I don't understand why anyone would still watch these two to begin with. Both of them are very unlikable in my eyes. With the advancement of the Internet and the multiple news publications and blogs out there, not to mention that one can easily go to a government website and see the raw unemployment numbers for yourself without any pundit bias or corruption, I no longer feel the need to watch Rachel Maddow or Sean Hannity for news. There are far better things to do in my spare time.
I try to limit my viewing of them and watch more CSpan and CNN (no, they're not perfect, either, but Anderson Cooper and Erin Burnett in prime-time are good reporters), but, as a media critic (admittedly self-described), I have to force myself occasionally.
RT (Russia Today) and Al Jazeera sound a lot better than what's available in the United States. I occasionally check out their videos and websites. There's this Russian website called Pravda that's been pointing out various problems within the United States as well. I also try to read The Guardian, The Daily Mail, and The Telegraph as foreign news sources that happen to cover US issues.
Yeah, I've seen some of the interviews on Russia Today (on Youtube) and they were quite excellent. Penetrating, but without the yelling drama and constant interruptions.
Hannity is indeed fiscally irresponsible as he opposes cut, cap, and trade. Apparently falling in line somehow with Obama's plan to increase the debt by 20 trillion dollars.
At this time, Hannity deserves more ratings than Maddow. For the simple reason that I find a free press (Hannity) which challenges the ruling establishment to be more valuable than an organ of the free press which acts as nothing more than a mouthpiece (Maddow) of the most powerful.
The fact that Obama has done a fair # of things (drone attacks, rendition, dragging his feet on gay marriage) that Maddow should thoroughly oppose underscores your point.
7 comments:
I don't understand why anyone would still watch these two to begin with. Both of them are very unlikable in my eyes. With the advancement of the Internet and the multiple news publications and blogs out there, not to mention that one can easily go to a government website and see the raw unemployment numbers for yourself without any pundit bias or corruption, I no longer feel the need to watch Rachel Maddow or Sean Hannity for news. There are far better things to do in my spare time.
I try to limit my viewing of them and watch more CSpan and CNN (no, they're not perfect, either, but Anderson Cooper and Erin Burnett in prime-time are good reporters), but, as a media critic (admittedly self-described), I have to force myself occasionally.
RT (Russia Today) and Al Jazeera sound a lot better than what's available in the United States. I occasionally check out their videos and websites. There's this Russian website called Pravda that's been pointing out various problems within the United States as well. I also try to read The Guardian, The Daily Mail, and The Telegraph as foreign news sources that happen to cover US issues.
Yeah, I've seen some of the interviews on Russia Today (on Youtube) and they were quite excellent. Penetrating, but without the yelling drama and constant interruptions.
Hannity is indeed fiscally irresponsible as he opposes cut, cap, and trade. Apparently falling in line somehow with Obama's plan to increase the debt by 20 trillion dollars.
At this time, Hannity deserves more ratings than Maddow. For the simple reason that I find a free press (Hannity) which challenges the ruling establishment to be more valuable than an organ of the free press which acts as nothing more than a mouthpiece (Maddow) of the most powerful.
If Romney had won, I'd be saying the opposite.
The fact that Obama has done a fair # of things (drone attacks, rendition, dragging his feet on gay marriage) that Maddow should thoroughly oppose underscores your point.
Post a Comment