Tuesday, October 25, 2016
FOX NEW: KELLY FILE, ALWAYS LOOKING FOR A GOT YA MOMENT. IT'S SAD!
THE KUHNS REPORT
CALIF: Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
Fox News, "The Kelly File" tends to have a large tendency for bias. On October 25, 2016. Megyn Kelly interviewed Mike Pence, V-P running mate of Donald Trump. She quickly brought up the subject of Trump and sex with women. She clearly seemed obsessed with the titillating, salacious, sex conversation. Pence avoided getting down in the muck with her and handled the situation with class. Then, Kelly brought on Newt Gingrich, and again, brought up the Trump sex matter. When Gingrich called her on it and said something like "you're obsessed with sex" Kelly retorted, "I am not obsessed with sex. Then she went on with a rambling dissertation saying something to the effect that she's a woman and is concerned about such things. As Gingrich scolded her about her obvious obsession relating to the sexual conversations, she as host, and in charge of the microphone attempted to cover her tracks by interrupting and accusing Gingrich of having "anger issues." After being called out by Gingrich for her obvious bias she acted like an upset, little child, and the only thing she could say to close the segment was making a comment about Gingrich having anger issues. Wow! When did Kelly get a degree in psychology? What a joke this show is.
It looks to me as though Kelly makes the attempt to pretend that she is an objective host but it appears she is not what she is pretending to be. I have seen earlier shows where she tries to push bad press on Trump into her conversations with her guests. I think she should be right up front and tell the viewers she has a bias for Trump.
It's very clear that the Kelly File and other shows on Fox are all set up ahead of time to coincide with what these teleprompter readers are going to say at any particular or specific time. They act as if they are spontaneous but then they magically bring up a TV clip of whatever they were talking about. I say that's not fair and that's not balanced. That's fixed, set in stone, and prepped.
Fox News tries to sell themselves as fair and balanced but when one looks at some of the Fox hosts and their presentations, a prudent, reasonable person can come to the conclusion that there is nothing fair and balanced on the shows. -And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by email at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
THE ZIKA VIRUS IS RAMPANT.
THE KUHNS REPORT
CALIF: Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
The horrific Zika plague- running rampant in places like Africa, Southeast Asia and Central and South America is now playing havoc in the Unites States. And, my views is, it didn't have to be this way. It appears the U.S. is always a day late and a dollar short.
I submit that if the U.S. would have attacked the Zika virus in cooperation with other countries when it first reared its ugly head and then took specific action against this terrifying threat, our country would have been much better off. Instead, what did we do? Officials said, "don't worry about it," it's nit in the U.S., just don't travel to countries where the virus is. Then, when some people did travel to the infected countries and returned to the United States, carrying this dreaded infection, some government officials told the country that the cases were isolated incidents and there was nothing to worry about.
But,Zika cases broke out in Florida and what did the government people say? It's only in the area of "one block." Tey warned people not to travel to that block. Ir wasn't long until the bureaucrats told the people of Flordia that the Zika virus was only in a one-mile radius zone, so no big deal, don't worry. They told people to stay away from the one-mile area. Hell, the virus kept creeping further and further and finally, the officials became concerned. Can you believe it? Then these same state and government people started pointing fingers of blame using the old worn out phrases: "We could have, or we should have. They played the ol' could-a , should-a game.
Why is it our incompetent government officials nearly always fail to take action at the onset of situations, but instead allow bad things to occur and then after the fact, play arm-chair quarterback trying to explain what should have been done, in the first place? That's when all the so-called experts and talking heads hit television and start spouting gobbly-goop.
How many times have you heard government officials, politicians and groups tell the Amercian people: "We're taking this action so an occurrence like this will "never happen again?" But, guess what people? It always happens again --doesn't it.
I would estimate that at the present time there are about 3,000 cases of this mosquito-borne illness across our country, and growing larger each and every day.
Remember, this mystery illness that shrinks infants brains in-utero actually causes a myriad of defects in the baby. There is no prevention against the virus, The only way to hopefully avoid this scary virus and avoid infection is having our dumb-bunny bureaucrats tell everyone: "Avoid traveling to any infected areas, avoid mosquito bites, and to wear condoms when having sexual intercourse.
Now, I bet the rush is on to find a vaccine. But again, I would say that if, and when, the Zika virus was first discovered and the healthcare researchers were actually on the ball they could have tested monkeys, rodents, and other primates to have possibly had a vaccine in tge bucket well before this horrendous visus hit our shores.
