Ted Koppel takes on the truthsayers
Fri Sep 21, 2012 6:37 AM EDT
Rock Center
From Bill O'Reilly describing how some media pundits "smash" politicians and "pinheads," to Ann Coulter describing why O'Reilly isn't opinionated enough, Rock Center Special Correspondent Ted Koppel investigates the role of the media in the degeneration of politics into an ugly war of words.
The New York Times' David Carr says the partisan news business is so profitable, as much as $1 billion a year for one cable news network, that it's clear why others have followed suit.
Political commentators Ann Coulter and Bill Maher, ideological opposites, debate the issue.
"I think it's the first time a lot of liberals have been able to hear conservatives or know what they think," Coulter said, disagreeing that there has been a coarsening of political dialogue. "I think we just have both sides. ... You just get it from the other side now and Liberals don't like it so you're screaming bloody murder."
"We're not just screaming at each other," Maher said. "One side is screaming facts and truth. One side is screaming their version of truth, which is religious-based nonsense."
Of the industry overall, Carr says, "they're not interested in the fruits of piece. It's bad television. Who'd want to watch that?"
Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
#4 - Fri Sep 21, 2012 9:07 AM EDT
#4.1 - Fri Sep 21, 2012 6:34 PM EDT
#4.2 - Sat Sep 22, 2012 11:24 AM EDT
#3 - Fri Sep 21, 2012 8:22 AM EDT
#3.1 - Fri Sep 21, 2012 1:33 PM EDT
#3.2 - Fri Sep 21, 2012 6:42 PM EDT
#3.3 - Fri Sep 21, 2012 7:50 PM EDT
#2 - Fri Sep 21, 2012 8:00 AM EDT
#2.1 - Sun Sep 23, 2012 1:06 AM EDT
#1 - Fri Sep 21, 2012 7:31 AM EDT
#1.1 - Fri Sep 21, 2012 10:22 AM EDT
#1.2 - Fri Sep 21, 2012 2:01 PM EDT
I watched the Ted Koppel piece on Rock Center last night. It was a well done report, and pointed out that profits are more important than objectivity in the news business.
There is only one problem I see, howevver. O'Reilly, Coulter, Schultz, Maddow, Limbaugh, etc., are opinion programs. If anyone thinks they are objective news programs, they are getting their "news" from the wrong source. The opinion shows are just that, opinion!
Fox News is a different thing, however. They promote themselves as "fair and balanced", yet they have a clearly conservative bias. I believe that the networks,
NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, try to present the news in an objective manner. I think that the networks primary motivation is ratings and profits, however. Back in the days that broadcast media were regulated just by their licenses, fairness doctrine, 777 rule and the like, the news divisions usually lost money, but the networks had to present objective news in order for NBC, CBS and ABC to hold onto the licences of their 7 owned and operated broadcast outlets in major markets. During the Vietnam War, we saw the war on TV every night. This allowed Americans to see what was going on there, and led to the end (albeit far to late) of that war.
When was the last time you saw the Afghanistan war on TV? Mr. Koppel was right. The networks do not have as many foreign bureaus as they once did. Many times, they get their news footage from You Tube and Facebook! It certainly is cheaper than having a live correspondent there. Also, the entertainment divisions seem to be taking over the news. This is best evidenced by the morning "news" programs.
"Today" and "Good Morning America" are nothing but fluff news. At least "CBS This Morning" dedicates their first half hour to hard news, and saves the fluff for the 7:30 hour.
Do broadcast media need to be re-regulated? I think it would result in better news divisions, because the stick may work better than the carrot when trying to improve broadcast news
- 1
- !
#4 - Fri Sep 21, 2012 9:07 AM EDT
Regulated media was boring! Made to present both sides, unless you were uncle Walter and said you hated Viet Nam, or Eddie Murrow or 60 minutes and said McCarthy and Westmoreland were lying welps.
TV news has, now that there are many outlets, become what newspapers were when each town had more than 2 newspapers. One Left/One Right at the very least. This evolution is not the least bit surprising. But no! Bring back the alleged" Fair"ness Doctrine so Limbaugh can be silenced! That's what you want! If you don't like the bile. March with your feet and as Howard Beale said in Paddy Chaiefskys " Network" "turn it off" because the "fair"ness doctrine made me "mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore!"
