ain't news.

 

[Squawker]

The left has driven this campaign about Fox, so people won’t listen to them. It worked for the die hard lefties, but the Republicans figured if the left hated it, Fox was doing something right. I don't look to the TV to give me "hard News" but I do like to hear what the other sides have to say about the issues. CNN is a liberal, boring, gloom and doom channel. Just for your information, this is what Brian Wilson had to say about Outfoxed.

by Brian Wilson
You may have noticed that your friends at the FOX News Channel have been under attack of late. To hear some tell it, we are the personification of evil, a blight on society and may even be responsible for a worldwide epidemic of plantar warts.
The most prominent of the recent attacks has been in the form of the film, Outfoxed, which is backed by the ultra-liberal political action group MoveOn.org. Allow me to speak frankly — this alleged documentary is in fact a third-rate hack-job, full of clips pulled out of context, edited in such a way as to cast FOX News in the worst possible light. Don't take my word for it; read from a recent article in the Washington Post:
"...some of the editing in the movie is questionable. In a montage involving criticism of Kerry's tax policies, political correspondent Carl Cameron is shown saying: 'If you want to destroy jobs in this country, you raise taxes.' Left on the cutting-room floor is that Cameron was quoting Commerce Secretary Don Evans."
That assessment comes from none other than Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz, a guy who works for CNN in his spare time.
So desperate were the producers of the film to smear FOX News that they sought out interviews with an odd collection of miscreants and disgruntled former employees who appear on camera to trash us. Two of those interviewed NEVER EVEN WORKED FOR THE FOX NEWS CHANNEL.
Take for example, an interview with Frank O'Donnell. I worked alongside Frank at FOX affiliate WTTG in the late 80's. He left after a series of disagreements with the news director at the time and his parting shot was an article trashing our award-winning newsroom in a regional magazine. Today he is the politically active leader of a left-leaning environmental organization (something you will not find mentioned in the documentary). Frank has never worked for this news organization and left the employ of WTTG roughly a decade before FOX News Channel even existed.
That, my friends, is how desperate the producers of this film were to find people willing to say bad things about FOX News.
One wonders why the MoveOn.org people are so up in arms about our little 'ol news organization? Could it be that they fear a news organization that allows all voices to join in public discourse? Could it be they do not want you to have access to a fair and balanced debate of the great issues of our day? Could it be that they hope to maintain a stranglehold on the mainstream press that many Americans already see as left-leaning?
Take a look at the bigger picture and you can see this is an attempt to discredit, muzzle and, perhaps, intimidate a news organization during an election year.
Look! Here's the bottom-line: I have been reporting for this news organization for 6 years. I have never been asked to pull a punch or slant a story. I have never been told how to go about my reporting. I have never been hammered by the bosses for a story they did not like. All I have been asked to do is give all sides of an issue the opportunity to be heard.

Source

 

[ShamMol]

I never saw Outfoxed and now think I will have to rent it, lol if it drew such a sharp criticism from Fox (just kiddin man).

If you don't watch TV for actual news-Fox is your station, CNN is your station, it sure isn't the actual news. That is what radio stations that do all news and no commentary, or NPR from 6:30-8:30. That is what news is. Not this perverted crap from these news channels-though I do sometimes what Bill over at MSNBC for a laugh-but that isn't serious news (ditto for Oreilly, great comedy especially when he dealt with the Hamilton College thing-great stuff really).

 

[steve6871]

I don't really care about the discussion about whether Bill O'Reily is a reporter, correspondent, or what. I can tell you that he is the most arrogant, condescending jack-ass in the media. He has no audience because he has a habit of offending everyone, and inviting intellectually inferior morons that he knows he can out-talk to make himself look good, (so he believes).

 

[stsburns]

how many rights, how many lefts, could I end up in the same spot!

There are slanted reports in the media on both the left and right obviously.

So how many lefts and rights are we talkin?

