Americans love and hate O'Reilly equally, according to poll

Harris Interactive issued a press release Friday listing America's top three favorite and least favorite news personalities. Bill O'Reilly got 23% of the vote on both sides of the issue. He, Charles Gibson and Anderson Cooper came out the three favorites.
The least favorites were Rush Limbaugh, O'Reilly and Larry King. Michael Savage, our choice for third, didn't even place. (You know that's gonna tick that egomaniac off.)

Anyway, the entire press release is below. The results are interesting, to say the least.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conservative Talk Show Hosts Top Lists of Both Favorite and Least Favorite News and Current Affairs Personalities

O’Reilly, Gibson and Cooper Top Favorites and Limbaugh, O’Reilly and King Top Least Favorites List

ROCHESTER, N.Y.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The days of old when there was just network news and newspapers for people to go to for their information are long gone, and people who deliver the news have become much more numerous. They are no longer just newscasters, but rather news and current affairs personalities; toward that end, America has their favorites and, of course, their least favorites.

Leading the list of favorites, just under one-quarter (23%) of Americans cite Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly as one of their three favorite news and current affairs personalities, followed by the host of ABC’s World News Tonight, Charles Gibson and CNN’s Anderson Cooper (17% each).

Leading the list of least favorites, a plurality of Americans (42%) say Conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh is one of their least favorite news and current affairs personalities. The same number who cite Bill O’Reilly as one of their favorites also say he is one of their least favorites (23%) and 19 percent say CNN’s Larry King is one of their least favorite news and current affairs personalities.

These are the results of a nationwide Harris Poll of 2,302 U.S. adults surveyed online between January 15 and 22, 2008 by Harris Interactive®.

Rounding out the top five favorite news and current affairs personalities is NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams (16%) and then with 13 percent each is Meet the Press host Tim Russert, CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric and 60 Minutes host Mike Wallace. On the other side, 17 percent say that CNN Headline News’ Nancy Grace is one of their least favorites and just under that (16%) cite Katie Couric. In looking at the two lists, there are a number of the same people who are in the top ten on both. Bill O’Reilly, Katie Couric, ABC’s 20/20’s Barbara Walters, Rush Limbaugh and Fox News’s Sean Hannity all are in the top half of the favorites and the least favorites list.

Partisan Differences

It’s not just the backing of candidates that show partisan differences, their choices of favorite and least favorite news and current affairs personalities are also very different. For Republicans, their top three favorites are Bill O’Reilly (42%), Rush Limbaugh (28%) and Sean Hannity (27%). Perhaps, not surprisingly, Democrats have a very different list of favorites – Anderson Cooper (22%), Brian Williams (20%) and Charles Gibson (19%). One thing to note is that Republicans are more united behind their favorites while the Democrats are a bit more fragmented.

Where the Democrats do show stronger support is in the list of their least favorites as three in five Democrats (60%) say it’s Rush Limbaugh, followed by one-third (34%) who say Bill O’Reilly and 17 percent who say Nancy Grace. For Republicans, just over a quarter (26%) each says Larry King and Katie Couric are their least favorites. Rush Limbaugh definitely inspires mixed emotions for Republicans as 24 percent say he is one of their least favorites.

So What?

With the rise of online news and information sites and the 24 hour nature of news, there are many more places for Americans to get their news. This means that just having the anchor seated behind the table isn’t enough to grab viewers or listeners. These news personalities are competing for these viewers and each must try to stand out in some way. Maybe they focus on a single issue, trying to be the dominant news source on it. Maybe they go extremely high tech for announcing elections or, as in Tim Russert’s case, very low tech and just carry around a white board and marker. Whatever it may be, the dissemination of news has changed and the Cronkites, Brinkleys and Huntleys are no longer around.

TABLE 1

FAVORITE NEWS PERSONALITY

“Thinking now of the media in general, of the news and current affairs personalities listed below, which three would you say are your favorites?”

