Full Version: Network and Cable News Hosts
I’ve never liked Joe Scarborough, but I’ve watched him nearly every night, just to get a capsule version of what the “right” is up to. Scarborough has a new book out entitled Rome Wasn’t Burnt in a Day. In the book Scarborough takes on leadership of his party, the Republican Party, over the issue of fiscal responsibility. I have no problem with writing a book on this or any other subject. What concerns me is that Scarborough has and is using his MSNBC television show Scarborough Country to hawk his book. In the interest of fairness, I know others have done the same thing. I was not on this board at that time, so I'm using him as the most recent exmple.
The above quote was from last night’s Scarborough Country.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5962283/
Additionally, the book is featured prominently on Scarborough home page. See link below:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/
Three hours earlier, Scarborough was on Hardball pushing the book. I don’t have any problem with that. Hardball is a different show with a different host.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5962170/
I’m not interested in posting this as a specific attack on Scarborough. I’m using him as the most recent example. As I said earlier, others have done this before. I want it to address the questions in a general way, though you might want to use other examples, just as I have used Scarborough.
QUESTIONS FOR DEBATE
1. Is promotion of books by authors on their own network or cable news program unethical or a conflict of interest?
2. Why or why not?
3 If yes, what remedy do you propose?
QUOTE
SCARBOROUGH: No, it‘s not a Tom Clancy best-seller. It‘s not a thriller. It‘s my new book, “Rome Wasn‘t Burnt in a Day,” my account of how you are getting the shaft by beltway barbarians.
The above quote was from last night’s Scarborough Country.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5962283/
Additionally, the book is featured prominently on Scarborough home page. See link below:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/
Three hours earlier, Scarborough was on Hardball pushing the book. I don’t have any problem with that. Hardball is a different show with a different host.
QUOTE
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL.
Joe Scarborough is taking on the Republicans, his own party, in his new book, “Rome Wasn‘t Burnt in a Day: The Real Deal on How Politicians, Bureaucrats, and Other Washington Barbarians are Bankrupting America.”
Joe Scarborough is taking on the Republicans, his own party, in his new book, “Rome Wasn‘t Burnt in a Day: The Real Deal on How Politicians, Bureaucrats, and Other Washington Barbarians are Bankrupting America.”
QUOTE
MATTHEWS: Because you were ready to take our your leadership any time we had you on.
SCARBOROUGH: And I wasn‘t taking on my leadership to take on my leadership. I was just telling the truth. I was the master of the obvious.
SCARBOROUGH: And I wasn‘t taking on my leadership to take on my leadership. I was just telling the truth. I was the master of the obvious.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5962170/
I’m not interested in posting this as a specific attack on Scarborough. I’m using him as the most recent example. As I said earlier, others have done this before. I want it to address the questions in a general way, though you might want to use other examples, just as I have used Scarborough.
QUESTIONS FOR DEBATE
1. Is promotion of books by authors on their own network or cable news program unethical or a conflict of interest?
2. Why or why not?
3 If yes, what remedy do you propose?
1. Is promotion of books by authors on their own network or cable news program unethical or a conflict of interest?
I think it is unethical. I don't see it as a conflict of interest, however. Pat Robertson is doing this now with "The 700 Club" and his new book on the Supreme Court. Since he is merely an opinionist, hawking his book is fine. The book is full of opinions as well. I haven't read it (nor will I, since from the advertisements alone I know he doesn't understand the point of the judicial branch of the government).
2. Why or why not?
It's not ethical because they're being paid for the show. Most advertisers have to pay the network for airtime. Since the hosts are being paid by the network, promoting their personal books should really anger the net-execs.
3 If yes, what remedy do you propose?
If yes to what? I don't propose any remedy. They can do whatever they want. It's up to the networks to deal with it. Sean Hannity can tout his "Deliver Us From Evil" book all he wants on Fox News, but that doesn't make him any more credible. It makes him more of a corporate sell-out, in my opinion (I didn't think it was possible, but there you go).
Hmmm, now that I think about it... did you mean REAL news people?