Lets see the lefts,
CNN, CBS, 1/2 NBC, MTV news +4

The rights,
Fox News, 1/2 NBC +2

The Best Neutral coverage (in my opinion):

MSNBC (Cause Microsoft could careless)

CSPAN (You got 2 mins. after that, you get cut off)

 

[1SGRet]

I'm a little apprehensive here. On one forum I got a warning for too harsh a critique of pundits. In that post I merely quoted Rush, Sean and Bill. Bad liberal!

So, I won't do that - quote them, I mean.

Occasionally, I see or hear O'Reilly make an attempt at fairness. I always wonder when the other shoe will drop. OK, maybe he's a sincere guy who only occasionally likes to talk dirty to associate producers. (That was a nasty crack! Wasn't getting personal...)

Sean Hannitty is full tilt boogie conservative on his radio shows. Never has a Dem done anything right, or Bush or his supporters - wrong. He's a bit less harsh on TV, with Colmes to mitigate his viciousness.

We ain't mentioned Rush. Ah, Rush - who gets his 'white position papers' direct from the Oval Office. Maybe Bush doesn't know Rush is still on the Oxycontin - I can't prove that - for the pain...

 

[LaMidRighter]

Occasionally, I see or hear O'Reilly make an attempt at fairness. I always wonder when the other shoe will drop. OK, maybe he's a sincere guy who only occasionally likes to talk dirty to associate producers. (That was a nasty crack! Wasn't getting personal...)

Trust me, O'Reilly is an independent, he takes his own positions on issues and both sides are fighting over which one "owns" him

Sean Hannitty is full tilt boogie conservative on his radio shows. Never has a Dem done anything right, or Bush or his supporters - wrong. He's a bit less harsh on TV, with Colmes to mitigate his viciousness.

This actually isn't absolutely fair, becuase Sean does give credit when due, he praises Sen. Joe Lieberman when something gets proposed and Sen. Zel Miller ret. is constantly on the show both dems, Sean talks to dems all the time and when they do something the country can be proud of, he is the first one to praise.

We ain't mentioned Rush. Ah, Rush - who gets his 'white position papers' direct from the Oval Office. Maybe Bush doesn't know Rush is still on the Oxycontin - I can't prove that - for the pain...

Come on now, you seem like a nice enough person, but that one was low.
Seriously though, I am a broadcasting major at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette about to graduate and have had extensive media theory training, What O'Reilly, Hannity, Colmbs, and Limbaugh do is editorial style reporting, they give you their opinion of current news, many people don't consider that going into consuming this form of news product, where most should have problems is straight news reporters on either side who edit down a story to slant the message, that is dangerous.

 

[edb19]

I love Hannity and Colmes. I listen to them on conservitive radio every day that I can. My dad is the kind of guy that thinks that Hannity and Colmes are the greatest ever.

The first time my daughter saw Hannity and Colmes she decided that Sean Hannity looks like Nathan Lane and Alan Colmes looks like Skeletor. Now I can't look at him without thinking that :rofl

 

[26 X World Champs]

Trust me, O'Reilly is an independent, he takes his own positions on issues and both sides are fighting over which one "owns" him

I find it incredible that anyone would post that Democrats/Liberals would say that O'Reilly is on our side! That is insane, yes, insane! Here's a website that shows you how much we Dems love O'Reilly:

http://www.sweetjesusihatebilloreilly.com/index.html

Quote from 1SGRet:
Sean Hannitty is full tilt boogie conservative on his radio shows. Never has a Dem done anything right, or Bush or his supporters - wrong. He's a bit less harsh on TV, with Colmes to mitigate his viciousness."

This actually isn't absolutely fair, becuase Sean does give credit when due, he praises Sen. Joe Lieberman when something gets proposed and Sen. Zel Miller ret. is constantly on the show both dems, Sean talks to dems all the time and when they do something the country can be proud of, he is the first one to praise.

