Ed Schultz just insulted Amy Goodman and Democracy Now...

[cascadiance]

He was just mentioning that Katie Couric is now talking about taking over the CBS News anchor slot as the "first woman solo news anchor of a network news show". In my book Amy Goodman has that title. Democracy Now will always be a major network news show to me, and the best one at that! And Amy Goodman is far better a news anchor than most of the others I've seen out there too! If CBS wants to start "building" it's audience with those that have left the network news and make news by hiring a woman for it, they might want to try hiring Amy. Though I'm guessing that with her honorable sense of journalistic ethics, she'd refuse.

[NYCGirl]

1. Democracy Now is not considered a network news show in any way. NT

[Richardo]

2. I don't think many other people would call "Democracy Now" a major show

You're looking for an insult where there is none. Ed can be a jerk, but based on what you said here, this was not one of those times.

[coalition_unwilling]

7. At other times, however, callers to his show have tried to bring up Amy

and "Democracy Now" and Ed has said (on at least one occasion): "I don't care about Amy Goodman." Ed is my least-favorite announcer on AAR, because he wants "lefties" to support him, but he doesn't return the courtesy.

[Richardo]

12. I don't really like her that much either

I find her way too humorlessly earnest, didactic and whiny. She relentlessly exposes the problems without offering solutions. I find her very depressing. (Yes, we have Pacifica in Houston, believe it or not)

As I said, Ed can be a jerk, but so can Amy.

[5X]

18. She is a REAL newscaster and journalist, she is not supposed to...

offer solutions.

[Richardo]

33. Amy: "Tell me how crappy your lives are."

Oppressed Interviewee: "Pretty crappy."
Amy: "Is it all the fault of the United States and our imperialist policies of doom?"
Oppressed Interviewee: "You bet, Amy."
Amy: "This.... is Democracy Now."

[5X]

40. You ever even watched her show?

[Richardo]

43. No. I occaisionally listen to her on KPFT, Pacifica radio in Houston.

Sometimes.

[coalition_unwilling]

44. This is an unfair characterization of her show.

First of all, she covers stories in detail that MSM won't touch with a ten-foot pole (like Sudan, Palestine, Venezuela). Second, her show frequently attempts to get the "official response" and can't be blamed if the nominal subject of the story declines her requests for a response. Finally, most people in the third world (except for the social elites) have pretty shitty lives by comparison with our middle class. And it is pretty much the fault, not of the United States solely, but of imperialism in general.

[coalition_unwilling]

19. I actually like her show a lot -- it helped keep me sane for the

two years before AAR got established in Los Angeles. I try to listen to DN every day on Pacifica (KPFK), if only because I can count on hearing stories and perspectives I won't hear even on AAR.

That might make an interesting DU poll: which do you prefer, AAR or DN?

[CottonBear]

17. Ed is NOT affiliated w/ AAR: some talk stations carry his show & AA shows

Randi Rhodes does not like Schultz.

[MadisonProgressive]

20. He isn't on AAR - he's syndicated

[Ian David]

25. Well, it got you to read the message post, didn't it?

And now, if Ed Schultz reads this on the air, his evil plan will have been a success.

Muhahahaha!

[DrGonzoLives]

3. Jesus

You people find any reason you can to take a shot at anyone on the radio not named Rhodes or Malloy, don't you?

Most of the population considers "network" to be ABC, CBS, NBC or Fox. Hell, you yourself just called CBS, et al, "network news."

In order to be considered "major," it might have to reach more than a small market, don't you think? I seriously doubt most people in this country have even heard of Democracy Now. How many markets outside of the west coast does Pacifica reach, anyway?

[coalition_unwilling]

11. Do you bother to listen to "Democracy Now"? If so, you would

know that it has enjoyed a phenomenal growth rate from 2001-06. It has expanded from a radio show to a televison show, staff has increased five-fold. DN now airs on over 400 various media outlets across the U.S.

What does it have to do to be considered "major"?

[MadisonProgressive]

21. Not network!

[Ian David]

26. What does it have to do to be considered "major"?

It can start by buying me a pony.

[DrGonzoLives]

42. "400 media outlets"

Where? Concentrated in one region or a few? It's not on around here. I would "bother listening to it" if there were a radio station that would broadcast it where I live. I guess areas outside of big cities aren't good enough to get such things.

Fact is, Ed was referring to "major network" the way most everyone would - ABC, CBS, NBC or FOX (and maybe CNN or MSNBC). It's nice that Democracy Now is on 400 media outlets, but if those outlets don't reach 80% of the country, it's hard to believe that it's "major."