TV news has, now that there are many outlets, become what newspapers were when each town had more than 2 newspapers. One Left/One Right at the very least. This evolution is not the least bit surprising. But no! Bring back the alleged" Fair"ness Doctrine so Limbaugh can be silenced! That's what you want! If you don't like the bile. March with your feet and as Howard Beale said in Paddy Chaiefskys " Network" "turn it off" because the "fair"ness doctrine made me "mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore!"
- !
"NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, try to present the news in an objective manner."
No they don't. CNN may be the exception, but only by a narrow margin on the bias scale.
- 1
- !
The move to take over the airwaves has been a concerted effort by the right over the last thirty years. Removing the Fairness Doctrine and modifying rules for number of media outlets one group can own are just two of the moves made towards this goal. Radio is dominated by right wing agenda that puts forth the ideas that Democrats and liberals hate America, that there should be no compromising, (which is quite against the ideas of the founders), and that those who do are traitors.
I have listened to most of the right wing hit parade and found that the message is dominated by half truths and outright lies, along with the consistent hammer strokes of the 'no compromise' message, up to and including validating torture as a political tool. It is beyond rational belief that in a country based on the rights of man and equal justice before the law that we even had a conversation regarding whether we should torture people or not. After listening to what is presented by these outlets and finding no comparable Democratic point of view available, I am quite pleased the MSNBC has chosen to air a counterpoint to this flood of right wing rhetoric that we are blasted with every single day.
What Anne Coulter said in your piece is exactly right. When reporting is objective, those on the far right feel that it is left wing propaganda because they are so far right. We used to laugh at the John Birch Society and their adherents because very few people believed their conspiracy theories, but the JBS has recently been revived and given a seat in the Conservative sphere. Bill Maher was also correct in that the conversation has consistently been dragged to the right, the goal lines constantly changed to bring the entire conversation towards those points.
Having said that, I get the majority of my news from National Public Radio. I find that their reporting is consistently factual and free from bias, which is how things used to be. After that, I usually listen to or watch Rachel Maddow. I like the fact that when she makes a mistake, she corrects it on the air and I also like that when she has a guest, she presents the issue, then asks them up front if what she said was correct, giving them a chance to state if there are discrepancies. This is not something that you will hear from right wing media.
President Obama stated that the one thing that surprised him was how little Republicans had to pay in political support from their constituency for taking one point of view, then abandoning it within weeks. This is due to the right wing noise machine of radio and cable that shapes these acts for willing listening public. It is not without reason that polls have shown that Fox News' audience is the least informed group out there. When that statistic begins to reverse, perhaps we can get back to a normal political conversation.
- !
#3 - Fri Sep 21, 2012 8:22 AM EDT
joedlang. Can't agree with you more. I also enjoy NPR's attempt at objectivity. No media can be totally free of bias, but at least NPR tries. Inform, not incite is a good motto. Regardless of political affiliation, we need to think for ourselves if democracy was to work.
- !
When you hear something you agree with it is not objective. It's an echo chamber.
NPR is as liberal and exceptionally subtly steers every single story they do and little show like What do you know" to "car talk" to the left. Limbaugh and pale imitators lack that sublty.
NPR is as liberal and exceptionally subtly steers every single story they do and little show like What do you know" to "car talk" to the left. Limbaugh and pale imitators lack that sublty.
You just like NPR cuz it reflects your belief and right wing radio does not. I personally listen to both and am equally appalled by both. That's the beauty of our 1st amendment.
- !
I get my news from PBS and NPR. I am a liberal but not due to ignorance. I choose to be informed by these two stations because it's in depth and comprehensive. I like the interviewers because they ask the good questions and have thoroughly researched their subjects before interviewing them. Charlie Rose, Fresh Air. I am a liberal because I'm informed, not because these channels have a slant. Also I wanted to say that Brian Williams and Ted Koppel had a subject that was too big for their time slot and I felt very unsettled for the massive information left out of a good story. Too little.
- !
There is no problem having shows dedicated to a radical point of view. They're simply entertainment and people can watch them if they like. The problem lies with networks that pretend to be unbiased news sources when they are not. These networks need to be shunned by the legitimate media and by the news makers themselves. If a network can't meet a certain criteria for presenting news without opinion or spin, they don't deserve to be recognized.
- 1
- !
