Former CNN anchor gets a promotion

[Montgomery Burns]

Bill Hemmer has joined FOX News Channel (FNC) as a weekday anchor and correspondent, announced Roger Ailes, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of FOX News.

In making the announcement, Ailes said, "Bill is a journalist of great integrity, and his strong reporting and anchoring skills will prove beneficial to the entire FOX News team."

Hemmer added, "I am thrilled to be joining FOX News Channel, and I welcome the opportunity to be a part of the nation's leading cable news network."

For the past 10 years Hemmer was an anchor/correspondent at CNN, where he most recently co-hosted American Morning. While there, Hemmer also anchored CNN Live Today and CNN Tonight. Earlier this year, he reported live from Rome and Vatican City on the death of Pope John Paul II, and in 2004 he covered both the Democratic and Republican conventions and served as one of CNN's anchors on election night.

A recipient of several awards and honors, including a 1996 Emmy Award, Hemmer began his career as a weekend sports anchor for WCPO-TV (CBS) in Cincinnati. He is a graduate of Miami University of Ohio and is a native of Cincinnati.

FOX News Channel (FNC) is a 24-hour general news service covering breaking news as well as political, entertainment and business news. For more than three years, FNC has been the most watched cable news channel in the nation and currently presents eleven out of the top twelve programs in cable news. Owned by News Corp., FNC is available in more than 85 million homes.

Welcome to the winning team, Bill

Good on you for leaving those biased liberals at CNN; the station that allowed Paul Begala and James Carville to continue to host Crossfire while both were campaign advisors for John Kerry - a blatant conflict of interest; the station that admitted they ignored Saddam's atrocities so they could keep their Baghdad bureau open (which makes one wonder what atrocities they are ignoring so they can keep their Havana bureau open), and the station whose chief news executive - Eason Jordan - resigned in disgrace over his unfounded accusations against the US military (typical military-hating liberal).

You will get tremendous exposure at the news channel that gets higher ratings than CNN, CNN Headline News, MSNBC, and CNBC combined. People are hungry for fair and balanced reporting; you have the opportunity to continue Fox News' tradition of providing this.

Thank goodness the Liberal Party lifted its 5 year ban of the Fox News Channel (after tremendous pressure because they approved Al Jazeera 5 months earlier). What a breath of fresh air Fox News is versus the stench that passed as news and commentary at the state-run, taxpayer-funded, Soviet-style CBC.

[crazymf]

I was watching both Fox and CNN the day the plane went down in Toronto. The very SECOND that it was announced there were no fatalities, Fox dropped it like a hot potato.

Death and destruction must be in that order for them to report it I guess.

Bill Hemmers real name is Rick Squarejaw, really.

[Montgomery Burns]

Odd. I remember it being the opposite, CNN dropping the story the very SECOND that it was reported that there were no fatalities. Indeed, the last story on Flight 358 on Fox's website is 6 days later than CNN's.

I suppose if CNN doesn't get a chance to solemnly intone, on an hourly basis, the death of another US soldier in Iraq, and solemnly announce that this brings the death toll of US soldiers to XXX in Iraq, they aren't interested in reporting other stories.

[crazymf]

I wasn't trying to bash Fox. It was merely an observation that I found strange at the time. Also, I'm not willing to argue the point. It doesn't matter. Merely conversation.

[Montgomery Burns]

Fair enough. I guess we remember it differently.

I was trying to bash CNN. I am so tired of their bias. I don't know if I ever recall Jack Cafferty ever reading a pro-Bush email on the CNN morning show. Very strange that the majority voted for Bush, but apparently CNN only receives emails that bash him.

And I will never forget the difference between CNN And Fox News when it came to showing the tape of that Marine general saying that it is fun to shoot the Taliban. CNN only showed that, but Fox showed the whole tape, where he said that the Taliban liked to slap women around, so it was enjoyable shooting these jerks.

[Argus]

Odd.  I remember it being the opposite, CNN dropping the story the very SECOND that it was reported that there were no fatalities.  Indeed, the last story on Flight 358 on Fox's website is 6 days later than CNN's.

I don't watch FOX, so I can't comment on their coverage. I was watching CNN, however, and a number of stations linked to CNN. CNN's coverage went well past the time it was announced everyone had survived. So either you're talking out of your ass because you reflexively want to defend a so-called "conservative" media source, or you're simply being knowingly dishonest.

[kimmy]

One of the most interesting media moments I have seen in a while was CNN's Anderson Cooper going off on Louisiana senator Mary Landrieu. He began interviewing her, and she immediately set about thanking various relief agency and government officials for their response to the tragedy. He interrupted her and said, essentially, that it makes people angry to hear the politicians patting each other on the back and congratulating each other during a situation where there's so much chaos and suffering, and explained-- in graphic detail-- some of the carnage he had witnessed. When she said that she was angry too, he demanded to know who she was angry at.

It struck me for 2 reasons. First, to see a news broadcaster who had clearly been so deeply affected by what he was experiencing really drove home the gravity of the situation. And secondly, I can't recall the last time I saw a reporter so assertive during an interview. Whether here in Canada or in the US, I have been so accustomed to seeing reporters stand there like dummies as they allow politicians run through their "talking points" and accept everything at face value. I'd forgotten what it looked like to see a reporter actually challenge his subject, to actually take control of an interview, and to smack down the "talking points" and get to the real issue.

