Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : THE WHITE HOUSE -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (8750)	9/21/2007 1:03:03 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 25737

Re: "Of course you're entitled to your own opinion, but one would presume it had some basis in fact... and if you've been watching him for years then you ought to have numerous examples by now.... I believe I have proven my point, you have attempted to make a mockery of someone without any shred of evidence...." I think my question was what MANNER of 'proof' would be acceptable to you in this instance? I mean, yeah, I've watched a TON of Bill O'Reilly's show over the years (the basis for my opinions about him, of course, which I never claimed were superior to anyone else's opinions), but it's not like I videotaped several hundred hours of his shows and have them all cross-indexed on digital media and handy for contextual searches, or anything. Let's assume for the purpose of this discussion that I haven't devoted years to archiving his utterances and broadcasts into searchable digital media, and merely have my own fallible human memory to turn to for the experiential facts that I base my opinions upon. --- Let's assume that because it happens to be true. :-) So, absent that... I was left wondering exactly what form of 'proof' would have been acceptable to you? Is there some sort of external Mass Media monitoring organization who's conclusions would be acceptable to you as 'proof'? Or some sort of poll of the public's opinions about him or something that would be acceptable as 'proof'? That was why I asked if you had any transcripts or any such thing that we could agree on as 'evidence', and then which I could use in an attempt to justify my opinions. Though... even printed transcripts would lose some necessary information --- unless every question and answer were time-stamped. 'Cause, otherwise, how would we be able to employ statistics to conclude whether the host (like so many 'Talking Heads' do these days...) had a habit of 'talking-over' his guests, or 'cutting short' their replies? Only a detailed statistical examination (with a long enough baseline of evidence - likely years's worth) could definitively answer such a question. And, for that, the ideal thing would be to turn a database search loose on archived digital video. Resources I certainly don't have access to at the moment. :-) So, absent a COMPUTERIZED statistical examination of his shows... we are left with just the impressions and opinions of humans who have watched his shows and witnessed his speaking style. (Which is why I asked if 'polling' would be a form of 'proof' you would accept....)