Ed Henry reported on another flip flop from the White House, this one concerning terrorists tribunals. 2 days, 2 switcheroos.....me thinks the ghost of a President past has returned to haunt the new administration. Dick Cheney must be dancing a jig....let's hope his heart is strong enough to stand all the excitement (or not). Add to this the Pelosi mess and things are looking a little bleak in Democratville.
Paul Begala and Ari Fleisher joined AC for a discussion of the days developments. Usually I enjoy Ari, but tonight I found him to be obnoxious, smug and rude. Paul had the best line of the night when he said 'Excuse me for talking while you're interrupting'.
Good news for weed smokers....you're getting more bang for your buck. Randi Kaye filed a report on the new super charged pot and how the government has decided to approach those who use. Sanjay Gupta gave us the science behind the drug and its affect on the brain in adults and in children.
Jason Carroll caught us up on the NTSB hearings on the crash of flight 3407 in Buffalo. Under paid pilots, under trained pilots and under experienced pilots were some of the shocking details to come out of the hearings.
The 360 Bulletin with Erica Hill:
• Swine flu has shut down 3 NYC schools in Queens
• President Obama will tackle the credit card industries business tactics
• Chrysler will close 789 dealerships in the US
• Karl Rove will face questioning in the 2006 dismissal of US attorneys
• Palin is defending Miss California (they are a match made in Hell)
• Rumsfield's were accosted by protesters at the WHCD this past weekend
Another excellent follow-up report by Gary Tuchman tonight on the suicide of Jaheem Herrera. Jaheem was the 11 year old Atlanta boy who was taunted by schoolmates who said he was gay. The family's attorney has said he will file charges against the boys school and school system for tolerating bullying. I think this action is the only way schools are going to take notice that this bulling needs to stop.
'The Shot' was an heartwarming look at a dog who was struck by a car (and will survive) and the dog who stopped traffic to prevent further injury. I still am not able to clip so if you missed it follow the link to the 360 Blog.
Anderson and Erica showed some clips from his appearance on Ellen on Thursday. If you missed it here is the pop quiz game. Thanks to BA for staying up waaaay past her bedtime to upload these for me.
And the opening segment.
Did you catch AC saying that he would dance for Ellen's 2,000 program (she just passed 1,000 this month). ATA will pass the 2,000 post mark early next year (if we last that long). I wonder if Anderson will do a little dance for us? Maybe we should start a petition? :)
If you missed the special 'Money & Main Street' that aired at 8 tonight, hosted by AC and Ali Velshi, it will re-air on Saturday and Sunday evenings at 8 PM.
I've got a question for all of you. We've had some really negative comments come our way in the last few days (and you should see the ones we reject). I'm wondering what you think about the way we handle them. Obviously, if someone seems deranged, or doesn't follow our guidelines those comments are easy to reject. But if someone submits a comment that is well thought out and their honest opinion, but full of hate and disdain for AC/the 360 crew/CNN, should it be posted? I'm not talking about the occasional 'I hated last night's program' or 'What did they do with my AC360'...we're all guilty of that. I'm talking people we refer to as 'the haters' since they just seem to hate everything and everyone associated with AC360. For the life of me I don't understand why they visit ATA or watch CNN since they seem to despise it so much, but there they are, day in and day out, sharing their negativity. When the comments are posted it usually does start a dialogue, and I think that's a good thing. But do you think by giving them a forum we're making a mistake? Just curious as to your take on this.
Ms. Sapphire is off tomorrow night. Tedi B is still on her extended vacation, but will be blogging from the road, if technology cooperates. I will be around to do screengrabs for her. Have a great Friday one and all. ~Phebe
All Things Anderson is a blog dedicated to CNN's AC360 and its host Anderson Cooper.
41 comments:
Phebe: I just have to say, I love it when you and EM and Cyn post or is it blog, I get confused. Your hearts are in it and it shows, it really does.
Now for your question: I think you should post it, if it is respectful
and well thought out because people take the time to phrase and rephrase thoughts and are disappointed when their posts don't appear. If it is not respectful of AC, than no. Having said that if something is publicized on another site and it is published and there is a reference given, newspaper etc. that too should be posted. I've often written what I felt was respectful, given a reference, and it was either overlooked or not acknowledged and I had not the slightest idea why. Just a suggestion.
