Where to start……
The forced laughter when someone’s buddy is filmed wiping out - AH hahaha AH hahaha

99.9% of “selfies”, I despise that word. I don’t want to see your pasty bloated pimply mug so close-up like we’re jammed in a fuckin elevator and I can count your nose hairs. Wearing either the blank dumb look people have when looking at their computer screen or camera phone, or the overly gleeful shit-eating ventriloquist dummy look, All it takes is a camera lens to make people go ape-shit, like a baby making faces in a mirror. When did that shit become normal?

Any kind of rambling monologue with the subject weighing in on the stupid shit of the day, like they are some wise head of state being interviewed on some crisis. Or filming themselves narrating at the scene of some non-event, like they are Edward Murrow reporting on the London Blitz.

The vast majority of trend videos, like “Things New Yorkers Say”, etc. They generally have high production values but ZERO talent on the actual writing. The “punchlines” are usually weak or non-existent, apparently there’s no such thing as out-takes anymore. It’s usually weak material followed by long pauses, which I guess if you drag it out long enough it somehow becomes funny. “Modern Family” and “The Office” have beat that non-punchline pause to death. “Spinal Tap” was the only mock-umentary that ever worked, everything else is just weak.

Idiots who edit videos and who don’t have the basic sense to accommodate people who haven’t seen the material. I’m watching a video on YouTube of vacation snaps from someone’s trip to the mountains of Chile, and they leave each photo onscreen for about 1.2 seconds, with the editor’s goal to use every single transition available in the editing palette to move on to the next picture. It’s amateurish.

Someone else mentioned videos with overly long intros\titles and I agree. It's not "Gone With the Wind", it's a video of your dog pissing in your living room, just get to it.

Back in a few, going to pour my second cup of the day. :-)

Thank you for the promote!
In reply to this comment by radx:
*promote the immortal voice of Edward R. Murrow

*promote the immortal voice of Edward R. Murrow

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^ChaosEngine:
Funny how this is so much more effective than the over blown theatrics of his "worst person" segments.
Olbermann really wants to be Murrow's spiritual successor, and just occasionally, he could be.
Well done, sir.

"Worst person" is usually semi tongue-in-cheek, and meant to be used for situations where the person has merely said something unconscionable.
Special Comments are for when people have committed some sort of real injustice in both word and deed.
For the former he tends to be humorous and sometimes uses salty language. For the latter he keeps it serious and clean, but really unleashes the righteous fury.


fair point.

>> ^ChaosEngine:

Funny how this is so much more effective than the over blown theatrics of his "worst person" segments.
Olbermann really wants to be Murrow's spiritual successor, and just occasionally, he could be.
Well done, sir.


"Worst person" is usually semi tongue-in-cheek, and meant to be used for situations where the person has merely said something unconscionable.

Special Comments are for when people have committed some sort of real injustice in both word and deed.

For the former he tends to be humorous and sometimes uses salty language. For the latter he keeps it serious and clean, but really unleashes the righteous fury.

Funny how this is so much more effective than the over blown theatrics of his "worst person" segments.
Olbermann really wants to be Murrow's spiritual successor, and just occasionally, he could be.

Well done, sir.

>> ^ChaosEngine:

It's a sad day when two comedians have higher journalistic standards than actual journalists. We need to raise Cronkite and Murrow from the dead and let them unleash zombie justice on the people who have sullied their profession.


I think it's kind of great. I love that the fools are here to remind us of our hubris or whatever you want to call it. Comedians/fools/performers are never given enough credit for their role in society.

It's a sad day when two comedians have higher journalistic standards than actual journalists. We need to raise Cronkite and Murrow from the dead and let them unleash zombie justice on the people who have sullied their profession.

The lamestream media didn't quite follow Murrow's/Moyer's advice. They abandoned all pretense of objectivity when they went to work for His Earness's election campaign in 2008, but still totally deny their bias.

Moyers certainly has a right to express his views, except when he leeches off taxpayer-funded "public" television to spread his foul gospel of class envy.