Man, are you amazing, truly amazing! Zel Miller a Democrat? Did you miss his speech at the REPUBLICAN convention in 2004 trashing the Democratic Party.

This type of bullshit has to stop, it's so foolish. Think Hannity is fair do you?

Here's a website that we Democrats enjoy:

http://www.hannityisamoron.com/archives.html

What O'Reilly, Hannity, Colmbs, and Limbaugh do is editorial style reporting, they give you their opinion of current news, many people don't consider that going into consuming this form of news product, where most should have problems is straight news reporters on either side who edit down a story to slant the message, that is dangerous.

I say let these rabid righties say whatever they want, no qualms from here. However....for anyone to suggest they are impartial reporters is ridiculous. Al Franken, Randi Rhodes? Equally prejudiced on the left, but they do not pretend to be "fair and balanced" and therein lies the difference.

 

[Squawker]

Here's a website that we Democrats enjoy:

Democrats wouldn't enjoy those sites Champ, they have too much common sense. Those are for the left wing whacko's such as yourself buddy. :mrgreen:

 

[26 X World Champs]

Democrats wouldn't enjoy those sites Champ, they have too much common sense. Those are for the left wing whacko's such as yourself buddy. :mrgreen:

You need to get out more, I was joking! Yikes!

 

[GottaHurt]

Uh um, ratings , yea, that's what I thought.FNC, 8 out of the top 10 spots.

People are tuning in because they're tired of all the Chicken Little reporting found elsewhere.

Dan Rather and CBS (not only will you CBS, but you'll hear some too) did a great service to the American public, with their "accurate" and "in depth" reporting, than any other news agency, ever.

Turn to any liberal station and you get the same sickening rhetoric.

Nazi's, gulags, collapsing economy and my personal favorite, the ever so sober
Ted "Cutty Sark" Kennedy sloshing out, "quagmire" to describe the status of the war in Iraq.

The best part, is watching the libs juke and jive as they dodge the bullets, from their own guns.

Howard Dean, you're my hero :smile:

 

[1SGRet]

Trust me, O'Reilly is an independent, he takes his own positions on issues and both sides are fighting over which one "owns" him



Come on now, you seem like a nice enough person, but that one was low.
Seriously though, I am a broadcasting major at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette about to graduate and have had extensive media theory training, What O'Reilly, Hannity, Colmbs, and Limbaugh do is editorial style reporting, they give you their opinion of current news, many people don't consider that going into consuming this form of news product, where most should have problems is straight news reporters on either side who edit down a story to slant the message, that is dangerous.

Ah, Lafayette. You know, I always loved Louisiana, despite the weather, and some of the biggotry, but then great people, and some vignettes, but later.

Colmes is the house liberal, I believe, and a sort of counterweight to Hannity. That Yankee lover gave some (true) quotes that Hannity made. I heard him with my own ears say, "War protestors should be interned like the Japanese (Americans) in World War II." My parenthesis. And I heard Rush say something to the effect that they oughta send all addicts to jail. (I could find the actual quote, but am much too lazy.) Oh, Rush is one of the 'good' addicts. O'Reilly said early in the Aruba investigation - a tragic case, but how in the hell could those parents afford the trip? - "She's at the bottom of the ocean, isn't she?" The very next day: "On this program we do not speculate (talking about the missing senior)."

Back to the other LA. We came to Fort Polk from Fort Hood to do some finance outprocessing, TDY, for a NG division. This was pre Vietnam, 'bout 62-63. I was the ops NCO. Had a guy, an E-6 who was married - like me, and some others - and who happened to be black. He had the only car, a recent Chevy model, and we all ganged up with him to save the TDY money. He decided to stop at a drive in near Leesville to grab some burgers. Served w/o any delay or comment. Three weeks later we nearly tangled with some college dudes who said we were running with a n------, and they were going to kick our butts. We had one old boy who was a load so we walked, after we explained things. I've always regretted not punching those dudes out.

