NEIL CAVUTO GOES OFF ON IVY LEAGUE DON!!!

Fox News Channel ^ | March 28, 2003 | Neil Cavuto

[Illbay]

OMGOODNESS!

Neil Cavuto, Sr. Business Editor and Anchor on FNC, apparently received an email from an "Ivy League Professor" chiding him for his "bias," telling him that a "real journalist" isn't supposed to be so obviously on the side of the United States in this conflict, telling him that he "betrays journalistic ethics" by so doing.

Cavuto stated that he wouldn't read the professor's name or affiliation, because what he was about to say in reply was so scathing and personal that he wanted to feel free to say it.

Then he LAUNCHED man!

Wish I had a transcript! In essence he told this elitist that he ought to be ashamed for benefitting from the freedom and liberty afforded by this country without showing the least amount of respect or gratitude for it.

If I can find Neil's words, I am GOING to post them! He was almost shaking, he was so angry, but he managed somehow to keep his composure! But he DRILLED this guy!

It was something to witness!

[AlexW]

My email to Neil:

Mr. Cavuto,

I do not recall hearing a better editorial. It was priceless.

With the university professors that have taken over education
in our universities, Sadam does not need chemical weapons.
We have enough toxic filth from the ivy league to destroy all
that made America great.

[CyberAnt]

And ... commercials have been kept to a minimum. Not so on the other stations.

I would bet some sponsors were willing to contribute to this type of programming even though they got less commercials for their buck.

[AgentEcho]

If anyone remembers the old video game Punch Out!:

Body blow, Body blow, Upper cut, Body blow, Right...hook, Right...hook

He's Down for the count

Æ

[Contra]

This is why people are watching FOX rather than those other communist news networks. And to call FOX's coverage, or Cavuto biased, but claim that the others (like CNN) are not biased, is absolutely ridiculous. Look, CNN and all those other liberals can keep telling you and themselves how patriotic they are for being anti-American, but at the end of the day they are not patriotic, just anti-American. And the people know this. FOX, Rush, Drudge, the Washington Times, they are all the dominant media sources now and the liberals are feeling the pinch. CNN has got to be alarmed by the fact that more people are watching FOX's coverage than theirs. They just assumed that when the bombs started falling people would turn to them, but it didn't happen. And it's because people don't want to see anti-American propaganda, which is not patriotic at all (and not "the truth" either). People are not going to forget that FOX was not only patriotic, but truthful, during this war, while CNN, MSNBC, PBS and others were anti-American, untruthful, and even treasonous.

[=Intervention=]

You cannot possibly be that ignorant. You must certainly be stirring the pot for the sake of argument.

[Lost Highway]

Everyone knows that a good journalist hopes the USA loses. Just ask any CNN reporter.

[alisasny]

Hannity just said his show tonight will be commercial free, Fox must be doing very well.

[CyberAnt]

You are right on the money.

I saw the article about FOX being ahead of CNN for war coverage, and that CNN was shocked to find that out. Such total arrogance has been truly rewarded.

[pilgrim]

In contrast with a couple of other "news reporters!!"  What makes me ill......I heard this and did nothing!

---

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/96feb/media/media.htm

 

Why has the media establishment become so unpopular? Perhaps the public has good reason to think that the media's self-aggrandizement gets in the way of solving the country's real problems

by James Fallows

Snippet: 

"Ogletree brought them into the same hypothetical war. He asked Jennings to imagine that he worked for a network that had been in contact with the enemy North Kosanese government. After much pleading Jennings and his news crew got permission from the North Kosanese to enter their country and film behind the lines. Would Jennings be willing to go? Of course, he replied. Any reporter would--and in real wars reporters from his network often had.

But while Jennings and his crew were traveling with a North Kosanese unit, to visit the site of an alleged atrocity by U.S. and South Kosanese troops, they unexpectedly crossed the trail of a small group of American and South Kosanese soldiers. With Jennings in their midst the Northern soldiers set up an ambush that would let them gun down the Americans and Southerners.

