Megyn Kelly Moving To Primetime on fox

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The liberals seem to think otherwise.

Nothing wrong with it at all is my view. Good for her (short term) and good for Fox I think. It's obviously time for some new blood.

I don't see it as being a good career move for her long term because there is no prestige in the slot any longer and the network she is on will prevent her from being taken seriously.

I think you'll see her on the PBS news hour at some point if she's a serious journalist (I don't know her) or, if not, she'll be a female Geraldo--lets hope she tweets better than he. Come to think of it, I follow her but never recall seeing her tweets...hmmm.

Only by liberals I find it highly amusing that someone would think having a prime time slot on the top rated cable news network is a bad long term career move.

‘Top rated’ among conservatives, and as already correctly noted, Fox ‘news’ is perceived outside of the rightistphere as a joke, and in no way serious journalism.

 

[candycorn]

It was a plum assignment 4 years ago. Quick..name her 3 competitors....if you can, you're likely in the minority.

She is handicapped by her network's cartoonish reputation. Sorry.

bwahahaha.....

Fox News only has like 100 MILLION viewers......and you think going to PBS with its typical 2 million prime time viewers would be a step up......you are nuts.....FNC is the BIG TIME news channel....respected both nationwide and worldwide...

there are no competitors for Fox during prime time.....only washed-up liberal hacks...

Megan Kelly will be a great addition to the line-up on Fox prime time...

Fox News Channel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Downton Abbey sets PBS record with 7.9 million viewers | Reuters

100 million viewers? 1/3 of America watches Fox? Really?

Why aren't any of you rats commenting on the fact that your beloved Hannity ship is sinking? So soon forgotten for a little T and A in his place.

The highest rating they ever had was less than 12 million viewers.

It was during this episode:

Post Democalypse 2012 - America Takes a Shower - Karl Rove's Math - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 11/07/12 - Video Clip | Comedy Central

Sweet!

 

[candycorn]

Nothing wrong with it at all is my view. Good for her (short term) and good for Fox I think. It's obviously time for some new blood.

I don't see it as being a good career move for her long term because there is no prestige in the slot any longer and the network she is on will prevent her from being taken seriously.

I think you'll see her on the PBS news hour at some point if she's a serious journalist (I don't know her) or, if not, she'll be a female Geraldo--lets hope she tweets better than he. Come to think of it, I follow her but never recall seeing her tweets...hmmm.

Only by liberals I find it highly amusing that someone would think having a prime time slot on the top rated cable news network is a bad long term career move.

‘Top rated’ among conservatives, and as already correctly noted, Fox ‘news’ is perceived outside of the rightistphere as a joke, and in no way serious journalism.

As we saw with the Boston Bombing manhunt that most of us followed on Twitter; the definition of journalism is in need of being re-written.

The only real benefit that the talking heads on the TV can give to the viewer any longer is analysis. FOX and MSNBC are now entertainment channels because they will openly pander to their audience; like a stand-up comedian doing a gig in the South talking about the north or vice versa. The big difference is that whomever the party that is perceived to be in power; their network comes off as sounding shrill.

If you're serious about your craft, you're not working at either one of those places.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

It was a plum assignment 4 years ago. Quick..name her 3 competitors....if you can, you're likely in the minority.

She is handicapped by her network's cartoonish reputation. Sorry.

bwahahaha.....

Fox News only has like 100 MILLION viewers......and you think going to PBS with its typical 2 million prime time viewers would be a step up......you are nuts.....FNC is the BIG TIME news channel....respected both nationwide and worldwide...

A quote from Wikipedia:

On the night of October 22, 2012, Fox set a record for its highest-rated telecast ever, with 11.5 million viewers for the third U.S. presidential debate.

Fox News Channel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not quite 100 million or even 12 million. But Fox viewers aren't known for putting much stock in education.

When I mentioned PBS, I was speaking about her career as a newswoman specifically. She is permanently handicapped by her network. Few trust Fox outside of Conservative circles and for good reason. PBS is the logical brand choice for her and for them quite frankly. The really plum assignments left in news are the nightly news broadcasts and those are pretty hard to get for reputable journalists. PBS would be a good fit, a bit of heft on the resume as she moves forward. She's 43 so she is a bit up against it career-wise.

there are no competitors for Fox during prime time.....only washed-up liberal hacks...

Fox News Channel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Downton Abbey sets PBS record with 7.9 million viewers | Reuters

DA almost draws as many viewers? That is sad for news in general. Congratulations, I guess. You're almost as popular as a 1920's English drama on public television.

oops my mistake....i mistook Fox being available to over 100 MIllion households....HOWEVER it still crushes the other news channels...

Comparing Fox to its 24-hour-news-channel competitors, in May 2010 the channel drew an average daily prime-time audience of 1.8 million viewers (versus 747,000 for MSNBC and 595,000 for CNN).

what great journalists appear on PBS.....? Bill Moyers(resigned).....Jim Leher(resigned).....Judy Woodruff....?

