Thursday, February 12, 2015

"Here's a Thought with Charles Shaughnessy" February 12, 2015 post show comments


On today's show we featured Annaliesa Rose from her Kickstarter donation reward for advertising.  Here are the links to all of her social media.  Please follow her on TWITTER, like her FACEBOOK page, check out her OFFICIAL WEBSITE, connect with her on GOOGLE + and most especially, subscribe to her YOUTUBE page and listen to all her videos she has up there!

Thanks to Janne Nordvang for this delightful cartoon!

If you missed today's live show, you can watch it by clicking HERE or on the photo of Charlie.

Please leave your comments and questions in the comments section below!

26 comments:

  1. loved the show tonight that was fun when karen was on that was really good and it was funny , i'm so glad charlie spoke well about brian williams some many just don't speak well about him i liked him and so sorry about everything that happen to him I hope something good come out soon and Bob simpson to very sad it keeps getting worse everyday on the news i a bit worry about the news tomorrow and whats going to happen next always something new like the weather in Boston still frozen up they're more coming well good show looking forward for next week !

    ReplyDelete
  2. Another interesting show! So glad you brought up Brian Willuams. He is my favorite news anchor and I am so upset that he has been suspended for six months. Total overkill. I really don't think the crime fits the punishment. Now everyone is dumping on him! How people love to bring down those who are on top! It is so sad, because many think he will never come back!
    I agree with Karen about the media stirring things up. They always seem to need to put an angle on a story, an angle that will stir things up the most!
    I really enjoyed Annaliesa Rise's music. She is very talented and deserved the first 'shout out' on the show.
    Happy Valentine's Day to you and your family and to Janelle and her family. Looking forward to next week's show!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Great show,Charlie! i just loved you touching on the subjects of Bob simon's death from CBS News 60 Minutes show.Speaking your mind on Brian Williams from NBC Nightly News was interesting,not too connected with himbut it was still interesting to hear your take on his dismissal.Thanks again to Karen and Gale for calling in and sharing their opinion with you.Your show once again was riveting.Can't wait til the next show.there is much talk that could be discussed avout your feelings on Gun Rights and peoples belief in the 2nd Ammendment rights.Watch out!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I've been fortunate to see Annaliesa perform live several times now and she is a fantastic singer. Thank you Charles Shaughnessy for featuring Annaliesa on your show - and keep up the great work :) Greg Kininmonth, Wollongong, Australia

    ReplyDelete
  5. I saw the archives of yesterday's show this morning during breakfast ;-)

    First of all I want to say that Annaliesa has a beautiful, warm pleasant voice, especially when she sings jazz ; I also went on her website to listen to some of her tracks & videos to discover her performances: cheers! :-)

    About the Russian/Ukrain crisis (war) that is happening at the gates of Europe, very close from us, I would like to add that Putin's entourage is most likely being unofficially advised by a very scary man: Aleksandr Dugin.
    As you said, this situation is multifactoral, a complicated one with many stated & unconfessed purposes on both side but still, the scariest part of all that, is represented by Russia: Dugin -"Putin's Rasputin"- is well known to be an ultranationalist, anti-western-world-fanatist, dreaming of a futur Eurasian Empire -from the French west coast to the Russian east coast- dominated by Moscow. Ukrain is part of his plan...

    Read this article written one year ago for an overview of the context at the beginning of the conflict : http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/04/opinion/dont-let-putin-grab-ukraine.html?_r=0

    Let me tell you that the US citizens should be more interested by what is happening here ; I have had difficulties to find recent english newspaper articles about Dugin's influence, but read for example this one written in 2014 about his theories, especially the fact that "The American empire should be destroyed": http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141080/anton-barbashin-and-hannah-thoburn/putins-brain

