Talking Head Primetime Invades Daytime: Chapter 2…
I’m watching the Mark Simone/David Shuster interview right now and it’s almost as bad as the John Ziegler interview with Shuster once again challenging conservatives (in general, not Simone whose politics I’m not clear on) during MSNBC dayside and Simone trying to correct/clarify Shuster on the air and Shuster having none of it, this time over the Dick Cheney/Scooter Libby/Richard Armitage/Valerie Plame mess. Once again, clearly Shuster had an agenda he wanted to push and he pushed it. On MSNBC Dayside. Which is supposed to be about news and not opinion according to NBC execs. I’d love to say more on this but I’m literally headed out the door and I just know this is going to be all over the blogs today and I wanted to get in on it first, and give y’all a place to comment on it. I’m sure someone will post the video and/or a transcript soon enough.
March 16, 2009 at 10:57 am
Shuster is unbearable. He sucks on 1600 (a terrible show in general made worse by him), and on dayside he is really bad. MSNBC is too cheap to hire another anchor for dayside it seems.
March 16, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Mark Simone fills in for Imus when he is on hiatus.
March 16, 2009 at 1:07 pm
I would call Simone right of center
March 16, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Shuster on 1900th just showed a clip from Forbes on Fox where the debate centered on whether Obama is worst than Bernie Madoff.
Stay Classy Fox News.
March 16, 2009 at 3:15 pm
Elmonica, the difference between Shuster & Forbes on Fox is that the Fox show is a business show whereas Shuster is “supposed” to be an independent journalist since this is how MSNBC has advertised their daytime lineup.
Forbes on Fox has never been advertised as anything but a pure business show with strong opinions being aired.
Perhaps Shuster is attempting to get the 10pm slot behind Madow???
Have A Good Night Elmonica
March 16, 2009 at 3:23 pm
Shuster may be lobbying for that 10pm slot – but I seriously doubt he’d even be up for serious consideration.
And once again, MSNBC lets opinion drift into what is supposed to be straight reporting. Let the guest pundits do this stuff – is it that hard?
March 16, 2009 at 3:25 pm
Sorry, but when I watch business shows (rarely anymore), I don’t expect douchebaggery. That was douchebaggery at its finest.
March 16, 2009 at 3:47 pm
I rarely see you Spud go after Megyn Kelly for her biases in the moring, or any of the other biased Fox News Anchors on dayside. Why is that? Why do you focus only on MSNBC?
March 16, 2009 at 3:50 pm
Elmonica, you may be right that the guests may have crossed over the line however Fox clearly identifies these shows (typically at the beginning of the broadcast) as business opinion shows.
Where is the identifier for Shuster’s show identifying his as opinion???
Again, if they want to put Shuster on @ 10pm I have no issue with him making as many statements as he wishes. However, MSNBC clearly markets his show as news not opinion.
Shuster routinely crosses the line between journalist & opinion maker.
March 16, 2009 at 6:38 pm
hnmnf, Spud has criticized Megyn Kelly’s on-air prosecutions on more than one occasion.
You weren’t paying attention.
March 17, 2009 at 4:57 am
I never see the morning news show on Fox with Megyn Kelly and Bill Hemmer marketed as an opinion show; yet, she daily has to let her opinions drift in as an almost militant way she has of presenting the news in that bombastic delivery.
March 17, 2009 at 7:00 am
Hey Chip, Spud, BR, etc etc, if you don’t like how MSNBC is being run, I have an idea for you: save up all your pennies and buy it. Then you can make decisions about how the network is run. Until then, STFU. It’s none of your business. If you don’t like it, don’t watch it.
March 17, 2009 at 7:17 am
SMH:
There’s nothing wrong with pointing out when someone says one thing and does another. With regard to the comments, if you don’t like them, then don’t watch them!
March 17, 2009 at 7:49 am
Of all the topics to be sparring over, you would think David Shuster would know better that his track record on this topic (“Karl Rove will be indicted in less than 48 hours”) has been less than stellar.
