HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » calimary » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 51 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Female
Home country: USA
Current location: Oregon
Member since: 2001
Number of posts: 68,522

About Me

Female. Retired. Wife-Mom-Grandma. Approx. 30 years in broadcasting, at least 20 of those in news biz. Taurus. Loves chocolate - preferably without nuts or cocoanut. Animal lover. Rock-hound from pre-school age. Proud Democrat for life. Ardent environmentalist and pro-choicer. Hoping to use my skills set for the greater good. Still married to the same guy for 40+ years. Probably because he's a proud Democrat, too. Penmanship absolutely stinks, so I'm glad I'm a fast typist! I will always love Hillary and she will always be my President.

Journal Archives

I'm coming at this from the base line of being a Clinton supporter, but

it confuses me when I see this - that there's a sense of the Sanders campaign being almost ignored by the mainstream media. Seriously? I find that astounding. To me it seemed rather glaringly the opposite.

I mostly watch MSNBC. And some CNN. NEVER Pox Noise, of course. For some reason, my husband and I stopped watching the "Big 3" networks a long time ago. Today neither of us has any clue what shows are on prime time on any night on any network. We're always on alternative channels. But on MSNBC, please forgive me saying this but I felt it was Hillary getting SEVERELY short shrift. Week after week, I felt like people like Chris Hayes and others on MSNBC were almost literally trying to jam Bernie Sanders down my throat.

I actually grew not to like Chris Hayes in particular, because of that. Show after show, I'd sit there and grouse to my husband - "shit, does he EVER cover Hillary? Oh great. Yet ANOTHER interview coming up with Bernie Sanders. Is this a weekly feature now? How long has it been since he had Hillary on?" Almost everything Chris Hayes said had some sort of Bernie angle to it, or how this compared to Bernie, or what Bernie was doing about such-and-such, or what Bernie said about this or that, or somehow related back to Bernie. Even a quickie network promo that briefly featured him (maybe for a mere three seconds) showed him as part of a panel where, sure enough, he was bringing up Bernie Sanders. His interview with Ilyse Hogue of NARAL was stunning! He pushed and pushed and pushed, to the point where I felt he had to have made some bet, off-screen, that he could flip her to Bernie right there live on the air. But as the interview dragged on, and she held firm, his facial expression actually turned visibly darker and darker, and more and more concerned, she wouldn't budge, and he finally gave up. Frankly, sometimes I couldn't help but suspect that what Chris Hayes was really doing on his show was auditioning to become White House Press Secretary in a Bernie Sanders administration. Hey, it's happened before. Ron Nessen certainly made the jump from network news to White House Press Secretary - for Gerald Ford. Again, my own personal bias here as a Hillary supporter. SO much more attention seems to have been paid to Bernie Sanders that sometimes I just couldn't even watch anything anymore, out of sheer frustration.

I still don't understand how anyone could think Bernie got short shrift in the media. Quite the contrary. To me it felt strongly as though some anchors and reporters were quite literally obsessed with him.

EVERY convention gets a bounce of some sort.

But I agree with you NYC Liberal. Judging from this, as well as the favorable comparisons and terrific reviews across the board, the Dems' convention bounce is likely to be substantial! I expect it to be very corrective of last week. Trump got what I've seen described as a moderate bounce. The Dems' bounce will likely wipe that out completely.

HAH! My husband's been referring to "short Donald."

Objectively here - it's MOST intriguing to study the way these folks are LIT.

It's the LIGHTING.

I've covered a fair number of celebrities, on sets, in dressing rooms, as part of my last news-related job. I noticed that when Andrea Mitchell is in studio, you don't see as much of the flaws in her face as you do when she's out on the stump somewhere. It's the LIGHTING.

I once invited an older actress onto a local cable show I had. Her first question was - "how'd the lighting? I'd have to see how I'm going to be lit." I was perplexed by that - until I drilled down into it a little and then completely understood the concern. OF COURSE someone in the public eye would be focused on how he or she was lit! Particularly someone whose appearance matters, professionally. Lighting is amazing, what it can do - and the flaws it can mask and diminish. You might assume this was just a picky little superficial thing. I certainly did, at first. But when you think about it, it really does make a difference. And then when you SEE it, well, as the cliche goes - seeing is believing.

One down, one more to go!


Meh, fuck 'em.

NOTHING's gonna ruin my mood tonight. Particularly the pouters calling in to CSPAN.

Yep. Gotta give it to her. This was VERY well done.

And if you compare it to last week, it was a world-class TRIUMPH. A total GRAND SLAM! She left us with a happy ending, for sure!

Re: the balloons

"Look at that pile of balloons! I can't believe there aren't people under there!" - Rachel Maddow

Well, it figures! They're against choice, so why wouldn't this be true, too?

Shit - I was all ready to get mad!

You got me!

Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 51 Next »