The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
Glenn Beck relaunching his company. https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=9555 |
Page 1 of 1 |
Author: | DFK! [ Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:19 am ] |
Post subject: | Glenn Beck relaunching his company. |
As a libertarian network. http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/gl ... al-liberta Quote: Glenn Beck Relaunching The Blaze As Global Libertarian News Network Beck takes a shot at Fox as he expands his news network with foreign bureaus and a new show. “I consider myself a libertarian… I'm a lot closer to Penn Jillette than I am to Chuck Hagel.” McKay Coppins BuzzFeed Staff Posted Jan 8, 2013 6:06pm EST Glenn Beck announced plans Tuesday during his online television program to expand the news operation in his media company, The Blaze, and refocus it as a libertarian network, opening three foreign bureaus, debuting a nightly newsmagazine show, and relocating his New York staff to showy new offices. Beck introduced his ambitious plans by standing in front of a split screen with MSNBC's Chris Matthews on one side and Fox News's Sean Hannity on the other, and bemoaning the fact that cable news has devolved into the "far left [and] far right... yelling at each other." "We're not gonna play in that crazy space as a network," he said, adding, "I consider myself a libertarian... I'm a lot closer to Penn Jillette than I am to Chuck Hagel." He said over the next 60 days, The Blaze will open three foreign bureaus in cities that are "important to America." He will also relocate his New York staff from their current midtown offices into a building that will "send a very clear message to everyone in New York... it will piss everyone off." Beck also showed a teaser for a new nightly 30-minute newsmagazine show called For the Record. "Our Nightline will be a nightly half hour broadcast to update you on a topic that no one else quite frankly has the balls to do. I will," he said. The trailer for the show — which he said will be "the most expensive show on the network, including mine" — featured future episodes exposing the NSA for turning America into a "surveillance state," and warning that the UN "want[s] your guns," both big issues in libertarian circles. After the in-your-face trailer ended, Beck chuckled, "Security is going to be a real issue for the people in our company." The Blaze also has plans to hire investigative journalists and plans to produce more documentaries, Beck said. "We are currently looking for our own Woodwards and Bernsteins," he said. "Maybe they don't exist anymore, and if that's the case I don't really care. We'll grow our own!" Beck launched his online TV network, then called GBTV, in 2011, and has brought all his media properties — including a news and opinion site, a monthly magazine, and an online radio network — under umbrella of The Blaze brand. Last year, the network began airing on a Dish Network channel, and last week, Beck revealed that he tried to buy the channel currently airing Al Gore's Current TV — a sign that he hopes to expand into cable soon. But Beck's decision to orient the network's programming around libertarian politics — or at least brand it that way — could be a play for younger, conservative viewers, who find the Republican Party, and the network that most closely aligns with its ideals, Fox, distasteful. Honestly, I've never been a big fan of his, but I like this idea. |
Author: | Diamondeye [ Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:40 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Glenn Beck relaunching his company. |
The idea might be better if it were almost anyone else doing it. I listen to him on day shift, followed by Limbaugh, then by Hannity. Not because I like any of them, but because you can only listen to the same country songs so many times. Hannity does a lot of yelling mainly because he's the only one of the three that bothers to have people from the left on his show at all. Limbaugh probably has the most solid information and the most intelligent discussion of it, as long as you don't accept everything he says. If you have a BS filter on for when he's distorting things, you can get some pretty good insights on other things. Beck is for laughs. The guy is alternately in a state of panic and desperation over some scheme of the left that for some reason Limbaugh and Hannity don't want to make hay over, or he's trying to parody the left but he just sort of gets wrapped up in his own amusement and kind of prattles on so that you totally forget what he's talking about. For example, shortly after the shooting in Connecticut, he decides to parody the anti-gun people talking about some incident where this kid brought some sort of prank chemical known as "Liquid ***" to school and sprayed it, with predictable consequences: room, maybe whole building had to be evacuated, kid in trouble, Liquid *** confiscated, and a huge stink - both literal and figurative, culminating in the kid's dad getting in some sort of trouble himself when he came to the school. I think he was digging his Liquid *** out of the trash or something. Well, Beck goes into this long discussion that was an obvious parody of the "gun-free zones" argument by talking about how schools were Liquid *** free zones and this had totally failed blah blah blah and that people needed to be able to take their own Liquid *** to school to protect themselves, and other people needed to be able to have Liquid *** in public to protect themselves from people like the parents. (Evidently, the reason the parents had the Liquid *** in the first place was to spray it in malls and movie theaters which is somehow more acceptable than doing it in school). I still am not sure if he was really trying to parody both sides or not, because it really did sound like he was making fun of the gun-free zones argument, but by the end of this you would be absolutely convinced that Glenn Beck cannot tell the difference between being subject to an offensive odor and being shot, regardless of where you fall on the issue. I suppose the incident with the Liquid *** had value as parody material, but he got so carried away with it that it quickly stopped making sense even as that. |
