"Voices From Above Silence a Cable TV Feud"

"Voices From Above Silence a Cable TV Feud"--that's the headline in Saturday's NYT, above the byline of one of the great Cable Gamers, Brian Stelter. Those voices, evidently, are Rupert Murdoch and Jeff Immelt, calling a cease-fire, or at least a little bit of a stand-down between Bill O'Reilly and Keith Olbermann.

Here's the top of Brian's story:

It was a media cage fight, televised every weeknight at 8 p.m. But the match was halted when the blood started to spray executives in the high-priced seats.

For years Keith Olbermann of MSNBC had savaged his prime-time nemesis Bill O’Reilly of the Fox News Channel and accused Fox of journalistic malpractice almost nightly. Mr. O’Reilly in turn criticized Mr. Olbermann’s bosses and led an exceptional campaign against General Electric, the parent company of MSNBC.

It was perhaps the fiercest media feud of the decade and by this year, their bosses had had enough. But it took a fellow television personality with a neutral perspective to help bring it to at least a temporary end.

At an off-the-record summit meeting for chief executives sponsored by Microsoft in mid-May, the PBS interviewer Charlie Rose asked Jeffrey Immelt, chairman of G.E., and his counterpart at the News Corporation, Rupert Murdoch, about the feud.

Both moguls expressed regret over the venomous culture between the networks and the increasingly personal nature of the barbs. Days later, even though the feud had increased the audience of both programs, their lieutenants arranged a cease-fire, according to four people who work at the companies and have direct knowledge of the deal.

NWS and GE, of course, work together on a variety of projects, most spectacularly, Hulu.com, the hugely successful go-to website for programming. And no doubt, also, there are many FCC-y concerns that unite the two companies. And there's the practical and immediate concern that something bad could happen to some of these people--this is, after all, a dangerous world, full of crazies, some of whom watch cable news and get ideas therefrom.

So TCG can see why this "ceasefire" happened--maybe even why it had to happen. And there's plenty to criticize outside of the media world. LIke, for example, Barack Obama and his works. Fox, in particular, as the only network not toadying up to BHO, might have concluded that it doesn't need to spend time attacking MSNBC.

But of course, The Cable Gamer will always say what she thinks. NWS and GE have their work, and TCG has her work.

"Murdoch and Immelt tried to broker MSNBC-Fox News peace accord"

Far out! Like wow! "Murdoch and Immelt tried to broker MSNBC-Fox News peace accord"--that's the tantalizing not-quite-sure-I-believe it headline atop an interesting blog-post from Joe Flint of the LA Times, reportingthat Rupert Murdoch and Jeff Immelt tried to bury the hatchet--and not in each other's back--at a recent Microsoft business conference. As Flint relates:

News Corp. chief Rupert Murdoch and General Electric chief Jeffrey Immelt met up at -- appropriately enough -- the Microsoft CEO summit in Redmond, Wash., to figure out how to defuse tensions between the two channels, Company Town has learned. The primary focus of the chit-chat was the back-and-forth sniping between MSNBC's Keith Olbermann and Fox's Bill O'Reilly. The two often exchange insults, Olbermann by name, O'Reilly by insinuation.

But the attempted peace-piping doesn't seem to have worked:

If Immelt and Murdoch took their message of peace and love back to their respective news channels, it doesn't seem to have taken. Olbermann, who generally is the aggressor, has been attacking Fox News and O'Reilly on a regular basis. O'Reilly still takes occasional shots at MSNBC, NBC and General Electric.

Joe Flint is a great Cable Gamer, and TCG doesn't doubt that something amicable was discussed between Murdoch and Immelt, but there's much reason to be skeptical that any such deal was ever in the making. Whether one loves or hates Fox or MSNBC, the plain fact is that the disputants--whatever else they might be--are sincere in their convictions.

So TCG rates this report as "not proven"--indeed, as a little acid-trippy. But if someone knows different, please tell me--and all of us!

CNBC Down 28%: "The bloodbath at GE's propaganda station has reached critical levels"

The bloodbath at GE's propaganda station has reached critical levels." That's the assessment of Tyler Durden, writing for a blog called Zero Hedge, which is mostly about finance but occasionally delves into Cable Gaming.

This is obviously a stunning failure in an environment where the top stories on any other medium are finance and economy related. Maybe if they were to actually report objective news, Jeff Immelt would not have to scratch his head in wonderment, pondering how to generate ad revenue and something even remotely resembling positive cash flow. Then again what are the poor anchors to do since the infamous Immelt memo made the rounds. At least GE stock is up: and for that GE, Barney Frank and Goldman Sachs, deserve a golf clap.

CNN Ramps Up on Health and Medicine

The fight over Health Care is transfixing Washington DC these days, and maybe the country, too. That seems to be the message of TV Newser's report that Roni Selig will be joining CNN as "senior executive producer/director of the health and wellness medical unit."

As TVN puts it, "Selig will lead CNN's medical reporting and investigations across all platforms, working alongside chief medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta."

This hire is an interesting straw in the wind. CNN has been floundering, of late, falling into third by some measures. It tried to ride the Michael Jackson death to ratings glory, and has struggled to beef up its "black" identity, airing specials starring Soledad O'Brien and Roland "Text Dawg" Martin. But both of those gambits were failures--the "Jackson Effect" was temporary, and the O'Brien/Martin specials were a dud.

But Health Care is interesting to just about everyone, so we shall see what CNN does with this.

