• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

O'Reilly to start his own news channel

He's going to beat all the other networks. Choke em to death really.
 
AlbqOwl said:
The Rupert sons just don't have the same kind of savvy that Rupert and Roger Ailes had. So far Fox is hanging in there because of some really good people Ailes brought in, but without a steady hand to guide everything overall, I don't know if it will be able to hold its audience.
Click to expand...

I think reasonable people have reached the saturation point and are turning off the news in greater and greater numbers.

There comes a point among intelligent people when they realize they are being played.

If that is true, looking at cable news ratings, one could see what reasonable people are doing.
 
ocean515 said:
I think reasonable people have reached the saturation point and are turning off the news in greater and greater numbers.

There comes a point among intelligent people when they realize they are being played.

If that is true, looking at cable news ratings, one could see what reasonable people are doing.
Click to expand...

I am as much of a news junkie as I have ever been, but I sure don't go to the MSM for any kind of objective reporting these days if the topic has anything to do with politics or a social issue. Fox News is the only member of the MSM who are still giving a fair hearing to all sides. How long that will last is anybody's guess. There are several internet news and commentary sites that are doing a half decent job reporting facts but they lack the resources to be everywhere at once like the big boys have.
 
O'Reilly is an equal opportunity bully. Fair and balanced.
 
AlbqOwl said:
I am as much of a news junkie as I have ever been, but I sure don't go to the MSM for any kind of objective reporting these days if the topic has anything to do with politics or a social issue. Fox News is the only member of the MSM who are still giving a fair hearing to all sides. How long that will last is anybody's guess. There are several internet news and commentary sites that are doing a half decent job reporting facts but they lack the resources to be everywhere at once like the big boys have.
Click to expand...

Like you, I will never be able to disconnect, but I'm certainly disappointed, and a bit alarmed, by the direction that has been taken by the 4th Estate.

Too much written history regarding the end result to ignore the ramifications of their activity.

Perhaps it's the internet, and the obsession with revenue from "clicks" that is feeding the beast.

Whatever the cause, an unreliable and ideologically driven media is not a good thing.
 
ocean515 said:
Like you, I will never be able to disconnect, but I'm certainly disappointed, and a bit alarmed, by the direction that has been taken by the 4th Estate.

Too much written history regarding the end result to ignore the ramifications of their activity.

Perhaps it's the internet, and the obsession with revenue from "clicks" that is feeding the beast.

Whatever the cause, an unreliable and ideologically driven media is not a good thing.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more. Once the media no longer feels an ethical and moral obligation to present the who, what, where, when, why, and how as objectively and without prejudice as possible, we are screwed so far as having ability to know what actually happened. And when they report only that which fits the theme they intend to project, and they omit any pertinent information that would challenge or put that theme in question, we have no way to know what is and is not truth.

They have no code any more. No ethic. No moral center.
 
AlbqOwl said:
I couldn't agree more. Once the media no longer feels an ethical and moral obligation to present the who, what, where, when, why, and how as objectively and without prejudice as possible, we are screwed so far as having ability to know what actually happened. And when they report only that which fits the theme they intend to project, and they omit any pertinent information that would challenge or put that theme in question, we have no way to know what is and is not truth.

They have no code any more. No ethic. No moral center.
Click to expand...

Many years ago, as a result of some positive things I had done, a major newspaper here where I live ran a story about it and me. In the article, they made some statements about me that were completely fabricated. It wasn't negative, but it was completely untrue.

I called the paper and spoke to the reporter, asking why the did that. The reporter apologized, but asked why I was complaining. Think about that.

My eyes began to open at that point, and what they are seeing today should be a great concern to all.
 
ModerateGOP said:
The loudmouth is looking to merge with another network and tie it into billoreilly.com.

Bill O?Reilly Reveals Details About New Plans: ?I Am Starting My Own Operation? | Mediaite
Click to expand...


ocean515 said:
Long live Capitalism. If he can find an audience and make it work, what's wrong with what O'Reilly is reported to be thinking about?
Click to expand...

chuckiechan said:
The left has deemed that his opinions not be distributed.
Click to expand...