 

[BobPlumb]

Meg Kelly is hot.......in many ways.

 

[blackhawk]

Nothing wrong with it at all is my view. Good for her (short term) and good for Fox I think. It's obviously time for some new blood.

I don't see it as being a good career move for her long term because there is no prestige in the slot any longer and the network she is on will prevent her from being taken seriously.

I think you'll see her on the PBS news hour at some point if she's a serious journalist (I don't know her) or, if not, she'll be a female Geraldo--lets hope she tweets better than he. Come to think of it, I follow her but never recall seeing her tweets...hmmm.

Only by liberals I find it highly amusing that someone would think having a prime time slot on the top rated cable news network is a bad long term career move.

It was a plum assignment 4 years ago. Quick..name her 3 competitors....if you can, you're likely in the minority.

She is handicapped by her network's cartoonish reputation. Sorry.

Her lack of known competitors speaks more to the poor job being done by the opposing networks than it does Kelly or FOX you might notice no one is leaving other networks for MSNBC while just over the last year CNN's former top political reporter Ed Henry left CNN for FOX and just a couple of weeks ago CNN's Howard Kurtz left there to come to FOX I don't think a cartoon reputation is what is luring people of this caliber to FOX.

 

[Pheonixops]

Cool, now I have something worthwhile to watch on fox, miss her when I was working nights.
Megyn Kelly Moving To Primetime On Fox News

"Megyn is an exceptional talent who has successfully filled and surpassed each role we have given her at the network," Fox News CEO Roger Ailes said in a statement. "Her ability to command the screen, delve into the facts and lead a debate is what makes her one of the most sought-after anchors in the business."

Good for her.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

It was a plum assignment 4 years ago. Quick..name her 3 competitors....if you can, you're likely in the minority.

She is handicapped by her network's cartoonish reputstion. Sorry.

The only competitor I can come up with in this time slot is Piers Morgan, as if that was any competition. Can you name two more competitors? I certainly can't.

This is my point. Four years ago it was a plum assignment. I dont know who is on MSNBC opposite her, what network tv news shows are on, etc... The 6:00 newscasts would be more visible for her.

Four years ago, actually coming up on five viewers still believed the sh*t that the left networks were spewing. I can't name any others because I quit watching them long ago. It says more about the sorry state of the media I can't list their hosts more than anything else.

 

[Wyatt earp]

meg is the storm when she is on prime time will fuck up libs so bad.....she has no past,..

 

[candycorn]

The only competitor I can come up with in this time slot is Piers Morgan, as if that was any competition. Can you name two more competitors? I certainly can't.

This is my point. Four years ago it was a plum assignment. I dont know who is on MSNBC opposite her, what network tv news shows are on, etc... The 6:00 newscasts would be more visible for her.

Four years ago, actually coming up on five viewers still believed the sh*t that the left networks were spewing. I can't name any others because I quit watching them long ago. It says more about the sorry state of the media I can't list their hosts more than anything else.

No.

It says quite a bit about the Fox demographic however. You can't honestly compare the product to it's peers.

 

[candycorn]

meg is the storm when she is on prime time will fuck up libs so bad.....she has no past,..

Really? I do like how the "news" network is charged with "fucking up the libs"...

And you wonder why Fox is though of as a cartoon network.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

This is my point. Four years ago it was a plum assignment. I dont know who is on MSNBC opposite her, what network tv news shows are on, etc... The 6:00 newscasts would be more visible for her.

Four years ago, actually coming up on five viewers still believed the sh*t that the left networks were spewing. I can't name any others because I quit watching them long ago. It says more about the sorry state of the media I can't list their hosts more than anything else.

No.

It says quite a bit about the Fox demographic however. You can't honestly compare the product to it's peers.

Holy sh*t, so you can't judge a product to it's peers when the peers you present for public consumption are complete f*cking morons?

 

[candycorn]

Only by liberals I find it highly amusing that someone would think having a prime time slot on the top rated cable news network is a bad long term career move.

It was a plum assignment 4 years ago. Quick..name her 3 competitors....if you can, you're likely in the minority.

She is handicapped by her network's cartoonish reputation. Sorry.

Her lack of known competitors speaks more to the poor job being done by the opposing networks than it does Kelly or FOX you might notice no one is leaving other networks for MSNBC while just over the last year CNN's former top political reporter Ed Henry left CNN for FOX and just a couple of weeks ago CNN's Howard Kurtz left there to come to FOX I don't think a cartoon reputation is what is luring people of this caliber to FOX.

Its sort of like trying to determine who the best fencer in or the greatest race walker; if you wanted to find out, you could but few care.

