What are your opinions on

[jusscali]

Over the top, conflict-ridden television news talk shows (i.e. Hardball, Countdown, O'Reilly) ?

I know that the election is over now but the incessant coverage from these shows during the campaign killed me.

Do you think these shows have any merit? Are they informative to any degree?
Do you think they are important to the democratic process in our country these days, or are they just making it easier to be politically apathetic or complacent? Do they make you any more cynical about the political process than you already may have been?

I got so sick of how these programs essentially determined the agenda - what issues were worthy of discussion. Do any of you feel that any of your issues were in the same vein as those seen on these programs?

Please, if anyone gets anything out of these types of shows, especially in regards to the previous political coverage, what is it - I'm dying to know.

[loveisdead]

I think it's important that if people are going to watch Countdown or Hannity, that they also watch Hardball. I think it's really important that people are able to hear both sides of the argument, and would get bored if it was the typical round table discussion that CNN always has.

[samsara]

I stopped watching the news.

It got annoying, hearing the same thing after a while.

[jusscali]

I completely agree, getting a balanced story is always important, but what do you think about any of the other questions

I guess my main concern is how do these loud, contentious, news anchors and conflict driven programs effect political perceptions? Do they have any? Or do you think it lessens or trivializes democracy in this country.

[jusscali]

I stopped watching the news.

It got annoying, hearing the same thing after a while.

So overkill? I mean it's certainly common. I got tired of it too, but had to watch for classes. Still, when and if you did watch did you ever find any merit (informational) or otherwise from them?

[J.C.]

Fine for entertainment, poor for the political discourse in this country.

[samsara]

So overkill? I mean it's certainly common. I got tired of it too, but had to watch for classes. Still, when and if you did watch did you ever find any merit (informational) or otherwise from them?

meh i cant really say I did.

I would turn on the TV to those channels and their voices ended up annoying me so I tuned them out.

[loveisdead]

I completely agree, getting a balanced story is always important, but what do you think about any of the other questions

I guess my main concern is how do these loud, contentious, news anchors and conflict driven programs effect political perceptions? Do they have any? Or do you think it lessens or trivializes democracy in this country.
All they are going to do is strengthen a certain viewer's belief. I'll watch Olbermann and think "this guy is making some really great points." Whereas if I watch O'Reilly or Hannity I listen for five minutes and then change the channel while mumbling some curse words under my breath. There are people in the world who this scenario is completely reversed for too. I don't think it is harmful because none of these shows are changing anybody's minds, they're just reaffirming their viewer's beliefs. It also leaves for some eye opening stuff like when Campell Brown completely schooled Tucker Bounds.

[jusscali]

All they are going to do is strengthen a certain viewer's belief. I'll watch Olbermann and think "this guy is making some really great points." Whereas if I watch O'Reilly or Hannity I listen for five minutes and then change the channel while mumbling some curse words under my breath. There are people in the world who this scenario is completely reversed for too. I don't think it is harmful because none of these shows are changing anybody's minds, they're just reaffirming their viewer's beliefs. It also leaves for some eye opening stuff like when Campell Brown completely schooled Tucker Bounds.

Ha yeah, I mean I think you're right to a certain point, but I also think you overestimate the intelligence of much of the electorate. You honestly don't believe they have any influence over less media literate people? At the very least put some doubt in their minds?

Can we at least all agree that their is definitely a bias present, and that these types of show set the agenda in most cases?

[loveisdead]

Ha yeah, I mean I think you're right to a certain point, but I also think you overestimate the intelligence of much of the electorate. You honestly don't believe they have any influence over less media literate people? At the very least put some doubt in their minds?

Can we at least all agree that their is definitely a bias present, and that these types of show set the agenda in most cases?
There's a bias. I think you're underestimating the stubbornness of the average voter. Most are pretty set in their ways before watching any of these shows. It wasn't Olbermann or Mathews that turned some republicans from McCain, it was his pick of Palin that did that. It was her interviews with Gibson and Couric that screwed things up for McCain, not any of the liberal commentators.

[jusscali]

Alright if they don't influence the electorate, and they don't provide any hard evidence, then why were ratings so much higher this election season compared to those in the past. Why are so many people relying on these cable news shows when the elections come near? I mean someone mentioned entertainment, but honestly, how entertaining is it compared to other primetime 8 o clock sit coms?

I'm just trying to gain a sense.