One of the best summations of hard core right wingers thinking process regarding "bias". They read a simple statement of "this is happening" and twist it in their warped minds to "well why do you think he's not allowed to do this!"

That's why we have all of these people running around complaining that the media dares to comment about the words that are actually coming out of the presidents mouth for attacking him relentlessly. Because stating a fact is now raging bias to the poor little snow flakes.
 
roughdraft274 said:
One of the best summations of hard core right wingers thinking process regarding "bias". They read a simple statement of "this is happening" and twist it in their warped minds to "well why do you think he's not allowed to do this!"

That's why we have all of these people running around complaining that the media dares to comment about the words that are actually coming out of the presidents mouth for attacking him relentlessly. Because stating a fact is now raging bias to the poor little snow flakes.
Click to expand...

:roll:

Give it a rest. What was the purpose of this OP?

To Quote: "The loudmouth..."

Feeling the heat from all the people throwing the vindictive fake news crap back in the face of those pushing it?
 
ocean515 said:
Give it a rest. What was the purpose of this OP?

To Quote: "The loudmouth..."

Feeling the heat from all the people throwing the vindictive fake news crap back in the face of those pushing it?
Click to expand...

He posted it in a debate forum so that everyone can discuss it. Whether it will be successful, whether it's a good idea, whether they would watch it etc. Not because he thought that he shouldn't be allowed to do it. That's the point. You are wondering out in the parking lot because you are so out of right field.

And then you bring up fake news crap in a thread that doesn't in any way contain fake news. Desperate much?
 
roughdraft274 said:
He posted it in a debate forum so that everyone can discuss it. Whether it will be successful, whether it's a good idea, whether they would watch it etc. Not because he thought that he shouldn't be allowed to do it. That's the point. You are wondering out in the parking lot because you are so out of right field.

And then you bring up fake news crap in a thread that doesn't in any way contain fake news. Desperate much?
Click to expand...

So you are saying the OP was posted in order to stimulate discussion.

I've commented, and you take the opportunity to complain about what I've written.

Could you be any more transparent and hypocritical?

Maybe you should try my parking lot; it appears to be a much better place than the planet you are posting from.
 
ocean515 said:
Many years ago, as a result of some positive things I had done, a major newspaper here where I live ran a story about it and me. In the article, they made some statements about me that were completely fabricated. It wasn't negative, but it was completely untrue.

I called the paper and spoke to the reporter, asking why the did that. The reporter apologized, but asked why I was complaining. Think about that.

My eyes began to open at that point, and what they are seeing today should be a great concern to all.
Click to expand...

I have experienced the same thing when I was giving a lot of speeches/presentations. Sometimes I would read the press coverage of whatever event that included and wondered if the reporter was actually there or just made up something to pretend he/she was there.
 
ocean515 said:
So you are saying the OP was posted in order to stimulate discussion.

I've commented, and you take the opportunity to complain about what I've written.
Click to expand...

And you haven't even tried to argue with what I said, so I guess you accept it as true?

You can get pissy all you want but if you ask a stupid question you're probably gonna have at least one person comment about how stupid the question is.

Might I suggest a waiver on future posts. Copy and paste below next time you have a question similar to the one in your first post.


***WARNING***
- Good chance that my question is very biased and not well thought out. It also probably attacks someone for something they didn't even suggest. I'm fully aware of how bad the question is and do not handle criticism well so please refrain from commenting on it unless you agree with my very biased and not well thought out question. Thanks!
 
AlbqOwl said:
I have experienced the same thing when I was giving a lot of speeches/presentations. Sometimes I would read the press coverage of whatever event that included and wondered if the reporter was actually there or just made up something to pretend he/she was there.
Click to expand...

I could answer your question, but you already know it. It's one thing to add a little fluff, or whatever, to improve the reading, but lies, deceit? Inexcusable.
 
roughdraft274 said:
And you haven't even tried to argue with what I said, so I guess you accept it as true?

You can get pissy all you want but if you ask a stupid question you're probably gonna have at least one person comment about how stupid the question is.