    For many reasons, France and Germany feel concerned: these past days they managed to negotiate a probably fragile peace deal in Minsk with both belligerents but I wonder if it is going to last...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Just watched the archives, this working on Thursday nights business is putting a damper on my "must see TRadioV"! Wonderful show again, as always. Loved the cartoons, Janelle in a tiara is always a good thing ;-). And the MUSIC!!! Not only does Anneliesa have a gorgeous voice, but the music style has my name written all over it. I had the silliest grin on my face(and ok, I sang along) when you played "C'mon Get Happy", one of my favorites.
    As for the topics, I'll "number them", because you KNOW I have an opinion on them all LOL. "
    1) Brian Williams~ I totally agree that this appears to be a huge overreaction on NBC's part. One "tall tale" shouldn't ruin a long and relevant career. It makes me wonder if there is more to this story, that perhaps he was in negotiations and demanding more $$ than they wanted to pay and they were looking for a reason to get rid of him, or something like that? I'm betting that if we "follow the money" there is more going on. And while I think you do tend to have "Fox Derangement Syndrome"(which is the sister illness to the one I have "MSNBC Derangement Synd."), I was pleased to hear you put MSNBC in the same category as Fox. I don't watch Fox, so I can't vouch for their accuracy, but I would assume that they tell a lot of truth too. The man who said that France has "no go zones" was a guest on an op-ed show, not the "news segments", and yes Fox should have apologized.
    2) The Muslim Students who were killed~How tragic and unnecessary! BUT, the media was out of control on this one too, as they always are. As you said, they have to make it juicy and salacious. Before the bodies were even cold, there are reports of "Hate Crime" and an assumption that this man has been taught Islamophobia(on Fox and on right-wing talk radio of course). *IF* Hicks killed these students for their faith, it's ain't the right wing's fault. He was a rabid "Anti-Theist" who quoted Christopher Dawkins on his FB page. So far, I haven't seen the media going after Dawkins and his "hateful teachings"(though to his credit, he came out and condemned it immediately). Those right-wing Spawns of Satan(sarcasm off) aren't the only ones preaching hatred and intolerance. And yesterday(on ABC News) I saw the family of the victims talking about how it MUST be a hate crime! I can't blame them for that, they are grieving and in shock, but WHY does the media have to perpetrate that? It's like they WANT it to be Islamophobia! Better story I guess.
    3. Russia~ Again, I agree that we seem to be resurrecting the Cold War, both in the news and in other media. I have to admit though, it's disconcerting to have "pseudo-historical" tv shows and movies(like "Argo"), and be able to remember them actually happening! When did something that happened in my college/post-college years become HISTORY?! We "old geezers" need to stick together.

    Again, enjoyed the show and look forward to the blog discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Here's a thought/question about media coverage. Fox News is slammed (and the mayor of Paris is threatening to sue) over their inaccurate reporting on the no-go zones in Paris. CNN initially reported about them, but nobody is attacking CNN or threatening to sue. Why is Fox evil and CNN good for essentially reporting the same thing?

    Another example: Look at the coverage of what happened in Ferguson. The mainstream media is all over the story, focusing on the looting, the grand jury decision not to charge Darren Wilson, Al Sharpton leading the protests, etc. But when the Department of Justice decides not to file charges of civil rights violations against Darren Wilson--where was the mainstream media? I think Fox covered it, but it certainly wasn't a lead story on CNN or MSNBC. Because only Fox covered it, does that make it a lie, or does that make the other networks irresponsible? Certainly it would have been interesting to hear Al Sharpton's reaction to the DOJ decision on his show (and not just interviewing Michael Brown's mother). Just hearing him complain about Eric Holder not finding evidence to file charges for civil rights violations would have been worth the cost of the cable bill.

    Again, what often seems to be most important is "if it bleeds, it leads" and getting the story first, not getting the story right.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Sorry...hit publish too soon. I loved the music on today's show! Great transition to and from commercial breaks. Looking forward to hearing more of it (and wish I could buy a CD so that I could listen in the car).

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. loved the show and good music hope more will come wish you where on longer i think one hour is not long enough i would like to see some men call in hear what they have to say that would be fun .

    ReplyDelete
  11. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I meant to add my two cents worth regarding Russia! I think we need to be a little more worried about Putin. I believe he would like to turn back time and take Russia back to when it was the mighty Soviet Union. He uses the West's distractions over ISIS and the Middle East in general, to hide his doings in Russia. In fact, I am not so sure we would even be that aware of the goings on in Ukraine if the Russians had not shot down that plane, and brought the focus of the world on that part of the world. Even now, in the American media, it is not the main story, though the cease fire agreement has brought it back to the forefront.
    I just feel that we need to be very wary of Putin. He is dangerous!

    ReplyDelete
  13. (The first part of my post must not have gone through. Apologies.)

    Charlie, my dear, I adore you and love your shows. I don't comment often, but I do listen.

    This one, however, almost made me stroke out.

