Fox's E.D. Hill impersonates Helen Thomas
On the September 6 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-hosts Steve Doocy and Brian Kilmeade re-enacted a contentious exchange between White House press secretary Tony Snow and NBC News chief White House correspondent David Gregory during a September 5 press gaggle. At one point in the re-enactment, Doocy called out, "Helen Thomas. Helen Thomas, you're next." Co-host E.D. Hill then gave what was apparently her rendition of Hearst Newspapers columnist Thomas. Following is a screen capture of Hill's impersonation:
From the September 6 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:
DOOCY: Keep reading.
KILMEADE: "I'm not being rude."
DOOCY: "Yes, you are."
KILMEADE: "Don't try to dismiss me" -- I lost my place. "Don't try to dismiss me as making a Democratic argument, Tony, when I'm speaking fact."
DOOCY: "Well, OK. Well, no."
KILMEADE: Oh. "You can do that to the Democrats" -- I was like, "Wow, you're good."
DOOCY: Helen Thomas. Helen Thomas, you're next.
KILMEADE: "Well, you can do that to the Democrats. Don't do it to me."
DOOCY: "No, I'm doing it to you because the second part was factually tendidious" --
KILMEADE: Tendentious.
HILL: Tendentious.
DOOCY: "Tendentious." Thank you very much.
So they were impersonating Helen Thomas? I think its funny. Other media types that are given great press on Media Matters imitate others , so whats the issue?
As far as the Gregory/Snow battle- they are both frauds looking for better press.
It is incredible that you are not aware that Thomas, who relentlessly probed McClellan and now Snow with uncomfortable questions, is a huge thorn in the Bush propaganda machine's side-ergo Fox News' side as well. Hence the childish mocking and demonization (a favored right-wing tactic) from Bush apologist Hill.
And feel free to elaborate on exactly how you arrived at your opinion that NBC's David Gregory (who likewise makes the Bush team squirm at times) is a "fraud".
This is why I think Gregory is a fraud
[link to mediamatters.org]
And I dont see the problem with making fun of Helen Thomas, she is a public figure . Just like its ok for Keith Olbermann to mock Bill O'Reilly.
Again why do we have a problem with being fair?
---"This is why I think Gregory is a fraud
Gregory very frequently asks tough questions and follow-ups of McClellan and Snow--something we've seen little of from the other, timid White House reporters (Thomas being a notable exception). Calling Gregory a "fraud", as you do, based on the one incident falls woefully short of proving your case. It also brings into question what your agenda is when you appear to have a problem with reporters who ask tough questions about Bush.
Your comparison of Thomas to Bill O'Reilly doesn't hold water either. Thomas is a well-regarded journalist with a sterling reputation. O'Reilly is a documented, serial liar and far-right-wing blowhard with a tv and a radio talk show. O'Reilly cowardly dishes it out by the bucket-full and asks for and deserves all the scorn he gets back.
Again why do we have a problem with being fair?"
Anyone who knows me on this site knows I cant stand Bush, He is the worst thing to happen to America. You again fall tot he Partisan line. When someone dares to question the party line, I am attacked as supporting Bush.
Again I have no problem with Helen Thomas. She can ask all the questions in the world, she is great, I just dont see the issue with making fun of her.
I dont care if David Gregory asks tough questions to Bush, I feel he doesnt. I also feel he caves in to Republicans because he is trying to work himself to be the host of Today in 2009.
This is not North Korea , we can have different opinions. I dont disagree with you on O"Lielly but everyone is fair game.
You say "Keith Olbermann [mocks] Bill O'Reilly" as if that somehow justifies Hill's actions. Are you referring to Olbermann's voice imitation of O'Reilly? The blustery voice Olbermann imitates happens to be nearly identical to O'Reilly's. I'd be interested your explanation of how Hill was doing an "impression" or imitation of Thomas. Because I have never seen Thomas look or act in the manic manner Hill depicts.
The simple truth is that the Bush-loving, Thomas-loathing Hill, lacking the will or ability to critique Thomas intellectually, had to resort to a childish, impetuous grimace and flailing of arms, unaccompanied by any sort of informative comment you might expect from a real journalist, in order to dismiss Thomas. It in no way was an "impression" or imitation.
I also have never seen Helen Thomas act like that , but O'Reilly does not talk like the way KO mocks that he does. O Reilly also does not have a big head also the way KO shows it.
Regardless, Helen Thomas is a grown up women and a great reporter, I am sure she can handle ED Hill and she sees humor in it. I know I thought it was hysterical.
---"I know I thought it was hysterical."---
Since you admit you have never seen Helen Thomas look or behave in the way Hill depicts, please feel free to enlighten us all on why, then, Hill's pathetic depiction had you in hysterics.
Because anything on FOX I find humerous, the whole network is a joke.
You'll be happy to know that after reading through the above thread, I went through the trouble of signing in for the express pleasure of chiming in to attack you ad hominem.
You are truly an idiot.
Thank you.
You are entitled to your opinion. Despite the Bush Administrations efforts we still have free speech.
Peace
Jlyon, aren't you proud to be a Democrat? Where the slightest break from the party line is met with invective and name calling. I feel your pain and understand what it is you're going through. Perhaps next time, you'll know better.
Signed:
Joe Lieberman
Despite some who feel you can never have a different view , and if you do you are a Bush supporter, I am a very proud Democrat and feel the Democratic party and Democrats in general are more tolerant than the other party.
Name calling certainly isn't nice, but let's not pretend that Democrats are the only ones who engage in it.
Signed, Ann Coulter
The giant head on the small body is a jab at O'Reilly's monumental ego. I thinks it's hysterical
...that this was a puerile, ad hominem attack on Helen Thomas. Read the transcript of the press gaggle -- Ms. Thomas was not part of the exchange between Gregory and Snow. The reference to her in the "reenactment" was gratuitous and served no purpose other than to give an excuse for Hill's so-called impersonation. It was a mean spirited and personal pot-shot at woman whose only "crime" is that she takes her job as a member of the Fourth Estate seriously and strives to hold this Administration (as she did those before it) accountable for its actions.
For those who have commented indignantly and have not taken the effort to look at the clip:
This impersonation of Helen Thomas takes place entirely between seconds 25 and 27 of the clip, thus it lasts LESS THAN TWO SECONDS!
There are quite a few clips of Helen Thomas out there on the Internet, and she DOES have odd, excessive hand motions. Of course, they are not quite like those exaggerated in these two seconds.
Also, for the record, Helen Thomas is no longer a reporter: She is now a columnist. There is a difference. Reporters ask questions they want answered... Helen is not about listening to answers, she is into speaking.
gesture to be offensive. The middle finger that Bush flashed at a camera during an interview a few years ago lasted half a second. Therefore it is not offensive your standards. How much time is required for Bush to hold a middle finger at the camera for you to be offended?
[link to www.youtube.com]
For the life of me. I have no idea time was a factor. I still need you to explain to me how it remotely matters.
Two seconds is a blooper.
Your Bush video is a blooper.
A music TV channel playing Prince's 1999 repeatedly for 24 hours is a waste. Once would have been OK.
Again, like Tommy, I am amused that MMFA enthusiasts are taking this thing so seriously.
Some are criticizing the quality of the reenactment--fine by me.
The overboard focus on less than 2 seconds of someone I had never heard of making a fool of herself--way beyond my comprehension.
But don't stop on my account. I see it all as harmless.
So you are saying that Bush's arm accidentally lifted up and his middle finger accidentally flipped up and it only looked like he was flipping somebody off but he really didn't mean it. That is the only way that can be a blooper.
Hill accidentally made a funny face that only seemed to be insulting to Helen Thomas. That is what you are saying when you call it a blooper.
A blooper can include things done on purpose that in hindsight you realize were stupid and regretable. Have you seen the video of the guys diving off the roof? What were they thinking?
In the case of Bush, I would have to think he regrets this act, just like Reagan regetted the joke about annihilating the Soviet Union during an unbroadcast sound check that was recorded and then sent out to embarrass him. He had little defense for what he had done. It was on purpose, but it goes down as a blooper.
does it take to say Macaca? Longer than using the "N" word? So by your standards we can reappropriate the "N" word, since it's less offensive by virtue of the lack of a third syllabel.
There are offensive words, long ones and short ones, that trigger emotions. If someone uses one of these trigger words, he or she should be held accountable.
However, if on a live show a camera catches someone doing something stupid for less than two seconds (not indecent, morally offiensive, racially charged, Muslim riot inciting, etc.)I find it hilarious that there are over 80 posts about it, many taking this thing waaaaaay too seriously.
I can't imagine how anyone could possibly take offense to this - this is just a bad impersonation on an even worse network.
Don't single E.D. Hill out for a juvenile impersonation. The whole segment was stupid. Single out the writers for FOX & Friends.
...Fox & Friends went out of their way to make a personal attack on Helen Thomas. See my response to Jlyon's original post above.
This item illustrates one of the following?
1) Some liberals have absolutely no sense of humor, Or
2) The bottom of the conservative misinformation barrel is being frantically scraped for ANYTHING.
It's that many of us don't get what passes for Republican humor.
It's funny to you when the person being made fun of is a conservative. Ok, got it.
Admit it, unless you're eighty years old Republican "humor" just ain't funny. (Well, actually it IS funny... but in an unintended sort of way.)
Its ok to mock someone they dont like , but its a national crime if Queen Helen Thomas is mocked.
The idea of fairness on this website is completely gone.
Because it was never there to begin with!! DUH!!!
This is a one-sided website! Always has been!
This site was designed to combat the overwhelming conservative bias that permeates the main stream media. Mocking some one like Helen Thomas is a perfect example of that bias and deserves to be talked about. It's interesting that when some post that this topic isn't worth talking about, those threads usually have the greatest number of posts. What's different here from mocking Bill O'Reilly is the absolute sophmoric approach on a "newsy" show. Helen Thomas has covered presidents before Bush went AWOL in the National Guard. She does deserve some respect, unlike Bill O'Reilly who deserves none.