Shepard Smith--#1, Loving It, and Being Loved in Unexpected Media Places

Joanna Weiss offers a remarkable portrait of FNC's Shepard Smith for, of all places, The Boston Globe. Which Gawker picked up on, in a feature entitled, "Another Reason To Love Shep Smith.

Here's the good stuff in the Globe piece:

But Smith’s on-air role is more complex, and the e-mail speaks to its delicate nature. This is a moment of unmatched prominence for the 45-year-old, who is on track to have his best year ever in the ratings. His two hours of live TV every day - “Studio B’’ and the 7 p.m. “Fox Report’’ - both draw more viewers than their CNN and MSNBC competition combined. (“Fox Report,’’ the network’s flagship newscast, was up 39 percent in June from a year ago, with 1.8 million viewers.) Smith is the most prominent anchor on a network that is poised to see its best ratings year ever, with a 50 percent increase in viewers this past quarter for its primetime lineup of conservative hosts. The Obama administration, it seems, is a very good thing for Fox. . . .

Smith describes himself as a newscaster. “All we’re really supposed to do is find out what’s happening and tell people about it. You can make that as complicated as you want, but it’s really not,’’ he says in a recent interview.

Still, Smith does more on the air than deliver straight-up headlines. His newscasts are fast-paced, full of motion, and peppered with asides like “Let me say that again,’’ and “Listen to this.’’ He anchors as if he wants to reach through the TV screen, grab you by the lapels, and give you a little shake.

From time to time, Smith seems also to want to shake his guests - albeit a little more roughly. Hence, the viral moments that spread through YouTube after big news events. During last year’s presidential race, Smith confronted the accidental pundit known as “Joe the Plumber’’ on his contention that a vote for Barack Obama would mean “the death of Israel’’; Smith closed out the segment by shaking his head incredulously and saying, “It just gets frightening sometimes.’’ He called out Ralph Nader for saying Obama might become an “Uncle Tom for the giant corporations,’’ asking Nader coldly, “What was that?’’

Rarely, Smith offers hints of his own views: “We are America! We do not [expletive] torture!’’ he said in April in a rare appearance on “Strategy Room,’’ a streaming webcast on foxnews.com. In the throes of Hurricane Katrina coverage in 2005, Smith, reporting on suffering residents of New Orleans, famously challenged conservative Fox News host Sean Hannity, who had called for some “perspective.’’ Smith shouted, “This is all the perspective you need!’’

But Smith’s own perspective is hard to attach to one ideology. Smith defines it as a truth-ferreting impulse, an urge to underscore or skewer the outrageous, no matter where it comes from.

“As a consumer of news, it sometimes aggravates me when people don’t call BS when it’s obvious. And so I do,’’ he says . “To me, it’s not a bias to say, ‘That’s BS.’ It just is.’’

More Tweets From Rick Sanchez

Not to be outdone by more enterprising bloggers, TCG has tracked down more Tweets from Rick Sanchez, CNN's wild-and-crazy guy:

I should do the right thing and tell Obama that I luv him

Chicks dig me, guys wanna be like me.

Anybody seen my Congressional Medal of Honor?

I am better looking than Ben Affleck. If I weren't Hispanic, I could have nailed Jennifer Garner.

I have an even bigger mouth than Joe Biden.

If I weren't at CNN, I'd be swinging in Hollywood.

What happened to my career?

OK, those are all fakes. I made them up. But why shouldn't I? I'm as qualified as Rick to be on the air. And if I get snockered enough, I might just start Tweeting.

Tweet War!

More from ICN, and from Johnny Dollar:

It’s a Tweet War! Julie Banderas responds to Rick Sanchez…(via J$)

As a wise Latina woman, I have no comment other than to say…

…if I were Rick Sanchez, I wouldn’t look in the mirror, period.

And Mediate gets this quote from FNC:

“Everyone knows that Rick is an industry joke, he shows that he’s a hack everyday. And he doesn’t have to worry about working at FOX because we only hire talent who have the ability to generate ratings.”

TCG can only add this: Aside from the obvious fact that Rick Sanchez is an idiot, we clearly are seeing some sort of escalation of media technology--hence, the Tweet War.

Calling Alec Baldwin! Rick Sanchez Hard at Work Being a Blowhard

The always must-read Inside Cable News notes and posts these Tweets from Rick Sanchez, who is CNN's answer to the bloviating Alec Baldwin.

Here are the Tweets:

if i didn’t believe in doing right thing, i’d be rich anchoring at fox news

and this…

do u know how much money i’d make if i’d sold out as hispanic and worked at fox news, r u kidding, one problem, looking in mirror

So where to begin? I'll begin with the observation that there is ZERO evidence that Fox has any interest in hiring Sanchez, at any price, including zero. And second, as with Roland Martin, it seems like CNN-ers are out of control. Maybe it has something to do with being #3. Third, Rick might consider drinking less.

MSM Enablers for Obama? Don't Take My Word For It! Ask This MSM-er!

Mark Plotkin is a regular political commentator for DC''s WTOP radio, focusing on local politics in the District of Columbia itself. As such, given the nature of DC, Plotkin is not obviously a conservative--and if he were, it would not be good for his career. But boy oh boy, does he let the MSM have it in this commentary on Thursday:

Last night the President had a press conference. But where was the press? I know they were sitting in their designated seats politely waiting to be selected to ask a question.

They all know the drill. The president has prepared for him a short list of the annointed few. They get to stand up, speak in the microphone and have their 15 seconds of fame.

I don't fault the President for trying to control the press. But I ask you, why does the press go along? There is not one moment of spontaneity. The questioners are tipped off, in advance, by the White House and they behave accordingly.