Kitzel
A pretty good show on Thursday, Paul Begala and Gary Tuchman get shout-outs and The Shot was indeed heartwarming.
Thanks for the Ellen clip, I didn't get to see the show. Loved that Anderson said "The Mole" but hated that he said "Amazing Race 2" because to me that counts as a repeat. But I loved how excited Anderson was to win the contest. It wasn't pathetic, Anderson, it was cute. For the second contest, it was interesting that no one said Oprah.
What to do with posts that just downright hate 360 and everything about it? I would include the ones that make valid points and offer constructive critiques. I would exclude the ones that complain about the same things over and over again and it's more blather and froth than anything else.
Jaanza
As I'm up late tonight burning DVD's from the party in NOLA last weekend, may I weigh in on Phebe's question?
First Amendment. As long as a poster follows the guidelines. Most of the discussions work themselves out and move on. This is a civil and polite blog site and on the whole, everyone abides by the rules.
We're in trouble if we can't have discourse and difference of opinion.
"Balance and perspective" as our favorite newsman has said on occasion.
360 last nite was so much better than wednesday nite.
Well I guess pot somokers will be happy knowing their pot is stronger than it was 20 years ago. I liked that Dr.Gupta was live in studio with AC. Anderson seemed pretty into his discussion with Sanjay.
Good for Jaheem Harrera's family for suing the school. For whatever reason these schools don't really want to do anything about bullying. I guess they figure if they ignore it it'll go away, but it doesn't, it only gets worse.
AC on Ellen was OK. It was better than the past couple of time he was on. He seems to really enjoy being on there.
As for the commenters, its a touchy subject. It can create dialogue, but then it can also great arguments. I guess it just depends on each comment. I guess just use your best judgment, Phebe.
I'd like to all comments, even if they are constantly negative. I think everyone deserves a voice.
Personally, I'd like to see the deranged ones as well, just out of curiosity. ;)
I think the commenters really hostile and negative towards Anderson and 360 may start some discussion but I think it's very rarely productive discussion. Usually I find the comments and the decision to hang around an AC fansite posting them irrational.
There is also the possibility of commenters like that alienating people who actually are here as part of an appreciation of AC and his work and leading them to no longer want to read posted comments or participate in discussion.
Regarding the Ellen quiz I imagine people are giving AC a hard time that he didn't name Kelly Ripa or himself (both he and Ellen were mostly picking talk show hosts but the category didn't actually specify talk show so I think Anderson would count as an answer). I've seen other people play the game and they were allowed to give another answer if they said a repeat, but Anderson obviously didn't know that's the way it works from Ellen's explanation (she really didn't do a great job on that). I do find it amusing he so obviously wanted to win but he used up part of the 30 seconds giving a whole apology instead of a quick "sorry" after misunderstanding how the game worked.
Hi Phebe, I love to ponder the ideas of others as long as they are in keeping with the guidelines of this blog. IMHO perceptions are not fact, they are a mirror of the individuals state of mind. As I read any blog I keep that in mind. With that said, I would not spend any time reading comments that spew hate because it is not fact, just someone's state of mind that hopefully, with self introspection, will change over time.
I like this blog because you manage that well.
We have freedom of speech but I also keep in mind that words have an energy component, the same as everything else, and as negative words expand so does negative energy. Giving individuals a forum for their hateful speech serves no purpose, other than, to encourage them to do more of it.
Thanks for your great blog
Judy
Phebe--there is nothing wrong with constructive critizism--but hatefulness I can do without. People with hidden agendas -- would be nice to have them weeded out--don't need their negative energy!
Thanks for all your hard work -- truly enjoy your blog.
Bonnie
In court proceedings, there's a rule permitting exclusion of evidence that's merely cumulative -- that which adds nothing new but just repeats what's already been offered. If I were in your position, I'd follow the rule here.
