Major newspapers losing subscribers (and ad dollars), the "big 3" networks with the lowest ratings ever. Hhhhhmmmm, do you have to wonder why?

When I get up, I want to read the news. When I come home from work, I want to watch the news.

I don't care about what some self-important reporter thinks about the news. (Which more often than not, IS the story.) I don't want to read six paragraphs about how it was a dark and stormy night only to find out the story was about penguin figurines after flipping to page six midway through the story. I'm sick of misleading story titles.

I want the facts. I want only the facts that are directly relevant to the story. I want four paragraphs (not single sentences disguised as paragraphs) all on the same page that tell me the facts with no fluff. I want story titles to give me a very good idea of what the story says. I want newspaper reporters to stop living out fantasy as 19th century Russian authors. I want TV reporters to stop making fluff, comments under their breath, and to stop searching for "a new perspective" on stories. I don't care that serial rapists collect stuffed kittens and knitted scarfs for homeless prairie dogs. I want the bias out of the stories. I'm sick of interviews where criminals are treated like poor victims and conservatives are treated like dog $h!t.

Wayne, the problem here is that Rather KNEW there was a problem with the documents' authenticity and STILL went ahead with the story. It'd be slightly less bad, had he just been caught unaware later. But he KNEW it and didn't stop it there.

Is it not interesting to note how long guys like Rather molded the news without scrutiny? How many manufactured stories did the public eat in his career?

Courage:rolleyes:

I recall that the facts in the forged document were sworn to be accurate by someone who was originally there, a secetary or something.

Like I said the facts bear out in statements by people who would know, the paperwork provided was found to be fake not the information in it. I think they were waiting for second or third opinons as their first document checker said it was good when the aired it. Just going off memory here.

Well, remember FL. was close, and we have 2 time zones, so cbs incorrectly called the state for gore 1 hour before closing, and since the part of the state in the affected time zone, is pretty heavily military, who tend to vote Republican, kinda makes you wonder. Sixty minutes is a hell of a long time to call something unless is was a total blow out. Funny what lies are you talking about that this Administration has been caught in??? And Red Baron is talking about having a few beers with me, you are welcome to join us if you like.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/suppo...s/beerchug.gifhttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/suppo...s/beerchug.gifhttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/suppo...s/beerchug.gifhttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/suppo...s/beerchug.gifhttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/suppo...s/beerchug.gifhttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/suppo...s/beerchug.gifhttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1190302070.jpg

I don't blame Rather for anything that happened in FL. But, as long as you mention it, NM was decided by a few hundred votes too and is a few hrs. behind FL. I'm sure plenty of folks in NM heard FL called on the radio while driving to the polls and decided their votes no longer mattered, so they went home. This is the problem with calling eastern states when there are a few hours left at the polls in close-call western states.

It's done wonders for reducing my blood pressure...watching old Gunsmoke reruns instead of the "nightly liberal views" as read by suzie shallow or fred dunce.

But FL. wasn't finished, and this call could have changed the out come of the election in FL. http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1190302937.jpg

Gee I would but for some reason it is real dark and smelly here where I am. I can't get a beer down with my head up my ass:D Actually, I was kidding about meeting you at Rennsport (obviously) I am completely across the country. Look, my point was I don't post pictures of Conservatives with their heads up their butts or call them names across the board either. I disagree with many of your points of view (but not all) but have no need to say your mother wears combat boots or you're a poo-poo head. Maybe its just me but that doesn't seem particularly constructive as to discussing different points of view.

As for Rather? Long before this I thought the guy was a stuffed shirt. Puffed up egotist and I even seem to remember stories about that leaking out occasionally. Something like this suit strikes me as typical of an egotistical jackass more than typical of his political bent. He's rich and he's retired. Seems like an ideal combo plate to me.

Dan Rather, why not just shut the hell up and try not to let the REST of your life be remembered by this bitterness and pettiness instead of your lifetime's accomplishments. I think the "just-shut-the-hell-up" approach ought to be used on both sides of the aisle a LOT more.

I would restrict any election night state calls completely until the last US citizen in the farthest time zone has voted.

On Rather, the suit should be thrown out. Let him wite a book and try to make some money.

"Kenneth, what is the frequency?" "Courage...courage"

Rather, STFU already.;)

Agree completely. The FCC can do that can't they?

There are already FAR too many people that don't exercise their responsibility (in my view) to vote. Enough lemmings that wouldn't go to the booths because they already heard their state "called". How about we let the people decide for themselves (even as badly as they sometimes do it)?