No. Not one questions about Iraq. Not one questions about Afghanistan, where American troops have had the worst month of fatalities in eight years. These guys, and women, are not journalists. They're enablers.

"They're not journalists, they're enablers"? Pow! H/T to TV Newser, TCG would never have seen this otherwise.

The Art of Spin, By Robert Gibbs

"Let Me Be Clear"--Not!

Thanks to Jim Hubbell for illustrating the art of spin--see previous post.

Liberal Knees Jerk on CNN and MSNBC

Barack Obama did serious damage to himself by wading into the Henry Louis Gates controversy last night. It wasn't presidential for the President to insert himself into the controversy over Gates' arrest, in response to Lynn Sweet's question last night. Moreover, Obama's position, in which he said to a national and international audience that Cambridge MA cops had acted "stupidly" in arresting that Harvard professor, won't prove to be smart or popular.

But in the meantime, the MSM is busy prostrating itself before Obama, taking his side in the controversy, and filling up the airwaves with guests who take Obama's side. And the cable news subset of the MSM of course fell into lockstep. On CNN in the last hour, Wolf Blitzer had on motor-mouthed liberal Michael Eric Dyson,who of course trashed the cops, and another black expert, whose name I missed, but who completely agreed with Dyson.

And on MSNBC, David Shuster and Tamron Hall piled on, while "interviewing" two guests, Democrat Peter Miranjian and black Republican Ron Christie. When Christie said that he thought it was a mistake for Obama to wade into the controversy, Hall (pictured above) jumped down his throat, saying, in effect, how dare anyone criticize Obama and thereby take attention away from the "real issue" of racial profiling, police misconduct, etc. One would never know that Hall is a reporter, not a commentator. And then Shuster offered some commentary of his own, declaring that the Gates controversy will "help" Obama, because his supporters will know that he sticks to his guns. What liberal b.s. Shuster is smarter than that.

Then came the Cambridge PD press conference, which MSNBC carried a little after 5 pm et today. But when Commissioner Robert Haas said that he was siding with Sgt. Crowley, MSNBC sure cut away quick.

MSNBC is doing its best to suck up to Obama, to keep their bailout money flowing to parent company GE, but it's going to be hard to do such defending. I could tell that Chris Matthews was not comfortable, because I am sure that his innermost sympathies are with the cops--although of course he can't say that on MSNBC.

As an aside, The Cable Gamer offers a special award for Spin Doctoring for his comments today. After Obama said that the Cambridge PD had acted "stupidly," Robert Gibbs loyally fell on the sword of his own credibility--and squashed what remained of his credibility in speaking to reporters:

"Let me be clear, he was not calling the officer stupid," Gibbs told reporters as Obama landed in Cleveland for two health care events Thursday.

It's been said before: Whenever a TV talking head says, "Let me be clear"--that's a sign that the talking head has no intention of being clear.

Look Who's Talking!

As recorded by Warner Todd Huston of Newsbusters.org, CNN's not-ready-for-too-much-more-primetime-player, Campbell Brown, proclaims that CNN is doing "real journalism," blah blah blah.

But gee, it was less than two years ago that CNN got caught using Democratic operatives posing as "real people" at a 2007 Democratic presidential nomination debate in Nevada. Was that real journalism? And of course, nobody at CNN got fired, even after conservative blogospherians uncovered the truth (see pic above, from Doug Ross; CNN would have us believe that LaShannon Spencer is both an "undecided voter" and a Democratic National Committee operative). Was that a "no bull" approach to the news?

"Mayo Clinic Rebukes Obamacare, How Will Media Respond?"

Good question from Newsbusters' Noel Sheppard. Here's the Mayo statement:

"The proposed legislation misses the opportunity to help create higher-quality, more affordable health care for patients. In fact, it will do the opposite."

Adds Sheppard:

"Given the reputation of this fine institution, it will be very interesting to see how Obama-loving media report this announcement."

"Immelting"

"Immelting": A great turn of phrase from Chickaboomer, summing up the fate of Jeff Immelt, amidst a 47 percent decline in GE's earnings.

So it looks like MSNBC, followed by CNBC and NBC, will have to work that much harder, sucking up to the Obama administration, so that parent company GE can continue to collect federal bailout money.

"A Revolutionary Love Story"

That's the headline atop Glenn Garvin's story in The Miami Herald, detailing the life and marriage of Fox Business Network's David Asman, who found his true love in Nicaragua, amidst the turmoil of the Sandinista rebellion and dicatorship. It's quite a tale.

And it has a happy ending, with David at FBN, wife Marta in NYC, and their son in the US Marines. (See pic above, in the Oval Office.)

CNN Moves Over to "Fiction Writing"--So Says MSNBC

"MSNBC challenges credibility of new CNN commercial"--that's the headline atop Joe Flint's blog post in the LA Times this afternoon. And MSNBC's Alana Russo accuses CNN of "fiction writing."

The Cable Gamer never got very far in economics and statistics, but she does remember one adage from her (sigh) long-ago school days: "If you torture the statistics long enough, they will confess."

And that's what CNN seems to have done--and then some. As Flint explains:

Confused? We can help. CNN is using a cumulative number that reflects anyone who watched CNN for six minutes in a given month, a tidbit it chose not to disclose in the ad. That's not a standard that advertisers traditionally embrace when trying to decide where to put their money, and CNN's rivals consider it a dubious number.

"We want to reach loyal viewers who tune in for longer lengths of time ... and hopefully are more engaged," says Andy Donchin of Carat, a media buying firm that spends heavily on cable news.

