Why not just apologize Bill? And then just move on - admit it was a stupid thing to say and just be done with it. Because racist or not…intentional or not…one thing is indisputable…it was a stupid thing to say…

Uh oh…

The Miami Herald’s Glenn Garvin blogs about the whole O’Reilly incident and takes a shot at CNN’s Rick Sanchez…

The cheapest shot of all comes from CNN’s Rick Sanchez, who — referring to a movie about white sexual fantasies about blacks — told the Washington Post that O’Reilly was using “the Mandingo argument…that there’s a big, bad African American out there that we all need protection from.” That’s a startlingly dumb summation of O’Reilly’s argument, but what Sanchez really ought to be ashamed of is the way he allowed a guest on his show to engage in a driveby sliming of the NPR correspondent Juan Williams. (I told you we’d get back to him.)

Williams, a former Washington Post columnist, is author of Eyes on The Prize, a best-selling history of the civil rights movement that he adapted into a documentary that won an Emmy and was nominated for an Oscar. Stanford history professor Clay Carson, the editor of Martin Luther King Jr.’s papers, called it “the principal film account of the most important American social justice movement of the 20th century.” Yet Sanchez stood by without comment or protest Wednesday night when one of his guests called Williams “the eternal happy Negro” whose role on O’Reilly’s show was “to congratulate him on his racism.”

Way to elevate the conversation, Rick. I guess this means it’s okay for Lou Dobbs, next time you’re debating immigration, to call you a wetback

CNN’s Rick Sanchez is addressing the O’Reilly incident again tonight on Out in the Open…

Here’s a higlight from Jesse Jackson’s appearance on The O’Reilly Factor which is airing now…

JACKSON: Well, I think the real point here is to get beyond the smashing — kind of smashing.

O’REILLY: You can’t unless you speak out against it. Unless you condemn what Media Matters and CNN did, you, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton, as well, unless you guys came out and said — and I think you have said this in the public. I read it. “O’Reilly didn’t say anything racist at all. This is diverting attention from the real issue.” You’ve got to do that.

JACKSON: I think the issue about you and your view of civility in Harlem was — thought was not nearly as insensitive as…

O’REILLY: Wasn’t at all (ph).
(more…)

Here’s a chart showing in Live ratings the Demo problems which CNBC has been facing in September so far. Scratches are in red. I apologize for the legibility trouble but I have to squeeze the graphic into a 470 pixel wide space.

Here’s a debate ranker for the Presidential Election season so far…(Live+SD ratings)

Drudge plastered this headline about MSNBC’s debate last night…

MSNBC PULLS 1,449,000 VIEWERS FOR NH DEBATE… BUT… FOXNEWS HANNITY/COLMES HIGHER VIEWERSHIP WITH 1,453,000 DURING 9 PM ET HOUR…O’REILLY TOP OF CABLE NEWS NIGHT WITH 2,132,000… ‘COOPER’ CNN’S HIGH WITH 905,000… Last night’s debate was second lowest-rated of ‘07 political season; the only one that rated lower was the Olberamnn AFL-CIO debate in August…

Cable News Daily Live Ratings for September 26, 2007

P2+ Total Day
FNC – 890,000 viewers
CNN – 462,000 viewers
MSNBC – 392,000 viewers
CNBC – 172,000 viewers
HLN – 244,000 viewers

P2+ Prime Time
FNC – 1,563,000 viewers
CNN – 739,000 viewers
MSNBC – 1,247,000 viewers
CNBC – a scratch with 119,000 viewers
HLN – 388,000 viewers

25-54 Total Day
FNC – 231,000 viewers
CNN – 165,000 viewers
MSNBC – 149,000 viewers
CNBC – 54,000 viewers
HLN- 95,000 viewers

25-54 Prime Time
FNC – 391,000 viewers
CNN – 256,000 viewers
MSNBC – 472,000 viewers
CNBC – a scratch with 52,000 viewers
HLN – 143,000 viewers

Morning programs P2+ (25-54)
FOX & Friends – 957,000 viewers (328,000)
American Morning- 434,000 viewers (189,000)
Morning Joe – 234,000 viewers (60,000)
Robin & Co. – 259,000 viewers (127,000)
(more…)

CNBC’s release on its new primetime schedule…

CNBC, First in Business Worldwide, today announced a new after-market hours programming line-up effective October 10th.

“Fast Money,” with Dylan Ratigan and the Fast Money traders, will air live 5 PM-6PM ET and will be rebroadcast during its current scheduled time period of 8 PM-9PM ET. “Kudlow & Company,” hosted by Larry Kudlow, will air weeknights from 7 PM-8PM ET. “On the Money,” currently airing 7 PM-8 PM ET, will go on hiatus and return at a later date.