March 17, 2009 at 8:15 am
Forbes on Fox has never been advertised as anything but a pure business show with strong opinions being aired.
I have to call quasi-BS on this statement. Forbes on Fox like the rest of the Saturdays Business block is ostensibly a business show but too often weighs into politics with its guest’s opinions and the topics it covers. I liked the business block better when it was more on the business side. But that was many years ago…like 9.
hnmnf, Spud has criticized Megyn Kelly’s on-air prosecutions on more than one occasion.
True but this needs clarifying. I can only comment on what I see or hear. I happened to be heading to turn off the TV at the time when it was on MSNBC and Shuster and saw Cheney’s video so I turned the volume up. It was a freak accident. For the record I don’t like Megyn Kelly’s prosecutions or Julie Banderas’ and I’ve said so before.
March 17, 2009 at 11:59 am
Spud:
I’m in agreement in that I do not like the direction of the Fox News Business Block. My point of contention is that the contributors are “business professionals” with backgrounds in business not journalism. As you’ve documented Shuster has a history with doing this type of thing. Again, I have no issue with Shuster stating his opinions if his show was clearly identified as such.
I’m guessing the reason why the business block has gone more political is that with the recent government actions it’s hard to separate business from government discussions.
I’m also in agreement that Kelly’s & Banderas proscecutions shouldn’t be aired. However, where would Headline News be without the daily Kaylee Anthony roundup. The same goes true for Greta & Natilie Holloway.
SMH:
Wow, you must be one overly sensistive individual. The last time I checked I was living in the USA where the 1st amendment provides me with the opportunity to state an “opinion”. According to HRC, dissent is a form of patriosm & since I believe in supporting dissent my reply is nothing short of being a Patriotic American.
Now, the last time I checked my comments were not “flagged” by Spud for being offensive.
Why is it that only you have any issue with my comments. In the past, I’ve engaged in “thoughtful” dialogues with Elmo, Joe, & UncleArthur where we’ve respectfully agreed to disagree. Hell, sometimes Joe & I even found common ground. At no point, did I tell any of them to STFU when I disagreed with them.
Perhaps you’re more “closed minded” than most people who post on this site??? Maybe you need to learn to be more open & respectful of other’s opinions???
SMH, to put it bluntly for only you to understand “GROW UP”. If you do not like someone’s postings, Be Respectful, Challenge the Premise, Use Documented Facts (not something made up on Wikipedia, Internet Blogs, etc..), and be Articulate & Pithy.
SMH, my advice to you is to not be a “DreadedPatrick”.
March 17, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Jeez Chip, for someone who is calling someone else sensitive in their post, you sure seem…. sensitive. And defensive. Just saying.
March 17, 2009 at 1:07 pm
SMH:
I didn’t tell anyone to STFU, now did I? Nor, have I attempted to stifle an opposing opinion. You’re the individual who called out Spud, BR, & myself to STFU & mind our own business.
I find it ironic that some people will champion free speech if they’re in agreement with the presenter and/or topic but will have no problem with attempting to silence those with whom they disagree.
Now, SMH you wouldn’t be one of those people who would try to stifle free speech, would you???
March 17, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Well gee whiz Chip, I didn’t realize that you were a first amendment crusader. Perhaps we should sign you up for the ACLU.
March 17, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Nice deflection…smh.
Actually, I’ve been a past supporter (1970′s-early 80′s) of the ACLU. My problem with that organization & many others is that they’ve expanded past their original charter & have entered into areas with which I strongly disagree (illegal immigration is one such area).
If you notice the first word of the ACLU is American & the last time I checked anyone illegally entering into this country is not an American citizen yet the ACLU will support the person who has illegally trespassed into our country yet not the homeowner who may have had their land ransacked. National Sovereignty be dammed.
The ACLU often times will protect the rights of the illegal alien over the rights of the individual property owner. Life, Liberty, & The Pursuit Of Happiness only applies to the downtrodden not to the common masses.
March 17, 2009 at 3:04 pm
LOL. You have a LOT of time on your hands, don’t ya Chip?