For example: some folks think he's copping out by showing that there are 2 sides to every issue without stating his own opinion on a subject -- it's fine to make that observation, but repeating it daily serves no purpose & becomes nothing more than nagging & harping.
As far as the whole comment posting thing: I think that you should post a little constructive criticism as well. I mean, to be honest, if you can post "oh, his hair looked great last night", "I love that tie, my favorite." "I'm lovin' AC standing at the beginning of 360." "His hair looks great short on the sides." Those are just a few things that I've seen that really gets under my skin. Phebe, if you guys can post the irrelevant, I don't see how a little criticism here and there will hurt. Otherwise you'll kinda come off as a one-sided blog, imo. I think there is a difference between criticism twords 360 and AC himself where you might have to draw the line. I think that shots twords 360 should be a go as long as they are respectful though. Its not like ATA is affiliated with 360. And afterall we are fans of 360 with opinions on the show. As far as shots at AC you might wanna be careful on that one. I think criticism twords AC should be OK as long its related to 360. But if its personal criticism that's where you might want to draw the line. I've read a lot of stuff on the web about AC that is not pleasant. And I'm sure ATA gets its share of that crap too.
I have to agree with Bonnie. I don't mind criticism but there are too many just down right hateful people.
Also, having been around awhile I also know that there are people with hidden agendas (as someone else stated) and it gets old. Very old after awhile.
For me, I just feel like the same discussion comes up every few months...
-the show sucks
-the ratings sucks
-Anderson doesn't seem to be into it
Go back and read comments since the beginning and you see the same things.
I really don't have an issue with people saying they don't like the show or are having an issue with it but if it's a constant thing then I really do feel that those people need to move on to watch another show or at the very least take their complaints to someone that can change things. Saying the same thing here day after day after day isn't going to change 360.
I guess, to me, I really don't mind people making suggestions or critizing the show in a constructive way, but there is a huge difference between doing that and just being hateful. I fully admit I hate conflict so I don't really care for arguing about things. But if others don't mind that I can deal with that too.
Did I make any sense? lol
First things first; you asked a serious question, and have already received thoughtful answers. Here's mine:
I am extremely grateful that this site is moderated with such care. It takes no time at all to find sites which do not. The hateful, deranged spewing of venom available for public consumption in those venues is atrocious. It's pretty clear, as well, that many contributors in this category have no training in punctuation, composition, or grammar and that, for these reasons, their displeasure at something can only be expressed without subtlety or even a connection with reality. So, thank you ATA (and especially you, Phebe) for reading through and rejecting this crap in advance.
As for the more thoughtful "haters" as you call them, I see no need to further moderate their statements. The more aggressive ones advertise their agenda in the first couple of lines and one can skip over them quickly. Those whose comments are typically limited to a lament on the state of the ratings, or criticism about their perception of AC's or CNN's political "agenda" are entitled to their opinion.
A good guide might be whether the subject at hand on a given day is addressed in a mostly positive or mostly not-so-positive vein by your "named" regular contributors. If they are upset over something in particular or a trend in the show, then even more commentary from "Anonymous" might be warranted. Good taste isn't always all its cracked up to be. I like it when the blood boils a little.
Shout out to Anons Bonnie, Judy and Kitzel - for participating by name. Jaanza, always love your thoughtful commentary - why don't you join Blogger?
Loved Ellen, of course. AC360 was better than Wednesday, and not as good as Tuesday, which was waay better than Monday! I have to admit to being distracted recently by other interests, and I find myself just glancing up from time to time when Anderson is on screen. I find myself wishing they could expand a little on the laundry list of subjects covered in Erica's 45 second appearance. some of those sound interesting.
Huge thank you for telling us Doggie Mom will be OK. What a fabulous story. In some cities the police would have just shot the defending pup. Thank God, that was not the news.
Hi Phebe, about the comments, my answer is yes, post all comments as long as they meet your guidelines. If a person expresses hatred or disdain for the show or someone on it, they could have a valid point. The most uninteresting sites are those that post only positive comments. They are not a true representation of what people think. I call these cheerleading sites. The show needs blunt criticism in order to survive. You could call it tough love.
