JayS:
If the CNN’s and MSNBC’s of the world had the journalistic integrity to cover stories like Acorn and Van Jones Beck wouldn’t have the audience he has today. He gain major credibility points on those stories when every other news organization simply accepted the Obama administration’s blanket statement of “there’s nothing to see here”.
Beck unfortunately has a lot of misses. Even more unfortunately is he also gets some things dead on that the mainstream media just refuses to cover for some unknown reason. The fact that our Obama appointed green jobs czar was a 9/11 truther and supported violent radicals most of his life is a story to me, as it was to most of the country.
So basically, yeah, I’ll listen to Beck. I may dismiss 95% of what he says but I’ll keep listening for that 5% where he’s right and covering a story the mainstream wants to ignore.
I agree, you have to take the good with the bad, that is the point.
There is no one media outlet that is 100% correct. You need to take them all in and make your own judgment.
JayS
May 18, 2010, 5:18am
22
Well, you used to only have to dismiss about 20%, when he was writing a column for CNN. Since he’s been over on Fox about the only thing I’ve paid attention to with him is the Acorn stuff and Van Jones.
boxxa
May 18, 2010, 6:38am
23
Ya its something no one understands why its important. People have this illusion that Timewarner or Verzion owns the internet. Haha.
If someone doesn’t happen with it, people will suddenly notice.
Jam
May 18, 2010, 10:33am
25
triple rezpots
edit- didnt realize that was from the olberman show :tup: SRY