THE KUHNS REPORT
CALIF: Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
The horrific Zika plague- running rampant in places like Africa, Southeast Asia and Central and South America is now playing havoc in the Unites States. And, my views is, it didn't have to be this way. It appears the U.S. is always a day late and a dollar short.
I submit that if the U.S. would have attacked the Zika virus in cooperation with other countries when it first reared its ugly head and then took specific action against this terrifying threat, our country would have been much better off. Instead, what did we do? Officials said, "don't worry about it," it's nit in the U.S., just don't travel to countries where the virus is. Then, when some people did travel to the infected countries and returned to the United States, carrying this dreaded infection, some government officials told the country that the cases were isolated incidents and there was nothing to worry about.
But,Zika cases broke out in Florida and what did the government people say? It's only in the area of "one block." Tey warned people not to travel to that block. Ir wasn't long until the bureaucrats told the people of Flordia that the Zika virus was only in a one-mile radius zone, so no big deal, don't worry. They told people to stay away from the one-mile area. Hell, the virus kept creeping further and further and finally, the officials became concerned. Can you believe it? Then these same state and government people started pointing fingers of blame using the old worn out phrases: "We could have, or we should have. They played the ol' could-a , should-a game.
Why is it our incompetent government officials nearly always fail to take action at the onset of situations, but instead allow bad things to occur and then after the fact, play arm-chair quarterback trying to explain what should have been done, in the first place? That's when all the so-called experts and talking heads hit television and start spouting gobbly-goop.
How many times have you heard government officials, politicians and groups tell the Amercian people: "We're taking this action so an occurrence like this will "never happen again?" But, guess what people? It always happens again --doesn't it.
I would estimate that at the present time there are about 3,000 cases of this mosquito-borne illness across our country, and growing larger each and every day.
Remember, this mystery illness that shrinks infants brains in-utero actually causes a myriad of defects in the baby. There is no prevention against the virus, The only way to hopefully avoid this scary virus and avoid infection is having our dumb-bunny bureaucrats tell everyone: "Avoid traveling to any infected areas, avoid mosquito bites, and to wear condoms when having sexual intercourse.
Now, I bet the rush is on to find a vaccine. But again, I would say that if, and when, the Zika virus was first discovered and the healthcare researchers were actually on the ball they could have tested monkeys, rodents, and other primates to have possibly had a vaccine in tge bucket well before this horrendous visus hit our shores.
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY BETTER WEAR BIG BOY PANTS-GET TRUMP ELECTED.
THE KUHNS REPORT
CALIF: Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
Boy, the corrupt media is something else.According to Donald Trump, Fox News and actual video tape disclosures the media goof-offs are anything but unbiased. They continue to degrade, insult and rip the Trump campaign to shreds. Yet, news items such as the Clinton emails, the Wiki-Leak revelations, the dishonesty and corrupt dealings of the Clinton foundation and the DNC go unreported. It has been reported that the journalists and news people spent 25 minutes hammering Trump but spent only between fifty and sixty seconds reporting on Clinton. Talk about piling on! Wow!
It's been said that 95 percent of donations from the journalists and media people went into the Hillary Clinton campaign pockets. Only 5 percent of donations from these same people went into Republican campaigns. That's got to tell us something folks. It looks like the media is in the tank for the Clinton campaign.
If that's so, how can the average middle-class John and Jane Doe expect to get honest and trustworthy news reports from television, newspapers, etc.? They can't. It appears the news is manipulated to such a degree that it is weighted in favor of the Democratic machine. The media idiots are tilting and skewing an election. Shame on them!
We only have a couple of weeks left in this presidential election and I would offer that the Trump camp saturate the airwaves and television screens with "positive ads" explaining Trump's"Contract with America," laying out what he intends to do in the first 100 days in office. Have Trump make numerous campaign ads outlining key points of his policy and the differences between the Republican and Democratic positions on such things as, immigration, economics, foreign policy and job creation.
I submit that if the Republican party would rally around Mr. Trump and saturate the television with such ads, the ads would speak for themselves and Mr. Trump would not have to be out there on the front lines being torn apart by the media hounds trying to derail his campaign.
I believe if Mr. Trump reads the campaign ad information away from the media dogs, and he clarifies the differences between himself and Hillary Clinton, along with the differences between the Republican and Democrat party, he would move up in the polls over -night.
A good example of a campaign ad would be to tell all of the women across America what he is going to do about such things as child care; maternity leave; equal pay; term limits on politicians and jobs. Tell them how he is going to allow them to put food on their table by better salaries, etc.
