Ted, the people who watch Fox News are not interested in objectivity and they never will be. May Media Matters destroy them.

Very well said, Ted. Terribly true. But, I have top agree with Same2U. FOX “News” viewers are pretty much one stop shoppers, and bargain hunters. Quality is of no concern to them.

So Koppel joins a long line of leftist twits who’re unable to differentiate between hard news and opinion shows. You can’t do news 24/7, Teddy, you have to fill it in with something.

same2u said:
May Media Matters destroy them.

So rather letting people judge for themselves, you would have the opposing opinion silenced. Wonderful.

Do you still miss Buffalo Bob , Ted ?

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
So rather letting people judge for themselves, you would have the opposing opinion silenced. Wonderful.

I think Same2U was speaking of destroying credibility, not removing a choice.

Is Koppel still under the bus from his last comment about Libya or is he all good, now? Kinda hard to tell.

same2u said:
Ted, the people who watch Fox News are not interested in objectivity and they never will be. May Media Matters destroy them.

How objective of you.

… said Ted, giving his opinion on the matter, and missing the irony of it all.

Ted Koppel is a fool if he thinks he knows objectivity. Real objectivity happens when people from different political perspectives are allowed to speak, something Fox News does. MSNBC and CNN are hard left versus liberals pretending to be moderates. The jig is up, Americans don’t need jerks like Ted Koppel to tell them what’s important.

Questions for Women Suing Wal-Mart.
http://libertarians4freedom.blogspot.com/2011/03/questions-for-women-suing-wal-mart.html

Hearing opinions you don’t agree with is harmful.

Objectivity means that somebody might say something bad about your side (left or right).

I’m not sure the partisans on the left or the right really want that.

same2u said:
May Media Matters destroy [Fox News].

Since you brought that up…..Still waiting on Mediaite to post an article about David Brock’s interview in which he said that Media Matters is engaged an “an all-out campaign of ‘guerrilla warfare and sabotage’ aimed at the Fox News Channel.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51949.html#ixzz1HtreyYr1

Of course, the only thing surprising about this is that Brock openly admitted it.

ImNotBlue said:
… said Ted, giving his opinion on the matter, and missing the irony of it all.

There’s no irony in that.

A) He wasn’t on the air as a newscaster when he said that.

B) He was commenting on the state of his profession, not on a political issue.

C) He singled out both MSNBC and Fox….he wasn’t taking partisan shots at just one or the other.

The other problem is that too many viewers are not able distinguish between commentary and analysis.

Analysis is when you take an objective look at the facts as they stand and try to offer a synthesis of what it all means.

Commentary is when you take a political stand on an issue or when you try to defend a particular point of view.

Think there can be fair and balanced analysis….but viewers have to be able to recognize when someone is making an honest attempt a fair analysis.

mibwilso said:
Objectivity means that somebody might say something bad about your side (left or right).

I’m not sure the partisans on the left or the right really want that.

Objectivity means that you hear a balanced take on the issues….and that means that sometimes the facts won’t always back your side.

Judge Mental said:
Since you brought that up…..Still waiting on Mediaite to post an article about David Brock’s interview in which he said that Media Matters is engaged an “an all-out campaign of ‘guerrilla warfare and sabotage’ aimed at the Fox News Channel.” Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51949.html#ixzz1HtreyYr1 Of course, the only thing surprising about this is that Brock openly admitted it.

If Brock wants MM to be tax exempt , this ” war ” may be illegal .

http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/03/media-matters-breaking-law-its-war-fox-news

It’s better to use more subtlety when inserting your left-wing opinion into the news the way Ted did every single day he sat in the anchor chair.

Ted, we watched you and the other 2 lefty anchors (and CNN) because those were the only options. You didn’t change anyone’s minds. We all knew you were coming at it from a lefty perspective. Your biases have been exposed, you’re continually mocked & your power has shrunk. That’s what you don’t like.

Tough shiite.

lonestar77 said:
It’s better to use more subtlety when inserting your left-wing opinion into the news the way Ted did every single day he sat in the anchor chair.

