Thursday, April 19, 2007
Big Ed Schultz Jumps on the I-Hate-NBC Bandwagon
OK, I can't stand the fat lump, radio talk show poser, faux-leftie, Ed Schultz, but I have my reasons. Today, he opened his show with a monologue about NBC's airing last night of the video made by the Virginia Tech gunman, Cho Seung-Hu, and criticizing NBC for doing so.
He keeps asking what was added to the the story other than "added grief," etc. Maybe, since Ed isn't a journalist, somebody should clue him in. The video is news, you idiot, big news. The video manifesto was produced by the killer after he had killed one person and was on his way to kill more. It brings up plenty of questions, most remarkably, where were the police for an hour and a half while this nutjob was making this video?
NBC had the video, photos and text as they were FedEx'ed to their headquarters in New York. They had them exclusive of all other media outlets. NBC apparently ran them by the FBI, who said they had no problem with NBC airing the video and reporting it. What was NBC to do, admit they had it, explain that they aren't airing it out of "sensitivity" to the parents, and just recap, with no photos and no video?
In case fat boy Ed and any of the other morons criticizing NBC haven't noticed, NBC is in the television news business. Video is their lifeline and exclusive video is like a bag of fresh plasma. Any other network would have done the same thing and rightfully so. The media exists to cover news and report events without bias. This video was enormous and NBC would have been chastised roundly if they hadn't aired it.
Sure, the video was distasteful, nasty and played to the most morbid interests, but it may provide some insight into the perpetrator and may provide researchers with some insight into the mind of a deranged killer. Maybe that information may lead to preventing of this kind of rampage happening again.
Ed is criticizing Matt Lauer and Brian Williams, two of NBC's top newsmen, and Steve Capus, president of the news division, for running their business in a prudent manner and defending that decision. Big Ed would have done exactly the same thing, because he, just like Williams and Lauer, is a poser, just not such a big one as those network biggies.
He wishes he was, and since people are critical of NBC out of sympathy towards the parents of the victims, Ed's jumped on that particular bandwagon today, because that's the money side of the issue, the side with which most of his listeners will agree. What a windbag, perfectly willing to be blown about by popular opinion. Maybe he should go on American Idol.
I'm not necessarily a big fan of NBC news or any of the mainstream outlets, but I'd much rather have those people making decisions on what to air than an unsophisticated midwestern hick who pretends to know what's right and wrong in the news business. Ed's a talk show host, not a journalist, and as such, he should stay out of the fire lest he get burned.
He's gotten a whole three callers agreeing with him after 45 minutes and he's still saying, "I think I'm right on this one..." Maybe not, chubby. NBC was right and you're, as usual, wrong.
UPDATE: At 2:27 pm Eastern, Ed Schultz zays live on the air, "I think Americans are split on this issue, how about hand guns?" suggesting that listener feedback on the NBC airing of the killer video didn't fit his profile (i.e., people disagreed with him) and that he has to switch topics to keep his listeners. What a simpleton,
He keeps asking what was added to the the story other than "added grief," etc. Maybe, since Ed isn't a journalist, somebody should clue him in. The video is news, you idiot, big news. The video manifesto was produced by the killer after he had killed one person and was on his way to kill more. It brings up plenty of questions, most remarkably, where were the police for an hour and a half while this nutjob was making this video?
NBC had the video, photos and text as they were FedEx'ed to their headquarters in New York. They had them exclusive of all other media outlets. NBC apparently ran them by the FBI, who said they had no problem with NBC airing the video and reporting it. What was NBC to do, admit they had it, explain that they aren't airing it out of "sensitivity" to the parents, and just recap, with no photos and no video?
In case fat boy Ed and any of the other morons criticizing NBC haven't noticed, NBC is in the television news business. Video is their lifeline and exclusive video is like a bag of fresh plasma. Any other network would have done the same thing and rightfully so. The media exists to cover news and report events without bias. This video was enormous and NBC would have been chastised roundly if they hadn't aired it.
Sure, the video was distasteful, nasty and played to the most morbid interests, but it may provide some insight into the perpetrator and may provide researchers with some insight into the mind of a deranged killer. Maybe that information may lead to preventing of this kind of rampage happening again.
Ed is criticizing Matt Lauer and Brian Williams, two of NBC's top newsmen, and Steve Capus, president of the news division, for running their business in a prudent manner and defending that decision. Big Ed would have done exactly the same thing, because he, just like Williams and Lauer, is a poser, just not such a big one as those network biggies.