#2 - Fri Sep 21, 2012 8:00 AM EDT
I watched this show because I really was hoping to get honesty from NBC. Instead I got the same hypocritical spiel that turned me away from the liberal networks in the first place. It is so frustrating to watch these liberal news reporters continue to demonize conservative programming like Fox News. The
reason I turned off their programs and tuned into Fox news is because I was so
tired of the liberal bias constantly being spewed as “factual” news. It is extremely disappointing to have Ted Koppel sanctimoniously lecture conservative news programs for what he and his peers did for years. I didn’t tune into Fox News until the late 1990’s, so believe me when I say that there was plenty of liberal leaning opinions bleeding from the 3 major networks and CNN. Why do you think Fox News had a market to begin with? People were fed-up with the liberal-leaning
bias.
reason I turned off their programs and tuned into Fox news is because I was so
tired of the liberal bias constantly being spewed as “factual” news. It is extremely disappointing to have Ted Koppel sanctimoniously lecture conservative news programs for what he and his peers did for years. I didn’t tune into Fox News until the late 1990’s, so believe me when I say that there was plenty of liberal leaning opinions bleeding from the 3 major networks and CNN. Why do you think Fox News had a market to begin with? People were fed-up with the liberal-leaning
bias.
Ted Koppel tried to blame it on money and even said money is the only reason Fox News is in the cable news business (because we all know that liberals think money is evil). Once again, he has his facts twisted. All businesses are in it for money Ted or they would not have a business (unless you are the government). I wonder if CNN made any money since their inception in 1980 (16 years before Fox News first aired).
The truth is Fox News saw a need because all the news stations were so left-leaning it was ridiculous. Fox News has done so well because Americans were tired of the liberal bias on every single channel we tuned into. Now the other networks are jealous because Fox is doing better than all of them. Maybe that should tell them something; like hello… you’re audience does not like you… But of course they’d rather just whine and lie about Fox and try to make it about - the greedy rich owners- instead of the true failures of the other networks to rain in their liberal bias. If the other networks want to keep viewers then they should be more fair & balanced. Ann Coulter was so correct when she said that the conservatives finally have a voice and the liberal media can’t stand it.
All that said, I will admit that some conservative programs
are very right leaning but… there are far more left leaning programs out there.
So thank God we live in America where we are allowed to change the channel if
we don’t like the program. Vote for the Constitution and the right to Free Speech
for all. That’s right; free speech is not just for liberals it’s for all Americans. And a high percentage of Americans are conservative.
are very right leaning but… there are far more left leaning programs out there.
So thank God we live in America where we are allowed to change the channel if
we don’t like the program. Vote for the Constitution and the right to Free Speech
for all. That’s right; free speech is not just for liberals it’s for all Americans. And a high percentage of Americans are conservative.
- !
Interesting story... looking back on tv history this type point/ counter point began long ago starting with shows like "Meet the Press" "McLaughlin Group" and "60 minutes" that showed there was an actual market for this political discussion in addition to gotcha journalism. It has gradually diminished in civility over the years. I have to say MSNBC lost its way after Tim Russert passed. But blaming one or two media entities for "degenerating " politics is ridiculous. All are complacent. Saying that it has effected the ability for Congress to do it's job is more than ridiculous. The reality is, the news is a business. What people are craving now is a news organization they feel they can trust that doesn't have an agenda ... btw.. Brian you kind of proved the loss of objectivity with your snide remark about OReilly. I don't care if you like him or not.... just do your job objectively. Let me decide whether I want to love or hate the guy.
- 1
- !
#1 - Fri Sep 21, 2012 7:31 AM EDT
Well said Dandygirl! What Brian Williams fails to realize is that NBC is part of the problem too. It was evident that he sees himself as above this media problem when he and his network are in it too. I laughed at that last night. He needs to take a hard look at his reporting before he criticizes others.
- 1
- !
Totally agree with you dadygirl. After the loss of Tim Russert NBC/MSNBC has gone to hell in a hand basket. I have lost any respect I had for Ted Koppel from the piece and never was a fan of loofah loving loser O'Reilly. Before there were alternatives than the three major networks I was old enough to realize there seemed to be a slant in the news. So I agree people are craving news organizations that don't have an agenda. I caught the snide remark too - shameful! Personally I believe any "reporters" on NBC/MSNBC have drank the Kool-Aid and are no longer a reliable source of reporting the truth without their personal slant. Tim Russert is spinning in his grave!
- 1
- !
No comments:
Post a Comment