    First off, let's distinguish between real news and news entertainment. Fox, MSNBC, CNN ... those are news ENTERTAINMENT outlets. Meaning they are NOT going to walk the line of truth bc that's not what their viewers and - subsequently - their big money advertisers want them to do. They have a target audience they are catering to, be it conservative, liberal, animal, vegetable or mineral. Just like politicians cater to their parties, so to do news entertainment outlets. Entertainment is supposed to be salacious. It is supposed to shock and stir up emotions. People either LOVE to HATE them, or they watch it so they can feel like their own opinions are validated by someone they deem "important."

    That's why those shows stay on the air. If people truly took those shows and networks for what they are, they would get bored and stop watching, advertisers would pull and it would be lights out.

    Also, there is a reason why most televised news shows have anchors who look like they just came off a fashion week runway (mostly female): entertainment value. Most of the people who are touted as being "journalists," don't actually do any real reporting. They read the news off a teleprompter. No one ever questions their qualifications, which is tragic.

    After spending four and a half years in J-School and more years in the business than I care to admit to, you can see why being lumped into the same categories with these people chaps my hide.

    You want real news? In all seriousness, the most accurate news is going to come from the local, community outlets, not the national media. The reporters in those outlets have taken the time to cultivate their sources and have worked in the same trenches as the people they are reporting on. They are more in touch with the story than a national media outlet that flies a reporter in for a day, gathers what they "perceive" to be the story and then flies out without a second thought. You want to know what is really going on in places like Ferguson, don't go to CNN or Fox News, go to the St. Louis Post Dispatch.

    Are community reporters always going to be right? No. We're fallible. We all make mistakes. As a reporter, I've had my share. Some were minor and some were doosies that I wish I could erase from time. And yes, mistakes do come when you are trying to get a story out fast. It's in those cases that you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. We reporters get criticized for reporting on something before all the information is out there, but then, in those instances when we are waiting for information, we are criticized for not doing our jobs in a timely manner. And it's those moments that truly drive journalists to caffeine, smoking and drinking addictions (for the record, mine is caffeine).

    ReplyDelete
  14. continued (cursed character limit):

    It comes down this: We have to get the information out there as quickly and accurately as we can. If we don't, our audiences go to another outlet for what they want - which is information. News is a business. And like any other business, if your customers go to your competitors, you eventually get closed down. So we have to be fast, but I promise you, in being fast, REAL reporters are doing everything they possibly can to be accurate. Sometimes we get curve balls (i.e. one police spokesperson telling us one thing, and then new information coming out later that contradicts it).

    Yes, "if it bleeds it leads." But that's because our readers want to follow the blood trail, even if they won't admit to it. And our digital stats back that up. People will click on the "car crash/shooting/bad things" headlines three times more than the "student success/Good Samaritan/happy" headlines. I personally believe the latter are more important to society, but people always want to watch the train wreck, even if they are horrified and disgusted by it. And where there are eyes, there are dollars. And since money rules the world (sad but true) nothing will ever reverse that. The only things journalists like me can do is keep covering the positive stories in hopes of keeping a balance.

    I have said this before: No journalist WANTS to be WRONG. There is no glory for us when we have to retract a story or write a correction. It hurts not only our own credibility, but the credibility of our news organization, and ultimately lends credence to the thought that "you can't trust the news."

    This week, I have already had one source - on a story that wasn't even remotely close to controversial - ask me not to "Brian Williams" my story. He said it jokingly, but such a comment still stings because I've worked my butt off for my career, and believe me, it isn't for the money. I don't take people questioning my journalist ethics lightly. Especially when the reason they are questioning it has nothing to do with my work at all.

    It's because of THIS, that the Williams situation IS important to the news industry. When someone as recognized and respected as Williams screws up, it hurts little people like me, because I have to deal with the fallout in the form of public distrust. As my editor is so fond of saying, "S--t flows downhill."

    Whether or not we agree with his "punishment," his actions feed into the "you can't trust the news" mentality. It also casts doubt on all of his other stories and makes you question what else was false. It's no different than the actions of Jayson Blair or Janet Cooke. It's Journalism 101: Don't make up stories. Journalism 101 for real news reporters that is.

    End of rant (i.e. I need more coffee).

