I currently do not trust either CNN or Fox, however, CNN has absolutely zero credibility to me and they've been caught on it before. This is probably the most horrendous example I can find from an audiovisual perspective:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIZh1nm8Lzg

In any case, out of all the major networks, I would presume Fox to be more accurate on hard news even while being alarmist and tabloid-like at times. The only reason that Fox stands out is because of how terrible the others are.

It may have been added after you wrote this post, but Greenwald explains this and for you to write this is probably being disingenuous.

Greenwald dislikes how mainstream journalists give anonymity to people who are saying things that are completely innocuous. Like a few months back CNN quoted "former administration officials" for saying that the full story of the torture memos would exonerate Cheney. WTF? Why do those people need to be protected? They already lost their job, and they are saying something that is directly in their own self-interest! For all we know those "officials" are like Dick Cheney and Karl Rove.

This case is quite different. The MSNBC producer feeding Greenwald this stuff is contradicting the party line from his bosses and could get fired if he went on record.

Also, lets recap the timeline:

Start: Olberman criticizing O'Reilly
Meeting
Olberman stops criticizing O'Reilly
Revelation of Meeting
Olberman criticizes O'Reilly again

That doesn't disprove the meeting or its effect, in fact it kinda supports it. As soon as the meeting was public and the damage, so to speak, was done Olberman went right back to on the offensive.

Jesus Christ. Have you considered that Saudi Arabia may have a television studio somewhere within its borders?

This isn't entirely true. In addition, attacks from the base corrode his appearance to moderates/independents. Considering how strongly white working class males oppose him, he needs an extremely energized and supportive base.

I think he believes a crappy set is what should distinguish a REAL war correspondent. He must have spent too much time watching war movies.

So what? It's still fake.

So, you would trust a news outlet that taped "coverage" on a soundstage?

A backdrop and lights makes a stage. They set these up everywhere on the planet every day. Or to satisfy you that its real, do you really need a shaky hand held camera that vibrates with percussion of exploding shells. They make a shaker machine for that purpose, Spielberg used one for Saving Private Ryan.

Problem is that people can't tell what is real and what's not. Like Rand, I refute the concept of the "noble lie" and am appalled at any news coverage that is faked.

Please indicate which words I used that would require a thesaurus. I try to keep my posts easily understandable to all, so I would appreciate your input.

I certainly don't know exactly what happened, but I think there are some clear threads forming in this story. Assuming Glenn's analysis of the past couple months is correct (and his end of the blogosphere would not likely be incorrect about this as it's fairly pro-Olbermann from what I've gleaned), the sudden turn-around is a rather apparent reaction to the coverage the deal has recently received. It could be otherwise, and certainly is more complex than that, but I feel it's a likely and quite intuitive thing.
Most likely. It will be interesting to see how this plays out now. Perhaps the deal will go back into effect in a few months, perhaps GE will end up proving it's the real pusher here and Fox won't get its quid for GE's quo, who knows.

It wasn't intentional disingenuity, if that's what it was. I assure you I'm generally a rather large fan of GG.

After re-reading both posts in full, I retract that criticism. For some reason I hadn't connected that comment in the newer post with the part in the previous post where he discusses precisely what you are discussing here for some reason (odd since I had that/your reasoning in mind when discussing this in my previous post). Call it a brain fart, I guess, as it should have been fairly clear to me that the two were connected - he said as much himself. I can understand why you thought I was being disingenuous and apologize for being wrong.

20 years ago there was no such thing as timeshifting television coverage. You want to see it live, you better live on the East Coast. Network news coverage (the 6:00 news) was considered live reporting on the West Coast. That was the source back then. Cronkite had a desk, not a Hollywood soundstage/set with multiple cameras and graphics to ooooh and ahhhhhhh the audience.

Today by the time a broadcast has started the news is not new anymore. If you want to use the metrics of 20 or 30 years ago, the fact you are on the internet with its ability to inform you of events in real time, is a major conflict.

As for faked information, todays internet is worse in that respect than anything in history. Its so easy now compared to the past.

Obv the thing wasn't filmed in Saudi Arabia. There's no audio lag time between the "anchor" and the "correspondent".

Who in this room is lying? Was that so hard?

"Tonight's worst persons in the world, brought to you, tonight, by Fixed News, celebrating 6 days without having fired Glen Beck even after he called the President of the United States a racist and even after they basically claimed he really didn't work for them.

