Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Jerry Springer's ogling at female news anchors just really PISSED ME OFF!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
dalloway Donating Member (744 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 11:35 AM
Original message
Jerry Springer's ogling at female news anchors just really PISSED ME OFF!
Edited on Fri Aug-26-05 12:08 PM by dalloway
Mind you, I am a huge Air America Fan. I was also willing to give Springer a chance when they put him on, and had grown to somewhat like him on the radio.

However, this morning, he really ticked me off He spent WAY TOO MUCH time contemplating how drop-dead gorgeous most of the female daytime new anchors are and how it is another example of the producers' strategy to water down the news value.

Mind you, I am not here by any means to defend the news shows and their trading in of real news for infotainment. But I STRONGLY OBJECT to the measures Springer is applying (he ran a compilation of all the mistakes these female anchors made over a 90 minute period, implying that their looks were directly proportional to their talent).

THE FACT OF THE MATTER is that women in any profession, especially one as public as a TV anchor, have unrealistic expectations of looks that are for their sex alone. Remember when Amanopour (sp?) was put under pressure to "look better" on TV? What a double standard!!! Expect talented journalists to put as much care to their looks at to their reporting and then criticize women journalists who look good, imply that they are less than qualified.

IF PEOPLE LIKE SPRINGER COULD FORGET ABOUT THEIR DICKS WHEN WATCHING THE NEWS this wouldn't be an issue.

For goodness sakes! Women could care less what an anchor looks like.

Jerry went so far as to agree with a caller that said those shows were best watched with the sound off. Jerry suggested that people turn off the sound and listed to him on the radio while checking the ladies out.

Come on guys!

That's it for me and Jerry Springer--we're through.

AAR--please bring back that guy who subbed while Jerry was on vacation. He ROCKED!

Anybody else catch this? Anybody else offended?

I'm leaving for vacation shortly so can't babysit this thread, but please keep it going so that AAR know this is bull*.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 11:37 AM
Response to Original message
1. So what you're saying is that Jerry is right? I agree.
No. Not offended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merwin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
2. Seems like his position is spot on (to me at least)
It's not the women in the job that hire themselves. It's the producers that are hiring the drop dead gorgeous women. I'm not saying viewers don't have unrealist expectations, but it does seem to me to be a calculated effort by producers to go for looks over talent in order to gain viewers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThreeCatNight Donating Member (930 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
3. That's the way it has always been ....
since TV started.
I can remember the days of weather "babes".
If anyone has ever heard of Angie Humphrey, you will know what I am talking about (and you are old too! :) )
It may sound crass, but if I have to hear bad news upon more bad news, I don't mind if the vessel is pleasing to the eyes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mattclearing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
4. I wonder how the KOEB feels about this issue. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 11:54 AM
Response to Original message
5. Well, once I get past your snub of men and the assumption that we
all think with our dicks, I agree with you completely. If he makes comments like this to a co-worker, she can sue him for harrassment.

I gave Springer the benefit of the doubt when he first came out. I figured he was just pandering to the masses, trying to bring our POV mainstream. But I've changed my mind on that. I don't think he gets it. He may get it that Bush is a liar and a murderer, but I don't think he gets the whole Democratic picture.

As for men and their dicks--it's a lot more complicated than that. Sometimes we look at attractive women and think nothing sexual, the same way we'd stare at an attractive painting or a landscape. The problem is the conditioning. We all (both genders) have been conditioned to think of men as the standard, and women the also-rans, the co-eds, etc. Men are supposed to do these jobs, women are allowed to do them. No one talks about why Dan Rather is hired, but they analyze why a woman is hired. Her looks, her talent, whatever. Women are still, to the American mind, women. They can work, they can stay at home, they can be attractive or talented. But their main identity is their gender. Men are not seen that way. Dan Rather is a journalist, who happens to be a man. The cute, perky anchor on CNN (i haven't watched tv news in so long I don't know any names) is a woman, who got a job as a journalist. That's how too many people see it, without realizing that's what they are doing.

That's what we've got to fight. Not dicks. Well, different kinds of dicks, anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dalloway Donating Member (744 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. thanks for that thoughtful, articulate post.
Edited on Fri Aug-26-05 12:10 PM by dalloway
I don't mean to be harsh on men at all.

