Jump to content
270soft Forum

I have a favorable opinion of...  

12 members have voted

  1. 1. I have a favorable opinion of...

    • Natalie Allen
      0
    • Christiane Amanpour
    • Becky Anderson
    • Dana Bash
    • John Berman
    • Wolf Blitzer
    • Erin Burnett
    • Ana Cabrera
    • Alisyn Camerota
    • Rosemary Church
      0
    • Chris Cuomo
    • Robyn Curnow
      0
    • Dr. Sanjay Gupta
    • Hala Gorani
      0
    • Michael Holmes
      0
    • Brianna Keilar
    • John King
    • Richard Quest
    • Michael Smerconish
    • Brian Stelter
    • Jake Tapper
    • Amara Walker
      0
    • Fareed Zakaria
    • Jim Acosta
    • Victor Blackwell
    • Kaitlan Collins
    • Anderson Cooper
    • Kristen Holmes
      0
    • None of them


Recommended Posts

Since I am watching CNN on a daily basis as it's the only American network I can view on TV in Austria, I thought it would be fun to hear what Americans (and others) are thinking about them. You might know them better than I do. I largely skipped correspondents and people I can't name immediately, so you're free to give kudos or criticism to others as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

Since I am watching CNN on a daily basis as it's the only American network I can view on TV in Austria, I thought it would be fun to hear what Americans (and others) are thinking about them. You might know them better than I do. I largely skipped correspondents and people I can't name immediately, so you're free to give kudos or criticism to others as well.

I don't watch CNN. I don't watch news American channels or websites at all. The viewpoints of their news coverage is FAR too obviously skewed to one side or the other of the American political divide to be truly credible, and it's also FAR too sensationalist, over-the-top, and yellow-journalism and manipulative-coverage focused. I tend to watch CBC News, Global News, BBC New World, Reuters, al Jazira, and a few others, plus my local paper published Southam News. So, to answer your question, I'm afraid I don't know enough about them to answer your question.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

it's the only American network I can view on TV in Austria

Yikes - then you're getting a distorted view of things. Fox News is much more highly rated than CNN.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, admin_270 said:

Yikes - then you're getting a distorted view of things. Fox News is much more highly rated than CNN.

More highly rated by whom? Got a source? I see CNN and Fox News equivalent at best and both are biased, Fox News is generally considered even more biased by cites that track bias. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Yikes - then you're getting a distorted view of things. Fox News is much more highly rated than CNN.

Still, I don't watch either. I prefer to watch the ACTUAL NEWS!

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Yikes - then you're getting a distorted view of things. Fox News is much more highly rated than CNN.

I don’t know what Kool-Aid you’re drinking...

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hestia11 said:

I don’t know what Kool-Aid you’re drinking...

Just 18 years at #1 in the ratings ... but sure, I'm the one drinking something.

Ratings data provided by Nielsen. Fox dominates - almost 3x CNN's prime time numbers.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/markjoyella/2020/01/28/fox-news-celebrates-18-years-as-number-one-network-in-cable-news/#6edb2f9b1e99

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, admin_270 said:

Nielsen.

That's not a good way to estimate a rating for them. That just shows viewership. If you have two or three major left-wing news sources and only one major right-wing news source, then of course the viewership for Fox is going to have more viewers. A "highly rated" news source is one that has a low bias and high factual reporting, which neither FOX News, nor CNN, MSNBC, etc have. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vcczar said:

That's not a good way to estimate a rating for them. That just shows viewership. If you have two or three major left-wing news sources and only one major right-wing news source, then of course the viewership for Fox is going to have more viewers. A "highly rated" news source is one that has a low bias and high factual reporting, which neither FOX News, nor CNN, MSNBC, etc have. 

'Ratings' when it comes to TV usually means exactly that - viewership #s. CNN is much lower rated than Fox.

If you mean something else, such as 'low bias and high factual reporting', then of course it might be different, but I am referring to viewership, which is how the term is typically used in TV.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, admin_270 said:

'Ratings' when it comes to TV usually means exactly that - viewership #s. CNN is much lower rated than Fox.