MSNBC is calling the ad fiction and has asked ratings service Nielsen to weigh in. While Nielsen approves all print ads based on its data, it does not require such approval for TV spots. But if questions about an ad are raised, Nielsen can step in and request that claims be substantiated on screen. Nielsen has sent a request to CNN to discuss the spot.

"If we see it is misleading, we will advise them to change it," a Nielsen spokeswoman said.

Said MSNBC spokeswoman Alana Russo: "MSNBC beat CNN in prime time last quarter. It seems to have driven our competitor from news to fiction writing."

"Fiction writing." Zing!

Speaking of zingers, Fox's Irena Briganti added one, too: "Jeff Bewkes is too smart to buy [CNN U.S. president] Jon Klein's [nonsense]." Jeff Bewkes, of course, is the chief of Time-Warner, and thus Jon Klein's boss. Although given CNN's poor showing, and yet Klein's survivorship despite failure, TCG has often wondered, "Who's on top of whom in that relationship?"

H/T -- One of the great movies of all time, QT's "Pulp Fiction," starring, among others, Uma Thurman.

Susan Roesgen to MSNBC!

OK, that's not quite the headline that TV Newser used in its big scoop that Susan Roesgen is out at CNN.

It's all a big "no comment" at CNN, of course, but it seems clear that Roesgen was canned for her outburst at the Tea Parties in Chicago, when she lectured regular Americans on the wonderfulness of Barack Obama and all his Democratic programs.

So maybe SR will wind up in the Obama administration, along with other MSMers, such as Linda Douglass, Jay Carney, and Jill Zuckman.

Or maybe, just maybe, she will end up at MSNBC.

The one place Ms. Roesgen won't be looking is Fox--according to Gawker, she already tried there, and was turned down.

CNBC Perfects Its Business Model--Pandering to Advertisers On The Air!

A cool financial blog, Zero Hedge, caught this exchange on CNBC this morning where Joe Kernen effusively praised advertiser Charles Schwab before they go into break.

Schwab had previously pulled their advertising from CNBC’s Porn Special this week. And Kernen obviously wants to get Schwab back. And so he laid it on thicker than thick:"Schwab is a fine, fine company and a fine individual” and “we are ready to just be sponsored on Squawk Box" AND “...I don't think you can have too much [of Schwab]."

Is this journalism??

Here's the full post from ZH's Tyler Durden--who does seem to be a real journalist! (Even if he did misspell "Kernan"; we all make honest mistakes--it's the dishonest or corrupt mistakes that we should really worry about, right, Joe?)

With the recent elimination of anything even remotely approaching journalistic rigor or analysis, and its substitution with endless propaganda and the pitching of "hope" as an investment conduit, many have been scratching their heads over the question of just how it is that CNBC is still on the air, let alone make money: after all selling hope is a very expensive process.

I provide the answer.

Below is an early segment from CNBC in which Joe Kernan provides his analysis of Schwab's just released results. As the video quality is pretty bad (yeah, I know, sorry) I will summarize how it works:

1. Intro - Kernan: Glowing review of Schwab's EPS "beat"

2. Kernan: "Schwab is a fine, fine company and a fine individual."

3. Kernan: "...and quite a sponsor for us."

4. Kernan: "...and we are ready to just be sponsored on Squawk Box."

5. Conclusion - Kernan: "...I don't think you can have too much [of Schwab]."

6. Cut to Charles Schwab Commercial.

So now you know.

A New Synergy Between Fox Business Network and ABC?

Interestingly, Fox Business Network's Alexis Glick was a guest on "Good Morning America"
talking about Goldman Sachs' earnings. Glick is a former Goldman-er, and so she is well qualified, but it was interesting to see her on ABC. After all, ABC has business correspondents of its own--doesn't it?

And while we're Glicking, here's a look at her life outside of FBN.

"We teach kids how to be citizens; we teach kids about these historic places."

Nice Washington Post profile of Fox Business' Peter Barnes, who runs a children's book business on the side, along with his wife Cheryl.

The books focus on historical and educational themes. So it would seem that cable newsers can think about higher things, even as others focus on, uh, lower things. And it's nice to see that Peter has a loving relationship with a woman--his wife!

And Finally, This Sort of Back-Tracking from Roland Martin

A final "thought" from Roland Martin, the Tweet- and Blackberry-happy CNN guy who got a little too frank in his evaluation of journalistic talent. Here's the relevant portion of Martin's second Blackberry burst to leading cable news bloggers. I screen-grabbed it above, and here's the text below:

The idiot part was for Stewart, who clearly doesn't have a life considering all he does is send out eblasts that we don't request.

So now we are told by Roland that we're not ALL idiots. Whew! The only "idiot," according to Roland, is Thomas Charles Stewart. Well, Roland, let me say that I am proud to be Thomas' e-pal (even though he and I have never met). The Cable Gamer can certainly understand why you, Roland, don't like Thomas, but to the rest of us--admit it, Roland, your first e-mail, saying that we are all idiots, was your true feeling!--Thomas is a great Cable Gamer. And what higher compliment is there than that?

Something tells me that we have heard the last of Martin for the evening. By tomorrow morning, early, CNN suits and flacks will have taken control of the situation. They will issue a soothing statement, and take away Martin's Blackberry for awhile.

And then it will probably blow over.

But one might ask: Can you imagine the ruckus if a Fox reporter had written the exact same words? The New York Times would be running editorials, the National Organization for Women would be staging protests in front of Fox HQ, and the offending Fox reporter would soon be gone.