Might I suggest a waiver on future posts. Copy and paste below next time you have a question similar to the one in your first post.


***WARNING***
- Good chance that my question is very biased and not well thought out. It also probably attacks someone for something they didn't even suggest. I'm fully aware of how bad the question is and do not handle criticism well so please refrain from commenting on it unless you agree with my very biased and not well thought out question. Thanks!
Click to expand...

So now it's a threat, insults, not to mention fabrication, and presumption.

You're not doing your cause any favors.

But please do persist.

The growing emotionalism in your posts is playing to stereotype, which does serve a purpose for the casual observer.
 
ocean515 said:
So now it's a threat, insults, not to mention fabrication, and presumption.

You're not doing your cause any favors.

But please do persist.

The growing emotionalism in your posts is playing to stereotype, which does serve a purpose for the casual observer.
Click to expand...

Still not arguing with what was said. Anything to avoid my main point from my first post, huh? Lol, you are hoot.
 
ocean515 said:
Long live Capitalism. If he can find an audience and make it work, what's wrong with what O'Reilly is reported to be thinking about?
Click to expand...

I agree.

I am not a Bill O'Reilly fan, but many people are.

I used to really enjoy listening to Lars Larson until he went national. Now he's like the rest of the arrogant assholes.
 
ocean515 said:
:roll:

Give it a rest. What was the purpose of this OP?

To Quote: "The loudmouth..."

Feeling the heat from all the people throwing the vindictive fake news crap back in the face of those pushing it?
Click to expand...

Oh Yes, Trump and O'Reilly aren't loudmouths...
 
ModerateGOP said:
Oh Yes, Trump and O'Reilly aren't loudmouths...
Click to expand...

That would depend on your definition of "loudmouth". I may disagree with both at times, but I wouldn't characterize O'Reilly that way ever and I wouldn't characterize President Trump that way most of the time.

Definition: Loudmouth: a person who tends to talk too much in an offensive or tactless way.
synonyms: braggart · boaster · bragger · blusterer · swaggerer · blabbermouth · big mouth · blowhard · show-off
 
ocean515 said:
Long live Capitalism. If he can find an audience and make it work, what's wrong with what O'Reilly is reported to be thinking about?
Click to expand...

Wouldn't be surprised if O'Reilly was forgiven while Cobsy wasn't. The latter hasn't done a show in two years.
 
AlbqOwl said:
That would depend on your definition of "loudmouth". I may disagree with both at times, but I wouldn't characterize O'Reilly that way ever and I wouldn't characterize President Trump that way most of the time.

Definition: Loudmouth: a person who tends to talk too much in an offensive or tactless way.
synonyms: braggart · boaster · bragger · blusterer · swaggerer · blabbermouth · big mouth · blowhard · show-off
Click to expand...

You must not have watched O'Reilly that much then. Every time he disagreed with someone he would talk over them and yell at them until he shut them up and they slinked away. Trump is only a loudmouth on twitter but he does say a lot of stupid things even off twitter.
 
Mr Person said:
Wouldn't be surprised if O'Reilly was forgiven while Cobsy wasn't. The latter hasn't done a show in two years.
Click to expand...

Yup take it from our own President's mouth. Celebrities are allowed to do anything they want.
 
ModerateGOP said:
You must not have watched O'Reilly that much then. Every time he disagreed with someone he would talk over them and yell at them until he shut them up and they slinked away. Trump is only a loudmouth on twitter but he does say a lot of stupid things even off twitter.
Click to expand...

You must not have read what I posted on that. He did talk over people and I hated that, but he didn't yell at them until they shut up or slinked away. He was not at all offensive in that way. He billed the O'Reilly factor as the 'no spin zone' and he was not about to allow his guests to filibuster their way out of answering questions or addressing the issue they were invited to address. Many of us complained that he pushed people too quickly and everybody was then talking at once--frustrating for a listener who was interested in the topic. But having done some television, I know from personal experience that he also had a producer in his ear urging him to move on because they were running out of time for that segment.

And it didn't seem to hurt his ratings as he beat EVERYBODY on cable and generally out rated those on network television too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom