current event
by Fox News offers a debate-oriented program known as "Hannity & Colmes" in which Sean Hannity leans to the right on current issues and Alan Colmes tends to argue more to the left. On a recent segment, they interviewed Michael Crook, the author of the infamous web site "Forsake The Troops!". During the interview, both Hannity and Colmes seemed to join sides against Mr. Crook and his outlandish assumptions and extreme conclusions that cover his web site.
But the subject of the debate is not what jumped out at me about this segment. Clearly, Mr. Crook's opinions are outliers on the scale of American thought. Regardless of their absurdity, Sean Hannity was relentless in his use of derogatory terms to attack Mr. Crook in an interview that the Fox News network certainly initiated, planned and executed. One must wonder what level of etiquette should be considered before berating a person on a world-wide broadcast. Is it ok for a network to say anything and everything they feel, or should program hosts use restraint? Sean Hannity's words were far less degrading than those found on Michael Crook's site, but should he bring himself down to that low level of discussion?
Add a Comment (12)
Email This
Message Author
I particularly like his ramblings under the salarytab of his website where he states:
As the solider progresses, and when/if they meet qualifications, such as rank, and time in, the military will supply him/her with a housing allowance, provided that the soldier lives off base (sometimes due to the fact that no on-base housing is available, due to overenlistment, and poor planning on the part of the military), depending on the branch of service.
Overenlistment? Is that even a word? I'm sorry I wasn't even aware that we had an "Overenlistment problem". Maybe this douche bag needs to read Will's article on the military's enlistment woes.
Poor taste? Are you kidding me? For the love of OmniNerd, who scores these things??
The "Forsake the Troops!" site is down.....WOO HOO!!!
Sold to the highest bidder on ebay.
If you have an Ebay login you can check it out by searching old items with the name "Forsake the Troops"
RSS
Hannity is a Cobra spy by Brandon :: NR9 :: on 25 May 2005
First reaction:
After watching the video, I have to say that Hannity was much more annoying than Crook. Some people have dumb opinions and make dumb websites, but having them on your show just to insult them is just as annoying, if not more so. Plus, Crook had a sweet haircut.
Deeper analysis:
One must wonder what level of etiquette should be considered before berating a person on a world-wide broadcast. Is it ok for a network to say anything and everything they feel, or should program hosts use restraint? Sean Hannity's words were far less degrading than those found on Michael Crook's site, but should he bring himself down to that low level of discussion?
I don't think Hannity & Colmes are obligated to do anything on their show other than observe the law - including maintaining a certain level of etiquette or restraint. However, I think journalism like that portrayed by Hannity in the interview with Crook is low quality because it forgoes an opportunity to educate its audience in order to get hyped up calling someone they didn't agree with names. This leads those watching to think they have an educated opinion on something when they actually know nothing about it at all. In this case, I can picture a conversation between someone who had just seen this interview and a friend as going something like this:
"I saw the biggest idiot on TV the other day. He actually started a website called 'forsakethetroops.' Can you believe that?"
"People like that shouldn't be allowed to live in this country. He should be deported to Cuba to see how he likes it without those troops protecting him."
"No doubt. I'm going to go buy five more 'support the troops' magnets for my car because I'm a real American."
The issues aren't debated or even brought up and neither of the two imaginary people in the dialogue have any idea as to the content of the website or the validity of its arguments. If Hannity had presented information instead of cut-downs, the conversation might have gone something like this:
"I saw the biggest idiot on TV the other day. He started a website called 'forsakethetroops' and is arguing that blah blah blah... which doesn't make any sense because blah blah blah..."
"I may or may not agree with those 'blahs', but at least now I know what I'm judging."
"And knowing is half the battle."
RE: Hannity is a Cobra spy by Liz_Miracle :: NR5 :: on 25 May 2005
I agree with Brandon on this one. Whether or not a news anchor uses tact or not is up to him (depending on how much he likes his job or jail for that matter). However, news is supposed to be just that. Give us an event, and present who, what, why, where, and how. I don't care if the interviewer agrees with who he's interviewing or not, his job is to tell me the facts, get answers and allow me to make a decision. I think had Crook been allowed to continue with his own thought process it would have inevitably failed. Hannity tried to prove this, but did a rather inefficient job. I too am angered by what Crook wrote, but I find that all the more reason to allow him to use his own words to make him look like an idiot with failed logic.