Ted, we watched you and the other 2 lefty anchors (and CNN) because those were the only options. You didn’t change anyone’s minds. We all knew you were coming at it from a lefty perspective. Your biases have been exposed, you’re continually mocked & your power has shrunk. That’s what you don’t like.

Tough shiite.

Of course, the criticism was equally directed at MSNBC. I thinking you started howling prematurely.

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
I think Same2U was speaking of destroying credibility, not removing a choice.

Doesn’t matter, he’s advocating that entity “A” destroy entity “B”, because, in his _opinion_, entity “B” is a threat to his political philosophy and should not be an available choice to consumers. Glad to see all of you wonderful liberal “rights” activists showing your true colors.

mibwilso said:
There’s no irony in that.

A) He wasn’t on the air as a newscaster when he said that.

B) He was commenting on the state of his profession, not on a political issue.

C) He singled out both MSNBC and Fox….he wasn’t taking partisan shots at just one or the other.

Said milbwiso, missing the irony of it all.

input this URL:

( www)(chic-goods)(com )

you can find many cheap and high stuff

” FOX “News” viewers are pretty much one stop shoppers, and bargain hunters. Quality is of no concern to them.”

King, Ted mentioned MSNBC, too.

Mr.Papshmer said:
Doesn’t matter, he’s advocating that entity “A” destroy entity “B”, because, in his _opinion_, entity “B” is a threat to his political philosophy and should not be an available choice to consumers. Glad to see all of you wonderful liberal “rights” activists showing your true colors.

I think the Gibberish of the Week Award has been won very early into the week. Congratulations!

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
I think the Gibberish of the Week Award has been won very early into the week. Congratulations!

Oh, I know… If you have no intelligent counter, simply insult. You little people are so transparent.

Mr.Papshmer said:
Oh, I know… If you have no intelligent counter, simply insult. You little people are so transparent.

And now, the winner of the Derivative and Repetitive Award of the week goes to Papshmer.

Conservatives watch FOX because every other channel has a liberal bias. That’s why FOX has the highest ratings. Almost all conservatives have one channel to have their views re-affirmed. Liberals have many.

Sean68 said:
Conservatives watch FOX because every other channel has a liberal bias. That’s why FOX has the highest ratings. Almost all conservatives have one channel to have their views re-affirmed. Liberals have many.

This is also because Fox repeats the propaganda over and over that it is somehow the arbiter of “fairness” and the entire rest of the media is somehow a liberal conspiracy.

Sean68 said:
Conservatives watch FOX because every other channel has a liberal bias.

Sorry, friend, but that’s a delusional conspiracy theory.

To be sure, there are liberal media outlets (MSNBC, HuffPo)….but to paint the entire media with that brush is just silly.

There are many outlets that make a genuine, professional effort to be balanced, only to be hectored and harrassed by the right for not giving them what Fox gives them.

Fox succeeds because they constantly repeat the notion that the whole world and the whole media is out to get them and their viewers….and the world hates Christmas too.

mibwilso said:
Sorry, friend, but that’s a delusional conspiracy theory. To be sure, there are liberal media outlets (MSNBC, HuffPo)….but to paint the entire media with that brush is just silly. There are many outlets that make a genuine, professional effort to be balanced, only to be hectored and harrassed by the right for not giving them what Fox gives them.

Could you name a couple of them?

Ted Koppel honestly believes he’s qualified to be Secretary of State. No one should take this man seriously.

There is no equivalency between Fox and MSNBC. One of these networks has hosts who engage in frank open debate on key issues without censorship and stultifying political correctness. The other network never allows debate and fills its air time with hit pieces and ridicule of anyone who disagrees with them.

Can you identify which is which? If not, spend 30 minutes tonight watching O’Reilly and another 30 minutes watching Maddow. I am confident you will then be able to identify which network practices propaganda and which allows for honest engagement.

Hey, I give credit to Koppel for keeping the blow-dried look alive for senior citizens — no small feat at his age — but he is completely off-base in these comments. Only one network offers real open debate and dialogue these days, and our democracy would be in better shape if the other “news networks” gave up their propagandistic agenda and did the same.