Base: All adults
Total Republican Democrat Independent
% % % %
Bill O’Reilly 23 42 11 19
Charles Gibson 17 17 19 19
Anderson Cooper 17 14 22 17
Brian Williams 16 16 20 12
Tim Russert 13 9 18 16
Katie Couric 13 10 17 12
Mike Wallace 13 9 17 16
Barbara Walters 12 10 16 12
Rush Limbaugh 12 28 2 11
Sean Hannity 11 27 2 7
George Stephanopoulos 11 8 13 14
Larry King 9 9 11 7
Keith Olbermann 7 2 10 9
Chris Matthews 6 5 8 8
Lou Dobbs 6 3 8 9
Nancy Grace 6 6 7 7
Bob Schieffer 6 4 6 9
Wolf Blitzer 5 5 7 5
Shepard Smith 5 9 3 4
Greta Van Susteran 4 7 3 3
Tucker Carlson 2 3 1 2
Alan Colmes 2 4 1 1
None of these 23 13 22 23

TABLE 2

LEAST FAVORITE NEWS PERSONALITY

“Of the news and current affairs personalities below, which three would you say are your least favorites?”

Base: All adults
Total Republican Democrat Independent
% % % %
Rush Limbaugh 42 24 60 50
Bill O’Reilly 23 10 34 29
Larry King 19 26 16 18
Nancy Grace 17 17 17 19
Katie Couric 16 26 10 16
Barbara Walters 15 20 10 16
Sean Hannity 10 3 15 15
Wolf Blitzer 9 13 8 8
George Stephanopoulos 8 14 3 10
Greta Van Susteran 8 9 9 6
Chris Matthews 6 11 3 5
Mike Wallace 5 10 2 4
Alan Colmes 5 9 3 4
Keith Olbermann 5 8 3 5
Tucker Carlson 4 4 5 3
Lou Dobbs 3 3 5 2
Anderson Cooper 3 4 2 2
Tim Russert 2 5 1 2
Brian Williams 2 3 2 2
Shepard Smith 2 1 2 2
Charles Gibson 2 2 2 1
Bob Schieffer 1 3 1 1
None of these 25 20 23 21

Methodology

This Harris Poll® was conducted online within the United States January 15 and 22, among 2,302 adults (aged 18 and over). Figures for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, region and household income were weighted where necessary to bring them into line with their actual proportions in the population. Propensity score weighting was also used to adjust for respondents’ propensity to be online.

All sample surveys and polls, whether or not they use probability sampling, are subject to multiple sources of error which are most often not possible to quantify or estimate, including sampling error, coverage error, error associated with nonresponse, error associated with question wording and response options, and post-survey weighting and adjustments. Therefore, Harris Interactive avoids the words “margin of error” as they are misleading. All that can be calculated are different possible sampling errors with different probabilities for pure, unweighted, random samples with 100% response rates. These are only theoretical because no published polls come close to this ideal.

Respondents for this survey were selected from among those who have agreed to participate in Harris Interactive surveys. The data have been weighted to reflect the composition of the adult population. Because the sample is based on those who agreed to participate in the Harris Interactive panel, no estimates of theoretical sampling error can be calculated.

These statements conform to the principles of disclosure of the National Council on Public Polls.

J33083

Q580, 585

About Harris Interactive

Harris Interactive is one of the largest and fastest-growing market research firms in the world. The company provides innovative research, insights and strategic advice to help its clients make more confident decisions which lead to measurable and enduring improvements in performance. Harris Interactive is widely known for The Harris Poll, one of the longest running, independent opinion polls and for pioneering online market research methods. The company has built what it believes to be the world’s largest panel of survey respondents, the Harris Poll Online. Harris Interactive serves clients worldwide through its North American, European and Asian offices, and through a global network of independent market research firms. More information about Harris Interactive may be obtained at www.harrisinteractive.com. Harris Interactive is an independent, non-partisan research company and does not take part in political campaigning or primary predictions.

To become a member of the Harris Poll Online and be invited to participate in online surveys, register at www.harrispollonline.com.

Old spin for the New Year

Good ol' Bill O'Reilly. The New Year has begun, and of course Mr. No Spin is already spinning.
Take his Talking Points for Wednesday night.
Please.

"But "Talking Points" has no horse in this race at present. We're watching all the candidates, hoping, hoping that one will emerge as a creative problem solver, who's truly looking out for you.

Only John Edwards is on our absurd list. Over the holiday weekend, Edwards once again demonstrated his unbelievable incompetence by suggesting that if elected, he would pull some U.S. forces away from training Iraqi forces. I mean, how dumb is that?

For the first time in almost five years, the military situation is improving in Iraq. And Al Qaeda there is being badly damaged. And you retreat from that? Dangerously irresponsible."

Even better is this.

"Now we expect John Edwards to be finished in the race shortly. We hope he is, because the USA needs smart leadership in the White House, not a crazed ideologue."

Guess again, Bill. Edwards' stature in the race has picked up significantly in the last couple of months. Did anyone tell you he's in a dead heat with Clinton and Obama?
Even more laughable was this conclusion.

"The point is that the media, generally left-leaning, really isn't much interested in you or what's good for you. They're interested in ideologues who promote a liberal cause, or in some cases conservative point of view. That is a complete waste of time. Again, this country needs creative smart leadership. In the next few months, we'll see if that emerges."

Straight out of today's right-wing talking points. No spin, right?

A meeting of the minds ... or at least ALF's ...

It was almost to unreal to believe. Bill O'Reilly facing off with ALF? Has O'Reilly dropped so far that he needs ALF to give him a lift. But it happened.



Here's the promo for O'Reilly's match with ALF. It aired in advance of the show.



Here's the actual "interview" that took place Friday night.


The actual encounter was rather amusing. O'Reilly, for a change, didn't take himself so seriously. Maybe he should consider a career change to comedy. His show is pretty funny now.

Conservative talk radio -- dumb and dumber

In the debate over why conservative talk radio outdraws liberal talk radio, I've found the answer and it's incredibly simple.
Conservative talk radio is very simplistic and dumbed down. Dumb and dumber. It's easier to instill fear in your listeners by saying things shouldn't change or they should revert back using old prejudices than to promote intelligent solutions.
They don't call liberals progressives for nothing. Conservatives aren't.
Conservative radio is a mental comfort zone. It's easier for people to lay back and not move forward in their thinking. That, of course, is the weakness of conservatives as a whole.
Look at the debate over immigration and how talk show host have used the logic of prejudice to make their point.
Look at the whole recent "Redacted" controversy manufactured by Bill O'Reilly, who isn't a true conservative talk show host, but more like a sideshow clown. O'Reilly did a cheerleading act to get his audiences to hate "Redacted" before it was released and before even he saw it. Don't bother suggesting your audience judge for themselves. Just tell them it's bad. Easy way out. No work on their part. Dumb and dumber.
Liberal radio, on the other hand, isn't dumbed down. Actually, if there's one thing liberals probably do too much of on the radio is they intellectualize. You don't see a lot of conservative show hosts do that. Their audiences would turn them off in a millisecond.
Conservatives follow the old axiom Keep It Simple, Stupid. Keep 'em entertained. Conservatives wisely keep their ideas in basic terms even a child could understand. Most liberal talk show hosts don't. Conservative ideas generally don't challenge. They rely on existing ideas and prejudices. That's why it's so easy to listen to conservative talk radio. It doesn't take any brainpower.
Most of all, conservatives want to dictate everyone's values. Don't criticize the president. Fund the war and shut up. Marriage is reserved for heterosexuals only. And the most outlandish of all: I got mine, so the hell with everyone else. All too simple answers to complex questions. Conservatives have no compassion, no soul and no values -- unless it benefits them.
Liberals, however, will ultimately triumph in the end. Conservatives may apply the brakes, but liberals supply the propellers. You can't move forward without them.

Fox gone wild

Keith Olbermann followed up the video we posted previously with this interview with Robert Greenwald. Fair and balanced? How about fair, balanced and sexy?

More smut from Fox

Brave New Films has created a new site called Fox News Porn to show some of the sexy footage that seems to run rampant on Fox News Channel. Their reaction to all this: "Can you quote us so not giving a shit?"

If all this bothers you, you can find a list of Fox News advertisers at http://foxattacks.com/attacker/?utm_source=rgemail.

