I predict you will be wrong.

Guess I'm not her demographic. Never watched her show. Never much followed her activities except awareness of her book club. Definitely appreciate that effort.

There is nothing (I'm pretty sure) that Oprah could do or say that would affect my vote.

In that laundry list of things you said about Oprah, you forgot one important one:

Celebrity.

____________________________

With the possible exception of things like box scores, race results, and stock market tabulations, there is no such thing as Objective Journalism. The phrase itself is a pompous contradiction in terms.

I like Oprah and I respect her for what she has done with her life and for others but please don't make me sit through one of her shows without something to read.

Wearybottom Associates

Here's something else Oprah represents. You may be surprised.

(link...)

“‘Oprah isn’t shutting down,’ commented (Chicago Film Office director Rich) Moskal. Neither are the Jerry Springer, Judge Mathis and the new Steve Wilcos show.”

The reason these shows are not shutting down is either because they employ non-union writers, or have no need for writers. Is this fact something the Chicago film community should be celebrating? While there certainly is a place for non-union production in town, without the skill level fostered by union crews Hollywood would not be taking even a casual interest in the other things the city has to offer (such as interesting locations and cooperative film offices). The result would be that Chicago’s image as a film town would evaporate, and with it the infrasctructure and economic support that allows non-union projects to thrive.

In the case of Oprah, she belongs to three different craft unions herself (as a performer), yet refuses to allow union representation of any sort inside the doors of her studio, instead paying substandard wages and benefits to non-union crews. It is a travesty that Oprah feels no responsibility to those who helped her create her billions in profit, but that’s the way things are and it’s part of the reason union representation is so vital in this industry.

"Wealth that respects even the lowest among us," so long as you don't work as a writer for Harpo, Inc.

____________________________

With the possible exception of things like box scores, race results, and stock market tabulations, there is no such thing as Objective Journalism. The phrase itself is a pompous contradiction in terms.

First, I, personally, don't give a flying fig about Oprah.I refuse to buy a book that is stamped with her recommendation. And, I'm thinking that her giving away her cars and other expensive items is misplaced spreading of good cheer. Yeah, a few of those people probably need a new car, but many more people in this world need the most base of basics -- food, shelter, education.

I think her campaign move has been will spark some interest, but I don't think it will be solid. It's going to be soft, which probably puts it out there with a lot of other Obama -- and Hillary -- support.

Unions. I'm for 'em. And, anything more than a perfunctory examination of the Writers' Guild of America strike will reveal that they are asking for a very valid change in their basic contract. If tv and movie folks are making more money because of writings in new media then the writers should make more money too.

And I have never purposely watched an episode of Oprah, and if she's against union workers, I'll make sure that I never do.

Pam Strickland

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut

This seems to refute the accusation that she pays low wages and refuses to let any unionizing in her enterprises. As there were no real facts about the wages she pays, I have to question that assertion.

Were you even aware that she refuses to employ union writers?

I have great respect historically for the union movement in this country, but I'm not sure the original intentions of their grassroots founders have prevailed.

Last time I checked, there's still a minimum wage, there's a 40 hour work-week, there's no [legal] child labor in sweatshops, many employers sponsor insurance...

____________________________

With the possible exception of things like box scores, race results, and stock market tabulations, there is no such thing as Objective Journalism. The phrase itself is a pompous contradiction in terms.

Oprah has a huge effect on the modern American woman. I mean, she got us to read Anna Karenina. Come on. Not to mention all the people she has mobilized to provide housing after Hurricane Katrina, or educate themselves about global warming, or just get in shape. Her interview with George W. had a huge effect on his approval ratings, not because of anything she did, but because he was on her show and came out and kissed her on the cheek. They had a good interview, he had a good response.

I am looking forward to seeing the "Oprah effect" if you will; of course, it helps that I completely believe in Obama as the best candidate for president, so I embrace her "authorization" at this point. I also hope people will take her intended previous advice, and find out more for themselves about the candidates in this election.

As far as Obama - look at his record, his policies, his priorities; I think he speaks for himself. And it doesn't hurt to have such a fabulous woman in his camp!

Well, I guess you can't really come to any kind of intelligent conclusion about what Oprah represents then

I can only take so much talk about angels and miracles and God. That's why I don't watch.

I can't find where she said this, but I remember her saying very clearly that "all the answers to the world's problems can be found in prayer." I know that there are a number of people who are fine with that sentiment, but for me that's about as anti-intellectual as it gets. QED.

I think the Writers' Union should be suppoorted, but I'd like to ask why if this union is so good for its members the poor writers haven't had a raise in eons. According to them, they've been getting screwed royally by the industry for a long time. Where was the union then?

Maybe it'd get further if high-profile people like Oprah took a stand in the favor of unions.

____________________________

With the possible exception of things like box scores, race results, and stock market tabulations, there is no such thing as Objective Journalism. The phrase itself is a pompous contradiction in terms.

Compared with the political/social clout that she supposedly has, I'm suprised at how FEW people actually watch Oprah. If only 7 million people watch her daily, that gives her a far less reach than Rush Limbaugh (12 million daily listeners) or even one of my favorite TV shows "House," which has pulled an average of 12 million viewers a week this season.

I'm hardly criticizing Oprah. In fact, I've only seen bits of her show a few times. However, hearing so much about the book clubs and magazines and such, I would have thought that more people actually watched her.

Certainly Oprah celebrity rubs many people the wrong way. I guess that's why we have a really negative climate here in America. We tend to be disparaging of positive people. Feelings and emotion are too often seen as simpy, and anyone in the spotlight gets torn apart.

Saying "she doesn't have a union writing staff" is a responsible complaint. Saying she sometimes doesn't go through a proper vetting process is a responsible complaint.

As far as the feelings & emotion go, whatever. I have a hard time with the simplistic metaphysical mumbo-jumbo (see: her willing advocacy of The Secret) and the self-righteous Dr. Phil avenue to living life.

Of the myriad reasons to support Obama - and I note that you mention the Oprah Effect without invoking his name, curiously enough - Oprah is among the least of them.

____________________________

With the possible exception of things like box scores, race results, and stock market tabulations, there is no such thing as Objective Journalism. The phrase itself is a pompous contradiction in terms.

If she says "He's the man" it is going to have a huge effect on women voters who above all else TRUST Oprah.

Why should people trust Oprah more than anyone else?

As I recall, Dean collected a boatload of big name endorsements in 2004, but that didn't seem to matter much once the votes started coming in.

Brian A.
I'd rather be cycling.

Oprah doesn't have to influence many people directly to vote for Obama to have an influence. If she can get even a midling portion of the older white women that are her fan base to vote for Obama in the Iowa caucus (as they are the largest demographic to participate from what I hear), she can push Obama past Hilary and Edwards in Iowa, and that alone will have a huge impact on the race.

BTW, things move so fast these days that it's hard to realize that six or seven years ago, the last time the WGA contact was negotiated, you would have had to be pretty clairvoyant to realize just how big DVD sales of TV box sets were going to be and what a profit center they would become for the studios and networks. Also, the cable networks have moved well away from the then common practice of showing old TV reruns to developing new content. Another trend you wouldn't have realized was going to be such a huge impact on screenwriters was the reality show boom. So it's not that the WGA is a bad union as the industry is changing really fast. Note that the directors and actors are getting the same bad deal, but their contract is up later, so they'll get to ride on the coattails of the writers who are striking.