If you mean something else, such as 'low bias and high factual reporting', then of course it might be different, but I am referring to viewership, which is how the term is typically used in TV.

Viewership would have been the more specific term to use. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though I have CNN on all day every day at work, I keep the sound off most of the time and therefore don't know most of the names.

My main gripe with Wolf Blitzer is during election nights, where he keeps interrupting the data guy (whose name I don't know, but I do like him) and he's pretty rude about it, on live TV.  The data guy is the only guy who actually has anything interesting to say while an election is actively happening.  Let the dude speak, Blitzer!

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Just 18 years at #1 in the ratings ... but sure, I'm the one drinking something.

Ratings data provided by Nielsen. Fox dominates - almost 3x CNN's prime time numbers.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/markjoyella/2020/01/28/fox-news-celebrates-18-years-as-number-one-network-in-cable-news/#6edb2f9b1e99

Numbers don't determine factuality. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hestia11 said:

Numbers don't determine factuality. 

'Higher rated' in TV means higher numbers. That's just what the term means - you seem to be arguing with the English language, not me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

'Higher rated' in TV means higher numbers. That's just what the term means - you seem to be arguing with the English language, not me.

BBC Newsworld has over five times the viewer base of Fox News. However, Nielson only aggregates American viewers, and thus Fox News seems to overwhelm completely BBC Newsworld in viewers, when, instead, globally, it's the complete reverse. AND, BBC Newsworld is far higher regarded for journalistic credentials in all meaningful and respected areas.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

'Higher rated' in TV means higher numbers. That's just what the term means - you seem to be arguing with the English language, not me.

(ˈhaɪlɪ ˈreɪtɪd) or highly-rated. adjective. generally considered to be of high quality. a highly-rated goalkeeper. The hotel has a highly-rated restaurant.
 
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anderson Cooper is almost certainly the most likable news anchor today. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

(Also I don’t have an unfavorable opinion on anyone,I don’t think,On CNN I just don’t recognize the names) there are definitely people I don’t,but I don’t know the names.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Hestia11 said:
(ˈhaɪlɪ ˈreɪtɪd) or highly-rated. adjective. generally considered to be of high quality. a highly-rated goalkeeper. The hotel has a highly-rated restaurant.
 

'Higher rated' *for TV* means higher numbers. It's just the standard usage for the term when it comes to TV networks and shows.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

'Higher rated' *for TV* means higher numbers. It's just the standard usage for the term when it comes to TV networks and shows.

I think this is one of those "context is everything," arguments. You and @Hestia11 are measuring different qualities using the same word, which technically is usable in both cases, but defining the argument on whose use of the word is more valid (subjectively, in the end). As fairly pedantic person, I'm very familiar, first-hand, with these sorts of debate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Patine said:

I think this is one of those "context is everything," arguments

I don't really view this as an argument with me. @Hestia11 seems to have thought I was using the term in a way I wasn't. So at best he has an argument with common usage of the term.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

I don't really view this as an argument with me. @Hestia11 seems to have thought I was using the term in a way I wasn't. So at best he has an argument with common usage of the term.

I would argue "higher ratings" would give more of a definitive look to the fact you were talking about viewership. Highly rated in common English usually means the quality. I digress, I can see where you came from.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

I don't really view this as an argument with me. @Hestia11 seems to have thought I was using the term in a way I wasn't. So at best he has an argument with common usage of the term.

Plus, you ignored my point about Nielson only measuring American viewership and BBC Newsworld having over five times the total, global viewership of Fox News, especially as making a point by omission as a Canadian making the original recommendation for Fox News by "highest-rated (period, stop, no qualifiers) news service," to someone in Austria ( @Conservative Elector 2).

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Hestia11 said:

I would argue "higher ratings" would give more of a definitive look to the fact you were talking about viewership. Highly rated in common English usually means the quality. I digress, I can see where you came from.

✌️👍

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...