“We’re moving ‘Fast Money’ to an hour after the market closes because it will provide maximum value to our audience closer to the conclusion of trading,” said Mark Hoffman, CNBC President. “With ‘Fast Money’ at 5 PM, CNBC viewers will know what moved the markets that day, have instant reaction to post market trading, breaking news and give viewers a first look at the trading day ahead.”
(more…)

TV Decoder’s Jacques Steinberg scoops that CNBC is dropping On the Money and moving Fast Money and Kudlow and Company’s timeslots…

The official said that the decision to jettison “On the Money’’ — the channel is apparently stopping short of calling it an outright cancellation — had less to do with its performance and more to do with a desire to showcase Larry Kudlow, an economist whose portfolio includes the 2008 presidential election, and Mr. Ratigan, whose profile is on the rise. Their programs will now serve as post-trading-day bookends around “Mad Money With Jim Cramer,’’ whose program appears at 6 p.m.

Eat the Press’ Rachel Sklar skewers Chris Matthews for a question he asked Chris Dodd…

Here’s a video of MSNBC’s Chris Matthews interviewing Chris Dodd after last night’s debate. Watch how he can’t wait to ask the burning question that’s been on his mind all night: “Do you find it difficult to debate a woman?”

Gawker goes a bit overboard trying to parse Bill O’Reilly. Question: Just how far back in time did Gawker go? All 10+ years of The O’Reilly Factor? Or not?

Bill Clinton took a photo with the On The Record crew. Clinton is interviewed tonight at 10pm on FNC…

Johnny Dollar has the audio from this morning’s Radio Factor where Bill O’Reilly talks about going to war with the media “smear merchants”. It looks like The New York Times will be the first victim tonight (though O’Reilly also mentioned The Washington Post but maybe he just got the two mixed up for a second).

Why did CNN let Watkins back on the air again after the first incident? And why wasn’t Watkins given a talking to beforehand by producers about what is appropriate on the air and what isn’t? You look at the two incidents and it’s hard not to draw the conclusion that CNN deliberately put Watkins back on the air again hoping for more fireworks.

Newsday’s Verne Gay pens a blog entry coming out in defense of Bill O’Reilly and attacks Media Matters.

This time, I’m actually on this guy’s side.

Here’s what MM posted on their site: “The headline of a Newsday article on Bill O’Reilly’s controversial remarks about a Harlem restaurant run by African-Americans asserted, ‘O’Reilly lashes out at CNN over misquoted report,’ but the article provided no examples of a ‘misquot[ation],’ nor did it quote O’Reilly claiming to have been ‘misquoted.’ The article also stated that ‘Mediamatters.org released a partial transcript’ of O’Reilly’s comments. In fact, Media Matters provided the relevant transcript and audio clip of O’Reilly’s remarks, which included the full context of his statements.”

Now, let me give you a little lesson in journalism, Media Matters Person. When you quote someone out of context - as you did - it’s the same as misquoting them. You may as well make up their words, because the import is the same - a disingenuous conveyance of information that had no bearing on the speaker’s intent.

Second, let me take issue with the weasel word “relevant.” In fact, it WAS a partial transcript, both print and audio. The print transcript that MM has on its website is in fact HEAVILY redacted, and the audio - or at least the audio posted Tuesday when this whole thing exploded - was only a small portion of a conversation that lasted an hour.

MSNBC.com’s Miki Turner writes about O’Reilly’s comments…

Enter Sharpton, who was beamed in from Louisiana where he’s been trying to peacefully resolve the powder keg Jena 6 conflict. Sharpton admitted he had not heard the tape and was going to refrain from commenting on O’Reilly’s alleged racial remarks until he did so. And although he did concede that the written accounts of his dinner date with O’Reilly were “disturbing and surprising,” Sharpton was quick to add that he and O’Reilly had dined in Harlem many times and that he had never heard him say anything “offensive.”

Translation: He’s got deeper issues to concern himself with in Jena, La.

Pundits have already started comparing O’Reilly to Don Imus, and the next thing you know one of them will start blaming the rappers. The difference between O’Reilly and Imus, however, is that Imus was going for the funny when he referred to the Rutgers women’s basketball team as “nappy-headed hos.” O’Reilly was actually trying to make a valid point.

Right now I’m not sure anyone really gets it.