    - Courtney

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Courtney, so wonderful to hear from someone 'in the trenches'. I have to admit, I thought that those 3 cable stations had some "news" and some op-ed/host type shows. I didn't realize that they were 100% entertainment. It is obvious that they are pandering to their audience. It's a sorry state of affairs when we as citizens have to double check what we hear/read before we share it(using sources like yours and local papers). Walter Cronkite and William Paley must be rolling in their graves.

      Delete
    2. Thank you Courtney! Honestly--I don't watch much cable news. I'm old school in that I want to hold a newspaper in my hand (and, if I can't, read one online). It might not be immediate (at least the print version), but at least there is a chance that facts are checked and you don't have to print retractions the next day.

      I think part of the problem with Brian Williams is now there is the question if you can trust the news anchor. They are people we invite into our living room--and if they are misrepresenting the news, you have to wonder what else they aren't telling us or why don't think they need to tell us the truth. Would anyone really have felt differently about Brian Williams after he returned from Iraq and said "it was scary, they were shooting at the other helicopters in the area" instead of what he actually said?

      And JoAnn--I think Edward R. Murrow is rolling in his grave, too.

      Delete
    3. Courtney, thank you your comments! Always pleased to read different points of view. I'm not sure that I agree with you that CNN, MSNBC, and Fox are news entertainment. I agree they have a lot of news entertainment shows, they also have very good reporters who have risked their lives, and in one case, lost their life, reporting on stories and doing their best to bring truthful stories to the public. These news networks are watched around the world.
      I do agree that all these news outlets have news entertainment shows and the line between the real news and entertainment is becoming harder to see! It is up to the viewer to be 'news savvy', which, sad to say, is often asking a lot!

      Delete
    4. Courtney, I will admit that I have a difficult time watching almost any news source for too long. Part of this comes from the fact that, at least from my point of view, every news source has bias and presents things with a slant of some sort. That’s because every story has to be told from one perspective or another. This is in no way intended to be an insult to you or to what you do, so I hope you don’t take it that way. Some news sources are far more slanted than others, and those are the ones that we hear about most frequently. I have even often encountered local news coverage that is slanted. It seems that the way that the news is slanted and spun is directly related to the audience that follows it. That makes me think that many of the news reporting agencies are trying to hit their target audience in a way that makes them want to come back for more. In other words, that’s where the entertainment factor comes into play. This leads to sources like both Fox News and MSNBC, as have been both mentioned here already, who are equally ridiculed and reviled from those of the opposing organization’s target audience. The entertainment factor in the news combined with the slant make watching too much news bleak and very depressing. Combine the ever present slant and bias with the already negative stories focused on as part of the entertainment factor, and that makes news seem like a vortex designed to suck out positive energy. But because it’s entertaining, it hits us in a place that makes us feel like we need to keep coming back for more or we are going to miss something vital. So now I ask, what does the fact that people seem drawn to so much negativity because we find it “entertaining” and riveting say about us as society?

      Delete
    5. I wasn't clear in my reply, I don't think that they're 100% entertainment, but when they do news stories, they are "tickling the ears" of their target audience. What frustrates me with the media, is when a story starts appearing on the internet(or our FB friends are sharing it), and you go to check out the facts....some networks don't even cover it, while others beat it to death! On both sides! That's an agenda, not providing info to the public(aka: doing your JOB).
      I know for myself, I lean right...so I "clearly" see left-wing bias on every network, including the 3 non-cable stations. Not as bad as Fox or MSNBC, but I see it. I've watched Good Morning America since day one, when David Hartman was the host. Now the host is George Stephanopoulos!! No political bias there! I will say though, the 3 main networks are really working on that, and it shows. #1, they want some of those Fox ratings, and #2 with the internet, we can see when stories are coming out(like the Lois Lerner emails, for example) and they are not covering them. They're being forced to cover the stories that interest the people, that might cast a negative light on their political favorites. You'd think this was rocket science.
      There is a "funny because it's true" meme on the internet, which has a photo of Obama drinking a Pepsi. The caption says:
      How News Really Works~~
      CNN:Obama appeals to Pepsi fans.
      Fox:Obama declares war on Coke
      MSNBC:In about an hour, we will have live coverage of Obama drinking the best cola. All who disagree are racist.
      BBC: 18 killed in US drone strike in Pakistan.