Author: | FarSky [ Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:43 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Pretty much what Diamondeye said. Good for him, hope it works (in a larger sense)...but Libertarians need a better representative than this weepy douche. |
Author: | Hopwin [ Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:43 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Did Glenn Beck really try to position himself as the sane alternative to Chris Matthews and Sean Hannity? |
Author: | Kaffis Mark V [ Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:47 am ] |
Post subject: | |
I'm kind of with DE, here. Having a network that goes after a libertarian market and wants to focus on documentaries and whatnot is actually a really good idea and something that could do a lot of good in this country, especially if it gets a reputation for low spin and a high caliber of journalistic integrity. I'm not sure Glenn Beck is the guy who can deliver that reputation, though. He's definitely not what I'd want to put forward as the face of the Libertarian party... As I submit this and see who's ninja'd me, I say again, "GOOMH, 'Skeee!" |
Author: | FarSky [ Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:49 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Is he going to tamp down on his signature crazy conspiracy ****? That's going to be a mark against him if he's wanting to gain a reputation for the network as a source for truth. Otherwise he's just a moist Alex Jones. |
Author: | Nitefox [ Wed Jan 09, 2013 11:12 am ] |
Post subject: | |
What do yall think of Al Gore selling his network to Al Jazeera? |
Author: | Hopwin [ Wed Jan 09, 2013 11:17 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Nitefox wrote: What do yall think of Al Gore selling his network to Al Jazeera? I think Al Jazeera is a fantastic news network and I think Al Gore is a hyper-hypocrite for selling out to them but overall a good move for consumers. |
Author: | Diamondeye [ Wed Jan 09, 2013 1:45 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Glenn Beck relaunching his company. |
I think it's more telling that he sold it just in time to avoid any new taxes on the sale than it is that he sold it to Al Jazeera. It isn't like Americans shouldn't have access to Al Jazeera, but he's been one of the "pay our 'fair share'" crowd. |
Author: | DFK! [ Wed Jan 09, 2013 1:58 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Glenn Beck relaunching his company. |
Diamondeye wrote: I think it's more telling that he sold it just in time to avoid any new taxes on the sale than it is that he sold it to Al Jazeera. It isn't like Americans shouldn't have access to Al Jazeera, but he's been one of the "pay our 'fair share'" crowd. "Pay our fair share" is for you, not him. Duh. |
Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Wed Jan 09, 2013 3:05 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
I always thought it was pay "your" fair share. I have no issues with Al Jazeera. I have issues with some of the folks they give air time to, but that can probably be said of any network. |
Author: | Diamondeye [ Wed Jan 09, 2013 3:15 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Glenn Beck relaunching his company. |
It is, most of the time. For a select few, they try to appear not hypocritical by saying "our fair share" before they dive into the loopholes. |
Author: | Micheal [ Wed Jan 09, 2013 4:02 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Hi folks, this is Glen Beck and I see the writing on the wall and so I'm staying ahead of the pack and reinventing myself now, watch everyone else follow my lead. |
Author: | Slythe [ Wed Jan 09, 2013 6:51 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Glenn Beck relaunching his company. |
I'm not quite sure why anyone would believe Glenn Beck is anything but a charlatan or an actor. Throw ideology aside; and if you don't like Rush or Sean, toss that aside. Glenn Beck takes a few parts from the rhetorical hyperbole of guys like Rush and Sean, a few parts from the ultimate conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, and the best onstage emotional performance of your favorite televangelist. |
Author: | Rorinthas [ Wed Jan 09, 2013 7:32 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Glenn Beck relaunching his company. |
Glenn has a good heart, but he needs to grow up . For example banning The President's name from his radio show is just childish . That aside I think the world will benefit from another news outlet, especially if it's less about him and more about ideas. |
Author: | FarSky [ Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:55 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/dear-glenn-b ... bertarian/ Quote: Dear Mr. Beck:
Congratulations on your slow move towards libertarianism. We are glad for your newfound support for legal marijuana, gay marriage, and your backing down from Bush-era hawkishness. But many of us libertarians prefer to say “thanks but no thanks” to your attempt to become the “libertarian” leader of a so-called “global news network.” As I’ve written before, you make it really hard for people who believe in limited government to be taken seriously. In the past, you’ve only given the media more reason to dismiss a largely intellectual movement as being just a bunch of tinfoil hat-wearing, overly aggressive crazy people. You’re free to call yourself whatever you want. But that doesn’t mean we should accept you. While we agree with you on some of the big picture — government spends way too much money it doesn’t have, and is far too intrusive into our daily lives — many of us dislike your rhetoric and your chalkboard-and-puppets conspiracy version of history. Look, we libertarians try to operate as a big tent. And I’m happy when non-libertarians like yourself aspire and draw towards it. The Atlantic‘s Jeffrey Goldberg recently pondered whether he is a