It is one of four possibilities:
He was whooshing us (intentionally misinforming for his own amusement).
He was misinformed and is currently damned to Hell by Cecil.
He was joking and mistakenly thought the class would understand he was joking.
He was joking, the rest of the class UNDERSTOOD he was joking, and I am a dumbass.
I tend to favor #1, but I just hope it wasn’t #4.
I was going to say the same thing. Billy Graham has always seemed to avoid the political and cultural wars that Robertson and Falwell have waged. He just really seems to care about ministering to people about Jesus.
Nothing right wing about that.
I love Paul Harvey, although I don’t get a chance to listen to him much anymore.
His news segment is always called “News and Comment” so you have to expect him to add his own twist and perspective on the news.
“The Rest of the Story” is entertainment, pure and simple. I’d never cite it for a research paper, nor would I read a research paper to someone looking for entertainment.
More than anything, I like Paul’s voice. Although it may have annoyed me at first, it grew on me over the years and now I just enjoy hearing him, no matter what he’s saying. If they broadcast “Paul Harvey Reads the Phone Book”, I’d probably tune in.
Speaking of facts…I’m still hoping for a cite for Sampiro’s claim that the Paul Harvey show is owned by a "right-wing Christian broadcasting company " and not ABC Radio (unless someone could point out how ABC Radio is a “right-wing Christian broadcasting company”)
For 10 years I lived through Paul Harvey’s noon report because we broadcast him. Twice when he came to town on a speaking engagement I was involved with origionating him.
The show is/was called “Paul Harvey News and Commentary.” There was some news. The news part would be contained in the part of his 15 minutes that could be defined as Page One. After that it was commentary with a viewpoint.
Onward to “The Rest of the Story.” I am now convinced that before the internet and FAX machines Paul Harvey spread more UL’s than any other single source. He had the microphone and over 800 affiliates all over North America.
Many, many of TROTS plots that Mr. Harvey spread I would later recognize on Snopes…with a “False.”
It is sweet justice then that Paul Harvey is become the victim/target of many an Urban Myth:
SNOPE SEARCH (The Hillary Clinton One comes to mind) (Though some are merely the ULs he DID spread!)
“…has become”
I’ve had to correct a lot of errors lately. I’m really off my game.
(Walks away ashamed.)
Ya can’t forget Bunn coffee machines!
I became disenchanted with Paul Harvey around 1978 or so when he reported what I knew to be an Urban Legend as a cutsie news storey. You know the one: the rich Arab student bought himself a brand new van, got on the interstate, set the cruise control, then ambled to the back of the van to fix himself a drink.
Har, har. He even reported what interstate this purportedly happened. I’m not sure why the student had to be Arab, although this was at the height of the Arab oil embargo, so resentment was running pretty high.
Yet his voice is so sincere and down-home, it’s hard not to believe every word he says.
Not sure about the “Christian” part, but I think you can make an argument for “right-wing”:
I still see that as a business decision. If you want to make money in the talk radio format, you either have sports or conservative talk.
Disney has the sports radio network. They wanted the other piece of the pie.
I haven’t listened to Paul Harvey in years, mostly because I can’t stand it when a radio personality blends commercials seamlessly in with their commentary.
But I used to hate it when I sat through a long, drawn-out “the rest of the story”, and then at the end when he revealed his subject, it was somebody I’d never heard of.
I’ve been listening to Paul Harvey for decades, but always as a bit of a joke; it strikes me that someone would have to be gullible indeed to accept much of the guff he spouts as factual. AFAIK, ABC mainly keeps him around because he generates huge advertising revenues; that stentorian voice hawking Sleep Number beds and patent medicines for macular degeneration just mesmerizes certain people, apparently. More than most such programs, Mr. Harvey’s sanctimonious screeds and fluffy little glurgefests exist mainly to provide a sincere-sounding lead-in to his pitch, and what a pitchmeister extraordinaire he is. A legitimate journalist, however? Er, not so much.
An item from today’s broadcast is a prime example of Mr. Harvey’s disinformative style, in which he reports that someone in the US military, he doesn’t say who, has published a book, he doesn’t name the title, stating “that prisoners at Guantanamo Bay were taunted by US troops”. He then repeats this statement in the inimitable “I’m talking to a bunch of inattentive three-year-olds” Harvey manner, then follows with a statement along the lines of “this person gets television air time for his accusations; meanwhile, US troops are having their heads lopped off in Iraq and only their families mourn”. Sorry, but there’s not enough information provided there for any reasonable person to determine the accuracy of this so-called ‘story’, much less that his apparent inference that the media are ignoring atrocities against Americans in Iraq is correct.
But that’s his particular schtick, that he’s the lonely alternative voice telling you what’s really going on that all those other pinko so-called journalists are, probably deliberately, failing to report, and now that he’s shown how much he cares about informing you of the Real Story, you certainly won’t mind if he just, by way of being helpful and all, tells you about how well his tankless water heater is working, because, well, you know, you might want to give it a try as well. Very effective, I’ll admit , but for me the man has always been, and always will be, a fraud and buffoon of the first rank.
Or Bose Wave Radios…
manhattan
Wrong. He enlisted in the Army Air Corps after Pearl Harbor. But hey, don’t let any actual facts get in the way of your slam.
If they are actual facts … cite?
Paul In Saudi
I listened to him as a kid thirty years ago. I like learning a bit of history. I noticed that he was pro-war (in Vietnam) and became less and less so until coming out against the war when I certain young man became eligible for the draft. And that young man’s name, why it was Paul … Harvey, Junior.
I’m guessing that is a whoosh - but a cite would be great if it is true …
just like your local True Value Hardware Store.
Sorry for the delay- I wasn’t ignoring your post cite but just hadn’t noticed it, and you are correct, I was wrong. The article that I was reading from was in error.
The mix-up: Paul Harvey is cited many places as the author of a review of the movie Passion of the Christ in which he mentions working for the Billy Graham Crusade. In fact what happened is that this review was written by a minister who works for the Billy Graham Crusade, Paul Harvey read bits of this review on the air (giving full credit to its true author), and as will happen the entire thing soon got attributed to Harvey on both the web and in print sources. (It’s rather like the Vonnegut=Sunscreen speech and the Cindy Williams of Laverne & Shirley disses servicemen getting raises stories). Withdrawn with embarassed apologies.
(Just the part about the Graham Crusade; I still think the old man’s a tool… and $10 million a year and he still pimps True Value and Acne Acme medicine type crap? Sheez.)
Thanks for the clarification.
FWIW…I tend to roll my eyes at a lot of what Harvey says (whenever I hear him, which isn’t very often).
You’re the one who made the initial assertion, along with a political slam in CS, sparky. You cite.
manhattan
Most of the chickenhawk databases state that Paul Harvey is “a complicated case - we’re working on a dossier”.
Among the other “chickenhawk” sites, here’s one that lists him under “Media VIP’s”
http://p090.ezboard.com/fbooktalkfrm79.showMessageRange?topicID=117.topic&start=1&stop=20
Here’s another one listing him under “Propoganda Platoon” stating that the conflict he avoided was WW2:
http://www.todaysalternativenews.com/index.php?event=link,150&values[0]=2&values[1]=207
Listed at the top of the page at this site:
http://www.sierratimes.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard/printpage.cgi?forum=11&topic=176
Wow.
Your “cites” are message board posts, partisan blogs and lists (with no supporting details)from partisan media?
FWIW…
http://www.wgem.com/radio/fm_1051_harvey.php
(plenty of other similar cites…Google em if you like)
Which seems to discount your blanket statement…
Retraction?