He wishes he was, and since people are critical of NBC out of sympathy towards the parents of the victims, Ed's jumped on that particular bandwagon today, because that's the money side of the issue, the side with which most of his listeners will agree. What a windbag, perfectly willing to be blown about by popular opinion. Maybe he should go on American Idol.
I'm not necessarily a big fan of NBC news or any of the mainstream outlets, but I'd much rather have those people making decisions on what to air than an unsophisticated midwestern hick who pretends to know what's right and wrong in the news business. Ed's a talk show host, not a journalist, and as such, he should stay out of the fire lest he get burned.
He's gotten a whole three callers agreeing with him after 45 minutes and he's still saying, "I think I'm right on this one..." Maybe not, chubby. NBC was right and you're, as usual, wrong.
UPDATE: At 2:27 pm Eastern, Ed Schultz zays live on the air, "I think Americans are split on this issue, how about hand guns?" suggesting that listener feedback on the NBC airing of the killer video didn't fit his profile (i.e., people disagreed with him) and that he has to switch topics to keep his listeners. What a simpleton,
Labels: Ed schultz, Virginia Tech
Monday, March 26, 2007
Fat Ed's Heels Go Down
Once again, it's time to report on my favorite radio goon, Ed Schultz. Now, anyone who's been reading my posts for a while understand that I am a serious media critic and generally call a spade a spade. After calling out Tim Russert and the producers of "Meet the Press" last week for having Tom DeLay on their air, Schultz (and every other talker out there) chimed in on the issue, proving that one does not have to be especially sharp to be a radio talk show host.
What brings me back to Fat Ed again was the superb job the Georgetown Hoyas did on the North Carolina Tar Heels on Sunday, winning in overtime to advance to the Final Four.
While that was, in my estimation, the best game of the tournament thus far, I was overcome with joy that not only are the Hoyas my pick to win the NCAA Tournament, but they advanced past the pick of Fat Ed, the Tar Heels.
So today, Eddie actually opened his show with a denunciation of North Carolina, which means that the shameless self-promoter won't get any more mileage out of his pick to win the tourney. Ed had picked the Tar Heels only because he is headed to North Carolina in mid-April, and being the unrepentant shill that he is, picked them to win it all.
What an a$$-hole. The Tar Heels don't need fair-weather fans like Ed Schultz. I hope they boo him off the stage when he does his little meet and greet in April.
What brings me back to Fat Ed again was the superb job the Georgetown Hoyas did on the North Carolina Tar Heels on Sunday, winning in overtime to advance to the Final Four.
While that was, in my estimation, the best game of the tournament thus far, I was overcome with joy that not only are the Hoyas my pick to win the NCAA Tournament, but they advanced past the pick of Fat Ed, the Tar Heels.
So today, Eddie actually opened his show with a denunciation of North Carolina, which means that the shameless self-promoter won't get any more mileage out of his pick to win the tourney. Ed had picked the Tar Heels only because he is headed to North Carolina in mid-April, and being the unrepentant shill that he is, picked them to win it all.
What an a$$-hole. The Tar Heels don't need fair-weather fans like Ed Schultz. I hope they boo him off the stage when he does his little meet and greet in April.
Labels: Ed schultz, progressive, talk radio
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Ed Schultz, the Pet Food Shill
Radio talk show host Big Ed Schultz was noticeably not on top of the news yesterday regarding the gigantic pet food recall involving Canadian company Menu Foods Inc., a supplier to more than 50 brand names of dog food and 40 brand names of cat food.
Could it be that Ed exercises selective editorial control as one of the show's major advertisers is one of the biggest brand names in the pet food business - the Purina company?
I'd say that's a good guess, since Ed Schultz has already been identified as a self-promoting, business-first kind of "progressive" who leans towards the money side of issues. In other words, if it's good for Ed's business, it makes the show. Alternately, Ed would not want to alienate an advertiser even though Purina's pet foods aren't even involved in the recall.
Considering Big Ed's propensity for the outdoors and his love for the family dog, Buck (frequently mentioned on the show), it's difficult to imagine the big guy simply missing the story.
This is just more proof that Ed Schultz isn't really a progressive, but nothing more than a paid shill for whatever advertiser offers him enough money - or in this case, a paid censor.
Could it be that Ed exercises selective editorial control as one of the show's major advertisers is one of the biggest brand names in the pet food business - the Purina company?