Sean68 said:
Conservatives watch FOX because every other channel has a liberal bias. That’s why FOX has the highest ratings. Almost all conservatives have one channel to have their views re-affirmed. Liberals have many.

I’m conservative on many issues. I don’t watch Fox, except briefly to ogle to newsbabes. I don’t watch MSNBC either. I don’t want to be in anyone’s camp. I like to think for myself. And I think the reason FOX has the highest ratings are the newsbabes. This simplest explanation is usually correct.

I sure hope Mediaite is making a lot of $$ off those ANNOYING showtime pop up ads on here! Very conveniently the “stop” x is located just above the cut off of my screen. Hopefully once those dumbass shows premier the ads will GO AWAY! Okay, rant over. Thank you.

Koppel is turning into an even more pompous fruitpie than before. And how does he make the comparison between fair-and-balanced [relatively speaking] straightforward and hugely-watched Fox News and the totally attack-oriented single-point-of-view commissars and cadres of the hysterical left on MessNBC?

One draws viewere, the other repels them. My guess is that Koppel is not acquainted with either one of these two, and his false equivalence is evidence of his lack of relevance.

I notice that as soon as Dan Abrams departs Mediaite that commenters are being moderated and pop-up ads are appearing on every screen every minute. I guess it’s downhill for Mediaite here on out. Had a good run under Dan though.

mibwilso said:
There’s no irony in that. A) He wasn’t on the air as a newscaster when he said that. B) He was commenting on the state of his profession, not on a political issue. C) He singled out both MSNBC and Fox….he wasn’t taking partisan shots at just one or the other.

A) It doesn’t matter if he’s a newscaster or not, much of the complains about FNC are about their guests, not their hosts.

B) He was giving his OPINION on the state of journalism, while complaining about others giving their opinions.

C) Nowhere did I suggest that what he said was partisan.

mibwilso said:
Objectivity means that you hear a balanced take on the issues….and that means that sometimes the facts won’t always back your side.

No, that is not what “objective” means. Objectivity means reporting only the facts about the story, not the opinion. The problem is too many don’t grasp the difference between fact and opinion.

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
Of course, the criticism was equally directed at MSNBC. I thinking you started howling prematurely.

Odd that you’d say that… especially since your first post was an attack on FNC, and didn’t mention MSNBC:

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
Very well said, Ted. Terribly true. But, I have top agree with Same2U. FOX “News” viewers are pretty much one stop shoppers, and bargain hunters. Quality is of no concern to them.

Oh well, I’m sure you can come up with a reason why YOU can use Koppel’s words to attack FNC and the viewers, but someone who talks about Ted is “missing the point.” It’s not hypocrisy… it’s just Royal logic.

Koppel spent many years at ABC where he never seemed to care about left-leaning biased reporting by his own network.

For many years I stuck by ABC News, after turning away from first CBS and then NBC. But first with the “World News Tonight Sunday”, and then with the weekday broadcasts, ABC abandoned objectivity. Maybe Koppel wasn’t watching his own network so never noticed?

Now Koppel is at the BBC, which has its own problems with objectivity.

ImNotBlue said:
mibwilso said:
There’s no irony in that. A) He wasn’t on the air as a newscaster when he said that. B) He was commenting on the state of his profession, not on a political issue. C) He singled out both MSNBC and Fox….he wasn’t taking partisan shots at just one or the other.

A) It doesn’t matter if he’s a newscaster or not, much of the complains about FNC are about their guests, not their hosts.

B) He was giving his OPINION on the state of journalism, while complaining about others giving their opinions.

C) Nowhere did I suggest that what he said was partisan.

The irony of his comments is what had me laughing before. He excused Koppel because he was giving opinion not in a newscaster function, dumping on O’Reilly, whose job it is to give opinion not in a newscaster function.

Mr.Papshmer said:
The irony of his comments is what had me laughing before. He excused Koppel because he was giving opinion not in a newscaster function, dumping on O’Reilly, whose job it is to give opinion not in a newscaster function.

Yup!