What would Jennings do? Would he tell his cameramen to "Roll tape!" as the North Kosanese opened fire? What would go through his mind as he watched the North Kosanese prepare to fire?

Jennings sat silent for about fifteen seconds. "Well, I guess I wouldn't," he finally said. "I am going to tell you now what I am feeling, rather than the hypothesis I drew for myself. If I were with a North Kosanese unit that came upon Americans, I think that I personally would do what I could to warn the Americans."

Even if it meant losing the story? Ogletree asked.

Even though it would almost certainly mean losing my life, Jennings replied. "But I do not think that I could bring myself to participate in that act. That's purely personal, and other reporters might have a different reaction."

Ogletree turned for reaction to Mike Wallace, who immediately replied. "I think some other reporters would have a different reaction," he said, obviously referring to himself. "They would regard it simply as another story they were there to cover." A moment later Wallace said, "I am astonished, really." He turned toward Jennings and began to lecture him: "You're a reporter. Granted you're an American" (at least for purposes of the fictional example; Jennings has actually retained Canadian citizenship). "I'm a little bit at a loss to understand why, because you're an American, you would not have covered that story."

Ogletree pushed Wallace. Didn't Jennings have some higher duty to do something other than just roll film as soldiers from his own country were being shot?

"No," Wallace said flatly and immediately. "You don't have a higher duty. No. No. You're a reporter!" (Emphasis mine)

Jennings backtracked fast. Wallace was right, he said: "I chickened out." Jennings said that he had "played the hypothetical very hard."He had lost sight of his journalistic duty to remain detached.

As Jennings said he agreed with Wallace, several soldiers in the room seemed to regard the two of them with horror. Retired Air Force General Brent Scowcroft, who would soon become George Bush's National Security Advisor, said it was simply wrong to stand and watch as your side was slaughtered. "What's it worth?" he asked Wallace bitterly. "It's worth thirty seconds on the evening news, as opposed to saving a platoon."

[Tuscaloosa Goldfinch]

Professors like this loony are the biggest cowards of all, because they LIE their a**es off daily, professing to be objective AND knowledgegable, attacking the country that allows them their idiotic rantings, while benefiting from the fruits of the freedom we live under. (and often crying discrimination if anyone disagrees with them.)

OR ... FLUNKING anyone who disagrees with them. How many times have I heard ... just give the answers the professor wants on the tests and keep your opinions to yourself if you want to pass. Sheesh.

[Paul Atreides]

I would love to see him light into that idiot Columbia professor.

[LibertarianLiz]

You have the right to be the self-absorbed, condescending imbecile you apparently are and I have the right to tell you that. You didn't give me that right, professor. My country did.

Yahoo, Neil Cavuto. He's hit two in a row, yesterday's commentary was just as scathing about the French.

[watchin]

Yikes! A real scorcher. Go get 'em Neil.

[hobson]

Should we email Neil this tread? He needs to receive a ton of emails with kudos!

[watchin]

How about this, then: I think you're a loser. Almost every word you type on FR is more proof of the same. Feel free to respond.

[jonathonandjennifer]

You have the right to be the self-absorbed, condescending imbecile you apparently are and I have the right to tell you that. You didn't give me that right, professor. My country did.

WOW! Much more plain speaking like this is required of the media. Although this was certainly not "plain" in its skill and accuracy; six in the 10 ring.

One small comment, in no way critical of Mr. Cavuto: God gave him that right, not our country.

[MEG33]

Oh, please do!

[wallcrawlr]

WHOA!

Thats awesome.

[Naspino]

If journalists do not question the Iraqi position (any they cannot or they would be killed) then they have no choice but to spill their natural hatred out on the United States. Of course -- even if they could -- I doubt they would act any different.

There is no such thing as unbiased journalism in world politics. You are either with us or against us. If you don't question the other side then you are with them especially when its such a fundamental difference between good and evil. You cannot wonder whether the Iraqis are better off under Saddam Hussein than without. They are -- Period.

[CaptIsaacDavis]

Neil is the MAN!!!!