Cuban challenges O'Reilly to a debate on Olbermann show

Bill O'Reilly likes to challenge people. You think he'll take a challenge when one is issued to him?
Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks and the force behind the upcoming film, "Redacted," which is critical of the Iraq war, has challenged O'Reilly to debate him on it (a film O'Reilly has admitted he hasn't seen!) on "Countdown With Keith Olbermann," reports Crooks and Liars.com.
I doubt that O'Reilly will do it. It would give credibility to his rival, Olbermann, probably the only man he hates more than Al Franken. And he'd have to think on his feet without pre-written remarks.
C'mon, Bill, how about it?

I'm adding a link to Mark Cuban's blog that includes his full remarks on Bill O'Reilly's campaign against the movie (the subject of a post earlier this week), plus his personal review of "Redacted."

Bill O'Reilly, strikebreaker?

Writers Guild of America member Steve Young complains that Bill O'Reilly is continuing to make a living off the back of striking writers during their labor dispute. On the Huffington Post, Young, whose column runs in the Los Angeles Daily News on Sunday next to O'Reilly's, complains that during a mail segment on "The O'Reilly Factor," he explained he was the sole writer of the show. That, Young opined, explains the quality of the writing, but it doesn't explain how he is allowed to continue writing the show.
"I'm not sure if he is a paid up WGA-ite, but he should be. In the very least he should honor the strike," says Young.
He explains that O'Reilly sold a novel to fellow WGA member Mel Gibson. Says Young, "The sale to a WGA signatory production company had to fall under WGA precepts and, in affect, brought Mr. O'Reilly into the WGA fold. If not the fold, at least near enough to benefit from the minimums the WGA has fought and died for.*"
Secondly and more important, says Young, "the WGA strike affects those writing television fictional drama and comedy. Certainly judging which of the two Bill's work falls under might be in question, but that he serves up plenty of fiction is not. That in itself should fall under Guild jurisdiction. Whether Fox News is a signatory network shouldn't be of matter."
He says, "The WGA must call for him to cease and desist. In addition, every WGA writer should contact the SRCC or call the WGAW STRIKE TIP HOTLINE at (323) 782-4898 to report O'Reilly."
He concludes," Whether fictional news is on the Comedy Channel or Fox News, it cannot continue during the strike."
We agree.

One of O'Reilly's most shameful moments

In this January, 2007, exchange on "The O'Reilly Factor," Bill O'Reilly tells Greta Van Susteren he thinks young kidnapping victim Shaun Hornbeck liked being kidnapped. Unbelievable.



Keith Olbermann responded with some very direct thoughts.

Bill certainly know how to win friends and influence people

O'Reilly apparently has been on a big kick lately (you need a scorecard to keep track of all his rants) against Brian DePalma's upcoming film, "Redacted," all about the Iraq War.
Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, the money man behind the film, has called Bill O', "my new best friend" for all the publicity he's brought to the film. As reported by Bradblog, here's what Cuban had to say:

After first replying that O'Reilly's attacks didn't much matter, and that they had very little effect either way, I followed up to ask specifically about Brian DePalma's upcoming film, 'Redacted,' which Cuban's network, HDNet is releasing shortly.

"When it comes to a specific project like 'Redacted,'" Cuban responded, "which is a small movie, it's grown bigger and bigger by the day. So I'm very grateful to him."

"Bill O'Reilly is my new best friend," he added, to laughter from the crowd which was made up of bloggers and industry-related folks of all political stripes.

Oh, that Bill. Doncha love him? :)

Gratuitous sex? You'll probably find it breaking on Fox News

The folks that brought you "Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price" and "Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism" have just released
"FOX Attacks: Decency," which, according to their description, "shows how Fox News routinely peddles explicit
sexual content for ratings, even while Bill O'Reilly and other FOX
personalities moralize about how popular culture is degrading
civilization with wanton sexual imagery."
Alongside the video is a petition to the FCC, asking the agency to
require cable operators to offer an "a la carte" subscription option
so that subscribers are not forced to pay for Fox's smut.
"FOX News shows more sexualized violence and humiliation than probably
any other network -- all in the name of condemning it -- while
under-showing violence in Iraq, all in the name of supporting it,"
said Gloria Steinem after watching the video. "After this video, smart
viewers and advertisers will boycott FOX."

(Please add your comments.)