Now, I've visited Louisiana every decade since, and I love it. Even then I loved it, what with Ville Platte, Opelousas and some other places I've forgotten about. One 'bar' outside of Monroe was named Murphy's. Turned out to be a wh*re house. The Parish Sheriff owned the joint and used his deputies for bouncers. We didn't partake of the place's products. Oh, no! And when you went to the john, btw, you had to shoot craps before you could actually cr*p.

Sorry for the travels down memory (or mammary) lane. What this has to do with media giants I don't know. Cheers...

 

[LaMidRighter]

Ah, Lafayette. You know, I always loved Louisiana, despite the weather, and some of the biggotry, but then great people, and some vignettes, but later.

I'm glad you (mostly) enjoyed your experience here, we pride ourselves on hospitality, as far as the bigotry, there is some, but modern thought is to try to get away from that and hate only the appropriate people of all areas, not just the blind prejudicial way

Colmes is the house liberal, I believe, and a sort of counterweight to Hannity. That Yankee lover gave some (true) quotes that Hannity made. I heard him with my own ears say, "War protestors should be interned like the Japanese (Americans) in World War II." My parenthesis. And I heard Rush say something to the effect that they oughta send all addicts to jail. (I could find the actual quote, but am much too lazy.) Oh, Rush is one of the 'good' addicts. O'Reilly said early in the Aruba investigation - a tragic case, but how in the hell could those parents afford the trip? - "She's at the bottom of the ocean, isn't she?" The very next day: "On this program we do not speculate (talking about the missing senior)."

I haven't watched the Fox op-eds in awhile so I really couldn't say one way or another about comments on those venues, but Colmbs isn't the only liberal(on that show, yes) you have Geraldo(I know, I know, bad ex.), Juan Williams, Greta Van Sustern, and I believe on of the Beltway Boys is a liberal as well, there may be more, but those are the ones that stick out in my mind. As far as the Op-ed stuff goes, I say, let them say whatever, that's basically their job, they do need to remind people though that it is their job to give their opinion and admit bias(Hannity will proudly proclaim that when challenged, Rush as well) I don't like slanted straight news however, as this style is supposed to show both sides and give equal time to all points.

 

[LaMidRighter]

I find it incredible that anyone would post that Democrats/Liberals would say that O'Reilly is on our side! That is insane, yes, insane! Here's a website that shows you how much we Dems love O'Reilly:

http://www.sweetjesusihatebilloreilly.com/index.html

Honestly, the blind right says he is on your side as well, my statement stands.

Man, are you amazing, truly amazing! Zel Miller a Democrat? Did you miss his speech at the REPUBLICAN convention in 2004 trashing the Democratic Party

. I know I'm amazing, but thanks for pointing it out . Seriously though, Zel is a Truman Democrat, he has many a time said he wants the party to return to it's previous values and regrets what it has become, he has also refused Republican invitations to the party respectfully as he wants tradition to be restored to his party, Zel is, in fact, the ultimate Democrat along with Joe Lieberman. Also, did you miss his speech at the '92 convention praising Clinton, the party left him, he didn't leave the party.

This type of bullshit has to stop, it's so foolish. Think Hannity is fair do you?

Hannity is fair in that he doesn't hide his conservatism, he is fair in that he gives you his opinion on the news and qualifies it as that, he is even fair in that he invites plenty of liberals on the show to defend their views. I think he's biased but fair.

I say let these rabid righties say whatever they want, no qualms from here. However....for anyone to suggest they are impartial reporters is ridiculous. Al Franken, Randi Rhodes? Equally prejudiced on the left, but they do not pretend to be "fair and balanced" and therein lies the difference.

Never said that, I said they are editorialists which is by it's nature supposed to be biased news, it is news commentary,not reporting and people should not rely on just them to get their information, just like people can no longer simply trust one source for news, it's sad really, but true.