Several months ago I commented that I'd noticed a pattern of certain posters who seem to come here specifically to complain about Anderson/Erica/360 in a manner that didn't seem the least bit "constructive", but merely mean-spirited and bitter - some of these people appear to have a disdainful and condescending attitude towards AC fans as well and they take on this "above it all" attitude about how some of us express our appreciation for him. I said before that most of us have occasional negative opinions about the program and perhaps we might even become frustrated with something AC or Erica have done, but the majority of us ARE actually fans of theirs and do have genuine admiration for them. I don't get that feeling from some of these commentors - they have this tendency to come off like they have nothing but contempt for Anderson (and sometimes Erica) and everything he's ever done - nothing he does is good enough. Having said that, there are commentors here who make valid points about problems with the show and their views should be heard - there's a definite difference in the tone of the hateful commentors and the ones who are just expressing their frustrations with the show - I agree with ACAnderFan, just use your best judgement in determining which comments to post.
I always think positive and negative comments should be heard. The hateful ones are the ones that make me exit quickly. I'm here because I enjoy 360 and AC and understand that nothing is perfect.
I have a very odd take on comments. I find that I get to know the poster and can determine how constructive she or he is being by knowing who they are. There is history to their posts. If something negative is posted by someone who is usually respectful and falls off the wagon once, you know it was an odd moment or they were heated up. When I read constant posts from annon's I kind of put them all in the same category as quite a few are negative - not all, but alot and I can't tell if it is the same person or tons of different people. There is no way to go back and kind of look at that persons history to see if I feel it is valid or want to comment back. I would hope if people want to comment, they would do so by identifying themselves. Why do they use annon and not their names? I have never gotten an answer to that. I think to use annon gives them free reign to say whatever and not be responsible for it. Please - I don't want every annon throwing tomatoes and I'm not trying to be disrespectful, however, I do believe when you put your name to something, you, more than not, say things somewhat differently. Its kind of like trying to communicate to a random voice - plus it has been fun getting to know people that you can call or write by name. Just my very own opinion.
Looks like I missed a good show last night :(. It was hard giving up 360 for Grey's, but it had to be done.
Thanks for the Ellen clips! I love Anderson's competitive side.
As for the question you asked Phebe...I think that as long people are constructively criticizing the show it's fine. I don't want to hear anyone be disrespectful towards anyone else, but differing opinions on the show are fine to me.
I wonder if CNN would consider having Ellen DeGeneres co-host NYE with Anderson.
He obviously likes her, they have a good rapport, and there would not be the controversy of Kathy "love her or hate her" Griffin.
M in Oregon 11:36 AM - Why don't I join Blogger?
Well, way back in the day of Peter's Anderson Cooper Effects website, I tried to sign in as a regular and there was some snafu so instead I kept posting as Anonymous and signed my name in the post.
I think the snafu was because this computer also belongs to someone else here and he probably already had his own Blogger identity. I don't know the technicalities of how these things work but I'll ask him later about it.
Thanks, M, for saying I posted thoughtful commentary. I try my best but often I read the other posts and think 'gee, I wish I wrote that.'
Happy Birthday, Cyn!
Jaanza
I really enjoyed the Ellen appearance. He seemed a bit younger and more carefree than usual; it was nice to see him just sit and shoot the breeze with somebody. I'm glad he had a good time and I do think he's generous to show us that side of him.
I loved:
"Real Housewives of NYC."
"Amazing!"
"No, say a *show*, Anderson."
"Oh!"
...Hee.
We had power outages two nights in a row at my house, so I've been catching as much of 360 as I can in repeats.
I'm on the fence about comments...I tend to agree with Tedi B (yes, you made sense, dear!). I do think that constructive criticism should be posted, but there are certain disrespectful things that are pointless and mean and shouldn't be. Like the anonymous comment a bit ago that snidely said that Anderson, Erica and Jack are "dysfunctional." That was all the person said. I would not have allowed that through. It's not based on anything factual--you can't believe everything you read about Anderson's personal life, Jack is self-deprecating for humor's sake, and Erica is married with a child, for heaven's sake. What on Earth is dysfunctional about her? Why would you post here merely to call these people dysfunctional? It's just not nice and it's not conducive to any sort of dialogue. These people have families, and their loved ones might be hurt by reading such things. I don't see the point to comments like that one being posted. That's called "flaming" in most circles and I personally would prefer not to see those comments.
