Bill O'Reilly out at Fox

[Adam White]

Sort of like Willey, Broaddrick and Jones huh...

At least 2 of those (Broaddrick and Jones; not sure about Willey) are legit. I firmly believe that if those two stories broke today, it would be treated a lot differently by the media and the public. And they probably would have broken well before Clinton was elected, due to the internet and 24 hour news cycle.

I agree. The world was a very different place in the early 90s.

[Tacachale]

Sort of like Willey, Broaddrick and Jones huh...

At least 2 of those (Broaddrick and Jones; not sure about Willey) are legit. I firmly believe that if those two stories broke today, it would be treated a lot differently by the media and the public. And they probably would have broken well before Clinton was elected, due to the internet and 24 hour news cycle.

I agree. The world was a very different place in the early 90s.

Hell, it was different just a few years ago. In 2004, Bill Cosby was accused of sexual assault and it was reported in the media, but it was mostly forgotten until 2015. Now, he's a pariah. The way the media reported hacked celebrity photos also changed dramatically just between the two leak from 2011 and 2014. It went from being kind of a big joke with the blame on the celebrities for taking them, to being reported as a serious invasion of privacy and crime.

[peestandingup]

Sort of like Willey, Broaddrick and Jones huh...

At least 2 of those (Broaddrick and Jones; not sure about Willey) are legit. I firmly believe that if those two stories broke today, it would be treated a lot differently by the media and the public. And they probably would have broken well before Clinton was elected, due to the internet and 24 hour news cycle.

Probably true, I agree. If Broaddrick's been lying all these years, and still gets this emotional after all this time, she's got a hell of an acting coach: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHh73fkDUIs&t=2m7s

There's nothing for her to really gain by doing this, unless she just wants attention (which I guess is possible).

[Cheshire Cat]

Fox News anchor Kelly Wright has joined a lawsuit alleging racial discrimination and harassment at the cable-news network. Wright—who has been with the network since 2003, mostly anchoring Saturday's America's News HQ—alleged that he "has been effectively sidelined and asked to perform the role of a 'Jim Crow'—the racist caricature of a black entertainer." Additionally, he claimed he had been shunned from appearing on recently ousted prime-time star Bill O'Reilly's show; and that Fox News co-president Bill Shine "has demonstrated an obsession with race when it comes to discussions with Mr. Wright, including regularly asking him, 'How do black people react to you' and 'How do you think white viewers look at you?'" He further alleged that when he tried to show a series of positive stories about the black community, he recalled being told "it showed blacks in 'too positive' a light." Wright's addition means the lawsuit now contains 13 racial minorities who are current or former Fox News employees alleging racial discrimination at the network. Fox News responded to the allegations with a statement:


http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2017/04/25/fox-news-anchor-sues-for-racial-discrimination?via=desktop&source=copyurl

[spuwho]

Sort of like Willey, Broaddrick and Jones huh...

At least 2 of those (Broaddrick and Jones; not sure about Willey) are legit. I firmly believe that if those two stories broke today, it would be treated a lot differently by the media and the public. And they probably would have broken well before Clinton was elected, due to the internet and 24 hour news cycle.

I agree. The world was a very different place in the early 90s.

Actually.....the Bush 1 Campaign already knew about Clinton's "women" in detail and started to leak it to the press to discredit him during the 1992 election season.

Clinton's Campaign had done the exact same research on Bush 1 and fired a return shot on a made up story about one of his best female friends from years past as "something more" which of course wasnt true.

Bush 1 had his campaign call off the dogs and you never heard another word about Clinton's women until the Lewinsky affair broke wind.

Handled differently?  The Bush 1 Campaign gave the press enough to do on their own and they did......nothing.

This was when the media landscape changed and the Limbaughs and other "media bias" folk came out loud and clear.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

and that Fox News co-president Bill Shine "has demonstrated an obsession with race when it comes to discussions with Mr. Wright, including regularly asking him, 'How do black people react to you' and 'How do you think white viewers look at you?'" He further alleged that when he tried to show a series of positive stories about the black community, he recalled being told "it showed blacks in 'too positive' a light."

Don't take this the wrong way, but wouldn't those be relevant questions ratings-wise?

If black people aren't reacting very well to him and white viewers aren't paying him any attention then wouldn't you suggest he change how he does things if he wants to stay on the air?

[Cheshire Cat]

and that Fox News co-president Bill Shine "has demonstrated an obsession with race when it comes to discussions with Mr. Wright, including regularly asking him, 'How do black people react to you' and 'How do you think white viewers look at you?'" He further alleged that when he tried to show a series of positive stories about the black community, he recalled being told "it showed blacks in 'too positive' a light."

Don't take this the wrong way, but wouldn't those be relevant questions ratings-wise?

If black people aren't reacting very well to him and white viewers aren't paying him any attention then wouldn't you suggest he change how he does things if he wants to stay on the air?

I would imagine but those are not my questions, they are from an article that I posted the link to beneath them.  But you are correct that rating do drive viewership and honestly I have no clue what the attraction to FOX is, but I can say the same about another number of media outlets these days. 

[peestandingup]

They're going after Jesse Watters now for a rather innocuous comment. http://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/fox-host-jesse-watters-announces-vacation-following-backlash-over-ivanka-trump-remark/ar-BBAqQ56?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

I also don't understand what people consider "backlash" these days. Like, Twitter backlash?? Because half that shit is fake outrage, bots, phony accounts, etc. I'd never put much weight into that. Plus, Twitter has been known to promote (bump up trending topics) of things that appeal to them, and squash trends that they don't like.

I remember reading a few Trump tweets, and beside the fact that almost every high up reply was negative, many were worded the exact same way on his other tweets. But those were what you saw when you read the replies.