 

[1SGRet]

Honestly, the blind right says he is on your side as well, my statement stands.


. I know I'm amazing, but thanks for pointing it out . Seriously though, Zel is a Truman Democrat, he has many a time said he wants the party to return to it's previous values and regrets what it has become, he has also refused Republican invitations to the party respectfully as he wants tradition to be restored to his party, Zel is, in fact, the ultimate Democrat along with Joe Lieberman. Also, did you miss his speech at the '92 convention praising Clinton, the party left him, he didn't leave the party.

Hannity is fair in that he doesn't hide his conservatism, he is fair in that he gives you his opinion on the news and qualifies it as that, he is even fair in that he invites plenty of liberals on the show to defend their views. I think he's biased but fair.



Never said that, I said they are editorialists which is by it's nature supposed to be biased news, it is news commentary,not reporting and people should not rely on just them to get their information, just like people can no longer simply trust one source for news, it's sad really, but true.

Case might be made for O'Reilly, and in his aging years, Rush. Hannity is just rabid. Two minutes of listening will impart that knowledge. Occasionally, a liberal will find his/her way onto the radio program. They are carefully controlled interviews. Sean wins because he sets it up. After he gets the opponent pissed, it's Mr. Reasonable. Try Michael Medved if you want intelligent conservatism.

Al Franken is sort of avancular, and sometimes so laid back, I fall asleep. My favorite, con or lib is G. Gordon Libby. He out Ollies Ollie. The poor old Zell just wants to duel. He makes as much sense as Strom Thurman did in his latter years. (Both former Democrats - yes, I know, Zell is a nominal Democrat, but he is also a nominal Alzheimer's.) (Unfair poke - ainkkk.)

 

[Fu_chick]

"NOT"A lot you know if you think Bill Reilly or Sean Hannitty are news reporters they are not they are news commentators their is a huge difference.

I hate to hurt your little bittie feelings, I hope I didn't burst your bubble I know a lot of you think Bill & Sean are gods you think, they walk on water ,

They are just like talk show host on the radio a bunch of hot air nothing more

I willing to bet most of Bill & Sean's and fox die hard's never listen to the news ...........This is why it is so easy for FOX to brain wash a lot of you telling you they are fair and balanced "YA RIGHT"

Um, duh. It's pretty obvious that these guys, like Rush are conservative commentators. I've heard Sean say that himself (I don't know about Bill, I try to avoid listening to him if I can at all help it). Sometimes I agree with Sean, often I don't, but I do not rely on him for news, and I highly doubt that any half-way intelligent person would.

 

[LaMidRighter]

Case might be made for O'Reilly, and in his aging years, Rush. Hannity is just rabid. Two minutes of listening will impart that knowledge. Occasionally, a liberal will find his/her way onto the radio program. They are carefully controlled interviews. Sean wins because he sets it up. After he gets the opponent pissed, it's Mr. Reasonable. Try Michael Medved if you want intelligent conservatism.

Sean is passionate about his views, no doubt, I think he'll mellow out a bit as he gains experience, either that or the Irish and New Yorker tendancies will intensify, either way, it will be fun to see.

Al Franken is sort of avancular, and sometimes so laid back, I fall asleep.

This is funny, when he is in control you are absolutely right, but when he starts to lose an argument it gets pretty funny, he just mentally derails and starts to lose it.

My favorite, con or lib is G. Gordon Libby. He out Ollies Ollie.

Liddy is pretty cool, but it's hard to find his show here, I only get snippets here and there.

The poor old Zell just wants to duel. He makes as much sense as Strom Thurman did in his latter years. (Both former Democrats - yes, I know, Zell is a nominal Democrat, but he is also a nominal Alzheimer's.) (Unfair poke - ainkkk.)