There is a real problem these days with people not being able to tell the difference between opinion and fact. But even more so, I’ve noticed that in the past few years, to cover for this, many on the left have started determining certain opinions to BE fact… that way they can avoid the argument all together. For example, according to the left, Sarah Palin IS stupid… that is no longer their opinion, they’ve decided that is a fact. As a result, anyone who says as much can be applauded, and the argument made that they’re still “objective.” It is still 100% dishonest… but it’s how they’re getting around the logical conundrum.

ImNotBlue said:
For example, according to the left, Sarah Palin IS stupid

Anyone who does not share the political philosophy of the progressive left is smeared and labeled as stupid, it’s one of their age old tactics, to isolate and to make unpalatable any opposition voice, straight out of Rules, but I think most folks are waking up. It just simply isn’t possible that _every_ progressive is way smart, and _every_ conservative is really stupid. :)

david r said:
I’m conservative on many issues. I don’t watch Fox, except briefly to ogle to newsbabes. I don’t watch MSNBC either. I don’t want to be in anyone’s camp. I like to think for myself. And I think the reason FOX has the highest ratings are the newsbabes. This simplest explanation is usually correct.

I wouldn’t exactly call Beck, O’Reilly, Hannity and Greta babes, And those are the highest rated shows

OxyCon said:
I wouldn’t exactly call Beck, O’Reilly, Hannity and Greta babes, And those are the highest rated shows

Good point. But Hannity and BOR always seem to have a cutie on with them. (Laura Ingraham, for instance.) Greta is no newsbabe. I’ll have to take your word about Beck’s show. He is usually pontificating, and I switch to Gunsmoke reruns.

So,Koppel gives his opinion about opinion shows on news networks and its news worthy?

Just another leftie hoping the right will be silenced. Boring.

Koppel knows, like all mainstream media veterans, that to openly state opinions, and to allow debate from all sides is wrong, wrong, wrong! A skilled “journalist” uses subtlety and nuance to influence viewers’ and readers’ opinions. He or she chooses which news to report (i.e., that which advances the liberal cause) and which news is unworthy (i.e., retards the cause), thereby crafting a professional-looking, undetectably biased final propaganda – er, product. It helps your credibility with the ignorant masses if you can deliver the message with a false air of impartiality and gravitas.

This practice perpetuates itself, of course, because when a less skilled “journalist” errs by allowing their biases to show, the other “journalists” politely ignore it, as exposure does not advance the liberal cause.

Heaven help the journalist who breaks ranks and reports both sides of all of the news, which incurs the wrath of the great arbiters of taste and professionalism in the mainstream media, like Ted Koppel.

Thank goodness for FoxNews!

We need a lot more serious objectivity, sorely lacking in Ted Koppel.

Facts aren’t partisan – though you get relatively few unadulterated ones from Fakes “News.”

Fox often presents opinion AS fact – and just as often eithr fails to present justification for those “facts” or creates justification out of thijn air.

O’Reilly arbitrarily concluded as “fact” that abortion is murder – despite laws to the contrary. He labelled Dr. George Tiller as “Tiller the Killer,” an ultimately fatal “reductio ad absurdum.” Regardless of one’s own feelings or prejudices, abortion is legal in the U.S. Tiller’s murderer was goaded into committing his crime by the atmosphere of false justification created by O’Reilly and others of his odious ilk.

O’Reilly gave little or airtime to any group or individual who disagreed with him, to my knowledge.

Maddow and O’Donnell at MSNBC usually explain the rationale for their conclusions at length, addressing divergent points-of-view in the process. Maddow notably hosted Rand Paul for a memorable appearance. She begged former RNC Chair Michael Steele to be a guest on her show for years. He only obliged after stepping down from his post. (Maybe he just needed the gig.) She has hosted many other conservatives, and repeatedly invites Sarah Palin to appear. Chris Matthews frequently hosts conservative guests, as well.

While Ed Schultz hosts few conservatives, I know of no instance in which he has ever said anything that was factually untrue. MSNBC as a whole is more honest about separating news programming from opinion shows.