If the Republican party would help Mr. Trump do the ads, I would think the Republicans would win the election. The Republicans who are bashing Trump, those Republicans who have sour grapes, who want to retain their Washington power should realize that if Trump wins they will still have their power. If they continue to try to bring Trump down (because they have a personal vendetta) they are going to allow the Democratic party to change the course of this country in the worst way for generations to come.
I predict that if Trump is not elected, millions of voters will take their wrath out on the snooty, snobbish, Republican wnnna-be elites who snubbed their nose at a person that was not, or is not, a greedy politician. I personally think that if Trump fails to get elected a large part of the blame can be laid on the shoulders of the Republican party. These Republican idiots really believe that since Trump is not one of them ( a Washington insider), he's not worthy to be president. Rather than thinking of what is best for the country they are only thinking of themselves.
I would suggest the Republican party get off their lazy duff, pour the money into the ads, stand behind Trump, get him elected and then surround him with the smart, intelligent people that he would need to put all of his policies in motion. - And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W, KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by email at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Monday, October 17, 2016
FOX NEWS HAS GONE DOWN HILL OVER THE YEARS.
THE KUHNS REPORT
Hello America- and how is the world treating you?
Why people still watch the Fox News Channel is very perplexing to me. They steered away from a very good news organization and turned it into the (FNC-Funny News Channel) when they began to run Jesse Watters and Dennis Miller segments on the O'Reilly Factor. To me, those segments are a waste of valuable air time. It appears all Fox News is doing is trying to fill time between excessive commercials and promos. All the programs on FOX basically do the same thing.They follow the same format. It appears Fox has everything scripted out for these teleprompter readers to the exact second for a commercial break.
To illustrate some of the complaints I have heard about Fox: They have film cuts already cued up to insert into their conversation that are supposed to be a spontaneous, natural discussion,with a guest. They also shut down conversations with their guests to run FIVE minutes or more of commercials and promos.
As I mention in earlier blogs FOX is running approximately FIVE minutes of time with the narrator and the guests, THEN they run FIVE minutes of commercials. At times they only spend THREE minutes in discussion before they run FIVE minutes of commercials. I challenge anyone to time the commercials on the FOX NEWS programs like O'Reilly, Kelly, Hannity, etc.----
I believe it's a rip off folks. It's a race for the commercial break. You can hear the moderators say, "We're coming up on a hard break. I gotta go." Folks, it's not about the news or guests. I have an opinion and since every one's entitled to an opinion, mine is: "IT'S ABOUT THE MONEY PEOPLE." I believe what FOX is doing by running FIVE minutes of program and then running FIVE MINUTES of commercials and promos is outrageous. It is total outright GREED.
I stopped watching FOX weeks ago when I caught on to their money grab with the commercials. Come on! Five minutes of supposed show and then FIVE minutes of commercial. They squeeze in at least TEN or more commercials in that five minutes. When is enough, enough?
Basically, out of the hour program we, the consumer, are subjected to at least THIRY MINUTES or MORE of commercials. The teleprompter readers on the O'Reilly Factor, the Kelly file and Hannity and all the others at FOX are making big bucks for THIRTY minutes of info- commercials.Could it be because they may not be able to carry on a conversation without the FOX executives setting up each and every word they spout out? It's like a dog and pony show. "Here's your cue -- read it." And, like a fifth grader they read what's in front of them, like little robot.
How dumb does a person have to be to sit in front of a television set and watch the same old narrators talk to the SAME, old worn out talking heads night after night? You already know what each guest is going to say before they say it. It appears they pay some of these guests by way of saying, "A FOX CONTRIBUTOR."
To my thinking FOX is selling "commercials. When I watched FOX it appeared to me that it was nothing more than an infomercial of commercials. Folks, I do not believe there is anything "fair and balanced" at FOX. That is why I stopped watching the Network. However,if ever the "greedy executives" running the show for these teleprompter readers get back to having them read NEWS and current events WITHOUT pausing every FIVE minutes or less for FIVE minutes or more of commercials I and many of my friends around the world might consider viewing the shows again. Let's see if they (FOX), can once again offer good shows without an over-saturation of COMMERCIALS.- And, that's my opinion. Make up your own minds. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by email at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
THE KUHNS REPORT
Hello America- and how is the world treating you?
Why people still watch the Fox News Channel is very perplexing to me. They steered away from a very good news organization and turned it into the (FNC-Funny News Channel) when they began to run Jesse Watters and Dennis Miller segments on the O'Reilly Factor. To me, those segments are a waste of valuable air time. It appears all Fox News is doing is trying to fill time between excessive commercials and promos. All the programs on FOX basically do the same thing.They follow the same format. It appears Fox has everything scripted out for these teleprompter readers to the exact second for a commercial break.
