On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 6:33 AM, televisiongirl<[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:11 AM, Kevin M. <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 12:42 AM, Aaron Barnhart<[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > Called it: >> > >> > http://blogs.kansascity.com/tvbarn/2009/08/billo.html >> >> You are, indeed, the man. >> - > > And Bill strikes back: > http://tinyurl.com/nllwjp
Nobody disputes the Immelt/Murdoch meeting with Charlie Rose reported by Stelter. Stelter then says that four unnamed people who work at the companies told him of a deal agreed to by "lieutenants" of the two CEOs. Olbermann said he told Stelter more than once he knew of no such deal and there couldn't be a deal if he were not to be a party to it. Now O'Reilly acts as if there were no deal. Assuming Stelter is competent and ethical (meaning he's not making stuff up), then he was mislead into writing there was a deal, the executives made a deal without telling their on-air talent, or they made a deal that could not be enforced if knowledge of it became public. Since the answer means a lot about the relation of media corporations and their news departments, it would be helpful to know what happened. I have a felling, though, that the story just went away and we won't know. Tom --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