Kitzel, it's possible that some of your earlier comments may not have been posted because they had links in them? Just a thought. Also, sometimes Blogger eats them. I find that logging into Gmail first and then refreshing this page *before* I type my comment helps, rather than typing it and then putting in my login information and hitting "publish." If I am already logged in, Blogger doesn't eat my comments. That was my problem for awhile before I figured it out--I would get the green message stating that my comment had gone through, but then Phebe & co. wouldn't receive it. It's a finicky little website we have here. :P
There are some really, really lovely anonymous posters here and I always enjoy those comments. However, comments like: "Well, I don't KNOW about the REST of you but I think Anderson might as well get another JOB, and perhaps some of you might disagree but WHATEVER" begin to sound like white noise after awhile. If people can post their criticism without sounding like a 13 year old girl about to stomp to her room and slam the door, we might have a more positive response.
Note to everyone: capital letters don't make you correct, they just make you irritating.
Welcome, Judy and Bonnie! Thanks for your lovely contributions.
@olsond: It is wrong to lump all anonymous people TOGETHER. I have, as well as others, posted anonymously for a long time. In fact, I've played the "devil's advocate,"quite a lot. Not on purpose, but because that was the way in which I felt, but I always felt it was legitimate and respectful.
People often post anonymously because they get hateful replies that are posted and called names by those who have Google accounts and when the anons try to reply, they cannot respond. Some commentors who go by name are immature and say things like quote "Your kind," and it is posted. Just because you give a name does not give you the right to
insult. You may disagree, but it should always be in a respectful manner.
A while back, I critized AC for spending too much time on a certain someone, and a Phil replied on this BLOG: "I will now vomit." It never should have been posted, even though it said Phil.
We all like EM, because she has a way of disagreeing in a nice, reasonable manner and that is appreciated by all.
EM, in my opinion, you are a role model and I have read your posts many times and you have read mine, under anonymous. Might I also include M in Oregon and Aires Moon, whose politics is always right on, though we have disagreed on AC...but it was with respect.
Words Matter.
Kitzel
Phebe, I noticed in your blog you said in (), "if we last that long,"
in reference to Ellen's 2000th episode. I gather you've seen AC's latest ratings from Thursday. Shall we say, "in the dog house" and let it go at that.
I know people are tired of hearing about it, but unfortunately, AC appears on our screens, because of RATINGS.
On a liter note, David Gergen did make mention of AC's popularity on college campuses. It's a shame that hasn't translating into the R word.
@anon: 3:50 PM: That's a terrific idea!! Try contacting 360 about it.
The ratings would be over the top.
Happy Birthday Cyn. :)
I am one that doesn't like the hateful comments about Anderson, Erica or the 360 team.
We all know that there are issues with the SHOW, but that can't be all Anderson or Erica's fault. Maybe they need a change in producers to give the show a new prospective. Also none of us are perfect and neither are they.
What I worry about is the ratings and how long CNN will stand by the show without replacing Anderson or he gets upset about the ratings and leaves after his contract is up. I am sure he could obtain another job, but we probably wouldn't get him every night like we do now.
I guess what I am trying to say, is that if people do not like Anderson or the show, as others have said here, vote with their remote and watch something that they would enjoy more.
Thank you,
Jasper
Constructive criticism is fine, so long as it really is constructive.
Often times I’ve read the most despicable, disgusting & condescending comments pertaining to Anderson personally, his Program, his accomplishments and achievements or his personal life in general that have nothing to do with his Program. It is absolutely beyond me, why people who “pose” as fans of Anderson’s, what do they get out of such spiteful comments.
I honestly believe once someone has crossed that line and such comments are posted, the snowball affect of such comments spinning out of control are endless, so why give them an avenue to engage in such malevolent commentary in the first place? Nobody deserves that, no matter how public a profile you may have, that line should never be crossed. NEVER.
