I also loathe Oprah because she’s a woman. It’s the exact same reason I hate Jenny McCarthy.
Hey, I do what I can.
Oprah Winfrey owns Dr. Oz’s television program. He is produced by one of her companies and he got his start on television from his appearances on Ms. Winfrey’s now defunct daytime talk show. She has given him her imprimatur and she continues to do so by earning a staggering amount of revenue from his series. She is as much to blame for the snake oil products and medical quackery that he purveys as he is.
You really can’t criticize Dr. Oz without Also criticizing the people who are responsible for his becoming a television celebrity and pitchman and that includes Ms. Winfrey.
The reason this goes back to Oprah is that Dr. Oz wouldn’t be on TV if it wasn’t for her.
I do wonder if Nzinga would be in such a frothy state here if it were Paul Deen we were criticizing (for promoting such unhealthy eating) instead of Oprah. Would she still be screaming about Jon Stewart over and over and over? I doubt it. Fangirls gotta fangirl, I guess.
Sigh. Does this include Miss Crabapple from second grade who told him he can be whatever he wants to be when he grows up?
Yes, we get it. You are a retard.
And by extension, Winfrey’s fangirls like Nzinga. She’s as much to blame as O is for Dr. Oz’s ascension.
But my point is that he started out as a well-regarded doc. When Winfrey gave him his platform, he was not peddling woo for the most part. It just seems like a stretch to blame her for Oz’s detour down snakeoil lane to the extent that we’re supposed to see her as a cuntiest cunts of all cunts.
And this is where you completely lose me. Oz is the licensed medical professional who should know what is snake oil and what isn’t. Because he’s an MD, he is speaking as an expert authority when he endorses snake oil, and thus, has more influence than someone is not an MD. Winfrey is not a medical professional and doesn’t portray herself as one. Why would we expect her to better have discernment than Oz? For all we know, she’s trusting him as anyone in his audience would.
Sure you can.
I don’t disagree that in a case of real medical stuff, Dr. Oz should know better than Oprah.
No, because she didn’t use her influence to promulgate his dangerous snake oil advertisements.
If you weren’t a crazy person, that would be clear.
Don’t forget, she also gave Jenny McCarthy a platform. And she gave Oz his show after he flipped out.
And Oprah wouldn’t be on TV if some guy didn’t give her show back in the 80’s.
The chain of blame goes back to the inventor of television.
I grant you that Jenny McCarthy was an irresponsible move, but the thread is about Dr. Oz.
IMO Oprah has crafted a deliberate moral platform along with a facade of plausible deniability for her method. She uses the “town hall” format as popularized by Donahue to give the appearance of an open critical discussion, complete with audience questions and faux-serious Barbara Walters style interviews. In her early days, she started with the journalistic critical approach of Donahue, but her ratings and appeal were limited until her show changed to a personal Oprah-interest platform.
However, her genius in creating her environment is that there is no actual critical discussion ocuring, only softball questioning and shilling for either her guests, or her personally chosen topics. Anything a guest says that is even slightly contrary to her predetermined position is met with the unassailable Oprah-frown and sudden “I’m just regular people like you” turn to her audience, where the shared disapproval ripples across her nodding fans. It is quite literally (in the idiomatic figuratively literal sense) the SNL Church Lady without the over the top satire. There’s nothing like a simple “Isn’t that special” condescension from Oprah to simultaneously imply critical authority while shutting down any thought of dissension.
Long story short, I agree that she isn’t merely objectively allowing ads or guests neutrally, but is very slyly pushing her own moral advocacy which is very damaging to the public that it is targeted at (mainstream women seeking a strong woman role-model and influential voice).
Wow, Gargoyle, that’s very well said. Exactly.
Man. It is so interesting to watch you people either blindly worship Oprah as the anointed one whose mere approval decides whether or not measles makes a comeback, or you all burn her at the stake. You folks fascinate me.
So now you’re claiming to be a neutral shit-stirrer?
So, on his show, Oz tells viewers to forgo things like chemotherapy and use herbal fungus rememdies instead?
The guy might be a loon, I don’t know, but nothing in this thread is coming from Oz himself.
I have never claimed to be neutral. I have championed Oprah on this board since day one. You pretend to misunderstand on purpose in the hopes that others will genuinely misunderstand. It is a transparent tactic. I LOVE OPRAH. I LOVE THE EFFECT SHE HAS ON YOU. I am her number one fan on this board. Does that make me one of the idiots who believes in anti vaxxing because Oprah said so? Only if you are a dishonest arguer.