To illustrate some of the complaints I have heard about Fox: They have film cuts already cued up to insert into their conversation that are supposed to be a spontaneous, natural discussion,with a guest. They also shut down conversations with their guests to run FIVE minutes or more of commercials and promos.
As I mention in earlier blogs FOX is running approximately FIVE minutes of time with the narrator and the guests, THEN they run FIVE minutes of commercials. At times they only spend THREE minutes in discussion before they run FIVE minutes of commercials. I challenge anyone to time the commercials on the FOX NEWS programs like O'Reilly, Kelly, Hannity, etc.----
I believe it's a rip off folks. It's a race for the commercial break. You can hear the moderators say, "We're coming up on a hard break. I gotta go." Folks, it's not about the news or guests. I have an opinion and since every one's entitled to an opinion, mine is: "IT'S ABOUT THE MONEY PEOPLE." I believe what FOX is doing by running FIVE minutes of program and then running FIVE MINUTES of commercials and promos is outrageous. It is total outright GREED.
I stopped watching FOX weeks ago when I caught on to their money grab with the commercials. Come on! Five minutes of supposed show and then FIVE minutes of commercial. They squeeze in at least TEN or more commercials in that five minutes. When is enough, enough?
Basically, out of the hour program we, the consumer, are subjected to at least THIRY MINUTES or MORE of commercials. The teleprompter readers on the O'Reilly Factor, the Kelly file and Hannity and all the others at FOX are making big bucks for THIRTY minutes of info- commercials.Could it be because they may not be able to carry on a conversation without the FOX executives setting up each and every word they spout out? It's like a dog and pony show. "Here's your cue -- read it." And, like a fifth grader they read what's in front of them, like little robot.
How dumb does a person have to be to sit in front of a television set and watch the same old narrators talk to the SAME, old worn out talking heads night after night? You already know what each guest is going to say before they say it. It appears they pay some of these guests by way of saying, "A FOX CONTRIBUTOR."
To my thinking FOX is selling "commercials. When I watched FOX it appeared to me that it was nothing more than an infomercial of commercials. Folks, I do not believe there is anything "fair and balanced" at FOX. That is why I stopped watching the Network. However,if ever the "greedy executives" running the show for these teleprompter readers get back to having them read NEWS and current events WITHOUT pausing every FIVE minutes or less for FIVE minutes or more of commercials I and many of my friends around the world might consider viewing the shows again. Let's see if they (FOX), can once again offer good shows without an over-saturation of COMMERCIALS.- And, that's my opinion. Make up your own minds. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by email at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Thursday, September 22, 2016
KEEP PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES CLEAN-HONEST. CHECK FOR EARPIECES.
THE KUHNS REPORT
CALIF: Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
Matt Lauer's interview with Hillary Clinton was questionable in regards to "if" Clinton was wearing a covert earpiece during the interview. There are reports from social and certain media organizations that she did wear the hidden earpiece on September 7, 2016. A flesh-colored earpiece can be easily concealed so that Hillary Clinton could receive information, answers, and responses to questions by the moderator.
What's that say about cheating? The opponent, without an earpiece, in any debate, would be at a severe disadvantage. The other person answering questions without the help of someone whispering in their ear versus Clinton being fed stock answers and responses by her campaign staff via a covert earpiece ---WOW!
I would suggest to the sponsors and moderators of the upcoming debate between Clinton and Trump on September 26, 2016, to have each of the candidate's ears checked for earpieces and listening devices before the debate starts and during breaks.
If these candidates cannot speak for themselves, what good is a dog and pony show advertised as a debate? Neither of these presidential candidates should be fed answers and responses to questions in any way, shape or form. Keep the debate clean. And, -- that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by email at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Sunday, September 11, 2016
CHECK ALL DEBATE PARTICIPANTS FOR COVERT EARPIECES. KEEP ELECTIONS HONEST.
THE KUHNS REPORT
CALIF: Hello America,and how is the world treating you?
The other day, a television forum was held featuring Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Each candidate took separate turns before the cameras. However, it was insinuated that candidate Hillary Clinton was wearing an earpiece during her interview. What? The Clinton camp denies the accusation but people on the Internet and social media are buzzing with stories that she did wear a listening device.
If, in fact, that is the case, and she was wearing a listening device throughout her interview. I call it "dirty pool." Can you imagine the uproar there would have been from the Clinton campaign if Trump was seen or alleged to have been wearing a listening device?