I’m of the opinion that comments on this and every other blog should be constructive, factual and specific to the topic at hand. On multiple occasions I’ve come across some of the most hateful and distasteful comments posted by individuals who comment just to start a “war of words”. It’s like these people have nothing else better to do with their time, except think of ways to nit-pick at Anderson personally, as well as his Program or the Rating of his Show. I have no use for such individuals or such comments and find them counter-productive to the time, energy and dedication the Moderators and more disciplined Commenter’s put in to this Blog.
In my opinion, NO, such comments and individuals should not be allowed to par-take in this process if they can’t be constructive and share in the true spirit and reason this Blog was started, which I believe was to celebrate a magnificent and Professional Journalist, Author and Humanitarian. If they can’t learn to play by the rules, go find some place else to spew their verbal crap.
"Like the anonymous comment a bit ago that snidely said that Anderson, Erica and Jack are "dysfunctional." That was all the person said. I would not have allowed that through. It's not based on anything factual--you can't believe everything you read about Anderson's personal life, Jack is self-deprecating for humor's sake, and Erica is married with a child, for heaven's sake. What on Earth is dysfunctional about her? Why would you post here merely to call these people dysfunctional? It's just not nice and it's not conducive to any sort of dialogue. "
I said that.
That was a JOKE. Go back and read it. What's funny is that Anderson, Erica, and Jack would've all thought it was funny. If not funny, certainly not anything offensive. J-O-K-E
@12:11 pm: Forgive me for not using your Blogger name. By the time I get to comments, I'd have forgotten it.
You are absolutely right. If there were no controversy there would be
no discussion and this blog would be boring, which it is not, thankfully. If everyone agreed on everything what a bland world. The idea is to discuss, not to demean or ridicule....and that goes for comments to commentors as well.
Thanks for that recap, Phebe. And I do hope that all of us will be here for the 2000th post! Regarding your question...
I do think that any comments reflecting constructive criticism should be allowed. As Laurie Beth said regarding the haters, "It's just not nice and it's not conducive to any sort of dialogue." I understand that everyone has a right to have their voice heard, but sometimes their thoughts aren't relevant to what any of us are here for. I don't think these people should find another corner of the internet to infect with their idiocy.
On another note: there will be a segment on NOLA and the FEMA trailers on the show tonight...I'm sure this will be a chance for the 360 team to win us over again!
Happy Birthday Cyn!!!
Phebe, thanks for the Ellen clips, I loved that we got to see Anderson's competitive side again.
I think you do a very good job of "moderating" what comments to publish. Not that I don't get annoyed about what some people write sometimes...
Frankly I am sick of reading that Erica is a waste of space on the show and that she does nothing constructive. I know that everyone's entitled to have their own opninion, but some people just need to keep their opinion to themselves! Maybe they should wonder if people really wanna hear what they have to say before they start typing...
Ok, I'm the first one to admit that I don't have very interesting things to say most of the time, but I would never write a negative comment just for the sake of it, there's nothing interesting about that either!
I do love reading most people's comments, there are a lot of very clever people on ATA!
HAPPY BIRTHDAY CYN!
I’m of the opinion that comments on this and every other blog should be constructive, factual and specific to the topic at hand. On multiple occasions I’ve come across some of the most hateful and distasteful comments posted by individuals who comment just to start a “war of words”. It’s like these people have nothing else better to do with their time, except think of ways to nit-pick at Anderson personally, as well as his Program or the Rating of his Show. I have no use for such individuals or such comments and find them counter-productive to the time, energy and dedication the Moderators and more disciplined Commenter’s put in to this Blog.
In my opinion, NO, such comments and individuals should not be allowed to par-take in this process if they can’t be constructive and share in the true spirit and reason this Blog was started, which I believe was to celebrate a magnificent and Professional Journalist, Author and Humanitarian. If they can’t learn to play by the rules, go find some place else to spew their verbal crap.
@ Anon 8:50 I don't have to go back and read it because I remember exactly what it said. An earlier comment was very nice and complimented Candy Crowley on having a nice family life without being dysfunctional. The comment to follow said merely, "You mean like Anderson, Erica and Jack?"