But even though O’Reilly clearly enjoys stirring the pot, let’s not string him up just yet. If in fact he was purposely offensive, perhaps his buddy Sharpton can help enlighten him. Those who know better, help others do better.

If his comments were indeed taken out of context, O’Reilly should be more careful next time. These days all conversations about race in America have to be qualified.

TVNewser notes that the word “Exclusive” doesn’t seem to hold the meaning it used to…

I had not known about this until an emailer sent this in. The New York Times wrote an editorial last week castigating Republican Presidential candidates for skipping out on a TV Debate this week that will focus on minority issues…

Ken Mehlman, former chairman of the Republican National Committee, is urging the candidates to reconsider their rejection of the debate on the PBS network and “lay out their vision,” according to The Washington Post. Jack Kemp, the party’s 1996 vice presidential candidate, is more blunt in his dismay: “What are we going to do, meet in a country club in the suburbs one day?”

The candidates insist that their absence next Thursday is dictated by scheduling conflicts. But it’s important to note that the invitation to the debate at Morgan State University in Baltimore was sent out in February. “Baloney,” said Newt Gingrich of the scheduling excuse, warning of the “enormous error” in ducking the event. The Democrats’ comparable debate at Howard University in June was attended by all the major contenders.

No argument there. The Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot and they do themselves and their party a disservice by shunning an important constituency. However where was the Times when the Democratic candidates boycotted the CBC Institute/FNC Debate while candidates like Obama and Clinton would continue to appear on FNC in one on one interviews? Just asking…

I’m hearing the “Happy Negro” crack that Boyce Watkins used during an interview on CNN’s Newsroom yesterday was used again during Rick Sanchez’s Out in the Open program last night. I don’t know the context and I’m trying to track down the video. If anyone has any more info send it in to me…

Media Daily News’ Wayne Friedman writes that Nielsen is planning on making some changes to how it samples viewers via the National People Meter Panel…

While the total new sample size will be 37,000 homes for NPM in 2011, Nielsen says the “effective” sample size will actually be 17,000 households, taking into account weighting of geographical distribution of the 56 local markets that have Local People Meters. Nielsen says the “effective” sample size of the NPM sample is now 10,000 homes.

As does Media Week’s Katy Bachman…
(more…)

The Washington Post’s Paul Fahri talks with both Bill O’Reilly and CNN’s Rick Sanchez…

O’Reilly was still simmering last night. “They’re making it something that it isn’t,” he said in an interview by phone from New York. “Anyone who listens to the tape [of the radio show] and is fair-minded will tell you this was an intelligent conversation about race. . . . Aren’t they supposed to be in the business of honesty over there” at CNN?

His point, he said, is that “some whites fear blacks based on irrational notions. They’re afraid to go into Sylvia’s, they’re afraid to go to Harlem. But there’s nothing different in Sylvia’s than any other place in the U.S.”

The flap — which CNN’s Rick Sanchez covered again in prime time last night — has faint echoes of the controversy that drove TV and radio host Don Imus from the air in April. In that incident, the Washington-based Media Matters was the first to note Imus’s comments about the Rutgers University women’s basketball team, and Sharpton was prominent in condemning those remarks.

_______________

Sanchez, in a phone interview, said O’Reilly is perpetuating racism by using “the Mandingo argument” against black rappers. “The idea [is] that there’s a big, bad African American out there that we all need protection from,” he said. “It’s a dangerous way of looking at racial relations. The African American community is extremely complex. The thinking that black culture is confined to guys sticking their underwear out is just wrong, and many African Americans resent it.”

Variety’s Michael Learmonth writes about the story…

Cut, parsed, and repurposed, and according to O’Reilly, taken out of context, the comments have been red meat for liberal groups as well as for O’Reilly’s 8pm rivals, MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann and CNN substitute host Rick Sanchez. Both have spent two nights keeping the controversy alive.

Williams, who was present during the discussion, called CNN’s coverage of the flap “dishonest.” O’Reilly accused Media Matters of “fabricating a racial controversy where none exists.”

The debate spilled over onto network TV Wednesday morning on “Today” when Matt Lauer moderated a debate between Media Matters’ senior fellow Paul Waldman and MSNBC conservative pundit Joel Watkins.

Watkins argued that O’Reilly was trying to make what he intended to be an uplifting observation about race relations in America by showing there was no difference between a black- and white-run restaurant.

“I do think if Bill O’Reilly were able to have a do-over in the way he phrased some of those paragraphs and be a little more articulate about this I think he would take a do-over,” Lauer said.

As does the New York Times’ Manny Fernandez…
(more…)