Funny stuff, but I see in Zel Miller and Joe Lieberman the same kind of Democrats that Truman and JFK represented, Zel is ornery to be sure, but I think it comes from a passionate love of his country and I guess it would seem his proper political affilitation is up to individual opinion.

 

[26 X World Champs]

Funny stuff, but I see in Zel Miller and Joe Lieberman the same kind of Democrats that Truman and JFK represented, Zel is ornery to be sure, but I think it comes from a passionate love of his country and I guess it would seem his proper political affilitation is up to individual opinion.

I think it's more than safe to say that neither HST or JFK would have ever made a convention speech at a Republican convention? You really think a Kennedy would turn his back on the Democratic party?

Zell Miller spoke his mind for sure. It's just that some of us question his sanity....

 

[LaMidRighter]

I think it's more than safe to say that neither HST or JFK would have ever made a convention speech at a Republican convention? You really think a Kennedy would turn his back on the Democratic party?

Zell Miller spoke his mind for sure. It's just that some of us question his sanity....

I don't know if that would have been an issue if that make of Democrat still existed Champ, truth be told. JFK and HST were phenomenal examples of the principles for which the Democrats once stood, and also, I would probably have voted for Kennedy or Truman with zero qualms. The old Republican party was waaaay too conservative, back in the day, the Dems were the perfect balance of conservative ideals and laws with compassion(FDR is a different story, but we'll leave that alone). I see this in Lieberman and Miller as well, but hey, to each his own.

p.s. The cub streak at Yankee stadium stands. :smile: :applaud :2dance: arty

 

[26 X World Champs]

p.s. The cub streak at Yankee stadium stands. :smile: :applaud :2dance: arty

The Cubs have NEVER won a game in Yankee Stadium....

 

[Pacridge]

The Cubs have NEVER won a game in Yankee Stadium....

Maybe he means streak of losses?

 

[26 X World Champs]

Maybe he means streak of losses?

I was reaffirming what he wrote, he knew that the Cubs are now 0-7 lifetime at Yankee Stadium... :2wave:

 

[alienken]

ISean Hannitty is full tilt boogie conservative on his radio shows. Never has a Dem done anything right, or Bush or his supporters - wrong. He's a bit less harsh on TV, with Colmes to mitigate his viciousness."

Hannity? Viciousness? he is the nicest guy in the business. Have you ever listened to his radio show? The only time he is a jerk to people is when they start it. He defends himself and fire back. Besides look who is talking. You can't disagree with anyone without calling them a name.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

I don't know if that would have been an issue if that make of Democrat still existed Champ, truth be told. JFK and HST were phenomenal examples of the principles for which the Democrats once stood, and also, I would probably have voted for Kennedy or Truman with zero qualms. The old Republican party was waaaay too conservative, back in the day, the Dems were the perfect balance of conservative ideals and laws with compassion(FDR is a different story, but we'll leave that alone). I see this in Lieberman and Miller as well, but hey, to each his own.

p.s. The cub streak at Yankee stadium stands. :smile: :applaud :2dance: arty

What history books do you guys on the right read? Democrats back in the days of Truman and Kennedy were far more economically liberal back then than they are today. You’re telling me that as a conservative, you would have supported Truman’s Fair Deal? The difference between Democrats today and Democrats 40 to 50 years ago is that today they are more socially liberal. However, economics and domestic policy wise, back then they were a lot more liberal than they are today. The top tax rate during the 50s was 91%, the top tax rate during the Kennedy years was 70% (the reason Kennedy dropped it was not ideological, but rather because his economists told him that the government was running the risk of hoarding money from the economy and he still left it at 70%). You would have supported Kennedy and a 70% tax rate for the top bracket? Johnson’s Great Society was all JFK ideals that he was already pushing for prior to being assassinated. You would have been a supporter of the Great Society?

Republicans on the other hand are more conservative today than they have ever been. Forty years ago, Barry Goldwater represented the far right of the Republican Party. Today, he would at best be a Moderate Republican.