> Catherine Driscoll wrote:
>
> >Surely there is in terms of how it's advertised? There's a difference
> between
> >Lehrer and whatever-is-what-hard-copy-was, surely?
>
> Well yeah, the News Hour is "marketed" (the quotes signifying that
> it's not marketed very aggressively) as serious stuff for serious
> people. But most of the shows that don't approach that level of
> high-minded tedium are looking more & more like O'Reilly - lots of
> shouting, posturing, testosterone. I can't imagine why anyone would
> want to watch the Lehrer show - it's narcotically dull, though
> without the euphoria of narcotics.
OK, but while I get that, O'Reilly is staggeringly content-free. I mean, we just watched an episode which was entirely springer stories, except for the mail bit at the end. I'm not saying I'm shocked. I just want to know how it's placed. Clearly not "news", but far from the LehrerNH as well. I hesitate to call it tabloid, however, because of the address to politics. The mail section was pretty much all war stuff. So...?
Catherine
------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP at ArtsIT: http://admin.arts.usyd.edu.au/horde/imp/