For example, Ed Henry and Howard Kurtz...never heard of either of them really but it's my fault...I don't care much for who does the reporting standing outside the White House. I do notice from time to time but usually it's just a name. I Googled Ed Henry and found out the move was made in 2011...2 years ago. Kurtz...I knew the face but not the name. Did you know who he was before he came to Fox?

I did find this on his wiki bio:

KURTZ: I think the argument that I've heard Olbermann make in the past about Fox News – it's not an argument that I embrace – is that, because it poses as a news organization and puts out dangerous misinformation is a cheerleader for the Bush administration, that it's misinforming our society. But you know what? They're entitled to do that

With "friends like these"...

 

[candycorn]

Four years ago, actually coming up on five viewers still believed the sh*t that the left networks were spewing. I can't name any others because I quit watching them long ago. It says more about the sorry state of the media I can't list their hosts more than anything else.

No.

It says quite a bit about the Fox demographic however. You can't honestly compare the product to it's peers.

Holy sh*t, so you can't judge a product to it's peers when the peers you present for public consumption are complete f*cking morons?

How do you know the peers are "complete f*cking morons"?

 

[candycorn]

bwahahaha.....

Fox News only has like 100 MILLION viewers......and you think going to PBS with its typical 2 million prime time viewers would be a step up......you are nuts.....FNC is the BIG TIME news channel....respected both nationwide and worldwide...

A quote from Wikipedia:

Fox News Channel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not quite 100 million or even 12 million. But Fox viewers aren't known for putting much stock in education.

When I mentioned PBS, I was speaking about her career as a newswoman specifically. She is permanently handicapped by her network. Few trust Fox outside of Conservative circles and for good reason. PBS is the logical brand choice for her and for them quite frankly. The really plum assignments left in news are the nightly news broadcasts and those are pretty hard to get for reputable journalists. PBS would be a good fit, a bit of heft on the resume as she moves forward. She's 43 so she is a bit up against it career-wise.



DA almost draws as many viewers? That is sad for news in general. Congratulations, I guess. You're almost as popular as a 1920's English drama on public television.

oops my mistake....i mistook Fox being available to over 100 MIllion households....HOWEVER it still crushes the other news channels...

Comparing Fox to its 24-hour-news-channel competitors, in May 2010 the channel drew an average daily prime-time audience of 1.8 million viewers (versus 747,000 for MSNBC and 595,000 for CNN).

what great journalists appear on PBS.....? Bill Moyers(resigned).....Jim Leher(resigned).....Judy Woodruff....?

Charlie Rhodes for one, Jim Leher resigned after what, 35 years on the job...

And yes, Judy Woodruff has a reputation that Meg would want if she is serious about her craft.

As stated, the clock is ticking on Kelly's career. I hope she does well in whatever she pursues but the network is not going to help her to get that reputation. Who knows if that is even important to her??? Is it a bad thing? No, not really in this day and age. She may "break the mold" as the saying goes.

Good on her.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

No.

It says quite a bit about the Fox demographic however. You can't honestly compare the product to it's peers.

Holy sh*t, so you can't judge a product to it's peers when the peers you present for public consumption are complete f*cking morons?

How do you know the peers are "complete f*cking morons"?

I see their actions and calculate their words on the air. The fact you can't witness these people and come to the same conclusion is pathetic really. Your peers are complete f*cking morons yet you can't see that. It makes you worse than them in the end.

 

[candycorn]

Holy sh*t, so you can't judge a product to it's peers when the peers you present for public consumption are complete f*cking morons?

How do you know the peers are "complete f*cking morons"?

I see their actions and calculate their words on the air. The fact you can't witness these people and come to the same conclusion is pathetic really. Your peers are complete f*cking morons yet you can't see that. It makes you worse than them in the end.

At 5:38 PM today you wrote:

I can't name any others because I quit watching them long ago.

Now it's:

I see their actions and calculate their words on the air.

Strange how you can see them without watching them... Someone else is doing your thinking for you.

 

[candycorn]

Dropping the mike...

 

[Missouri_Mike]

How do you know the peers are "complete f*cking morons"?

I see their actions and calculate their words on the air. The fact you can't witness these people and come to the same conclusion is pathetic really. Your peers are complete f*cking morons yet you can't see that. It makes you worse than them in the end.

At 5:38 PM today you wrote:

I can't name any others because I quit watching them long ago.

Now it's:

I see their actions and calculate their words on the air.

Strange how you can see them without watching them... Someone else is doing your thinking for you.

I see the highlights, or lowlights depending on your grasp of things. Thinking for me doesn't mean I have to spend my time watching your favorite moron 24/7. I get the gist of the stupid and can pretty safely pass over the mundane minutia.

 

[whitehall]

Good looking babe but why is it political news? I couldn't care less if former twerp Clinton enabler Georgie Stephonoplis got a new gig. Who would care if tingle up the leg Chrissie Matthews had a new gig? The point is that the radical left never stops it assault on the 1st Amendment.