That's the double standard.

Wait! There's More from Roland Martin!!

Check this angry e-mail, to leading cable bloggers, from someone who sure seems to be a lot like Roland Martin. It sure seems like Roland Martin, since the e-mail is coming from his website and domain.

For the sake of the historical record, I screen-grabbed the e-mail--and you can click on it and expand it--but here's the text below:

Wow, you idiots can't take a joke. We were joking backstage at Zo's Summer Groove and she dared me to put the item on Twitter just as she said it.

You guys need a life...and some levity!

...

Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone with SprintSpeed

Roland Martin: You Gotta See This To Believe It--So Here It Is!

National Review Online's Greg Pollowitz is a new Cable Game fave. He caught this bit of oafishness from CNN's Roland Martin and his man-about-town Twitter account. Here's the way Pollowitz wrote it up:

CNN's Roland Martin doing his part to help employ young reporters:

A request: I ran into this fine, bad ass Miami Heat reporter, Lisa Lee. If u wanna hire a red hot reporter, hit her @ lisaleeinc@gmail.com.

And here's her picture from Martin's Facebook page:

As noted, I screen-grabbed it above.

Can you imagine? (Well, yes, I can imagine, but still.)

See screen grab above. I screen-grab, you decide!

Another Look at Van Jones

Jim Hubbell offers his own take on Van Jones. TCG knows that Greens in Europe are sometimes called "watermelons"--because they are green on the outside, but red on the inside--so we need to look closer at this man Jones. It sure looks like he and Cass Sunstein are forming their own little Big Brother-ish cell inside the White House. For a closer look at Sunstein, see the post below.

"Gag The Internet! An Obama Official's Frightening Book About Curbing Free Speech Online"

The New York Post's Kyle Smith scoops us on an important--maybe ominous is a better word--new book from Cass Sunstein, a Harvard law professor whom Obama has picked for a top regulatory job at the Office of Management and Budget.

But even before entering government, the prolific Sunstein has published a new regulatory book of his own, "On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done," which boldly calls for restrictions on Internet free speech.

But let Kyle tell the tale in his own words:

Gag The Internet! An Obama Official's Frightening Book About Curbing Free Speech Online

When it comes to the First Amendment, Team Obama believes in Global Chilling.

Cass Sunstein, a Harvard Law professor who has been appointed to a shadowy post that will grant him powers that are merely mind-boggling, explicitly supports using the courts to impose a "chilling effect" on speech that might hurt someone's feelings. He thinks that the bloggers have been rampaging out of control and that new laws need to be written to corral them.

Advance copies of Sunstein's new book, "On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done," have gone out to reviewers ahead of its September publication date, but considering the prominence with which Sunstein is about to be endowed, his worrying views are fair game now. Sunstein is President Obama's choice to head the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. It's the bland titles that should scare you the most.

"Although obscure," reported the Wall Street Journal, "the post wields outsize power. It oversees regulations throughout the government, from the Environmental Protection Agency to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Obama aides have said the job will be crucial as the new administration overhauls financial-services regulations, attempts to pass universal health care and tries to forge a new approach to controlling emissions of greenhouse gases."

Sunstein was appointed, no doubt, off the success of "Nudge," his previous book, which suggests that government ought to gently force people to be better human beings.

Czar is too mild a world for what Sunstein is about to become. How about "regulator in chief"? How about "lawgiver"? He is Obama's Obama.

In "On Rumors," Sunstein reviews how views get cemented in one camp even when people are presented with persuasive evidence to the contrary. He worries that we are headed for a future in which "people's beliefs are a product of social networks working as echo chambers in which false rumors spread like wildfire." That future, though, is already here, according to Sunstein. "We hardly need to imagine a world, however, in which people and institutions are being harmed by the rapid spread of damaging falsehoods via the Internet," he writes. "We live in that world. What might be done to reduce the harm?"

Sunstein questions the current libel standard - which requires proving "actual malice" against those who write about public figures, including celebrities. Mere "negligence" isn't libelous, but Sunstein wonders, "Is it so important to provide breathing space for damaging falsehoods about entertainers?" Celeb rags, get ready to hire more lawyers.

Sunstein also believes that - whether you're a blogger, The New York Times or a Web hosting service - you should be held responsible even for what your commenters say. Currently you're immune under section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. "Reasonable people," he says, "might object that this is not the right rule," though he admits that imposing liability for commenters on service providers would be "a considerable burden."

But who cares about a burden when insults are being bandied about? "A 'chilling effect' on those who would spread destructive falsehoods can be an excellent idea," he says.

"As we have seen," Sunstein writes, having shown us no such thing, "falsehoods can undermine democracy itself." What Sunstein means by that sentence is pretty clear: He doesn't like so-called false rumors about his longtime University of Chicago friend and colleague, Barack Obama.

He alludes on page 3 (and on page 13, and 14, and 45, and 54 - the book is only 87 pages) to the supposedly insidious lie that "Barack Obama pals around with terrorists." Since Sunstein intends to impose his Big Chill on such talk, I'd better get this in while I can. The "rumor," i.e., "fact," about the palsy-walsiness of Obama and unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers (Ayers referred to Obama as a "family friend" in a memoir) did not "undermine democracy," i.e., prevent Obama's election. The facts got out, voters weighed them and ruled that they weren't disqualifying.

Sunstein calls for a "notice and take down" law that would require bloggers and service providers to "take down falsehoods upon notice," even those made by commenters - but without apparent penalty.