The day one of these socialists admits government meddling on behalf of "the poor" fks up the economy as bad or worse as aiding the evil rich, I'll eat my hat, and I see no reason to buy a hat for eating in the next 20 years because what I just wrote will never happen.

Angela Hill bio:
http://www.wwltv.com/on-tv/bios/66110237.html

honored recently:
http://www.wwltv.com/news/WWL-TVs-Angela-Hill-honored-with-Murrow-award-for-best-writing-90102847.html

Dennis Woltering bio:
http://www.wwltv.com/on-tv/bios/66113057.html

You have been awarded 1 Power Point for fixing the embed code for Dead Pool video McCarthy Accuses Murrow Of Defending "Traitors". Thank you for helping maintain VideoSift's reliability.

*promote. The spirit of Ed Murrow is needed now more than ever

Oh yeah I sifted it but it's been called a conspiracy theory and inserted into the lies channel by burdturgler already. I suppose it was just misinformation and kneejerk reporting based on rumours even though they claimed it was CONFIRMED by the justice dept. Silly reporters huh?

In reply to this comment by schmawy:
Don't fret over Sofaking Mr. or Ms. Kisses in fact you can almost take it as a sign that you're on the right track. I cancelled it out.

I had always heard that there was something fishy about OKC and bombs in the building, but didn't know it was so well substantiated in the early reports of the day. I'm sure it was retracted, just like flight 93 landing in Cleveland.

Guess I has some googling to do. Would you dare try to Sift that clip?

In reply to this comment by ButterflyKisses:
well.. the reporters in the video I attached stated that a 2nd bomb was diffused and they found a 3rd one. No it doesn't appear that they were in the truck since that had already exploded.... unless they were in the truck also and they were ejected into the basement of the murrow bldg and just happened not to explode. Highly improbable I would think considering the damage that the truck bomb had done. No, something isn't right here. Why, I wonder isn't this being discussed? Oh I also noticed that sofaking downvoted my comment as if I were asking some inappropriate question. Based on evidence from news coverage I would think that this topic is more than appropriate to inquire about and I'm quite surprized that this has been swept under the rug so to speak.

In reply to this comment by schmawy:
Whoa wait what? He said on the tapes that there was an addional bomb on the front seat he could set off with a pistol didn't he? But that wouldn't be the second larger bomb, would it? Early reporting can't generally be trusted by that's odd.
In reply to this comment by ButterflyKisses:
What about the bombs that were found inside the building? They didn't even cover that did they? How did he get those in there? I recall news coverage on this for a couple of hours that day. Story incomplete.

Don't fret over Sofaking Mr. or Ms. Kisses in fact you can almost take it as a sign that you're on the right track. I cancelled it out.

I had always heard that there was something fishy about OKC and bombs in the building, but didn't know it was so well substantiated in the early reports of the day. I'm sure it was retracted, just like flight 93 landing in Cleveland.

Guess I has some googling to do. Would you dare try to Sift that clip?

In reply to this comment by ButterflyKisses:
well.. the reporters in the video I attached stated that a 2nd bomb was diffused and they found a 3rd one. No it doesn't appear that they were in the truck since that had already exploded.... unless they were in the truck also and they were ejected into the basement of the murrow bldg and just happened not to explode. Highly improbable I would think considering the damage that the truck bomb had done. No, something isn't right here. Why, I wonder isn't this being discussed? Oh I also noticed that sofaking downvoted my comment as if I were asking some inappropriate question. Based on evidence from news coverage I would think that this topic is more than appropriate to inquire about and I'm quite surprized that this has been swept under the rug so to speak.

In reply to this comment by schmawy:
Whoa wait what? He said on the tapes that there was an addional bomb on the front seat he could set off with a pistol didn't he? But that wouldn't be the second larger bomb, would it? Early reporting can't generally be trusted by that's odd.
In reply to this comment by ButterflyKisses:
What about the bombs that were found inside the building? They didn't even cover that did they? How did he get those in there? I recall news coverage on this for a couple of hours that day. Story incomplete.

Much obliged, amigo.

In reply to this comment by NordlichReiter:
*promote