If it's something important from someone important, sure. But in that case the story is "Important person X said important thing Y in a tweet on Z date". The tweet is just the source. What I'm objecting to is the tired cookie cutter articles that boil down to "Person the writer doesn't like said something the writer doesn't like, and here are a bunch of Twatter randos 'calling him out'", often with inane commentary after each tweet. Ted Cruz is a particularly frequent target of this retardation for some reason.
In many contexts it does. I'm just saying that far too often journalists act like a bunch of terminally online losers agreeing with them means anything.
Bill O'Reilly is a crusty old neocon. He has almost no appeal to an increasingly radical right. Tucker flirts with more radical and controversial things. He can weather this better than Bill, as long he doesn't start cucking out too hard.
it's funny, w bush was a terrible president and made repubs look bad, it made anyone that supported w look bad like oreilly. as opposed to trump supporters, most did like him since economy was good, until he trusted fauci of course. so tucker is in a different position. who would listen to oreilly a podcast? the last few w bush supporting boomers? millions would tune into tucker tho.
really no one but boomers watch tv anymore anyway, no one here watched tucker tho sometimes shared clips and memes with him saying stuff. but fox news don't get ad money that way. I'm sure the govt has been bailing out msm for years.
I really wish right wing outlets would stop copying MSM trash by reporting on tweets and other social media.
Love it or hate it, tweets are news. Politics today unfolds on twitter in real time.
If it's something important from someone important, sure. But in that case the story is "Important person X said important thing Y in a tweet on Z date". The tweet is just the source. What I'm objecting to is the tired cookie cutter articles that boil down to "Person the writer doesn't like said something the writer doesn't like, and here are a bunch of Twatter randos 'calling him out'", often with inane commentary after each tweet. Ted Cruz is a particularly frequent target of this retardation for some reason.
like it or not twitter matters a lot
In many contexts it does. I'm just saying that far too often journalists act like a bunch of terminally online losers agreeing with them means anything.
Will be interesting to see what he does. Just hope he doesn't end up like Bill O'Reilly where no one hears from him again
Bill O'Reilly is a crusty old neocon. He has almost no appeal to an increasingly radical right. Tucker flirts with more radical and controversial things. He can weather this better than Bill, as long he doesn't start cucking out too hard.
oreilly was in on lying about how jfk died
He has a podcast but overall kind of a low profile
it's funny, w bush was a terrible president and made repubs look bad, it made anyone that supported w look bad like oreilly. as opposed to trump supporters, most did like him since economy was good, until he trusted fauci of course. so tucker is in a different position. who would listen to oreilly a podcast? the last few w bush supporting boomers? millions would tune into tucker tho.
Apparently Fox has already lost $1 BILLION already (insert joker laugh)
I bet the government will save them.
really no one but boomers watch tv anymore anyway, no one here watched tucker tho sometimes shared clips and memes with him saying stuff. but fox news don't get ad money that way. I'm sure the govt has been bailing out msm for years.
Now lets unsubscribe to all the approved media.