Megan Kelly destroys Sr Editor of Us Weekly .

This guy really deserved what he got here and Fox is probably the only place that would be this critical. Most in the major media need to be called on the exact same thing after their week long, 24/7 bombardment of Mccain and Palin. These propagandists just cant up to scrutiny. I wish Chris Mathews or Keith Olberman would get this sort of treatment.

[edit on 4-9-2008 by Dronetek]

It appears that they only had time to use misleading titles, and spread unsubstantiated rumors. It wasn't intended as a fully sourced, real expose, simply a smear campaign.

Megan ripped him a new one, and exposed how they misrepresented the facts. you go girl!

I have never considered US Weekly a news source. They are on par with the National Enquirer. However I am sure you will agree that we ought to be informed about our candidates for government. Just like watching TV, if you don't like the channel then change it. If you don't like what US Weekly did then don't by the mag and cancel your subscription. nuff said

Originally posted by stikkinikki
I have never considered US Weekly a news source. They are on par with the National Enquirer. However I am sure you will agree that we ought to be informed about our candidates for government. Just like watching TV, if you don't like the channel then change it. If you don't like what US Weekly did then don't by the mag and cancel your subscription. nuff said

The problem is that the supposedly respectable media spent a week going at this 24/7, up until today. I haven't seen much mention since Palin laid the smack down.

It's a rag. That reporter did a good job of nailing him on it.

(Now you guys know how we feel!)

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
It's a rag. That reporter did a good job of nailing him on it.

(Now you guys know how we feel!)

Again, you guys control the media making you the oppressors. We already knew " how you feel".

She grabbed him by his you know what and shook him to his knees.

The magazine deserves this kind of treatment and much more.

Originally posted by Dronetek
I wish Chris Mathews or Keith Olberman would this sort of treatment.

Those two are lost causes. They drank the kool-aide and smoked the hope-ium. There is no objectivity left in them. I used to watch MSNBC for Dan Abrams. But now .. with those two idiots and the rest of them ... bah!

reply to post by FlyersFan


Matthews has completely dismantled whatever reputation he has as an unbiased source of journalism during this election cycle. The entire world knows it. Its good enough punishment for him.

Olbermann?
If their intent was to destroy the credibility of their network in hiring that guy, I'd say they've succeeded quite well.

[edit on 4-9-2008 by vor78]

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Dronetek
I wish Chris Mathews or Keith Olberman would this sort of treatment.

Those two are lost causes. They drank the kool-aide and smoked the hope-ium. There is no objectivity left in them. I used to watch MSNBC for Dan Abrams. But now .. with those two idiots and the rest of them ... bah!

No, I totally agree. I meat that I wish someone would give them that sort of treatment. They wouldn't know what to do and probably get up and leave.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic



It's a rag that millions of people see the cover of in checkout aisles. It's horrible journalistic standards to put out such a headline and then claim "but you are missing the point". We got the point of the piece, which was to attempt a smear of someone with shoddy journalism.

What if they had done the same to Obama at the start of the primaries when no one really knew him. Wright, Ayres and Rezko would have sunk him.

One media slut calling another one out.

That's hypocritical.

All MSM is guilty of salacious, unethical journalism.

Megan Kelly is just as guilty as the Editor.

It is cool to see a beating though

bweuh, just another sign that fox loves the republicans.

faux news didn't mention anything about that racist Obama magazine cover some time ago.

I am so glad I cancelled my cable over a year ago.

Originally posted by Grey Magic
bweuh, just another sign that fox loves the republicans.

faux news didn't mention anything about that racist Obama magazine cover some time ago.

I am so glad I cancelled my cable over a year ago.

Should have kept the cable. Fox did discuss it.

How did this Faux reporter "Destroy" the Us Weekly guy?
I'm not seeing it. When I think "Destroy" I think "Holy crap! The reporter made someone speechless, or cry!"...If anything it's exactly the opposite. I love the Us Weekly guy's last line which is a well crafted crack at the Faux viewership: "I hope your viewers will read the magazine so they can make up their own minds"!!!!!!!! LOL!!!!!

Good for you Us Weekly guy!

Faux News.....Fair and Balanced

If an article isn't too their (Faux) liking (re: All good things about Palinazi) it's not "Fair and Balanced" to them.

But the Us Weekly article itself is fair and balanced, and it brings up the rumors and bad things as well as complimentary/good things about Palinazi. You can't get any more "Fair" or "Balanced" than that!

[edit on 9/4/2008 by justme2]

Megan Kelly really did her job.

Too bad we haven't seen that more consistently from the network over the last 8 years.

[edit on 4-9-2008 by loam]

reply to post by loam


Fox has been doing this for years. The reason the conservatives do not recognize it is that their case is often so weak there is no way to possibly defend it rationaly. Thats when they bring in Bill Olielly.

And I agree that MSNBC does it at well, but at least the facts are usually on their side. I love Keith but I think he over does it sometimes. Chris is almost always objective except when the facts say otherwise.

Not much anyone can do except turn off the tv and come to abovetopsecret. Wait a minute though, the same crap happens here as well. Hell, I even do it occasionally. Sorry about that SkepticOverlord.

Originally posted by Dronetek

Originally posted by stikkinikki
I have never considered US Weekly a news source. They are on par with the National Enquirer. However I am sure you will agree that we ought to be informed about our candidates for government. Just like watching TV, if you don't like the channel then change it. If you don't like what US Weekly did then don't by the mag and cancel your subscription. nuff said

The problem is that the supposedly respectable media spent a week going at this 24/7, up until today. I haven't seen much mention since Palin laid the smack down.

Talk about a Smack down. Did you see how Obama was acting on Thursday? I could not believe that we were looking at the same Barack we had come to know for the last nine months. He was acting so humbled, and all he could say about Palin was that she was not telling the truth about him and what he said before.

Even Obama's spokesperson was just caught in a huge contradiction from their official position not one week ago. One week ago the Obama campaign attacked Sarah Palin as being someone who was not ready for, and could not handle insider Washington, D.C., all because she was "only" a "Small-town Mayor" (Despite her currently being a Governor of Alaska obviously). YET, just yesterday the very same Spokesperson claimed that Sarah Palin sounded very much like an insider, and would fit right in with the Washington folks. I am certain this was meant as an insult, but considering the previous weeks attack, it came off as a HUGE compliment.

Since Ronald Reagan I have never seen a politician just come out of the woodwork and lay the opposition upside down, sideways, spin them around, smack them up like a rag doll, and drag them off a cliff, all with a smile.

It looks like Us Weekly is catching hell for it. They're apparently getting pummelled by people cancelling their subscriptions, possibly as many as 10,000 in the first 24 hours after they released the cover. Serves them right.

Article

Upset might be an understatement: One Us advertiser has admitted that they’ve received calls from angry former subscribers threatening to boycott their products. “(Us publisher) Jann Wenner supports Obama, Wenner media decided to follow the buzz around Palin before her speech, and now subscribers feel like a vote has been cast on their behalf," says another magazine editor. “It’s going to be tough to bounce back from this one. Especially if the advertisers get involved. If they get nervous, that can hurt all of us.”

Guess they won't do that again.