Consider how well this nudge would work. You blog about Obama-Ayers. You get a letter claiming that your facts are wrong so you should remove your post. You refuse. If, after a court proceeding proves simply that you are wrong (but not that you committed libel, which when a public figure is the target is almost impossible), you lose, the penalty is . . . you must take down your post.

How long would it take for a court to sort out the truth? Sasha and Malia will be running for president by then. Nobody will care anymore. But it will give politicians the ability to tie up their online critics in court.

Sunstein, trying to fair, argues that libel awards should be capped at $15,000, or at least limited for anyone demonstrating financial hardship. But $15K is the limit you'd pay to your opponent. The legal bill is the scary part, and the reason bloggers already have plenty of reason to be careful about what they say, even if they don't much fear a libel conviction.

Sunstein dreams of an impossibly virtuous America: "We could also imagine a future in which those who spread false rumors are categorized as such, discounted and marginalized . . . people would approach rumors skeptically even they provide comfort and fit their own biases." But if his chilling wind doesn't work, Sunstein may try to make good on the implicit threat that runs through his book: that he would redefine libel as the spread of false information and hold everyone up the ladder responsible.

If this happened, the blogosphere would turn into Pluto overnight. Comments sections would slam shut. Every writer would work on a leash shorter than a shoelace.

Sunstein is an enemy to every news organization and blogger. We should return the favor and declare war on him.

Fox & Friends Outs A Communist

There aren't many communists remaining in the world, but the San Francisco Bay Area has its share, and one of them has ended up in the Obama administration. That's according to Phil Kerpen, a conservative activist in DC, who appeared on "Fox & Friends" on Friday morning. As recorded by NewsBusters' Sam Theodosopoulos, here's the scoop on one Van Jones, the "Green Jobs Czar" at the Obama White House. But he sounds more like a Red Jobs Czar to me:

The administration’s “Green Jobs” czar, Van Jones, has a “very checkered past” deep-rooted in radical politics, including black nationalism, anarchism, and communism. The broadcast network newscasts have mostly failed to report on Mr. Jones’s past political affiliations which are lock-step with the network’s downplay of coverage regarding President Obama’s associations with the former radical and terrorist William Ayers during the election.

At 6:47 a.m. EDT on the July 10 edition of “Fox and Friends,” Americans for Prosperity Policy Director Phil Kerpen, told interviewer Brian Kilmeade that Jones is “somebody who was involved in radical politics in San Francisco, “who was self-admittedly “radicalized in jail” and found “Communism and anarchism.” Kerpen compares Van Jones’s Communist past with his new quest for environmentalism and the creation of green jobs:

"I think it’s pretty instructive what his past is...it’s the same sort of philosophy, the idea that government ought to be reordering society in accordance with some utopian vision that failed with communism and socialism, and will fail with this green jobs idea."

In an April 12, 2009 World Net Daily article titled “Will a “red” help blacks go green?”Aaron Klein reports that Jones himself stated in a 2005 interview his environmental activism was a means to fight for racial and class “justice,” and that he was a “rowdy black nationalist,” and a “communist.”

Because the administration’s “czars” do not go through congressional confirmation, and are therefore not scrutinized or vetted, many Americans have no idea who they are or where they come from.

Kudos to Fox News for bringing Van Jones’s controversial past and political ideology to light.

Yes, indeed.

"CNN Retains the Least Amount of Viewers post Michael Jackson Memorial"

That's the headline from TV By The Numbers, the data-driven Cable Gamer website. They report--that's TVBTN's graphic, above--you decide.

Former CNN anchor Miles O'Brien explained it all--as noted here at TCG on Monday--CNN has failed to find or develop the sort of talent that people want to watch, even when there's no ultra-hot news. So people dip into CNN, when something huge is happening, and then just as quickly dip out. By contrast, MSNBC and Fox have built up more loyal audiences. O'Brien himself is a case in point. Everyone knew him, and liked him well enough. And then he was gone. If CNN isn't loyal to its people, why should people be loyal to CNN? Answer, they aren't.

But back to TV By The Numbers: TVBTN reminds me of another great site, FiveThirtyEight.com Just the facts, ma'am!

Mallard Fillmore on Fox News

Maria Bartiromo: "I've been very surprised. I didn't think it would get this bad."

Those are the words of CNBC's Maria Bartiromo, speaking about the financial meltdown to Mark Follman, writing for Amtrak's freebie magazine, Arrive.

Some of us, of course, remember that CNBC talent was united in demanding that the federal government bailout Wall Street last fall. And Washington complied. (John McCain would probably be president today if he had come out against the bailout, but oh well.) Since then, the stock market has stabilized, but the country continues to decline. Strange to think that a bailout of Wall Street hasn't trickled down to Main Street!

So it's easy for Bartiromo to say, "I've been very surprised. I didn't think it would get this bad," because she's safe and bailed out, and so are all her family and friends. Meanwhile, the rest of America is high and dry.

And so when the Money Honey says of the whole debacle, "The country will be better off," why should we believe her? Especially if we keep falling for Wall Street sharpies and their dulcet words of reassurance?

CNN Finds Its Niche

CNN has a strategy for dealing with the dominance of Fox and the rise of MSNBC. As its coverage of Michael Jackson turns into near frenzy, CNN is going all tabloid, all the time.

"Fox News Still Dominant Despite CNN, MSNBC Jackson-mania"

The Cable Game always applauds anyone who PhotoShops images to illustrate a point, in this case, Sharon Waxman's terrific new blog, The Wrap, detailing the cable ratings battle.