I'd say that's a good guess, since Ed Schultz has already been identified as a self-promoting, business-first kind of "progressive" who leans towards the money side of issues. In other words, if it's good for Ed's business, it makes the show. Alternately, Ed would not want to alienate an advertiser even though Purina's pet foods aren't even involved in the recall.
Considering Big Ed's propensity for the outdoors and his love for the family dog, Buck (frequently mentioned on the show), it's difficult to imagine the big guy simply missing the story.
This is just more proof that Ed Schultz isn't really a progressive, but nothing more than a paid shill for whatever advertiser offers him enough money - or in this case, a paid censor.
Labels: Ed schultz
Thursday, March 08, 2007
Ed Schultz: Serial Chest-Thumper
Being one myself, I give a certain amount of latitude to self-promoters. But overdoing anything can grate on one's good side and the non-stop self-praise that comes from the mouth of progressive radio talk show host Ed Schultz is so far over the top as to be onerous.
Ed never misses a chance to pimp himself to his listeners, even though they've heard it from him ad nauseum. He flaunted his ranking as the #5 choice in Talkers magazine Heavy Hundred. I had to remind Ed that he's keeping company with a crop of loudmouth lying losers from the right, aka Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage and their ilk. How good a survey can it be, touting "the most influential talk show hosts" when Limbaugh, Hannity and Savage are preaching to a conservative choir that's diminished to 20-30% of the population?
Real liberals didn't show up in the survey until Randi Rhodes at #13. When it comes to influence, I'd put Randi far beyond "Big Eddie" because while he does get some name guests (mostly elected politicians), Randi offers far and away a production that's smarter and better-researched than his. And ranking nitwit Glen Beck above her proves the survey is seriously flawed. The Talkers' editors even admit "Aside from the hosts whose sheer numbers and fame demand their inclusion on this list, the selection process is subjective..."
But any reasoned analysis failed to dissuade Schultz from talking himself up for a week or so. It was disgusting.
Ed also never fails to mention - at least twice per hour and complete with clips - from any appearance on anyone else's show. He shows up alot on Larry King Live, which should explain much. Schultz is palatable to the right because he's only leaning to the left. He really doesn't have any identifiable convictions beyond making sure he never misses a meal or an opportunity to pimp himself or, even more whoresome, one of his program sponsors.
I recently had the good fortune of exchanging some email with Big Ed himself (or, hisself, as he would say in his faux redneck accent). Here's the transcript:
-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Gagliano [mailto:fr@dtmagazine.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 1:31 PM
To: ed@edschultzshow.com
Subject: You're a huckster, shameless self-promoter
Ed,
Whatever Howard Stern said about your show sucking eggs, he was probably right. Since your meltdown about Air-America a few weeks ago and the departure of Al Franken, we here in Rochester have been subjected to your daily middle of the road, wishy-washy opinions from noon until 3:00 pm on WROC 950. Thankfully, you're bookended by the soul sisters of the left, Stephanie Miller and Randi Rhodes, so I only have to tune out 1/3 of the time.
I've contacted the station and have requested that your time slot be changed to Thom Hartman, a real progressive with a functioning mind, rather than the daily blather you produce. I mean really, who gives a crap about college kids downloading music, or less-fattening food in schools or, for that matter, who's winning the stupid race for president in '08. It's a year to the first primary for god's sake.
You are nothing more than a loudmouth panderer who serves at the behest of your advertisers. Just today you revealed yourself when you mentioned that you wrote a book to "promote yourself" or something to that effect, and to make money. It's not the primary reason most people produce works of art, something you obviously know little about.
YOU write books to make money. You run your mouth on the radio to make money. I'm certain that you would champion any cause that would improve your ratings. Basically, you've sold out to commercial interests and aren't worth listening to. While I wish you well, I wish you were off my air. And please, don't get into the March Madness stuff, something you know nothing about. I mentioned you on my web site last year and you couldn't return the favor with so much as a mention. It's a two-way street, Ed. I'll see you on my way up. You'll be going in the opposite direction.
OHHHHHH! I'm #5 in Talker's Hot 100. Big freaking deal. Do you see who's ahead of you? Nice company you keep.
Regards,
Rick Gagliano
Downtown Magazine
http://www.dtmagazine.com
Ed Schultz wrote:
Rick…Can you send me that magazine so I can it use while sitting
On the toilet.
ed
-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Gagliano [mailto:fr@dtmagazine.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 1:52 PM
To: Ed Schultz
Subject: Re: You're a huckster, shameless self-promoter
Your response proves what a self-possessed, self-important ass-hole you are.