If she was wearing a listening device she had an enormous advantage. Wow! Her team and staff could feed her answers to the questions being asked by the moderator. They could also instruct her when to sit or stand to emphasize a point in the interview. Fact is, the interview could be manipulated in her favor.
To be on the safe side, I would suggest to the television networks, the moderators and the sponsors of any political forum, town hall or debate to actually check each person taking part in the debate for earpieces or listening devices immediately before the start of any debate or interview. In addition, following each and every break , prior to returning to the stage, each individual should be checked again so as to prevent any one of the debaters from obtaining a listening device during their breaks.
For those doubters that say a person involved in a debate cannot be equipped with such a device. I say, "grow up." As an example, at the present time most news anchors, moderators, and commentator on television already wear very sophisticated earpieces as they report each and every day. Their production directors are always talking in their ear telling them when to break or what to do or say.
Some devices are so small they are near undetectable. And is not unthinkable that aides, handlers, and managers from both the Democrat and Republican campaigns have access to some of the most sophisticated electronics out there. And, I wouldn't put it past either campaign to try to secure an edge in the presidential debates. Hell, the Democrats have already manipulated electronics by setting up secret private servers off and away from governmental sites, altering and destroying electronic emails and destroying Blackberry's and mobile devices, (with hammers.). So what would make a reasonable person think that some of these same people would not try to find a way to manipulate and covertly use other electronic aids.
If in fact, Clinton was wearing a listening device, all she was doing was parroting what some campaign aide was whispering in her ear and telling her what to say in response to the questions being asked. So all Clinton would have been doing was acting like a puppet, with someone else pulling her strings. If that's the case, that's sad -- and it's cheating.
NO ONE taking part in a debate, especially a political or presidential debate, should be allowed to wear an earpiece of any kind during the event. In any political or presidential debate, the viewing audience should be assured and guaranteed that they are hearing only the words coming out of the mouths of the individuals standing on the stage,without the help or assist of anyone else feeding them material.
It is obvious the advantage a person has who may be wearing an earpiece and/or listening device against a person who is not wearing one. So, let's keep our political and presidential debates HONEST and ABOVE BOARD. The audience has an absolute right to know, who, if anyone, is using an earpiece on stage during debates. -- And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by email at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
THE KUHNS REPORT
CALIF: Hello America,and how is the world treating you?
The other day, a television forum was held featuring Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Each candidate took separate turns before the cameras. However, it was insinuated that candidate Hillary Clinton was wearing an earpiece during her interview. What? The Clinton camp denies the accusation but people on the Internet and social media are buzzing with stories that she did wear a listening device.
If, in fact, that is the case, and she was wearing a listening device throughout her interview. I call it "dirty pool." Can you imagine the uproar there would have been from the Clinton campaign if Trump was seen or alleged to have been wearing a listening device?
If she was wearing a listening device she had an enormous advantage. Wow! Her team and staff could feed her answers to the questions being asked by the moderator. They could also instruct her when to sit or stand to emphasize a point in the interview. Fact is, the interview could be manipulated in her favor.
To be on the safe side, I would suggest to the television networks, the moderators and the sponsors of any political forum, town hall or debate to actually check each person taking part in the debate for earpieces or listening devices immediately before the start of any debate or interview. In addition, following each and every break , prior to returning to the stage, each individual should be checked again so as to prevent any one of the debaters from obtaining a listening device during their breaks.
For those doubters that say a person involved in a debate cannot be equipped with such a device. I say, "grow up." As an example, at the present time most news anchors, moderators, and commentator on television already wear very sophisticated earpieces as they report each and every day. Their production directors are always talking in their ear telling them when to break or what to do or say.
Some devices are so small they are near undetectable. And is not unthinkable that aides, handlers, and managers from both the Democrat and Republican campaigns have access to some of the most sophisticated electronics out there. And, I wouldn't put it past either campaign to try to secure an edge in the presidential debates. Hell, the Democrats have already manipulated electronics by setting up secret private servers off and away from governmental sites, altering and destroying electronic emails and destroying Blackberry's and mobile devices, (with hammers.). So what would make a reasonable person think that some of these same people would not try to find a way to manipulate and covertly use other electronic aids.
If in fact, Clinton was wearing a listening device, all she was doing was parroting what some campaign aide was whispering in her ear and telling her what to say in response to the questions being asked. So all Clinton would have been doing was acting like a puppet, with someone else pulling her strings. If that's the case, that's sad -- and it's cheating.
