Re: Interesting Viewpoint
 

What platform did I lose? I was pointing out that the broadcast media (and cable) has been granted access to public property. The airwaves, and the cable infrastructure, belongs to the people or was able to be put into place because of public granted access.

You seem naive about the broadcast medium. CNN? Well, they were part of the Turner Corp. Turner owns a hugh chunk of AOL/TIME/Warner. Time Warner owns cable companies, studios, Viacom, networks, production facilities, etc. (and a nice chunck of ATT telephone, etc.) Just like Disney owns ABC which owns ESPN and also owns other movie studios and cable channels, etc.

Kind of like the old Standard Oil Monopoly. This huge media companies are intertwined and own the studios making the product, own the networks distributing the product, and own the cable companies that deliver the product to you home. They also own other media outlets to let you know what you should think about their product.

By the way, Colin Powell's son is the head of the FCC, the govt. agency that is supposed to oversee these matters for the public interest. At the same time, Colin has become a multimillionaire on AOL/TimeWarner stock.

Re: Interesting Viewpoint
 

You have not written a single thing I didn't know. You have yet to offer a single argument. You continue to alternate offers of the obvious with misleading asides and rhetorical chest thumps. Rather than chase them down, let's begin at the beginning: What is my Viewpoint about CNN's Crossfire that you find Interesting and why? Be specific, rely on the text.

Re: Jon Stewart on Crossfire
 

Nate,

Whilst I LOVE your O/U's ('cept it hurts to sit on my fat wallet now), I think you are wrong here.

He doesn't care if you take his political statements seriously or not. He was attacking their CREDIBILITY, not their politics. Two different things.

Tuco.

You are absolutely correct.
 

I actually don't find anything interesting about your viewpoint at all. Nevermind. I momentarily thought you had something interesting to say, but you don't. Maybe it was just something I ate giving me a little gas.

Re: You are absolutely correct.
 

That was awesome.

How old are you?

34.

And you wear a bowtie.


-AA

Re: You are absolutely correct.
 

To review.

1) I offer my opinion on Ed's.

2) Without addressing my opinion, you interject a rhetorical tangent propped upon a misleading statement. I correct you, but still address your main point by stating my opinion of such.

3) You respond with another misleading statement, continued blather, and a lecture on corporate ethics (something I apparently can't understand). I again offer correction and address your main point.

4) Now, in Full Superscillious Twit Mode, you blather, still not addressing what I've said, but rather relying upon my ignorance and naivete as a point of disembarkation for things that apparently need saying about media conglomerates. I respond by trying to get you to actually take a position contra to what I've written.

5) You lose interest -- taking the hard way out, by changing the sense of "interesting" that you originally used as a sneer in an attempt to score yet another cheap point.

Congrats

*plonk*

Re: Jon Stewart on Crossfire
 

Crossfire used to be a decent show with Bill Press and Robert Novak who are both old school respected journalists as far as I can tell. Then the battle of the cable news networks broke out and FoxNews ended up cleaning up in the ratings.
This is when Crossfire changed formats to try to compete, started having a live audience , started encouraging the yelling matches, and invited Bow-tie boy and Begala. Coincidentally, it is also when I and many other viewers stopped watching CNN, opting for FoxNews instead.

It seems to me that the liberal Stewart is in no way going to embrace the competition of multiple networks after he finds out that FoxNews is dominating, so he feels that CNN is the last bastion of hope for his utopian idea of fair journalism. Of course the problem is, CNN has never been a totally hard hitting and unbiased source of news, it's just they were the only game in town for some time. He's clutching onto something that never existed.

That being said, can you think of one person you respect who wears a bow tie in modern times? Examples include, Carlson from CNN, Ross Perot, Michael Richards in the movie "Problem Child," some goofball at my vet school, and Steve Jobbs at one point.

Re: Jon Stewart on Crossfire
 

[ QUOTE ]
Crossfire used to be a decent show with Bill Press and Robert Novak who are both old school respected journalists as far as I can tell.

[/ QUOTE ]

As far as, "used to be decent", maybe you've changed more than it. I've thought it was a chimpfest for as long as I can remember having an opinion. That you think Bill Press was a journalist is kind of spooky.

Re: Jon Stewart on Crossfire
 

"You can't have it both ways. Either we can't take him seriously and thus we shouldn't criticize his political stances and the way he favors Kerry, or we should accept his serious pronouncements on politics and hold him to his own standards."

Stewart's show is a comedy, it bills itself as a comedy, and they constantly make fun of themselves. If you watch the show as a credible news source it is because you are ignoring the fact that it is not, they don't claim to be. Crossfire claims to be a debate show, jon stewart is attacking them for being theatrical and not a debate show in reality. He feels that they are intentionally misleading their audiences for ratings. He is pointing out his belief that they could do a much better job at a debate show than they currently are.

Re: Jon Stewart on Crossfire
 

I was really more of a Novak fan