The piece, by Lucas Shaw, includes this juicy reax from Miles O'Brien, the former CNN anchor:

“I think what Fox has probably figured out is that you need to program and you need to program with personalities that people want to listen to even when the world is not falling apart,” said Miles O’Brien, a former CNN news anchor. “CNN has historically been a victim of this. It has risen and fallen directly (with) world events.”

And in the wake of Fox’s success with recent event coverage, some even question whether CNN remains the primary destination for breaking news.

If CNN loses that battle, “then CNN has some problems, because that is their wheelhouse,” O’Brien said. “If they lose that then all bets are off.”

I guess it's safe to say that Miles won't be back at CNN anytime soon--not even for a holiday party.

MSNBC's Media Menu, As Seen By Jim Hubbell.

It's either Michael Jackson, or continued Bush-Cheney-bashing.

Photo illustration credit: Jim Hubbell

"Obama and networks: a symbiotic relationship"--Illustrated

And here's the best illustration of the symbiotic relationship between Barack Obama and the MSM TV nets, as detailed by AP's David Bauder.

The most telling symbiosis is between a sea anemone and a clownfish.

The anemones could sting the clownfish, but they don't, because they love him so much.

"Obama and networks: a symbiotic relationship"

Here are some symbiotic relationships in nature: sharks are pilot fish, rhinoceri and birds.

And then, of course, there's the symbiotic relationshipbetween Barack Obama and the MSM TV nets, as detailed by AP's David Bauder.

"Obama and networks: a symbiotic relationship"--And That's Putting It Mildly!

"Obama and networks: a symbiotic relationship"--that's the headline from David Bauder, the AP's veteran TV writer, filing a revealing piece about the relationship between Barack Obama and the MSM. Bauder recalls this joke, told by Obama at the Radio-Television Correspondents Dinner last month:

"A few nights ago I was up tossing and turning and trying to figure out exactly what to say," he said. "Finally, when I couldn't get back to sleep, I rolled over and asked Brian Williams what he thought."

Yuk, yuk.

But the truth is, Obama has so much control over the networks that he has started to treat the networks like slutty girlfriends: he can toy with them, and they will still go to bed with him. So his contempt for them only grows.

The People Receiving Instruction

And then Jim Hubbell contributed his own version. Note the pseudo-cyrillic headline.

MSNBC: The Place for Propaganda! But Not For Ratings!!

This chart, from TV By The Numbers, an encyclopedic blog of no known bias, and cited by David Zurawik, the gutsy TV critic/blogger for The Baltimore Sun, says it all about the decline of Keith Olbermann's ratings. As Zurawik observes:

MSNBC's Keith Olbermann took offense to a post I wrote Saturday that referred to him as "slumping." He didn't dispute any of the facts in my piece, he just went on the attack with his usual innuendo, slurs and bombast over my characterization of his performance in the ratings.

Here are two graphics from tvbythenumbers.com tracking Olbermann's ratings the last six months. Read them and judge for yourself whether the adjective "slumping" applies.

No spin, just the facts. Especially note the one that shows him down 50 percent since the last quarter of 2008 in the key news demographic of viewers 25 and 54.

Also, note that in the first quarter of 2009, Olbermann's show ranked in the Top 10 programs on all news cable TV. In the figures released this week for the second quarter of the year, he is no longer in the Top 10. All 10 spots belong to shows on Fox News.

That's the fatal flaw in Jeff Immelt's strategy of using MSNBC as a lobbying/p.r. operation for General Electric. Yes it's great for the Obama administration that GE's tools--Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow, and, of course, Olby--are shilling for them every day, but people won't watch. It's hard to be a cheerleader for a not especially popular administration. I mean most people support Obama, and he might even win re-election, but it's not that interesting just to watch people on TV kissing up to him.

And yet MSNBC's Obama suck-up strategy continues: new host Nancy Snyderman--that's Dr. Nancy Snyderman to you-- said on her show, "The White House, their health care agenda continues to be our agenda."

Talk about being on message! But nobody read Pravda, either.

The only time that MSNBC gets any traction these days is when the channel is slamming Republicans, especially those GOPers from the Bush-Cheney administration, but that's old news, and getting even older.

So MSNBC is stuck. Maybe they should just formally become a part of the GE p.r. operation. So instead of "MSNBC: The Place For Politics," it could be "MSNBC: Imagination At Work." And then MSNBC could fight more vehemently for "cap and trade" legislation, without naysayers like Pat Buchanan getting in the way of the message.

H/T for the Snyderman quote: Mark Finkelstein.

The Green Industrial Complex, Part 2

The phrase "Green Industrial Complex," of course, is a play on "military industrial complex," which President Dwight Eisenhower warned against in his Farewell Speech of January 17, 1961.

And so for Brendan O'Neill to rework Eisenhower's phrase now, in 2009, not about the military and defense contractors, but rather about environmentalists, such as Al Gore, and environmental contractors, such as Jeff Immelt's General Electric is both provocative and evocative.

Ike's speech, of course, set in motion decades of additional scrutiny of the MIC, as critics took Ike's warning seriously. We'll have to see what happens with the GIC, of course, but here's a prediction: If the enviros keep trying to raise unemployment at a time when people are hurting, there will be a big backlash.

Of course, you won't hear about it on MSNBC.

Photo illustration credit: Jim Hubbell.