I know for me personally, they make me angry and frustrated. I think that to a certain degree the overkill does make me a tad bit more cynical - but more so about the process. I can't believe how much time and stake people put in these shows, or how integral they seem to be to politics in general in this country. Maybe I'm overreacting but still..

[loveisdead]

Alright if they don't influence the electorate, and they don't provide any hard evidence, then why were ratings so much higher this election season compared to those in the past. Why are so many people relying on these cable news shows when the elections come near? I mean someone mentioned entertainment, but honestly, how entertaining is it compared to other primetime 8 o clock sit coms?

I'm just trying to gain a sense.

I know for me personally, they make me angry and frustrated. I think that to a certain degree the overkill does make me a tad bit more cynical - but more so about the process. I can't believe how much time and stake people put in these shows, or how integral they seem to be to politics in general in this country. Maybe I'm overreacting but still..
Because the conservatives wanted to hear more about how Obama is a socialist muslim who hates his brother and wasn't born in this country and the liberals want to hear about how Palin is a book burning, rape kit charging moron. People want their beliefs to be reaffirmed and by seeing it from a famous person on TV they feel better about themselves. I would say the ratings were higher because of the state of the economy and because of the possibility of the first black president/female vice president/oldest president getting put into office.

[Tony Pascarella]

Of course there's a bias. I watch those type of shows for either an entertainment factor or maybe to find some points to read up on. Olbermann is hilarious, and so is O'Reilly (I'd much rather watch Countdown because O'Reilly aggravates me). The blatant overdramatization and exaggeration of points makes it as much of an entertainment medium as The Daily Show.

Three years ago when I was a senior in high school, my Government and Politics AP teacher asked students in all of his sections where they got the majority of their news from, and many of them said The Daily Show/Colbert Report. The shows you cited in the original post are more politics and less entertainment, but would be a logical step for a lot of those people a couple years after they start watching Stewart and Colbert.

What really helped me was a class I took my first semester of college in which we explored a random news article (I think it was about the British pulling some troops from Basra) across three different news sources--an international (UK in this case) article, and then an article each from a perceived liberal and perceived conservative-leaning newspaper. Seeing the differences and the word choices, while it sounds boring to explain, really helped me understand media bias a lot more and it's why I don't mind flipping back and forth between say, MSNBC and FOX News.

I'm kind of digressing though. I don't think they dictate the agenda at all. Bill O'Reilly (for example) has said some stupid, arrogant, and blatantly false things over the years, and I wouldn't say those comments have particularly dictated any sort of political talk television agenda beyond a day or two of comments. They talk about the hot button issues, of course, but both kinds of these shows also bring up some points that casual viewers might not have known anything about. Whether those viewers choose to follow up on any of those issues is a completely different issue.

They're not going for balanced though. It's televised talk radio. Political Howard Stern even at times.

[jusscali]

Thanks Tony, that was well thought out and stated. I think to a certain degree they set the agenda, like you said, for a day or two. But if it gets commented on for a day or two and those two days of comments get commented on ...etc, etc. it's almost like a snowball effect.

Overall though for anyone who wishes to answer, do you think all the useless shouting, assaulting, attacking tactics they use hurt political news in general? Do they make you view politics in this country differently?

Are they speaking to the converted nearly all the time?

[Tony Pascarella]

Thanks Tony, that was well thought out and stated. I think to a certain degree they set the agenda, like you said, for a day or two. But if it gets commented on for a day or two and those two days of comments get commented on ...etc, etc. it's almost like a snowball effect.

Overall though for anyone who wishes to answer, do you think all the useless shouting, assaulting, attacking tactics they use hurt political news in general? Do they make you view politics in this country differently?

Are they speaking to the converted nearly all the time?I would be careful calling those type of shows news. What's the last thing you can think of Olbermann, O'Reilly, Chris Mathews, Mike Huckabee, etc., breaking as "news"? They comment on the news. I mean, the snowball effect you see is based on the stories broken, not necessarily the pontificating being done on these shows.

The electorate is only as educated as they allow themselves to be. If you don't want to give a crap about politics, it's easy to do so. Apathy is an easy out. If you want to learn what you're voting on and the changes you're seeing, you've got to do some digging. In that digging, you can either end up entrenched on one side or the other or (a lot more difficult to achieve) somewhere in the middle, able to at least listen to opposing viewpoints, even if you don't agree. So you almost have four different types of people in there, and you can take four different viewpoints away from that sort of programming.