-k

[Argus]

One of the most interesting media moments I have seen in a while was CNN's Anderson Cooper going off on Louisiana senator Mary Landrieu. He began interviewing her, and she immediately set about thanking various relief agency and government officials for their response to the tragedy.  He interrupted her and said, essentially, that it makes people angry to hear the politicians patting each other on the back and congratulating each other during a situation where there's so much chaos and suffering, and explained-- in graphic detail-- some of the carnage he had witnessed.  When she said that she was angry too, he demanded to know who she was angry at.

It struck me for 2 reasons. First, to see a news broadcaster who had clearly been so deeply affected by what he was experiencing really drove home the gravity of the situation. And secondly, I can't recall the last time I saw a reporter so assertive during an interview. Whether here in Canada or in the US, I have been so accustomed to seeing reporters stand there like dummies as they allow politicians run through their "talking points" and accept everything at face value. I'd forgotten what it looked like to see a reporter actually challenge his subject, to actually take control of an interview, and to smack down the "talking points" and get to the real issue.

-k

Yes, I was struck by the same thing watching - I think - Soledad O'Brien interviewing FEMA head Michael Brown the other day. He was quoting statistics, ie, achievements thus far, and she kept interupting him to demand where the aid was and why it wasn't already in New Orleans. Several times he replied about aid getting there now and she replied, in effect. "Why is it only now reaching New Orleans five days later? Why did it take this long? Where were they yesterday and the day before?" She was also in disbelief that he hadn't known there were twenty thousand people at the convention centre. "We knew about it. We were showing video all day. How could you not know about it?" was basically her response. Her entire tone during the interview was one of disbelief and demands for answers, and a refusal to be put off by the bland, excuses and non-answers we're so used to. I think a lot of people in the US are angry about this, and it's not confined, as some here would like to believe, to the "liberal fringe".

[Montgomery Burns]

Odd.  I remember it being the opposite, CNN dropping the story the very SECOND that it was reported that there were no fatalities.  Indeed, the last story on Flight 358 on Fox's website is 6 days later than CNN's.

I don't watch FOX, so I can't comment on their coverage. I was watching CNN, however, and a number of stations linked to CNN. CNN's coverage went well past the time it was announced everyone had survived. So either you're talking out of your ass because you reflexively want to defend a so-called "conservative" media source, or you're simply being knowingly dishonest.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You admit you never watch Fox; you are only interested in hearing one side. Yet you accuse me of talking out of my ass, when if you checked both websites, you would note that Fox's latest story was 6 days later than CNN's.

But do continue raging against "so-called conservative media".

Perhaps you can find some way to blame Bush for the Air France jet...

You know you want to.

[Argus]

Odd.  I remember it being the opposite, CNN dropping the story the very SECOND that it was reported that there were no fatalities.  Indeed, the last story on Flight 358 on Fox's website is 6 days later than CNN's.

I don't watch FOX, so I can't comment on their coverage. I was watching CNN, however, and a number of stations linked to CNN. CNN's coverage went well past the time it was announced everyone had survived. So either you're talking out of your ass because you reflexively want to defend a so-called "conservative" media source, or you're simply being knowingly dishonest.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You admit you never watch Fox; you are only interested in hearing one side.

I don't watch FOX because I don't like ideologically based news. I know that most of the media is biased to an extent, and I believe that bias is largely liberal. My preferred alternative would be an unbiased media, or one which is a little biased towards the right. FOX is not "a little based". FOX is a news service deliberately designed to be biased - very biased - towards the American right. So wheras CBS, for example, will strive to be accurate, but will have an unconscious, reflexive liberal spin to much of their political news, FOX deliberately and proudly slants its news to the right. I find that more detestable than an unconscious liberal spin, to be frank.

Yet you accuse me of talking out of my ass, when if you checked both websites, you would note that Fox's latest story was 6 days later than CNN's.

Nice. And? I'm talking about the live coverage on television, not which had the last item on their website.

[Montgomery Burns]

Fox News only seems biased to the right because all the others are biased to the left.

Fox would look ultra rightwing compared to the hard left CBC.

And if you don't watach Fox News, I suggest you lack credibility when you try to comment on it.

So wheras CBS, for example, will strive to be accurate,

Ahh yes. CBS of Memogate infamy; CBS' Dan Rather interviewing Bill and Hilllary Clinton and saying, "If we only could be one one-hundreth as great as you" infamy.

Dan Rather who spoke at a Democratic fund-raiser; a blatant flagrant conflict of interest.

CBS's 60 Minutes who always gives a full segment (or even the entire hour) to every author who has a book out bashing Bush.

But according to Argus, they are striving to be accurate.

For all the whining about Fox News, they cannot hold a candle to all the scandals after scandals in the liberal media.

There is no contest. None whatsoever.

Period.

[Argus]

For all the whining about Fox News, they cannot hold a candle to all the scandals after scandals in the liberal media.