March 17, 2009 at 3:10 pm
SMH, your childishness is an affront to good Democrats. I don’t see the point in you commenting here since you make no effort to debate. You just call everybody you disagree with stupid, and make no effort to take any issues on on a case-by-case basis. To you, FNC is all bad and MSNBC is all good. If it’s that simple, there’s nothing to comment on. Which makes you…wait for it…a troll.
March 17, 2009 at 3:22 pm
^Joe, you get a gold star for the day. Dead on.
March 17, 2009 at 3:28 pm
Oh great, a gold star from a rightie. Thanks!…I think.
March 17, 2009 at 3:46 pm
I’m guessing the reason why the business block has gone more political is that with the recent government actions it’s hard to separate business from government discussions.
It’s been going on longer than that. Way longer. Since before the 2004 elections but really since 9/11.
March 17, 2009 at 3:48 pm
Joe, thank you for the support. Isn’t it a shame that people with differing opinions cannot have the decency to rationally & thoughtfully discuss a topic?
Sometimes I wonder what our Founding Fathers would think of the country they helped to form
March 17, 2009 at 4:01 pm
I think the Founding Fathers would tell us to STFU!
March 17, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Joe…LOL, you’re probably right. Can you imagine them seeing the personalities on Cable News…BOR, KO, AC, Hannity, Matthews, Larry King, Greta, Nancy Grace, et al???
March 17, 2009 at 6:24 pm
Oh wow, Joeremi, if I’ve offended you, I must slit my own wrists. Your opinion, more than anyone else, means SO much to me.
I could care less what you think and I’ve made that pretty clear the entire time I’ve been on here. You’re Lieberman-lite, wanted to be pat on the head by the right-wingers on the board.
If Spud wishes to ban me from this board, he is more than welcome to. He’ll keep on attacking MSNBC and you’ll keep on agreeing with him like the good little LIEberman-Democrat that you are. You are exactly the type of “Democrat” they want here.
March 17, 2009 at 7:10 pm
Lieberman-lite, . LOL
March 17, 2009 at 7:31 pm
SMH, expecting you to grow up and express an intelligent opinion doesn’t make me a warmongering traitor like Joe Lieberman. Continuing to act like a little punk while refusing to address our criticisms of your boorish behavior does make you a clown.
March 18, 2009 at 8:10 am
Smacked down again. Nice left hook, joe.
March 18, 2009 at 8:37 am
“Left hook.” That one took me a minute.
SMH’s mistake – aside from being a gigantic tool – is to assume I’m a far left liberal just because I’m a registered Democrat. Well, this Democrat voted in CA. against the Gov. Grey recall, then voted for Schwarzenegger. In Nov. I voted for Obama and for the Prop. 8 ban on same-sex marriage. I’m also very conservative on illegal immigration. So at any particular moment I’m just as likely to agree with him as with you. SMH considers THAT kowtowing to the conservatives here, when in fact I actually hold some conservative POV. Which, of course, makes me the bad guy.
Ask yourself, how many others here think Keith Olbermann is right AND crazy? SMH can’t deal with contradictory viewpoints, even though everybody carries some. Most of us just won’t admit it.
March 18, 2009 at 5:53 pm
^
And he gets pat on the head once again like the good little Liebercrat that he is. LOL.
March 18, 2009 at 6:42 pm
Nice complete avoidance of anything I’ve said, SMH. Talking to you is like talking to a wall…except the wall is more nuanced.
March 18, 2009 at 7:59 pm
And finishes him off with an uppercut straight up the middle.
March 18, 2009 at 8:30 pm
Don’t worry, he’ll be back to call me a boy toy for conservatives or some such other inanity. I suppose I could level another devastatingly nuanced dissection of his apparent – what’s the word Red? Douchebaggery? – at him, but, what’s the point?
March 19, 2009 at 7:04 am
You already decimated him. They’ll need lots of smelling salts to revive him at this point….but you’re right, he’ll attempt another futile comeback.