The Bronze! To Brian Stelter of the NY Times.... front page story, FRONT PAGE STORY.. saturday about a "deal", as the headline read,"voices from above silence a cable TV feud"

Problem? Mr. Stelter asked me at least twice last week if there was such a deal and I told him on and off the record there was not, and I told him that I, rather obviously, would have to be a party to such a deal, and I told him that not only wasn't I, but I had not even been asked to be by my bosses... AND HE PRINTED IT ANYWAY!

and I had even written to him that this was merely a misinterpretation of an announcement I made here on June 1st,'that because Bill O'Reilly of Fox News had abetted the assassination of Dr. George Tiller, he'd become to serious to joke about, and I would thus stop doing so.' An annoucnement that would obtain(remain adhered to?), unless and until, ofcourse, I felt like changing the rule again later... since this is not the US constitution here... it's a half-baked television newscast, and I MAKE ALL THE RULES!

Soooooo... Tonight's runner-up... Billo the Clown..."


and Olberman lays into Billo as only Olberman can as he awards him with the silver medal

"But our winner Ruppert Murdock...how would you like to be Roger Ailles right now(might be spelled wrong and who cares, it's beside the point) or Bill O'Reilly or anybody else who thinks they decide what goes on, even for a minute, on Fox News channel. Ruppert Murdock, according to that NY Times piece, has muzzled Billo, kept him from speaking his mind because, as the times put it, what Billo said,"could create real consequences for Foxs' parent corporation."

How dare you Muzzle O'Reilly, Mr. Murdock? How dare you, Sir? This is the essence of corporate interference in the market place of ideas, and it is shameful, and sumthin sumthin 'matey'.... Solidarity brother Bill.. Free yourself from your corporate shackles.. Solidarity! Rupert Murdock, who could never get away with that here, today's worst person in the World!"

A man confidently and brazenly feigning brotherhood with his rival after reading a report about Billo having been muzzled.

Doesn't bespeak of a man supposedly under a simular thumb of corporate infuence.

also, the premise of this bogus idea is that Fox has some disparaging goods on GE.. and Fox has threatened to expose some of GEs "unfavorable business practices" if they don't muzzle Olberman hahah

I guess CNN or the AP or any other news organization isnt capable of bringing to the publics attention.. whatever it is that GE "fears" having become known..

especially after last Nights lambasting of Lou Dobbs by Olberman... I'm expecting some clandestine meeting between heads of CNN and GE.. that will surely result in their forsaking of their journalistic credibility in exchange for...........?

This ends this discussion

Calm down.

LOL so he rails into one guy about running a fake story, and then rails the guy who the fake story involved as if it were real?

<3 Cable TV

im cool ryan thanx sorry for the infraction

So, Schlitz, full circle: are you questioning the validity of the NYT article then?

Olbermann himself said that it was correct. I don't see what's to discuss here. He said that everything Greenwald had written originally was correct - that there was a backroom deal brokered by Rose between Murdoch and Immelt regarding his and O'Reilly's shows' content - only denying that he was part of that deal, a claim no one, including Greenwald and the NYT' reporter, made. Has he denied that GE forced his superiors to alter his conduct?

It also appears both parties in the deal have acknowledged its existence. Furthermore, from GG again:
So, you have acknowledgment by both parties (if the NYT article is to be taken at face value on those points alone), implicit validation from Olbermann himself, and statistical evidence that this has happened. Obviously, Olbermann isn't likely to come out and directly say what happened, so I don't know what more you want. What more do you want here, an audio tape, give me an idea of what you need; what evidence would be enough for you?

Suit yourself then.

New example of hard hitting journalism out of the O'Reilly camp...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L8TEiQQ1dY

This probably is probably somewhat on par with the usual from him, but I'm from Eugene and its making a pretty big internet splash with us locals.

My favorites:

• There are 1150+ faculty at the UofO, this survey picks a subset of 186, but Bill still presents the data as if it represents the whole school.
• "Interview" with provost in parking garage
• That's indoctrination!
• Peoples Republic of Lane County
• An awful lot of those who actually know how to do things go into the private sector
• Diversity of who you sleep with
• Also, the UofO gets 90% of its funding from private sources, and is one of the lower paying public schools in the country so its not as plush and government run as Bill may have you believe.

Olbermann just mentioned Newscorp (Murdoch's company) going from 1B profits last year to 200M losses this year, then called out Fox News's Gretchen Carlson for claiming to have done her own research and finding out that only two "Cash for Clunkers" deals have been approved in Minnesota, while in fact it was two PERCENT or about 150 deals. And he still continues to call it "Fixed News".

What is your point? That news organization lie? I already stated that.

Is it that you hate Fox because they lie and you love CNN because they shoot war footage on a stage?

The very fact that two men could even make such a deal is an indictment of our media system.

This guy (Olbermann) oozes douche out of every pore. It really is fascinating.