Olbermann Announces He's Leaving MSNBC !

Originally posted by mishigas

You cite 2 lefty cable channels and one righty. Yet you state "Cable news - mostly right"?

Yes, I did.

Neither would talk radio, which you cite.

Can you read? I specifically said TALK RADIO AND CABLE NEWS. Neither has anything to do with network TV, Matt Damon, or Academia.

If you want to talk strictly cable news, then keep talk radio, etc., out of it. And stop being such a snit with your wiseass remarks.

Again, I specifically addressed CABLE NEWS and TALK RADIO. I can handle both. Why can't you?

When you think about who/what influences people, you gotta look at the big picture, not just cable news. Otherwise your 'study' is too narrow. It's useless.

Unless you want to actually address what I actually said. You can scroll up and review it when you get lost like this.

MSM is MainStream Media. Tell me who/what has the biggest influence on college students. There's your answer as to why they always vote for the liberal candidate.

What a stretch. So academia is media because you think college kids are influenced by media? Make that make sense for me.

Newspapers, etc. Ever hear of the New York Times? They have made and broken more careers than a hundred talent agents. LA Times? Wall St Journal ( opinion page, not the news section ).

Sure have. Neither would be cable news or talk radio though, would it? How about you show me some numbers on influence by source.

I really don't have to explain the effect that unions have on elections, do I?

You do have to explain how you list unions as part of the mainstream MEDIA.

All of the above are major elements of our society, and thus part of the MSM. Eliminate them from the discussion and you'll be forever scratching your ass wondering why things don't make sense.

Go back and read my post and this time pay attention to the words I wrote and try to address them. Colleges and unions are not media. I still think you need to define MSM, not tell me what the words that make it up are. Defining is a little more than that. How often do I hear "I read this in the WSJ" compared to how often I hear "I learned this from Glenn Beck." You show me some numbers to make your point. I can show you some. Fox kills in the ratings and talk radio is what it is. Far fewer people are influenced by the NYT and CNN than by Bill' Oreilly and his ilk. Just look around. Fox fans are always bragging about how many people watch FOX. They are always citing Hannity and Beck as people to listen to. You do not see anyone doing that with Larry King or Ed Shultz and you sure as hell do not hear anyone quoting "Air America" as a source do ya.

reply to post by Sinnthia

Go back and read my post and this time pay attention to the words I wrote and try to address them. Colleges and unions are not media. I still think you need to define MSM, not tell me what the words that make it up are. Defining is a little more than that. How often do I hear "I read this in the WSJ" compared to how often I hear "I learned this from Glenn Beck." You show me some numbers to make your point. I can show you some. Fox kills in the ratings and talk radio is what it is. Far fewer people are influenced by the NYT and CNN than by Bill' Oreilly and his ilk. Just look around. Fox fans are always bragging about how many people watch FOX. They are always citing Hannity and Beck as people to listen to. You do not see anyone doing that with Larry King or Ed Shultz and you sure as hell do not hear anyone quoting "Air America" as a source do ya.

I'm not going to go back and try to make sense of what you couldn't get across. It's better that you work on your communication skills; you will benefit from it. I have nothing to gain here. I'm not going to 'show you some numbers'. If you want to play count the marbles find someone else.

Oh yeah, and - YOU WIN, Ok? Make you feel better? Good.

Whatever you said.
Same as you.

Originally posted by dfens



Isn't there a position open in the obama admin for press secretary?

He would be much better than Robert Gibbs, for sure. At least Olbermann can think on his feet, he was much better at sports coverage though.

Thats it! I was wondering why he could'nt think sitting down.

Originally posted by mishigas
I'm not going to go back and try to make sense of what you couldn't get across. It's better that you work on your communication skills; you will benefit from it. I have nothing to gain here. I'm not going to 'show you some numbers'. If you want to play count the marbles find someone else.

Oh yeah, and - YOU WIN, Ok? Make you feel better? Good.

Whatever you said.
Same as you.

I am very sorry those 5 lines in my post were so confusing for you. I understand when I read radio and cable that I am not talking about colleges. I am not sure why you would not be able to figure that out. I could care less about winning. If you want to spend a page and a half refuting what I said, actually refute what I said. Rambling on about academia makes no sense. Glad you think it does.

My point stands.

reply to post by Sinnthia


The consummate deflector in action on yet another thread.

To remind, this thread is about Keith Olbermann leaving MSNBC and the possible reasons for his doing so, and not about you or any other members.

Back on topic, I personally like the theory stating that since obama needs a press secretary ...

Originally posted by centurion1211
To remind, this thread is about Keith Olbermann leaving MSNBC and the possible reasons for his doing so, and not about you or any other members.

Yeah, that is actually what I did address. Talk to your friends that follow me around just to yack for pages. You might want to go back and read the thread through. This has nothing to do with Obama needing a press secretary and everything to do with consolidation of media powers. That is something everyone should be agains but you see Olberman's name and me posting and your head just goes crazy.

Originally posted by Sinnthia
That is something everyone should be agains but you see Olberman's name and me posting and your head just goes crazy.

Still about you , and now me - instead of Olbermann.

And Olbermann's possible next career moves are quite within the scope of a thread likes this.

reply to post by centurion1211


You do realize that the only thing you have posted about here is me, right? Apparently I am your topic. I actually took the time to address the topic which is Olbermann being ousted in a media merger that is just one more step towards stifling the free flow of opposing ideas. I know how fascists love that and all but see if you can make one of your posts about the topic instead of about me...while trying to point out I only talk about me.

Oh the irony.

reply to post by Sinnthia


Wrong (again), but will you ever be able to admit it?

Go back and read my posts again. I've mentioned Olbermann several times.

Now pay attention, I'm going to do it again ...

All accounts I've read said olbermann has a history of being hard on management. That even though his ratings weren't even close to anyone on Fox, he still wanted more money.

Originally posted by inforeal
Olbermann is a good guy, not perfect like you guys here but he was overall a humanitarian who spoke for policies in the political realm that helped poor and middle class people.

Unless the folks here are all rich, then he fought on his show for YOU!

He was a Goober!

Originally posted by centurion1211
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

Wrong (again), but will you ever be able to admit it?

Go back and read my posts again. I've mentioned Olbermann several times.

Not in any of your posts to me.

Now pay attention, I'm going to do it again ...

All accounts I've read said olbermann has a history of being hard on management. That even though his ratings weren't even close to anyone on Fox, he still wanted more money.

I am sorry that the on-topic comment that I made has caused you such confusion. I am not sure what this reply had to do with anything other than some random interjection about Keith in order to appear on topic. You could have done that much without using three replies to me just to get there. Do you actually have anything to say about my on topic point?

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Originally posted by centurion1211
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

Wrong (again), but will you ever be able to admit it?

Go back and read my posts again. I've mentioned Olbermann several times.

Not in any of your posts to me.

Earth to sinnthia:

You're not the only other person on this thread or that I respond to.

The fact is that I have mentioned olbermann throughout this thread.