[jusscali]

So I take it from your stance you don't believe - to any degree - that watching these shows or all this banter on television - has no true effects whether positive or detrimental in terms of how people view politics, the candidates, the political process etc etc etc?

[more heart]

i only trust al jazzera

[jusscali]

hahah random

[Tony Pascarella]

I think that it really depends on how educated the viewer is or wants to allow himself/herself to be. If you're a staunch conservative who blindly follows, O'Reilly will only reinforce that. Ditto if you're to the left with Olbermann. If you're willing to be open-minded, they can make room for discussion, but it starts with wanting to understand and learn. If people are using these shows to form their personal political ideologies, that's a shame, but I'm sure it does happen. I'm just not sure how much of an effect it has (positively or negatively) on the more middle of the road, flexible voters.

[jusscali]

Alright, so where do you stand personally? where do you place yourself?

[mattybobviously]

It has very little effect on the electorate on the whole, yet it can inflame those who sit on the far boundaries of their party's ideology. A good example of how little effect it has are the preliminary poll numbers from Chris Matthews potential run for US Senate in PA, where a huge percentage of voters said they didn't know him.

[Tony Pascarella]

Personally, I watch Olbermann most often (I am a registered Democrat in the state of Florida, voted for Obama, pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, etc.), although I credit the entertainment factor because I love his rants. I will watch O'Reilly and Huckabee and do watch Fox News for actual news from time to time. I realize the need for several viewpoints, and I've had a number of moments where one of the political television talk shows have brought up an issue I knew nothing about, and I've then gone and done a little research on it.

I don't want or need to know everything, but it's nice to have at least a brief overview of what's going on. An example was a while back, Olbermann started talking about the Bush administration approving permits to drill for uranium near the Grand Canyon. I didn't even know that was an issue, and admittedly, that whole issue started long before it became fodder for his show, but now I definitely feel like I know even just a little bit more about what's going on.

I'm definitely trying to be as educated as I possibly can (I'm now minoring in Political Science so I want to try to do a lot more reading on my own). However I realize I'm not there yet. I have issues that interest me more than others (DOMA/the gay marriage issue being a primary one) but I'm way behind the curve on economic theory, for starters.

The key to those shows is understanding that it's extremely opinion-based. It's okay not to agree with every point, even if you generally do agree with a particular show regularly. They're informative, they're interesting, they're thought-provoking, but behind it all, they're opinions.

[jusscali]

Again, the end was very well put.

If anyone else wants to sound off like Tony, by all means

[jusscali]

Bump

[open mind]

my opinion is that watching news shows that are filled with overly opinionated dipshits is nothing but a waste of time....that said i waste to much of my time and watch olberman on occassion.

[saysmydoctor]

I watch Olbermann pretty religiously. But at the same time, recognize it is an oped segment.

[Poe-tryGirl]

I watch 'em when I get bored. It's interesting to see how much they think we care about what they rant about.

[TheZeroKid]

I find it really funny (and really sad as well) that the only way to get a well-rounded, unbiased look and take on the issues is by watching the very shows that make fun of it. I am, of course, talking about The Daily Show. While The Colbert Report is awesome in its own right, it's satrical of the right, and Stephen Colbert is much more liberal (the real Colbert, not the character he plays on his show) than Jon Stewart. They take on anyone, regardless of what side of the political spectrum they're on. When I watch the news/talk programs on the actual news channels, I just get aggravated and cynical. I tend to like Anderson Cooper though.

[loveisdead]

I find it really funny (and really sad as well) that the only way to get a well-rounded, unbiased look and take on the issues is by watching the very shows that make fun of it. I am, of course, talking about The Daily Show. While The Colbert Report is awesome in its own right, it's satrical of the right, and Stephen Colbert is much more liberal (the real Colbert, not the character he plays on his show) than Jon Stewart. They take on anyone, regardless of what side of the political spectrum they're on. When I watch the news/talk programs on the actual news channels, I just get aggravated and cynical. I tend to like Anderson Cooper though.
I don't know if I would call The Daily Show unbiased. He's pretty damn liberal and doesn't hide it.

[Adeniz19]

yea, i think colbert actually goes after both parties a little bit more evenly. i'm not watching either show for their well-roundedness, however. haha

[Machu505]

I doubt that Colbert is more liberal than Stewart.

[Machu505]

Stewart should run for office.