---------------------------------
Ed Schultz wrote:
Rick….Now be nice…at least it would be read….then flushed like your attitude.
ed
---------------------------------
Yes, I called him an ass-hole, but only after he expressed a desire to read my magazine on the toilet - a slur for sure.
Ed's got a big head, but it pales in comparison to the size of his gut. He, he, it's my blog, I get the last laugh.
Ed never misses a chance to pimp himself to his listeners, even though they've heard it from him ad nauseum. He flaunted his ranking as the #5 choice in Talkers magazine Heavy Hundred. I had to remind Ed that he's keeping company with a crop of loudmouth lying losers from the right, aka Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage and their ilk. How good a survey can it be, touting "the most influential talk show hosts" when Limbaugh, Hannity and Savage are preaching to a conservative choir that's diminished to 20-30% of the population?
Real liberals didn't show up in the survey until Randi Rhodes at #13. When it comes to influence, I'd put Randi far beyond "Big Eddie" because while he does get some name guests (mostly elected politicians), Randi offers far and away a production that's smarter and better-researched than his. And ranking nitwit Glen Beck above her proves the survey is seriously flawed. The Talkers' editors even admit "Aside from the hosts whose sheer numbers and fame demand their inclusion on this list, the selection process is subjective..."
But any reasoned analysis failed to dissuade Schultz from talking himself up for a week or so. It was disgusting.
Ed also never fails to mention - at least twice per hour and complete with clips - from any appearance on anyone else's show. He shows up alot on Larry King Live, which should explain much. Schultz is palatable to the right because he's only leaning to the left. He really doesn't have any identifiable convictions beyond making sure he never misses a meal or an opportunity to pimp himself or, even more whoresome, one of his program sponsors.
I recently had the good fortune of exchanging some email with Big Ed himself (or, hisself, as he would say in his faux redneck accent). Here's the transcript:
-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Gagliano [mailto:fr@dtmagazine.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 1:31 PM
To: ed@edschultzshow.com
Subject: You're a huckster, shameless self-promoter
Ed,
Whatever Howard Stern said about your show sucking eggs, he was probably right. Since your meltdown about Air-America a few weeks ago and the departure of Al Franken, we here in Rochester have been subjected to your daily middle of the road, wishy-washy opinions from noon until 3:00 pm on WROC 950. Thankfully, you're bookended by the soul sisters of the left, Stephanie Miller and Randi Rhodes, so I only have to tune out 1/3 of the time.
I've contacted the station and have requested that your time slot be changed to Thom Hartman, a real progressive with a functioning mind, rather than the daily blather you produce. I mean really, who gives a crap about college kids downloading music, or less-fattening food in schools or, for that matter, who's winning the stupid race for president in '08. It's a year to the first primary for god's sake.
You are nothing more than a loudmouth panderer who serves at the behest of your advertisers. Just today you revealed yourself when you mentioned that you wrote a book to "promote yourself" or something to that effect, and to make money. It's not the primary reason most people produce works of art, something you obviously know little about.
YOU write books to make money. You run your mouth on the radio to make money. I'm certain that you would champion any cause that would improve your ratings. Basically, you've sold out to commercial interests and aren't worth listening to. While I wish you well, I wish you were off my air. And please, don't get into the March Madness stuff, something you know nothing about. I mentioned you on my web site last year and you couldn't return the favor with so much as a mention. It's a two-way street, Ed. I'll see you on my way up. You'll be going in the opposite direction.
OHHHHHH! I'm #5 in Talker's Hot 100. Big freaking deal. Do you see who's ahead of you? Nice company you keep.
Regards,
Rick Gagliano
Downtown Magazine
http://www.dtmagazine.com
Ed Schultz wrote:
Rick…Can you send me that magazine so I can it use while sitting
On the toilet.
ed
-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Gagliano [mailto:fr@dtmagazine.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 1:52 PM
To: Ed Schultz
Subject: Re: You're a huckster, shameless self-promoter
Your response proves what a self-possessed, self-important ass-hole you are.
---------------------------------
Ed Schultz wrote:
Rick….Now be nice…at least it would be read….then flushed like your attitude.
ed
---------------------------------
Yes, I called him an ass-hole, but only after he expressed a desire to read my magazine on the toilet - a slur for sure.
Ed's got a big head, but it pales in comparison to the size of his gut. He, he, it's my blog, I get the last laugh.
Labels: Ed schultz, Randi Rhodes