NO ONE taking part in a debate, especially a political or presidential debate, should be allowed to wear an earpiece of any kind during the event. In any political or presidential debate, the viewing audience should be assured and guaranteed that they are hearing only the words coming out of the mouths of the individuals standing on the stage,without the help or assist of anyone else feeding them material.
It is obvious the advantage a person has who may be wearing an earpiece and/or listening device against a person who is not wearing one. So, let's keep our political and presidential debates HONEST and ABOVE BOARD. The audience has an absolute right to know, who, if anyone, is using an earpiece on stage during debates. -- And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by email at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Thursday, September 1, 2016
FOX NEWS! A RIP-OFF NETWORK: THEY RUN INFOMERCIALS OF COMMERCIALS.
THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN NEWS.
THE KUHNS REPORT
I refuse to watch FOX NEWS NETWORK anymore. Why? Easy! Because the FOX NEWS NETWORK is nothing but an "Infomercial" sales force. When you watch FOX you are watching an infomercial of "Commercials,", that's all. I'm not an expert with a stopwatch but I have been timing the commercial breaks with my trusty Timex wrist watch.
I dare and challenge anyone that is watching FOX to time the commercial breaks versus the supposed news they offer. I have found over and over again, night after night, that FOX shows, O'Reilly, Kelly File, Hannity, and Justice start their hour with FIVE MINUTES of commentary/news, etc. then, FIVE minutes later they say, "We'll be right back." "Stay with us."Guess what? They run FIVE minutes of commercials. In that, five minutes of commercials they run approximately TEN commercials, sometimes more. Then the shows host returns and talks to guests or rattles on themselves for another FIVE minutes. Then again, FIVE minutes worth of commercials. And folks, this goes on like this throughout the entire hour show. "FIVE MINUTES of supposed news or commentary and FIVE minutes of commercials. So, out of the entire hour we viewers only get THIRTY minutes of events, news, etc.
And, if you notice, FIVE minutes before the show ends, at the top of the hour, the host, (for example,) HANNITY always says something like this, "Well be right back, stay with us. We need your help." Then it goes to commercial for four-and- a- half-minutes, or 4-minutes, forty-five seconds . Again approximately TEN commercials are run and he comes back about 15 seconds before the hour and says, "That's all the time we have, thanks for watching. O'Reilly Kelly and the other hosts do the same thing.
When I first caught on to this commercial rip-off, I thought it was a fluke, but after watching for a couple weeks I found it was the norm for FOX news. In fact, you can hear Kelly, O'Reilly, or Eric (his fill-in host), or the Judge, often say to the guest. ":We have to go, we have a hard break coming up. And sometimes the guests and host are automatically cut off mid-sentence for the commercial breaks. Apparently, the network has the commercials set on a computer.
People, I REFUSE to watch "infomercials" of commercials. If FOX or any other network wants to saturate us viewers with commercials, they should PAY us to watch them.
____
I'm old enough to remember when cable shows came on the scene. Back then all TV viewers had to watch was ABC, NBC, and CBS. When the cable companies asked us television viewers to pay for cable, we asked, "WHY, should we pay to watch television?" The cable companies answer, "Because there are no commercials. Cable is commercial free."And, that, folks, is what people paid cable companies for - commercial free television programming. Now look how things have gotten out of hand.
Through the years, the cable companies greased the hands of politicians, special interests, and lobbyists and began running commercials on cable shows.
Even when commercials were being run on the major networks and cable shows the viewer could watch FIFTEEN MINUTES of the show, Example: In a half -hour show when they broke for commercial, the commercial was only three minutes in length, then the show returned to allow us to watch the remainder of the half-hour show. If it were an hour show, the commercials were approximately THREE minutes, every FIFTEEN minutes of the show.
However, through the years, the television networks, in collusion with their sponsors, now have TEN MINUTES of the actual show followed by a full FIVE minutes of commercials. So, in a half-hour show we only see 20 minutes of the show. TEN minutes of commercials. In an hour show, we see only 40 minutes of the show and a LONG, LONG 20 minutes of commercials. That's wrong folks. But it appears that is the norm for television programs now. TEN minutes of show, FIVE minutes of commercials (approximately TEN) commercials.
BUT REMEMBER- The GREEDY FOX NETWORK only wants the viewer to have FIVE minutes of a supposed show and FIVE minutes of commercials (Ten or more commercials in that FIVE minutes.)
So, that is why I am boycotting and refusing to watch FOX NEWS. In the past their shows like O'Reilly and, Hannity were good informative platforms, but now, these hosts just fill in FIVE-minute segments with a bunch of babble, just to get to the FIVE minutes of commercials. RIP OFF! You bet.