RE: Hannity is a Cobra spy by markmcb :: NR7 :: on 25 May 2005
However, news is supposed to be just that. Give us an event, and present who, what, why, where, and how.
I'd agree with you if it were done in a news report, but Hannity and Colmes is an opinionated program that digests the news and doesn't necessarily report it. It's not the traditional news report and therefore can stray from the 5WH rule. (Yes, I just made that name up.)
That aside, I really wish they would have let this guy get a full sentence out. They seemed so focused on ensuring that they tell me that he's a moron, that I never got to really see it for myself. (Though it was plainly obvious.)
RE: Hannity is a Cobra spy by mwhite :: NR5 :: on 25 May 2005
Hannity and Colmes is an opinionated program that digests the news and doesn't necessarily report it.
Whether they are 'digesting' the news or not, they should provide some kind of baseline to the issure before calling their guests names. If I wanted to see people get attacked without completing a full thought first, I'd turn on Jerry Springer. Actually, even Jerry let's his guests, no matter how whacko, speak their mind before being attacked from behind by an obese, bikini-glad ex-girlfriend. This segment speaks poorly of Hannity and Colmes and their guest, but more so of H&C.
The most frustrating part for me was that I had to visit this guy's website to figure out what it was they were so mad at him about. I resent being suckered into that site because they wouldn't let the guy explain in his own words how dumb he is. If he had been able to speak a little bit, I could have saved myself the trip through his ignorant and moronic web-thoughts.
RE: Hannity is a Cobra spy by markmcb :: NR7 :: on 25 May 2005
I see what you're saying, but it's not entirely true. In Hannity's intro, he says something along the lines of, "Regardless of your political stance, you probably agree that troops deserve some sort of support. There is a man with a web site who thinks soldiers are overpaid, thinks wounded soldiers are leeches, and celebrates when soldiers are wounded and killed." He then reads a series of quotes from the site and asks Crook if those are his words.
If you couldn't figure out what Crook was "about" at that point, then I'm not sure what else would have helped. It'd be like Hannity saying, "so you believe that chickens are our overlords, correct?" Do you really need to hear the guy say anything other than "yes" to know he's not the most rational fellow?
I agree that Hannity went overboard on the offensive, but he did give the who, what, when, where, and how. The "why" was the only thing cut short, but even that was apparent by the end: money and poor decisions. I'm curious as to what you gained from the website that wasn't obvious in the interview.
RE: Hannity is a Cobra spy by mwhite :: NR5 :: on 25 May 2005
Forced back to a second viewing, I concede that there was a bit more substance to the second half of the interview than I initially gave credit. So I'll fall back to the position of most others here: that the initial attack on the guy, the commentators' 'digestion,' while possibly warranted given the full story, certainly distracted from the viewers' ability to get that full story and digest the position for themselves. It obviously distracted me from evaluating the guy in one viewing of the segment. With a position so out there, Hannity would have made his point much better with more examination along the lines of Combs' interview than merely slinging insults out of the gate.
RE: Hannity is a Cobra spy by milhous :: NR5 :: on 29 May 2005
I believe we haven't seen the last of this "Crook". A friend of mine did some good detective work and found an old website by this kid which has an article about his prior enlisted experience. In the article under his "in the news" tab he talks about the enormous pride he felt while serving in the army. It seems that this kid is just pissed off and knows how to use the media to get his story heard. Whatever brain power he has left after that is left to be seen.
RE: Hannity is a Cobra spy by mwhite :: NR5 :: on 29 May 2005
It looks like the two articles he wrote about his time in the military are under his "His writings" link (not the "In the news" link). The story basically describes how he joined the military and then washed out in basic training for being underweight. At one point he writes:
...I feel sadness, because I know I'm not on the training field finishing my basic training as I should be. I feel jealousy fill up within me every time I pass a serviceperson in the mall or elsewhere. In a few cases, I've stopped and spoken briefly with them and reminded them how privileged they are to be serving out country.
And that is what people should think about when they sign up for the military. It's not just about the pay, the benefits, and the "perks". It's mainly about defending our country and making sure our freedom stays intact.
These statements couldn't be any different than his special Memorial Day Message. The guy clearly has some mental issues.
And wherever these new views came from, he is clearly reveling in the attention they are bringing him. At the end of his Philly Story he brags at the number of hits his site gets after the news broadcasts and how he "became a topic of conversation on weblogs, and radio shows nationwide."
Clearly the best response to this guy, if you can stand it, is to ignore him.