>Thanks Kelley
>
>Do you think O'R himself presents the show as "journalism" or
>as "entertainment"? It seems to me like it's a bit of both, but I'm not
>sure I
>have all the necessary context. Partly that's because there's a more local
>context than I'm confident saying anything about, and partly because -- in
>that
>context -- the distinction seems to be changing (again).
neither. it's editorial/op-ed. I think you have to put it in the US journalism context where news is supposed to be objective, neutral, unemotional. The editorial and op-ed pages are where people take sides and drop the facade of neutrality. It's aired directlly their news hour, across from Connie Chung's show. Whereas Chung's show seems to be a "news behind the news" or "news in-depth" pretense to journalism, O'Reilly isn't that at all. And it's not Larry King, which people who identify with Faux seem to view as a Lib'rul stooge.
When you say tabloid--what kinds of shows do you mean? Entertainment Tonight? Springer?
kelley