"The Green Industrial Complex": Good For Al Gore and General Electric, Bad for America--and Barack Obama & Democrats

"Green Industrial Complex." That's an evocative phrase from Brendan O'Neill, writing in The Australian,describing the well-funded effort to convert America and the world to a carbon-free economy--and make billions, even trillions in the process. Here O'Neill zeroes in on the efforts of Al Gore, who sits at the center of this "GIC":

For a snapshot of the government and business interests intertwined in the rise of green capitalism, consider Al Gore. He's getting rich from environmentalism, not just by being paid a whopping $US175,000 ($217,500) a speech but by using political pressure to force government policy in a direction that benefits his business interests.

Gore is chairman of the Alliance for Climate Protection, an outfit that seeks to "persuade people of the importance, urgency and feasibility" of going green. It recently launched a $US300 million ad campaign to coax American people and politicians to embrace the carbon-lite lifestyle.

But Gore is also chairman of a greeninvestment firm called Generation Investment Management, which is a member of the Copenhagen Climate Council, an international collaboration of businesses and science bodies, and which invests in firms that produce renewable energy and low-carbon technology. So Gore uses one of his multimillion-dollar organisations, the Alliance for Climate Protection, to put pressure on government to promote the low-carbon lifestyle that will furnish one of his other multimillion-dollar organisations, General Investment Management, with booming business.

Gore's activities provide only a glimpse into the new collusion between greens, businesses and government. So speedily has this network come together that according to one critic of the politics of environmentalism, Bjorn Lomborg, it is not going too far to liken the new green-industrial complex to the military-industrial complex that president Dwight Eisenhower warned of in the 1950s.

We have seen this before, of course, with Enron, which had the same idea: use political connections to rewire the regulatory system to its own advantage. Ken Lay, Jeff Skilling, and all those other crooks had a moneymaking vision, but they were simply ahead of their time.

So now, with better timing--and no doubt better lawyers--Jeff Immelt of General Electric picks up the green torch. That's "green" as in the environment, and "green" as in money. The same eco-fiscal scam, is happening today, only this time with the full faith and credit of the US government falling in behind Gore's and Immelt's rent-seeking efforts, thanks to Barack Obama.

Obama is a actually a sad case. Personally, he seems like a good enough guy, but he was always willing to be a tool for the powerful, be it Harvard Law School liberals, the Daley political machine, or the Chicago financiers who took up his presidential candidacy as their cause a few years ago. Between the TARP bailout and all the other bank bailouts, plus cap-and-trade, those billionaires are going to make more billions. But what they can't do, none of them, is create real jobs for Americans. And Obama and ordinary Democrats will get the blame in the upcoming elections.

Anderson Cooper's Swan Song? No Need For Panic In The Disco, Boys: This Opera Ain't Anywhere Near Over

Nicholas Carlson, writing for The Business Insider, a part of Henry Blodget's Silicon Alley Insider site, offers a devastating look at CNN, entitled, perhaps somewhat harshly, "The Case Against CNN, By The Numbers."

TCG doesn't have anything against CNN, other than its smugness and its liberal bias. But Carlson has done his homework; including the chart above, which demolishes Anderson Cooper. The graphic above shows both total audience and inside the demo (25-54), and both show the same distinct trendline--down.

I am not sure that anyone needs to make a case against CNN, but I do have to wonder how long La Anderson will be the apple of the Big Apple's eye. I mean, could it be that glamor and cool and attitude mean more to CNN president Jon Klein than ratings? Oops, never mind. Dumb question. After all, AC bragged recently that he partied with the late Michael Jackson at Studio 54 when he was just a 10-year-old, back in the 70s--but everyone at CNN must think that's tres chic.

But how about Klein's boss, Jeff Bewkes, CEO of Time-Warner. Surely he cares more about earnings, and shareholder value, than he does about being trendy and fashionable. Right? Well, uh, no--Bewkes just re-upped Klein.

So what's going on? TCG's theory is that the likes of Klein and Bewkes grew up as nerdy over-achievers; they were too busy studying for school, and so missed out on having the fun of being underage at a notoriously drug-drenched disco, such as Studio 54 in its Jacko-Liza-Halston heyday. And so the aura of someone such as AC--and the promise that he can introduce Klein & Bewkes to Hollywood A-listers and other Beautiful People--is enough to persuade the suits to overlook his declining ratings.

No need to fret, boys--Anderson's not going anywhere, even if nobody outside of Manhattan, West Hollywood, and Dupont Circle is watching.

Fox News, Watchdog of Freedom

That's not The Cable Gamer saying it, that's David Zurawik, of the Baltimore Sun, saying it a blog post today. As he writes:

Two weeks ago, I praised Fox News for being one of the only TV news operations seriously questioning the administration of President Barack Obama as it pushes an agenda of massive social change not seen since Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal.

Whatever the reasons for Fox's tenacity, I said, it is the one channel that seems absolutely committed to being a watchdog on the White House -- a job crucial to any notion of press responsibility. My post was inspired in part by Obama's petulant sounding complaint about Fox made in an interview with CNBC.

And he concludes:

Maybe, it's wishful thinking. But I would like to believe part of the latest surge is the result of Fox performing a socially important press function in not giving the president a free pass to change American life overnight.

I report, you decide!

"CNN's Rating Implosion"

That's the tough but accurate headline from Glenn Garvin, writing in The Miami Herald:

When the quarterly ratings were released this week, CNN finished behind MSNBC in weekday prime viewing hours for the first time ever. MSNBC's average audience between 8 and 11 p.m. was 946,000, CNN's 939,000. The more you slice and dicethe numbers, they look even worse: CNN often finishes behind sister network HLN in weekday primetime among viewers aged 25 to 54, the top news demographic.