Furthermore, the OP simply wanted to get in another cheap shot at Schultz, because he's not another Malloy/Rhodes clone that only targets a single demographic.

[coalition_unwilling]

45. I'm not a scholar on the subject, so I expect that

most of DN's coverage is in major urban markets where the majority of Americans now reside. It is available on-line and also via Sirius and XM Satellite.

I don't mean to imply that DN is a "major network" (in the sense that the corporate-whore networks are), but merely to suggest that it is fast-growing outlet for an alternative narrative. DN prides itself on not taking any corporate money; contrast that with the corporate-whore "major networks" and their local affiliates (which frequently broadcast un-sourced corporate video news releases, aka, "infomercials," as legitimate "news").

The only reason I pay attention to the corporate-whore media anymore is to get a sense of how uninformed people may be getting their news. I certainly don't watch (or listen) to it to get anything approaching balance or, dare I say, the "truth" on any subject.

[BlooInBloo]

13. It never would've occurred to me that it meant anything else...

It never would've occurred to me that ANYONE thought "network" meant anything else.

Live n learn I guess.

Or else it's just someone looking for an excuse to be outraged.

As though there aren't enough REAL reasons as it is...

[BrklynLiberal]

4. ..and Katie Couric is NOT a news person. She is an infotainment

personality at best. What "hard" reporting has she ever done? When she allowed the cameras to come along for her proctology exam? PUH-LEEZE!

[AX10]

5. "Democracy Now" is NOT a major news show.

This is just another cheap attempt to attack Ed Schultz because his last name is not Rhodes, Franken, or Malloy.

[meegbear]

6. Yeah! And why do they call the arabic region The Middle East ...

it's not really in the middle, is it?

[MadisonProgressive]

23. Not necessarily in the east either!

[obnoxiousdrunk]

8. Me see

no insult ????

[Connie_Corleone]

9. Talk about grasping at straws.

Most people have never even heard of Democracy Now, much less watch it. It's not a major network news show.

[drduffy]

10. Democracy Now is on

Dish Network and on Direct TV and broadcast in its own locale, I suppose. Not major network stuff, of course, but known at least by me in the little town of Morganton, NC (and others here as well).

So maybe it is no big deal to some. But Amy sure beats hell out of Katie where it counts in my book which is with respect to dealing with the issues that actually matter in a thorough and ethical manner. I haven't seen any MSM do that in quite a while.

And Ed.... mostly a nonentity to me. Has a loud voice though.

[LittleClarkie]

14. That's hardly an insult

Just a differing criteria.

Your title seems excessively flamebaitish.

[Drewskie]

15. Not sure about that but he's been working Delay over pretty good NT

[still_one]

16. i think that is pretty misleading

he is not insulting Amy

[Canuckistanian]

22. Schultz called the buyback of Phoenix "bake sale ethics"

Don't know exactly what that means, but it sounds like he wants to start a flame war with AAR.

[Bluestar]

27. He only cares about ratings and sponsors

Maybe he wanted the AAR Phoenix campaign to fail because he's on another station in Phoenix and it would help his ratings?? I don't know, just guessing. He seems to have a gigantic ego and is always bragging about how many listeners he has. His voice also is too close to Rush Limbaugh's for me.

But I listen to him because there is nothing else to listen to at that hour even though he irritates me a lot. Sometimes I really appreciate (and am surprised at) his positions. I appreciated his support of Russ Feingold and taking the Dems to task for not supporting him and the censure.

And then yesterday he gave a bunch of airtime to that salesman for gold and precious metals. This precious metal company also advertises on his program, so it seemed a lot like "advertorial" to me. Besides, the gold sellers have been saying that gold would hit $1,000 an ounce since the 1970's--never happened.

[CottonBear]

31. Who cares? He's not an AAR host. n/t

[Canuckistanian]

34. I sure don't

Schultz lost me after criticizing Murtha with GOP talking points.

[nolabels]

24. The title of his show is says it all

The short version of his take is 'the world is not ready for a female news anchor'. The untold version is of professional jealousy.

When you're trying to figure out what side the bread is buttered on, it's easy to remember commercial radio is for commercial purposes. CBS wants to increase their advertisement revenue and any idea of public service takes a back seat or even is thrown under the bus for profit reasons.