I think it is unethical. I don't see it as a conflict of interest, however. Pat Robertson is doing this now with "The 700 Club" and his new book on the Supreme Court. Since he is merely an opinionist, hawking his book is fine. The book is full of opinions as well. I haven't read it (nor will I, since from the advertisements alone I know he doesn't understand the point of the judicial branch of the government).
2. Why or why not?
It's not ethical because they're being paid for the show. Most advertisers have to pay the network for airtime. Since the hosts are being paid by the network, promoting their personal books should really anger the net-execs.
3 If yes, what remedy do you propose?
If yes to what? I don't propose any remedy. They can do whatever they want. It's up to the networks to deal with it. Sean Hannity can tout his "Deliver Us From Evil" book all he wants on Fox News, but that doesn't make him any more credible. It makes him more of a corporate sell-out, in my opinion (I didn't think it was possible, but there you go).
Hmmm, now that I think about it... did you mean REAL news people?
It is really a non-issue with me. The real impact of his book will be minimal at best. A bigger threat would lie not in the few impressionable fans who are energetic enough to read a book like his but rather could lie with the majority of the American electorate that will enter a voting booth in November and pull a lever based on what these shows tell them. That is if they can remember what was said between all the commercial breaks for Levitra, Cialis, Viagra and Claritin. (Is there ANY wonder why the U.S. pays MORE for the SAME drugs - made in the same plants that Canadians buy at 60% off?)
Between the flood of "election books" written by supposed insiders and the 527's, the public has little chance of understanding how much money politicians are paid by industries to cheat taxpayers. Arrrgh!
For Joe Scarborough to hawk his book on the air is of little consequence. If he weren't doing it, we would still be innundated with what used to be called a "press" or "publicity" tour complete with book signings.
It has about as much impact on my life and on my otherwise poor opinion of Scarborough as the appeal I have for going to a Dixie Chick album-crushing soiree.
Right up there with tickets to a Tractor Pull or a WWF World Championship.
Between the flood of "election books" written by supposed insiders and the 527's, the public has little chance of understanding how much money politicians are paid by industries to cheat taxpayers. Arrrgh!
For Joe Scarborough to hawk his book on the air is of little consequence. If he weren't doing it, we would still be innundated with what used to be called a "press" or "publicity" tour complete with book signings.
It has about as much impact on my life and on my otherwise poor opinion of Scarborough as the appeal I have for going to a Dixie Chick album-crushing soiree.
Right up there with tickets to a Tractor Pull or a WWF World Championship.
Is promotion of books by authors on their own network or cable news program unethical or a conflict of interest?
I've been watching the same thing, BoF, and it occurred to me that he was almost being a shameless shill about his book. I have to give him credit for talking about the national debt, which no one else is paying attention to.
2. Why or why not?
Is it a conflict of interest? Well, thats a good question. What is the purpose of his show, exactly? He's known to be a conservative Republican, he was elected to congress in '94(?), so for the network to give him airtime like they do, they must have struck some kind of deal.
If the network told him he had be completely fair regarding his debate of the issues, he would be in real trouble. But since he seems to be in charge and favors a conservative agenda, which this week has been talking about deficit spending, it would appear the shilling of his book is his only chance of selling it.
Should there be a remedy for this? Yes. Don't watch it, and tell MSNBC to cancel his show. Ignore it and hope it will go away.
If the restaurant closed, it must be because nobody wanted to eat there. - me
"Nobody wants to eat in an empty restaurant" - tom leykis
I've been watching the same thing, BoF, and it occurred to me that he was almost being a shameless shill about his book. I have to give him credit for talking about the national debt, which no one else is paying attention to.
2. Why or why not?
Is it a conflict of interest? Well, thats a good question. What is the purpose of his show, exactly? He's known to be a conservative Republican, he was elected to congress in '94(?), so for the network to give him airtime like they do, they must have struck some kind of deal.
If the network told him he had be completely fair regarding his debate of the issues, he would be in real trouble. But since he seems to be in charge and favors a conservative agenda, which this week has been talking about deficit spending, it would appear the shilling of his book is his only chance of selling it.
Should there be a remedy for this? Yes. Don't watch it, and tell MSNBC to cancel his show. Ignore it and hope it will go away.
If the restaurant closed, it must be because nobody wanted to eat there. - me
"Nobody wants to eat in an empty restaurant" - tom leykis
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.