      And sadly, that's very true. (ps~I hope it was ok to quote that meme on here, if not I'll delete it)

      Delete
    6. I do have to agree with you, JoAnn, in that they are not all designed to be purely entertainment. But they do tend to lean on the stories that are pleasing to their target audience. There are real news stories that they cover, but I find that I have to get the same story from a variety of sources in order to figure out the perspective that I seek. The problem that I run into is that I have to sift through the same negative and depressing stories multiple times to do so. I also agree that the advent of the internet and the increased access it allows us to stories and perspectives can lead to more accountability on the part of news agencies and reporters. It's very difficult to overlook the things that people have access to throughout the internet. But then we can also say that the internet also provides a plethora of sources that are just as questionable (if not more so) as the different spins you described from the meme about President Obama drinking a Pepsi. But we still have to be extra vigilant when it comes to the perspective that the news sources we follow. The way I see it, there is s a news source out there that caters to the perspective of either side. I actually think that it's one of the reasons we see such polarization in the different perspectives of when President Obama drinks a Pepsi. For the people that lean left, they have a news source that always tries to make anything on the right look foolish or elitist. And for those who lean right, they have news outlets that make everything that's on the left look radical or irrational. But I definitely believe that somewhere in the middle, there is the heart of what many news agencies and reporters do in simply presenting the facts and providing people with information, as you put it. A big part of the problem comes when the news reporting agencies turn their agenda into the entertainment factor in order to simply try to boost their ratings.

      Delete
    7. I agree with you Becky. Every news outlet has their audience that they play to, and audiences watch the news source they agree with and report the stories the way they want to hear them! If you want to get as close to the truth as possible, you have to watch a selection of news shows then check the internet. Maybe, just maybe, you will be able to come close to the truth! But then again, you have to recognize the truth when you hear it, which means putting aside your own bias!
      So, when did watching the news become so complicated? I think there has always been bias, but now there are so many more news outlets, so the bias is easy to see. Add to that, the blurring line between news and entertainment, makes watching the news very complicated!

      Delete
    8. It really is more complicated than simply watching in order to get the facts. Like JoAnn said, it's not supposed to be rocket science, but somehow, it requires more than just tuning in to find out the facts. That's an interesting thought that the number of news sources that we have make that bias so much easier to identify, since there are so many options that could present the opposite bias. And it really doesn't help to see the line between news and entertainment blurred so much. Yet, despite these problems, we still need to know what's going on in the world as well as in our own communities. That means that we have to sift through the biases in order to figure out the facts and to formulate our own opinions.

      Delete
    9. Exactly Becky! Sifting through the biases to find the truth, or the closest thing to it, to formulate our own opinions is precisely what we need to do.Unfortunately, most people don't.

      Delete
  15. I finally got a chance to finish watching the show. I hadn't actually realized how much I look forward to the show and Thursdays as I do until I have only been able to catch parts of the show and had to catch up later. I guess I just like things that get my brain working and help prevent brain numbness. And this was, yet again, a very interesting show, so thank you Charlie, Janelle and Annaliesa for making it so.
    When it comes to Brian Williams, I very much agree with the idea that the reaction seems to be complete overkill. Yes, he made a mistake, and it’s one that could easily make people question his credibility as a reporter. But I don’t think that his entire career should be in jeopardy because of his simply being human. It’s not like he woke up one morning and decided that he would completely make up a serious story and pull any details out of thin air. While, yes, he does need to be held to professional standards, it appears that many facets of the media are trying to demonize him and make him the “example of what not to do” by taking drastic measures against him. And, as Courtney discussed, negative news sells more than positive news, so that’s where the major focus lies, even when it is focused on the negative relative to someone directly involved in news reporting.
    In my opinion, he is more of an example of how the line between news and entertainment is very blurred for many TV news stations. I know that’s not the rule for any entity reporting the news, though, and that there are some very legitimate news sources that are there to simply ensure that we get the information pertinent to our lives, our communities and our world. Williams is charismatic yet comes across as trustworthy enough that people will tune in because they want to continue hearing from him about what is happening in the world. The fact that he made a mistake jeopardizes that reputation, and therefore jeopardizes the entertainment factor that will consistently bring viewers back. That’s why I believe that the consequences for him are so harsh, not because he made a mistake, but rather because his mistake could cause people to not want to tune into news he reports since they don't know if they can trust him any more as a reporter.

    ReplyDelete

Charles Shaughnessy on YouTube

Loading...

Followers

Charles Shaughnessy visitors

Total Pageviews