Paid millions to read the news!?!! No other country has our ridiculous system, ie "Anchors." While the "Anchors" are losing viewers to the internet, cable, and blogs, the network executives pay them even more!?!

They could save millions by just having someone literate (and not insane) read the news w/o the agenda. Does anyone really care who's sitting in front of the telepromptor? Walter Murrow, Edward R. Brokaw, Katie Cronkite... Who gives a rat's @ss. Just tell me if the stock market is up or down, how we're doing in Iraq (some good stories for a change), and how the economy is doing and keep you lame opinion to yourself.

Oh and BTW, W has been answering that National Gaurd question since he administered that incredible beat-down on Ann Richards. Whether it's true or not, apparently, there are more people who DON'T care that he skipped out on his National Gaurd duty than DO.

So keep dragging out that tired, old nag and we can take another mighty few whacks at it and resolve nothing!

Yes, it sure did require a highly trained eye to determine that the alleged 31 year old document was created using Microsoft Word.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1190311778.gif

You are wrong. By 2000, the networks had all agreed to never call a state until the last polling station in that state had closed. CBS claimed it didn't realize that the western part of the Florida panhandle was in the Central Time Zone.

You know, I tend to agree....and I think we are at opposite ends of the political spectrum too. I never really cared all that much about W's relative lack of service during Vietnam. In my opinion, anyone old enough to remember that time clearly wouldn't really fault a rich kid, a son of power, for finding a relatively painless way out of having to get shipped over there. My ***** has always been that he (his backers) chose to take on Kerry for going there and returning decorated for action he saw. How about your campaign just shuts the hell up when it comes to the other guy's service, since he had some? He went, he saw the action he saw and he came home with a real opinion since he was there up close. Why WOULD you choose to take that on? Instead if asked, just say you honor the Senator's service to the country during that time and move the hell on?

I "get" that there was political capital to make out of this, which is why all that BS went on, I just think the whole process is too bogged down with calling your opponent a name instead of talking about the issues.

If I'm not mistaken, isn't that from an REM song that pokes fun at Rather getting beaten up in Central Park?

Dan, you're right of course, but I remember W actually did say that Kerry served the country honorably, and in fact that was the response early on in the campaign. But when Kerry played the "reporting for duty" card at the convention and then tried to be both a war hero and war protestor, he opened himself up for criticism (Swift Boat Vets).

What Dan Rather never realized is that Bush's National Gaurd service was a lot more than 99% of the rest of the electorate put in. It didn't rise to the level of Kerry's service in actual combat. But at the time, while everyone was trying to get out of going to Vietnam, W at least wore the uniform and put in five spotty years at worst and thousands of hours of service, best case scenario.

Again, the media is not liberal. Unless "liberal" is a synomym for anything and everything that's bad. Like laziness or opportunistic or sensationalistic.

When I was working for our local Labor department, we were a favorite target of this so-called "liberal" media. Along with every other governmental agency. You know, the agencies that liberals believe it but conservatives hate. Yeah, those agencies that liberals believe in were clobbered regularly by the media. In some cases, I knew what information was gathered by the news agency, and it was obvious they were presenting only those facts that would outrage viewers and make them mistrust their government. Liberal media? Today, I still see this. Frequently. News sources demonizing government offices using cooked facts. Liberal media? I noticed a certain liberal US President whose indiscretion was a source of "news" each and every day for years. Liberal media?

Nope. Lazy media? Yup. Opportunistic, yes. Sensationalistic, yes. Treacherous, yes. I've got some fairly strong feelings about news sources with large viewerships that cook information for the purpose of misinforming citizens and voters so as to deliberately and selfishly erode our confidence in organizations we fund and own and count on, thereby misdirecting blame from where it is due toward offices that are doing their best to pursue the public good. This misinformation has a powerful impact on voters' decisions. And so, through this selfishness, news organizations ensure bad voter decisions in the future. Yeah, I got a problem with that.

Recently, a trucking company tried to bring a bridge section into Washington State that did not comply with our load limit regulations. WSDOT dutifully stopped it at the border. WSDOT worked hard to help the trucking company find a way to comply so that this section could be on its way. Meanwhile, the news media got ahold of the story and made viewers think it was all WSDOT's fault. Everyone loves to hate public agencies, especially conservatives, and news organizations are pouring kerosene on that flame.

Liberal media? Show me some deeper understanding than this, guys.