Why I think I was most offended was NOT b/c he is likely right that there are a lot of attractive women newscasters, but because it was EXACTLY THIS TYPE OF OGLING of them and his insensitive comments that ACTUALLY probably does make looks a characteristics in hiring. If you like the way she looks, fine. But by public gawking like he was doing he does nothing to help the situation. And to imply if she is beautiful that she must be less qualified drives me insane.

I'd love to live in a world where the beauty of our minds is more discussed that the size of our boobs or our great make-up jobs and plastic surgery.

And many men are exactly like that--my husband included. Those are the ones the smart women want to be with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
samsingh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
6. actually
the minute you tell a man not to think about his dick - you generally make him start to think about his dick.

its a very funny and complex organ.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txaslftist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #6
21. Astute.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CitrusLib Donating Member (748 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #6
26. Complex? Not hardly.
No pun intended. :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EnfantTerrible Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
7. I heard the show also
My immediate reaction was similar to yours... then I remembered that this is Jerry Springer!

Do we not remember his television show? He's a ring master... He just revamped his shlock format for a new market: Liberal Radio.

He's not worth the ire IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dalloway Donating Member (744 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. That was also part of my disappointment.
I expect better from AAR.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EnfantTerrible Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. Nebbish shock radio!
Brilliant. :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beelzebud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
8. The only problem is. He's right...
It's not sexist when it's the truth. Why do you think Fox News has larger number of "babes" than journalists?

Christiane Amonpour is a real women, and a real journalist.

Nora O'Donnell, and her ilk are just there to be a pretty face that lies to you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CatWoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. You know, night before last
Mike Malloy was making the very same observations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EnfantTerrible Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #8
19. He also said that Faux News
Had a tongue-cheek-approach to it's programming.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
10. Malloy was making a similar point the other day
I guess you should be mad at him too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dalloway Donating Member (744 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 12:15 PM
Original message
No. Somehow I don't think Malloy would have had the same
Edited on Fri Aug-26-05 12:16 PM by dalloway
tone. It was the tone and condescension that ticked me off. I'm not necessarily saying he isn't right. I'm just saying that if I don't want to turn on the radio and listed to an old man and his male callers gawking over newscasters when what I'd rather hear is some real info like the latest on the Able Danger cover-up or Fitz's investigation.

Springer wastes too much air time with crap like this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
16. go listen for yourself
Edited on Fri Aug-26-05 12:17 PM by LSK
http://www.whiterosesociety.org/Malloy.html

August 24 broadcast. About 20 minutes into the broadcast.

I think he said, go ahead, call me a lookist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dalloway Donating Member (744 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
17. I don't think Malloy would have, as Springer did,
"I think I'll cancel my subscription to Playboy and just watch the shows with the sound turned down."

or something pretty close to that.

THAT is the stuff offending me.---
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Snotcicles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
22. You should have called his show and express your feelings to him
One thing I know about Springer is he would have welcomed your comments.
He probably would have agreed with you and apologized.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dalloway Donating Member (744 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. couldn't. no cell phone. on the way to vacation.
I will email them though
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LizMoonstar Donating Member (392 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 12:11 PM
Response to Original message
13. Not necessarily true that women don't care how their newsanchors look...
Peter Jennings was one good-lookin' dude.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rniel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 12:12 PM
Response to Original message
14. I expect them
to replace all the female news anchors with playboy bunnies. I expect this to be complete within the next 2 hours. GET ON IT PEOPLE!! NOW!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
steve2470 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 12:15 PM
Response to Original message
15. If all the TV networks hired REAL female journalists with brains and
talent, I'd be willing to wager a few hundred bucks that the "babe quotient" would go down. We all know what the game is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Fate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
20. They all have long blonde locks & big ta-tas. He is right. n/t
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txaslftist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
23. It's surf appeal.
When I'm channel surfing and I hit a hot babe, I pause. Can't help it. I pause when I hit a James Bond movie. I pause when I see guns flashing or explosions. Or a really cool car. Or anything WWII or Civil War related.

I don't even think about it, but there it is.

It doesn't take me long to see that it's Faux news and accordingly vapid Republican whore-spew, but I pause.

Sadly, I would not pause for someone who looks like Martha Stewart (although curiously, I do pause when I see her face, just because her fall from grace was such a fantastic illustration of government overreaching and abuse. Her redemption an reinvention of self should be equally spellbinding -sorry, off point).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
I concur Donating Member (83 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 02:11 PM
Response to Original message
25. ...he's a pig!
He proved it when he had his television show.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Sep 30th 2014, 06:55 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC