Is FOX News doing any special reports on the Conclave?
ABC and NBC went live went live around 11:40am ET.
CBS waited till 12pm ET. My FOX station has local programming.
I mean, until we see the smoke, what is there to report?
It was all conclave all morning on cable news. Which is ridiculous. One particular church shouldn’t get blanket coverage like this.
Again no special report on FOX5 from the FOX Network as ABC, CBS, NBC and all the cable news networks report a new Pope was not selected today.
One particular church shouldn’t get blanket coverage like this.
One out of every 4 Americans professes to be Catholic. That’d be 256 NAACP-sized organizations put together. That’s more members than 2012 Obama voters. Just because you’re not Catholic (PS: I’m not either) doesn’t mean this isn’t a monster story.
If you’re argument is “this shouldn’t be hyper-covered” or “this is being covered in an incorrect manner”, those are arguments I’d be willing to listen to and/or just might agree with. But “this shouldn’t be covered at all” is a ridiculous notion even for you.
Remember that when liberals try to say that since public opinion polls support them over Repubs, ergo it means the people support higher taxes.
Re: Papal coverage
I feel the same way about NASCAR.
How did you get “shouldn’t be covered at all” out of “shouldn’t get blanket coverage”?
1.8 billion Catholics in the world. Not sure how many are on a boat with backed up plumbing.
The endless cruise-ship coverage was stupid, too. I said so at the time. So basically no one disagrees with what I actually said, but you’re gonna find a way to argue it anyway. Brilliant.
Does it always have to be about you? I actually didn’t read your comment nor do I plan to read anything you write on religion after your Mormon silliness.
Power to the Pope. Though my Protestant ancestors were not so inclined, I like the pageantry and am intrigued what kind of thinking may dictate the new influential leader.
1.2 billion is the figure that usually gets thrown around, and I think there’s approximately a 99.96% probability that is overstated. Vastly so if the subject is practicing Catholics, even in the casual sense.
CNN’s coverage is particularly terrible, endlessly hyping the “pomp and pageantry” of it all (to use Anderson Cooper’s words at the top of the last hour), with zero substantial attention given to numerous issues surrounding the church, the Vatican’s actual influence in the world, etc. They cover it like they think it’s some combination of the Olympics ceremonies and the British royal family.
Topping themselves for mindless gimmickry, they have Tom Foreman traipsing around in a “virtual Sistine Chapel” set.
I wouldn’t mind CNN as much if their look for their coverage didn’t have such an ugly typeface. Otherwise, it’s nice to see the colors actually be changed out instead of sticking to their typical blue attire.
Plural “you’re”. That included Farris, too, who read what I said; agreed with it; then extrapolated that I meant something else. ‘Cause who knows why.
Did not see any of CNN coverage, just Shep Smith who was top notch. Seemed to have done his homework.
Everyone watch the Maddow special tonight: Why Republican Catholics Are n Disarray.
^Sociology 101 (or 201 if you didn’t pay attention the first time): Groups in opposition to one another over time start to resemble each other.
AKA: iron of emulation.
I may have oversummarized joe’s point earlier. Still think he’s overreacting.
The bizarre hysteria over Chuck Hagel resulted in a parody story about him taking money from Friends Of Hamas becoming a real question to Rand Paul on FNC, which Rand responded to with “concern”. How many consumers of conservative media still think it really happened?
Another particularly egregious example of conservative-media hysteria overwhelming a story is Benghazi. What started as a convoluted situation involving an ambassador and three others being killed; with an equally convoluted explanation from the administration; quickly morphed into “that thing Fox keeps harping on because they hate POTUS”. At which point most of the country shook their heads at “Hannity losing his mind again”, and walked away.
When “conservative media” starts playing to Sean Hannity, the stories die. I don’t know why this is so tough to understand. There is great power in understatement. When every story starts from “outrage”, there’s nowhere else to go.
Yet Hannity thrives on FNC and radio. Mystery to my tastes. Guess, like Joe says, there is a strong minority that hates POTUS. Must enjoy wallowing in that mud hole.
And the thing is, it was no different when Bush was in office. The Left screamed their heads off, but it really wasn’t until Katrina that Bush started to drop. The war went on, the economy faltered, etc etc. I think that it became evident during Clinton’s Presidency that at a certain point, people tune out the venom. And at some point, it hurts the venomous as much as the venomee.
It’s the misinformation that gets generated during these “outrages”; then becomes common knowledge among conservatives; that bothers me the most. Hey, did you know the administration was watching the Benghazi attack in real time, and did nothing? Yeah, that didn’t happen.
Officially, that is what happened. The administration did lie about Benghazi so the conclusions reached aren’t entirely out of place. I happen to believe that they lied because the ambassador was CIA… which is a great BIG no-no.
Does Rudy Giuliani do anything besides go on Hannity’s show to whine and complain about Obama?
If you are that upset about how the country is being governed then run for any public office and try to change things.
The BBC isn’t done moving to their massive HQ. Their domestic news channel and national newscasts are moving next week. The real newsroom behind the new domestic news studio looks like an attempt to copy the fake newsroom the domestic division is using right now. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-21741690