There is no contest.  None whatsoever.

Period.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There speaks an open mind.

There is a segment of "conservatives" who know little or nothing about conservative ideology, know little or nothing about what it means to even be conservative, but boy oh boy do they hate. They despise anyone they believe is a liberal. To them the very term is an obscenity. Utterly intolerent, chanting their godly credo, usually pretty racist, unthinking robots who, in another place, another age, would have been perfect fodder for the SS or the Red Guards.

There are too many of those types infesting the body politic in the US.

Oddly, in Canada, their counterparts are mostly liberal or socialist. Though I must say their hatred and contempt is somewhat milder.

[Montgomery Burns]

For all the whining about Fox News, they cannot hold a candle to all the scandals after scandals in the liberal media.

There is no contest.  None whatsoever.

Period.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There speaks an open mind.

There is a segment of "conservatives" who know little or nothing about conservative ideology, know little or nothing about what it means to even be conservative, but boy oh boy do they hate. They despise anyone they believe is a liberal. To them the very term is an obscenity. Utterly intolerent, chanting their godly credo, usually pretty racist, unthinking robots who, in another place, another age, would have been perfect fodder for the SS or the Red Guards.

There are too many of those types infesting the body politic in the US.

Oddly, in Canada, their counterparts are mostly liberal or socialist. Though I must say their hatred and contempt is somewhat milder.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Says the tolerant compassionate unhateful one who accuses Bush of wanting kill ni**ers and links to Paul Krugman and Maureen Dowd; the one who has been spewing his blinding hatred of Bush the last couple of days and incredibly is blaming Bush for the dead in Louisiana. Spoken like a true hate-filled LLL.

And of course, Argus refuses to reply to my comment. The truth must hurt.

[Argus]

For all the whining about Fox News, they cannot hold a candle to all the scandals after scandals in the liberal media.

There is no contest.  None whatsoever.

Period.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There speaks an open mind.

There is a segment of "conservatives" who know little or nothing about conservative ideology, know little or nothing about what it means to even be conservative, but boy oh boy do they hate. They despise anyone they believe is a liberal. To them the very term is an obscenity. Utterly intolerent, chanting their godly credo, usually pretty racist, unthinking robots who, in another place, another age, would have been perfect fodder for the SS or the Red Guards.

There are too many of those types infesting the body politic in the US.

Oddly, in Canada, their counterparts are mostly liberal or socialist. Though I must say their hatred and contempt is somewhat milder.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Says the tolerant compassionate unhateful one who accuses Bush of wanting kill ni**ers and links to Paul Krugman and Maureen Dowd; the one who has been spewing his blinding hatred of Bush the last couple of days and incredibly is blaming Bush for the dead in Louisiana. Spoken like a true hate-filled LLL.

And of course, Argus refuses to reply to my comment. The truth must hurt.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Montie - I see why you named yourself after a cartoon character. And a doddering, helpless, stupid, uncaring one at that.

[crazymf]

I'd like to bring Bell satellite in on this. As of a couple days ago, I no longer receive Fox because the service I was paying for has been changed without my consent..

So, to add to the conspiracy, Bell must be in cahoots with CNN to only bring one perspective into my livingroom.

[Montgomery Burns]

For all the whining about Fox News, they cannot hold a candle to all the scandals after scandals in the liberal media.

There is no contest.  None whatsoever.

Period.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There speaks an open mind.

There is a segment of "conservatives" who know little or nothing about conservative ideology, know little or nothing about what it means to even be conservative, but boy oh boy do they hate. They despise anyone they believe is a liberal. To them the very term is an obscenity. Utterly intolerent, chanting their godly credo, usually pretty racist, unthinking robots who, in another place, another age, would have been perfect fodder for the SS or the Red Guards.

There are too many of those types infesting the body politic in the US.

Oddly, in Canada, their counterparts are mostly liberal or socialist. Though I must say their hatred and contempt is somewhat milder.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Says the tolerant compassionate unhateful one who accuses Bush of wanting kill ni**ers and links to Paul Krugman and Maureen Dowd; the one who has been spewing his blinding hatred of Bush the last couple of days and incredibly is blaming Bush for the dead in Louisiana. Spoken like a true hate-filled LLL.

And of course, Argus refuses to reply to my comment. The truth must hurt.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Montie - I see why you named yourself after a cartoon character. And a doddering, helpless, stupid, uncaring one at that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

More insults and you still haven't replied to my comment.

At the very least, you could learn to spell "Monty" correctly.

[Montgomery Burns]

I'd like to bring Bell satellite in on this. As of a couple days ago, I no longer receive Fox because the service I was paying for has been changed without my consent..

So, to add to the conspiracy, Bell must be in cahoots with CNN to only bring one perspective into my livingroom. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm sure Bush is behind this.

[crazymf]

I'd like to bring Bell satellite in on this. As of a couple days ago, I no longer receive Fox because the service I was paying for has been changed without my consent..

So, to add to the conspiracy, Bell must be in cahoots with CNN to only bring one perspective into my livingroom. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm sure Bush is behind this.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ultimately he does lead the big country right next door that our entire social structure and economy hinges on, so yes, I agree, in principle.