I submit, what informative information can you, the viewer get in a FIVE-minute segment, especially when they have three guests at once yelling and talking over one another, offering their party line. And sometimes the host of the FOX show joins in trying to be heard over the other three shouting guests. That leaves the viewer with a bunch of garbage.
I thought moderators and/or the host's job was to have control of the show but instead of telling each guest, "You'll all get equal time and get your turn," these nitwits allow the guests to run amok. And then the hosts have the arrogance to say, "Great debate." Are you kidding me! Debate? What FOX is offering is not a debate. All Fox guests do is offer an "opinion" and give a dissertation on the party line of whatever party they represent. What a joke. And, if you watch carefully, you'll see the same old worn out talking heads most every night and you know in advance what they're going to say before they say it because FOX puts the same ol', same ol' on the show most every day.
If you, the television viewer feels like I do about commercials being rammed down our throats by greedy FOX NEWS, I would suggest you get your news and information from other sources like I am doing now. I have always read newspapers and magazines,(at least in those venues you can skip the ads and only read the important events,) You can read your tablet or phone, like I do. And, you can listen to radio for your news. A side note: Even on my tablet I refuse to click or tap on items that have a video with a commercial attached.
Folks, the TV networks, and cable companies make billions of dollars. The sponsors putting out these commercials make billions. I suggest that what the networks and cable companies should do is charge the sponsors more money to place their ads on the television shows and then, --- give us viewers back out viewing time (FIFTEEN MINUTES OF SHOW and THREE MINUTES of commercial.)
If there is a reason for the people of this country to protest and march on Washington I would say it is this issue. Television is the only entertainment some households can afford. They should not have to be exposed to over-saturation of commercials interrupting their viewing pleasures.
When the average television household is paying well over ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS a month to watch TV , commercials should be at a minimum. Fact is, if these cable companies and networks want the viewers to watch commercials, THEY SHOULD BE PAYING US.
I mention FOX because I have been watching that network throughout the election cycle, But enough is enough. NO MORE! I haven't taken the time to time CNN and other cable channels but I do suspect they too are cheating us television viewers. It's bad enough watching most networks that offer TEN minutes of the television show and then FIVE minutes of commercials (which amount to TEN or more.)
Now that I refuse to watch FOX NEWS I'll look at other shows to see which ones I'll cease to watch. I am also going to contact my Congressman and would suggest those that share my views about these greedy networks, sponsors, and cable companies do the same. It's about time our representatives step up and protect us from this outrageous gouging. And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_________________________________
You can reach doctor Kuhns at bradleykuhns@gmail.com
THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN NEWS.
THE KUHNS REPORT
CALIF: Hello America and how is the world treating you?
I refuse to watch FOX NEWS NETWORK anymore. Why? Easy! Because the FOX NEWS NETWORK is nothing but an "Infomercial" sales force. When you watch FOX you are watching an infomercial of "Commercials,", that's all. I'm not an expert with a stopwatch but I have been timing the commercial breaks with my trusty Timex wrist watch.
I dare and challenge anyone that is watching FOX to time the commercial breaks versus the supposed news they offer. I have found over and over again, night after night, that FOX shows, O'Reilly, Kelly File, Hannity, and Justice start their hour with FIVE MINUTES of commentary/news, etc. then, FIVE minutes later they say, "We'll be right back." "Stay with us."Guess what? They run FIVE minutes of commercials. In that, five minutes of commercials they run approximately TEN commercials, sometimes more. Then the shows host returns and talks to guests or rattles on themselves for another FIVE minutes. Then again, FIVE minutes worth of commercials. And folks, this goes on like this throughout the entire hour show. "FIVE MINUTES of supposed news or commentary and FIVE minutes of commercials. So, out of the entire hour we viewers only get THIRTY minutes of events, news, etc.
And, if you notice, FIVE minutes before the show ends, at the top of the hour, the host, (for example,) HANNITY always says something like this, "Well be right back, stay with us. We need your help." Then it goes to commercial for four-and- a- half-minutes, or 4-minutes, forty-five seconds . Again approximately TEN commercials are run and he comes back about 15 seconds before the hour and says, "That's all the time we have, thanks for watching. O'Reilly Kelly and the other hosts do the same thing.
When I first caught on to this commercial rip-off, I thought it was a fluke, but after watching for a couple weeks I found it was the norm for FOX news. In fact, you can hear Kelly, O'Reilly, or Eric (his fill-in host), or the Judge, often say to the guest. ":We have to go, we have a hard break coming up. And sometimes the guests and host are automatically cut off mid-sentence for the commercial breaks. Apparently, the network has the commercials set on a computer.