This is America, land of the profit and loss statement

[cascadiance]

29. That's what I kind of took from it...

I apologize if I seemed a little harsh on Ed. I don't think he was consciously trying to insult Amy, even though he might be dismissive about her if talking about her (I don't know because I haven't heard him talk about her). But he was kind of the attitude that you are here with the prospect of Couric taking over, which I found kind of insulting that he wasn't even thinking of Amy Goodman, which totally destroys his logic for whether women are ready for these "prime time" slots.

I'd LOVE to see someone like Amy Goodman in one of the big broadcast networks' anchor chairs and think that she's certainly as capable as anyone (man or woman) to do so. Though part of the price of that is that they might try to take more editorial control away from her from the things she says too. And I think just working for a commercial network would take a bit away from Amy Goodman's sense of ethics that she projects which I think she'd have a harder time projecting if it was a for profit news show. So part of me says that I want her staying where she is now, and finding more ways to get Democracy Now as an option for mainstream news viewers instead.

[fujiyama]

36. Be as hard on Ed as you want

but if and when you attack someone make sure it's based on facts.

In general, the major networks are considered ABC, NBC, and CBS, and to a lesser extent Fox.

That said, the idea of Couric having a primetime news anchor spot makes my stomach churn. She's such an annoying twit. She's fit for tabloid television, if anything.

[pennylane100]

28. I can only take ed shultz in small doses and hate to stick up for him but

I think he meant the broadcast networks like NBC, CBS, and ABC.

I often watch Democracy Now, its a way to get unbiased news from around the world. To my surprise, Chris Matthews has her on his show sometimes and seems to treat her with respect even though she may disagree with him. I don't why. Maybe they are old friends.

[Roland99]

30. Can I watch Democracy Now! at 6:30pm using my TV antenna?

kthxbye

[cascadiance]

32. Are you in Louisville as your profile indicates?

Try WYCS TV (UHF channel 24) at 7 PM there... (or cable channel 138)

http://www.democracynow.org/stations.pl?op=search&state=KY

[Roland99]

35. Wow. Interesting! Well, I just tried to tune in UHF Ch. 24 and no go

Pure snow and very distorted audio.


I don't get Insight cable 138.

[Zomby Woof]

37. Misleading thread title

Which is par for the course in GD...

Ed Schultz never said anything about Goodman or Democracy Now. His omission is not the same as an insult. If he said something disrespectful about Goodman, then your title would be accurate. Did he? Apparently not. This appears to be a case of hypersensitivity and an overbearing sense of entitlement.

[cascadiance]

39. I already apologized here earlier...

... I don't mean that Ed Schultz directly insulted Amy. I do feel though if he at least acknowledged that Amy Goodman's already providing this role at a network that many don't feel is MSM at this point, it would show he's putting Democracy Now and Amy's role in proper perspective. That he isn't conscious of that bothers me, but I don't take his lack of such a sense a personal insult. Just the notion that there are no other "news networks" that keeps being perpetuated (by many folks, not just Ed) is insulting.

To not even talk about Democracy Now! and say that Katy Couric is "the first solo news anchor" keeps perpetuating to the average folk out there that there aren't other news sources out there (that could be better), which many of us feel Democracy Now! is!

Democracy Now is now on both satellite systems on two separate channels (LINK TV and Free Speech TV) and is on many cable systems and local over the air or cable channels around the country. It in effect is a "network" News offering, since it is offered on many "affiliates" albeit not organized in the same way that affiliates are on what many regard as the MSM outlets. For a long time Fox was probably not considered a network too, when the big three were CBS, NBC, and ABC too. At some point they crossed that thresshold. We should continue to try and pave the way for other viable alternative news and media sources to be recognized as alternatives too.

[obreaslan]

41. "I don't mean that Ed Schultz directly insulted Amy..."

And yet you said, "Ed Schultz just insulted Amy Goodman and Democracy Now"

I'm not trying to be confrontational, but your thread title is directly misleading.

I didn't hear the show, but I would bet Ed wasn't even thinking about Amy Goodman at the time. I know to most on DU that he is not "left enough", but let's at least acknowledge that he is on our side. He's not a "GOP Operative" as some have said. He is close to the center, but he is definitely left of center. I don't agree with him 100% of the time, but he is correct on a lot of the issues.

He doesn't support Murtha, as many have mentioned, but he supports Feingold's Censure call. I guess that puts him farther "left" than 99% of the Democrats in D.C doesn't it????

If we continue to attack our own, or those who are supporting us, we'll never be able to combat the threat from the right.

[Terran1212]

38. Democracy Now! is not major but it is the BEST

Imagine if they had the major networks' budget.

We'd have progressive, third parties and liberal democrats in office in NO TIME.