Why on Earth would anyone assume that was a joke?
I highly doubt that they would have thought it was funny, considering there was absolutely nothing to indicate that it was a joke. Jack is actually a bit sensitive--in my view, anyway--and has taken offense to much less. If you were kidding, you should have indicated that. You can pretend that it was obvious all you like; "it don't make it so."
I did comedy for years; I know funny. Calling someone dysfunctional without any indication that you aren't serious is not funny.
"Why on Earth would anyone assume that was a joke?"
Why on earth would anyone take offense? You could argue that almost anyone who works in the news business is dysfunctional with the hours they have to work and situations they have to cover. I would be dysfunctional too.
If you're an anchor or on the news in some other way, you also have to have a thick skin. If you get about someone saying you're dysfunctional you're going to have a very hard time when the *real* vultures come after you. I have no problem with Anderson, Erica, or Jack and I'd hope they could take an innocent joke. In fact, I'm sure they could.
Personally, if people have negative things to say (that are not constructive), then don't post them period. REGARDLESS OF THE TOPIC. If you didn't moderate, you would have a situation like youtube where a bunch of people say horrific racial slurs, gender slurs, and slurs about sexual orientation. Moderators are a good thing!
In my opinion, people should put positive energy out into the world, not hateful energy. So I can't stand it when people come on blogs and spew nothing but hate, it's like "Jeez, don't you have anything better to do? And keep the negativity to yourself--I'm a happy person." I think this blog is AMAZING (especially as a die hard Anderson Cooper fan--can't wait until Sunday), and that you guys have done an AWESOME job of moderating.
By all means, keep it up.
To keep saying that some posters are criticizing the show, Anderson, or the ratings, may have some sort of agenda, or are haters, is absolutely ridiculous!
To pretend everything is coming up roses with regards to the show and its contents- and yes, even its anchor, is even more ridiculous. Especially if it is to be censored to a degree by commentors or moderators here.
You keep telling people to just change channels if they do not like what they see. Well, it seems as if thousands have done that. That is why they are in this mess in the first place, isn't it?
A little too many people have already voted with the remote don't you think?
Can all of you not see the obvious? The show is in trouble and going deeper into a hole. Stop pretending otherwise. Fans do not have an agenda or hate the show. They just want 360 back to a decent watchable show again! Oh, and an anchor who does field work like he used to would be nice as well! Is that too much to ask or hope for? Why jump all over someone for stating that?
Can't you people remember those days, too?
Who in the world is Jack?? I don't remember a Jack. Jack Hannah?? This will drive me crazy!
@Anon 2:07 I'm glad you don't have a problem with them and I'm sure that they could take an innocent joke as well--if they knew that it was one. I don't personally feel that there was anything to indicate that you were kidding. Going by my own experience, it would be particularly insulting to say that to a person who is a parent--the word means you can't function normally, and Erica might interpret that to mean she's dysfunctional as a mother. After all, when we use it we're usually referencing family.
Sleeping strange hours, if it's compatible with your job and social life, doesn't make you dysfunctional. Truck drivers who drive at night are perfectly funcitonal; they just function differently. "Normal" and "average" are not the same thing.
If you said it to someone in person and they could tell by your tone that you were kidding, that's different.
@Anon9:27
I'm pretty sure the Jack everyone is referring to on this post is Jack Gray, a producer for 360. He's quite well known for his blogs, as well as in the Twitter world.
First I want to thank all of you for sharing your thoughts. It really does help give us an idea of whether we're on the right track or not. I can't address each of you, but I can say that I have read each and every comment and value your opinions.
@Kitzel, I think another commenter hit the nail on the head about comments that don't show up. Usually they include a link and we don't post those because we don't have time to check out each and every one. Sorry about that but please know you can send them to us at the address link on the sidebar and we will either post them, giving you credit or at the least get back to you.
@ Stump, trust me...you do not want to see the majority of what we reject. There are some really disturbed fans out there.
@Judy, Bonnie, Jasper and others who don't regularly post in comments....welcome. We love hearing from some of you who usually stay in the shadows.
Post a Comment