libertarian, and that’s a welcome step forward for the movement. But when you or (the far, far worse) Alex Jones label yourselves “libertarian,” it is most certainly not a progression for us who already feel marginalized by the political process and much of the media. Here’s just one example of how you take any semblance of a potentially rational discussion and elevate it to cuckoo land: In the trailer for your new “libertarian” news network, you tease newsmagazine specials on topics that supposedly matter to liberty-minded folk, like some evil United Nations plot to disarm Americans. Do libertarians believe the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms? Yes. Do we generally oppose restrictive gun control? Absolutely. But do we think the federal government is in a cahoots with the U.N. to take away all of our guns? Uhhhh, no. That’s not “libertarian,” that’s fear-mongering with a naked appeal to the large portion of your viewers who already buy into the doomsday survivalist shtick available in your web store. Sure, some of your more ardent fans will back you up on your self-labeled “libertarianism,” but I challenge you to walk down the halls of Reason magazine and not have them snicker at your bizarro connect-the-dots version of history; or speak before 1,200+ college students at the annual Students for Liberty conference and not be booed or laughed off the stage when you lament the downfall of Western civilization at the hands of pro-gay shows like Glee; or submit an article to the Rothbardian types at LewRockwell.com and not have them pick apart every hysterical myth contained within. Now, of course, you may say we sound like the cool kids at the lunch table telling the weird kid that he can’t sit with us. But this isn’t the school cafeteria; this is a battle of ideas. And we are currently losing it because of people like you who have helped give limited government types a bad name. Rush Limbaugh makes conservatives look bad on a regular basis; and you assumedly want to be the libertarian version of that? No thanks. Maybe you are, as you say, a “growing” libertarian — i.e., you’re “evolving,” coincidentally, like the president you dislike so much — but that doesn’t erase the years you’ve spent as a so-called “liberty lover” while almost never criticizing George W. Bush when he was in power. (Believe me. I know that because, in my previous career, it took days to find a single anti-GOP soundbite for a TV special on your fledgling career.) You’ve built a reputation as yet another right-wing firebrand who absolutely detests President Obama and will link anything and everything to his kneeling nightly before a Karl Marx statuette. It’s not the kind of baggage to carry around when dealing with libertarians who pride themselves on equal-opportunity skepticism of partisans on both sides who suffer from “President From The Other Party Derangement Syndrome.” BuzzFeed writes that your relaunch as “libertarian” is an attempt to grab the eyeballs of the young people who are disgusted by the two parties and by the “shouting heads” on cable news. If so, I’m not sure you’ll be able to court them. “If we’re Glenn Beck’s target audience, he’s missed his mark by a mile,” Daniel Bier told me this morning. He runs a prominent blog called The Skeptical Libertarian, which has a readership largely made up of libertarian students and professionals. During the GOP primaries, most young libertarians rolled their eyes but had their preferred candidates who at least nodded in the direction of libertarianism. That included a bit of Jon Huntsman, a whole lot of Gary Johnson, and an even greater amount of Ron Paul. But were you out there supporting any of these guys while lamenting the big-government-conservative GOP field? No. You supported Michelle Bachmann at first, and then… Rick Santorum, arguably the most anti-libertarian GOP candidate since Pat Buchanan. And, indeed, young liberty types find the Republican Party and Fox’s treatment of the news to be distasteful but, given that, do you really think that they will then turn to Glenn Beck, the man who has said things like this… or this? Hopefully someday you can drop the histrionics and the looseness with facts, and then maybe we can all sing “Kumbaya” together under a libertarian tent. But, in the meantime, I do wish you the best of luck. And since it’s part of my job, I will be watching. Sincerely, Andrew Kirell |
Author: | Hopwin [ Thu Jan 10, 2013 8:04 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Glenn Beck relaunching his company. |
Diamondeye wrote: I think it's more telling that he sold it just in time to avoid any new taxes on the sale than it is that he sold it to Al Jazeera. It isn't like Americans shouldn't have access to Al Jazeera, but he's been one of the "pay our 'fair share'" crowd. You think that is more telling than Mr. Global-Warming selling his news channel to an Oil Conglomerate in order to pocket $100M? |
Author: | Diamondeye [ Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:09 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Glenn Beck relaunching his company. |
Yes. He's pocketing it under more lenient tax rules. |
Author: | Hopwin [ Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:43 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Glenn Beck relaunching his company. |
Diamondeye wrote: Yes. He's pocketing it under more lenient tax rules. Which he did not advocate. He does rail against big oil specifically though. |
Author: | Diamondeye [ Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:48 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Glenn Beck relaunching his company. |
He's been on the "pay our fair share" mantra even if he didn't specifically advocate for these particular tax increases. Al Jazeera is also not an "oil conglomerate". Until 2011, it was opned by the government of Qatar. Since then it's been owned by the privately-held Al Jazeera Media Network. Yes, I'm sure oil interests have their fingers all over it, but he did not sell it to an "oil conglomerate." |
Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |