Magox Posted June 12, 2009 Posted June 12, 2009 Researcher: The average radio listener listens for eighteen minutes. The average Howard Stern fan listens for - are you ready for this? - an hour and twenty minutes.Pig Vomit: How can that be? Researcher: Answer most commonly given? "I want to see what he'll say next." Pig Vomit: Okay, fine. But what about the people who hate Stern? Researcher: Good point. The average Stern hater listens for two and a half hours a day. Pig Vomit: But... if they hate him, why do they listen? Researcher: Most common answer? "I want to see what he'll say next." according to the researchers implied hypothesis: people who hate, are really dumb
KD in CA Posted June 12, 2009 Posted June 12, 2009 It is interesting that the liberal bent of the board usually knows what & who have been on O'Reilly, Rush, etc more that the wacky conservatives. There are right-wing radio guys that I never knew existed until some frothing lefty on this board brought them up. It's hard for me to believe that people actually sit and watch that idiocy, whether it's O'Reilly or Meadow or Olbertard or whoever. Honestly, who really gives a flying f--- what any of these people think? I think I'd rather watch American Idol. Or chew tin foil.
KD in CA Posted June 12, 2009 Posted June 12, 2009 Researcher: The average radio listener listens for eighteen minutes. The average Howard Stern fan listens for - are you ready for this? - an hour and twenty minutes.Pig Vomit: How can that be? Researcher: Answer most commonly given? "I want to see what he'll say next." Pig Vomit: Okay, fine. But what about the people who hate Stern? Researcher: Good point. The average Stern hater listens for two and a half hours a day. Pig Vomit: But... if they hate him, why do they listen? Researcher: Most common answer? "I want to see what he'll say next." The difference being Howard Stern is/was actually entertaining. Then again, you're the guy who routinely tries to discuss what he saw on Nancy Grace, aren't you?
IDBillzFan Posted June 12, 2009 Posted June 12, 2009 It's hard for me to believe that people actually sit and watch that idiocy, whether it's O'Reilly or Meadow or Olbertard or whoever. Wait 'til they get home, turn on their Ford Philco to watch Olbermann tonight and not understand why they don't have a picture.
Adam Posted June 12, 2009 Posted June 12, 2009 I don't know that I'd call Barney Frank a sack of schitt, but given that you're a true lockstep liberal, you probably have a better sense of what your party thinks of Frank, so I'll take your word for it. Barney is a good guy, but his son Bam Bam needs to settle down.
Chef Jim Posted June 12, 2009 Posted June 12, 2009 It is interesting that the liberal bent of the board usually knows what & who have been on O'Reilly, Rush, etc more that the wacky conservatives. That is pretty funny, but you know what, over the past several months I've listened to zero minutes of Rush, zero minutes of O'Reilly but about 20 minutes each of Madow and Olberman. Know your enema.
Nanker Posted June 12, 2009 Posted June 12, 2009 Eeww! Back to back post about Bam Bam Barney Frank and an enema. Oh my what a hurtful imagery.
GG Posted June 12, 2009 Posted June 12, 2009 Then again, you're the guy who routinely tries to discuss what he saw on Nancy Grace, aren't you? Reason No. 1 to hate flying. I was stuck at the airport for a few hours and had to endure the cackle. Newt Minow was right, he was just 4 decades early.
Chef Jim Posted June 12, 2009 Posted June 12, 2009 Reason No. 1 to hate flying. I was stuck at the airport for a few hours and had to endure the cackle. Newt Minow was right, he was just 4 decades early. iPod my friend. My favorite travel companion.
Mark Vader Posted June 12, 2009 Posted June 12, 2009 Okay. Let me try to ask a couple different questions. I don't listen to any of them, from the few minutes here and there it seems like they all love themselves way too much and I can't stomach them. Either political leanings. When folks here mention an individual and how aweful he is or stupid, etc... I honestly do not even know what way these idiots lean, right or left. First question, how does anyone listen to them? Second question, is it that difficult for you idiots to actually listen to the news, read the news paper, etc.. and be able to form an opinion or understand the issue without it being spoon fed to you by these talking heads? To answer your first question. I watch "The O'Reilly Factor" every day. The reason being is because I like what he's got to say. I think he is informative, provacative and I like that he gets to the heart of the matter without any BS. I might get slammed for this, but I'm just being honest. To answer your second question, no it is not difficult for me to "listen to the news". Yes I watch O'Reilly every day, but I do watch cable news and local news as well. The only time I read a newspaper is to look at the Sports Section, so that probably does not count. All in all I think that I am well informed of what is going on in the world. I may not be an expert, but I think I have a grasp of what's going on.
OCinBuffalo Posted June 12, 2009 Posted June 12, 2009 I think everyone is missing the main point: the guy has to keep things moving on that show because more than anything else, he is about RATINGS, not ideology. This is why he is #1 and MSNBC is in the toilet. They can't get off their ideology long enough to actually be: interesting, or, dare I say...entertaining? Also: He interrupts/creates conflict because that's an instant cue for us psychologically. We may be inclined to only half pay attention while we are watching, or start doing something else, flip around, etc. We expect someone to say something, and they start talking and soon we start to think of something else...and suddenly out of nowhere somebody interrupts, or confronts them. You immediately want to know why, and will stop whatever else you are doing and pay attention until you find out. Suffice it to say that it's inherent in how our brains work from the caveman days. O'Reilly is very effective at these and other tried and true communication tactics, and his ratings prove it. Sometime just for fun, see if you can do something else while watching his show...and how well, and/or how much of it you get done by the end.
K-9 Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 Wait 'til they get home, turn on their Ford Philco to watch Olbermann tonight and not understand why they don't have a picture. Aside from the fact that MSNBC is not available over the air, I'm sure you're correct.
K-9 Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 You'd be wrong. I tend to read the Washington Post and when I read news online I go to USAToday and CNN. None of which is based on my personal beliefs. But in a lot of cases enough info is there to form and opinion. You however, seem incapable of understanding that even though I've said hundreds of times that is where I get my news from. therefore, it is my guess that you get your "talking points" from the talk show circuit since that's all your capable of doing. Like a good monkey. Hear, see and speak the same stupidity over and over again. Nah, I'm more of a reader and don't like to deal in sound bytes from talking heads. If you've said hundreds of times that you get your news from the sources you mention above, I apologize for missing it. But news is one thing. Opinion quite another. You seem to seek out opinions that only mirror your own or are you actually educated by the OP-ED sections of the two newspapers and news channel you cite? If our little debate in the Tiller thread and the links you provided in your posts are any indication, I doubt it. I am intrigued by your statement about the news from the W Post, USAToday, and CNN. You said " None of which is based on my personal beliefs." I had no idea that news was based on ANY personal beliefs. Tell me, what 'news' IS based on your own personal beliefs. Other than news of an abortion doctor being killed, that is. News vs. Opinion. Learn it. Know it. Live it.
Bishop Hedd Posted June 14, 2009 Posted June 14, 2009 It is interesting that the liberal bent of the board usually knows what & who have been on O'Reilly, Rush, etc more that the wacky conservatives.I dont deny that. It helps to be knowledgable about what you are criticizing.
Jim in Anchorage Posted June 14, 2009 Author Posted June 14, 2009 I dont deny that. It helps to be knowledgable about what you are criticizing. So whats your excuse?
Alaska Darin Posted June 14, 2009 Posted June 14, 2009 I dont deny that. It helps to be knowledgable about what you are criticizing. If "knowledgable" means "whiny B word who is a total hypocrite".
AlaskaDarin_Has_AIDS Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 To answer your first question. I watch "The O'Reilly Factor" every day. The reason being is because I like what he's got to say. I think he is informative, provacative and I like that he gets to the heart of the matter without any BS. I couldn't have said it any better myself.
buckeyemike Posted June 16, 2009 Posted June 16, 2009 ahh something we agree on. Let's talk about waterboarding Waterboarding Nancy Grace? I'm all for it.
Chef Jim Posted June 16, 2009 Posted June 16, 2009 Waterboarding Nancy Grace? I'm all for it. I've caught bits of her show a few times just out of curiosity while channel surfing. Does she only talk about the high profile murder cases? If so she's a !@#$ing sicko.
Cheeseburger_in_paradise Posted June 16, 2009 Posted June 16, 2009 I've caught bits of her show a few times just out of curiosity while channel surfing. Does she only talk about the high profile murder cases? If so she's a !@#$ing sicko. At first you almost can't take your eyes away, like a car wreck. Eventually, you just keep surfing.
Recommended Posts