People, I REFUSE to watch "infomercials" of commercials. If FOX or any other network wants to saturate us viewers with commercials, they should PAY us to watch them.
____
I'm old enough to remember when cable shows came on the scene. Back then all TV viewers had to watch was ABC, NBC, and CBS. When the cable companies asked us television viewers to pay for cable, we asked, "WHY, should we pay to watch television?" The cable companies answer, "Because there are no commercials. Cable is commercial free."And, that, folks, is what people paid cable companies for - commercial free television programming. Now look how things have gotten out of hand.
Through the years, the cable companies greased the hands of politicians, special interests, and lobbyists and began running commercials on cable shows.
Even when commercials were being run on the major networks and cable shows the viewer could watch FIFTEEN MINUTES of the show, Example: In a half -hour show when they broke for commercial, the commercial was only three minutes in length, then the show returned to allow us to watch the remainder of the half-hour show. If it were an hour show, the commercials were approximately THREE minutes, every FIFTEEN minutes of the show.
However, through the years, the television networks, in collusion with their sponsors, now have TEN MINUTES of the actual show followed by a full FIVE minutes of commercials. So, in a half-hour show we only see 20 minutes of the show. TEN minutes of commercials. In an hour show, we see only 40 minutes of the show and a LONG, LONG 20 minutes of commercials. That's wrong folks. But it appears that is the norm for television programs now. TEN minutes of show, FIVE minutes of commercials (approximately TEN) commercials.
BUT REMEMBER- The GREEDY FOX NETWORK only wants the viewer to have FIVE minutes of a supposed show and FIVE minutes of commercials (Ten or more commercials in that FIVE minutes.)
So, that is why I am boycotting and refusing to watch FOX NEWS. In the past their shows like O'Reilly and, Hannity were good informative platforms, but now, these hosts just fill in FIVE-minute segments with a bunch of babble, just to get to the FIVE minutes of commercials. RIP OFF! You bet.
I submit, what informative information can you, the viewer get in a FIVE-minute segment, especially when they have three guests at once yelling and talking over one another, offering their party line. And sometimes the host of the FOX show joins in trying to be heard over the other three shouting guests. That leaves the viewer with a bunch of garbage.
I thought moderators and/or the host's job was to have control of the show but instead of telling each guest, "You'll all get equal time and get your turn," these nitwits allow the guests to run amok. And then the hosts have the arrogance to say, "Great debate." Are you kidding me! Debate? What FOX is offering is not a debate. All Fox guests do is offer an "opinion" and give a dissertation on the party line of whatever party they represent. What a joke. And, if you watch carefully, you'll see the same old worn out talking heads most every night and you know in advance what they're going to say before they say it because FOX puts the same ol', same ol' on the show most every day.
If you, the television viewer feels like I do about commercials being rammed down our throats by greedy FOX NEWS, I would suggest you get your news and information from other sources like I am doing now. I have always read newspapers and magazines,(at least in those venues you can skip the ads and only read the important events,) You can read your tablet or phone, like I do. And, you can listen to radio for your news. A side note: Even on my tablet I refuse to click or tap on items that have a video with a commercial attached.
Folks, the TV networks, and cable companies make billions of dollars. The sponsors putting out these commercials make billions. I suggest that what the networks and cable companies should do is charge the sponsors more money to place their ads on the television shows and then, --- give us viewers back out viewing time (FIFTEEN MINUTES OF SHOW and THREE MINUTES of commercial.)
If there is a reason for the people of this country to protest and march on Washington I would say it is this issue. Television is the only entertainment some households can afford. They should not have to be exposed to over-saturation of commercials interrupting their viewing pleasures.
When the average television household is paying well over ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS a month to watch TV , commercials should be at a minimum. Fact is, if these cable companies and networks want the viewers to watch commercials, THEY SHOULD BE PAYING US.
I mention FOX because I have been watching that network throughout the election cycle, But enough is enough. NO MORE! I haven't taken the time to time CNN and other cable channels but I do suspect they too are cheating us television viewers. It's bad enough watching most networks that offer TEN minutes of the television show and then FIVE minutes of commercials (which amount to TEN or more.)
Now that I refuse to watch FOX NEWS I'll look at other shows to see which ones I'll cease to watch. I am also going to contact my Congressman and would suggest those that share my views about these greedy networks, sponsors, and cable companies do the same. It's about time our representatives step up and protect us from this outrageous gouging. And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_________________________________
You can reach doctor Kuhns at bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)