“A skilled “journalist” uses subtlety and nuance to influence viewers’ and readers’ opinions. ”

The “skilled journalists” at Fox are about as subtle as a punch in the face. They routinely lie,distort and mischaracterize – the “skilled journalist” who claimed he was struck by demonstrators in Wisconsin, for example. What’s he skilled at? Lying, apparently.

I don’t claim MSNBC is infallible. Ed Schultz allowed a Dem candidate’s website to be promoted and shouldn’t have. Nevertheless, the blatant propaganda and hypocrisy that Fox churns out daily is cause for far greater concern and outrage than anything Koppel expressed.

either fails to present justification for those “facts” or creates justification out of thin air.

Sean68 said:
Conservatives watch FOX because every other channel has a liberal bias. That’s why FOX has the highest ratings. Almost all conservatives have one channel to have their views re-affirmed. Liberals have many.

So you’re saying that conservatives don’t want the truth or their ideas challenged. They just want their beliefs reaffirmed whether it is the truth or not.

Seriously Ted? You still insist on wearing the same 40 year old ferret pelt on your head and you want to talk about not being serious enough is a joke. I have one bit of advise for you…..do yourself a favor, if you’re going to attempt coming out of obscurity ( again ), Get yourself a nice Chinchilla wig, ferret has been out since way back when hat you had to say was almost relevant.

OK morons, listen up!

GBR (whom the family lovingly refers to as “Goober-Brained Retard) put our son, BOMBSHELL JR. on a bus to Thule, Greenland. He told our boy there would be a kitten waiting for him when he got to Greenland, and you know how our son is ALWAYS asking everyone he meets to buy him a kitten.

Well, the kid is sort of dimwitted just like his ol’ man, and so I’m stepping in until we get him back to provide moral support for my ol’ man, and you’d danged well better NOT mess with me! Just know that I am GBR’s ol’ lady, and give me the respect I demand.

jrcmi said:

You realize that by saying, “I am unaware of…” doesn’t actually cover you for being wrong. Although, it does show exactly what “facts” you’re ignoring to come up with your theories.

If you want to know the truth, you should start there. Otherwise, don’t formulate opinions, when even YOU know you don’t have the full story.

ImNotTrue: “You realize that by saying, “I am unaware of…” doesn’t actually cover you for being wrong.”

I actually said O’Reilly gave little or no airtime to to opposing views “to my knowledge,” and that I know of no instance in which Ed Schultz said anything that was factually erroneous. He COULD have made an error when I wasn’t watching, since I don’t watch every episode. But, hey, you’re so used to twisting other peoples’ words it would actually be a pleasant surprise for you to quote someone CORRECTLY.

“Although, it does show exactly what “facts” you’re ignoring to come up with your theories.”

WHAT “facts” does it show? You accuse ME of ignoring “facts” but fail to elucidate any of your own – thus proving a point I made elsewhere on these boards: an accusation is as good as proof to some people – which makes you “some people.”

Here’s some facts: a search of MediaMatters.org for “O’Reilly” and “Tiller” shows only a couple of guests with opposing views on O’Reilly’s show, in relation to the Dr. Tiller murder – and a couple dozen articles about O’Reilly’s crusade against Tiller, often accompanied by like-minded guests. My original statement was essentially correct. I expect an apology. As if.

“If you want to know the truth, you should start there.”

We can start with the “truth” that you defended Fakes “News’” use of archive footage to pad the crowd at a Tea Party event as being inadvertent – knowing full well as a TV industry worker (or so you claim) that such an “accident” is extremely unlikely.

“Otherwise, don’t formulate opinions, when even YOU know you don’t have the full story.”

Who the hell are you, the schoolmarm? The Thought Police? Oh, I forgot . . . you’re a conservative.

Like most rational folks, I “formulate opinions” through observation, perception and judgement. You seem to formulate yours by distorting, mangling and accusing. You tell other people what they REALLY meant to say . . . rather than speaking to what they actually DO say.

Maybe YOU should work for Fox. That wasn’t a compliment.

I don’t need transcripts of every Fox show ever produced to know that they trade in proven lies, distortions and mischaracterizations. Not even YOU, all-knowing and all-powerful tongue-twister, can change THAT fact.