There are lots of dumbaya 'impersonations' that i do not like, because they are poorly done, off-point or mock something that does not relate to him. Now show me ONE TIME where Ms. Thomas acted in any way like it was portrayed in that 'hit piece' and you might have a point. Now, you and tommy-boy may not have liked how Helen would not just sit down and shut-up like you feel a woman should, but I do not recall her once waving around like a fool or blathering like that.
So put up or shut-up yourself.
I am a women, and I have no problem with Helen Thomas, I dont however see what the big deal is with ED Hill making fun of Helen Thomas. Keith Olbermann makes fun of O'Reilly and even Katie Couric and Tom Cruise and Suri Cruise and The Daily Show makes fun of people. We are a nation that makes fun of others.
LOTS of women feel 'other' women should judst sit down and shut-up, so what does yours have to do with the issue? I guess the whole lying thing just goes right past you.
such as Phyllis Schlafly, a woman who flies all over the country telling women that their place is in the home.
Was it a comedy show or was it SUPPOSED to be a news program. Explain the informative value of childishly ridiculing a well respected journalist. Is it meant to entertain the audience who one would assume tuned into a News program, I dont know maybe for NEWS. Instead we got ridicule of Mrs Thomas. I wouldnt object to this from a conservative version of the Daily Show should they ever find the talent for such a show. However from what was supposed to be a news program the obvious misinformation value of showing contempt and ridicule for someone for doing her job the way its SUPPOSED to be done as opposed to the lapdog administration apple polishing that often substitutes for substantive questions is apparant.
---"Queen Helen Thomas"---
An interesting light is shown on your overall politics and/or agenda in that you claim you have "no problem" with Thomas, yet you resort to the unnecessary and derogatory "Queen" label and also find Hill's childish mockery of Thomas "hysterical".
She is the queen of the White House Correspondents. She is the best there ever was and will be. Not sure again what your point is. ED Hill making fun of her was funny and not serious but not offensive and not newsworthy.
Seems your hitting blanks today.
I thought that title was reserved for Jeff Gannon...
a while back I made a comment on Sheeham's divorce. I WAS BOMBARDED by attackes on this thread. Yet yesterday, IWARRIOR made a comment about a senators sex scandle and divorce like it was not big deal. there it it..... equlity
There is no such public figure as "Sheeham."
For a visual impression of another person to succeed as comedy, there has to be at least some recognizable element of the person being imitated. Now, be honest, Tommy: have you ever seen Helen Thomas look or sound anything like that weird bit by Hill? No, you haven't, nor has anyone else.
By defending this sort of thing, you have proved once again that your sense of humor is lacking, not ours. Congrats.
The bottom line for you has nothing to do with the worthiness of the humor, it has everything to do with who the target is. If it's someone you loathe from the right, there are no boundaries and it's most likely hysterically "right on" in your book.
On the other hand, when someone pokes fun at a fellow liberal, then it's just gratuituous and mean.
It's all very explainable, and transparent.
We get it.
but as normal you project that onto others then whine about how unfair everyone else is. LOL, grow-up tommy-boy
Really? How exactly did you deduce that from that post? I suppose you "looked into his eyes and saw his soul."
The point is, Tommy, that caricatures can be funny. However, when you simply fabricate qualities, it ceases to be a caricature - it ceases to be perceptive - and amounts to juvenile humor. You may find it funny, but it leaves me and others cold.
car·i·ca·ture 1 : exaggeration by means of often ludicrous distortion of parts or characteristics --- from Webster
You could also say that nobody with a sense of humor laughs at a FOX News anchor's childlike impersonation of a respected media figure when all the anchor does is wave her arms around and open her mouth.
Personally, I laugh when I think of all the FOX & Friends segment writers concluding that this is the last thing they can do to raise their ratings.
I don't believe it's been posted here because lefties will find this offensive. It's posted so lefties can have a good laugh at how inanely stupid and pathetic conservative humor is.
I'm not offended, just amused and amazed that people consider this "Real Journalism, Fair and Balanced".
I don't see ill-contrived, improvised, clunky comedic bits being ridiculously acted out by the hosts on shows like Good Morning America or Today.
---"This item illustrates one of the following?"---
You omitted the correct answer:
3) Helen Thomas is an annoying thorn in the Bush administration's (and it's apologists') side (because she asks uncomfortable questions) and therefore must be denegrated or demonized by the likes of Hill & Co., because they (and their audience) lack the intellectual capacity to critique or judge Ms. Thomas (or inform their right-wing viewers) as true journalists have an obligation to.
or sense of maturity and civilty? You decide.
Hey here's a joke. Your mother's vulva is stinky and smelly.
Wasn't that FUNNY?
this is being posted for its offensiveness.
Just as an example of Fox News bias. Meaning that ED probably wouldn't make fun of a republican media member.
It's just a tiny nut on the top of the Fox News bias sundae and probably doesn't warrant much attention. But that is one scary face she's making.
Fox and Friends, a supposedly hard news, non-opinion program, ran an entire segment poking fun of (what they perceive as) liberal members of the media for supposedly reading Democratic talking points.
I wonder if Hill dreamed about this moment back in school when she was learning about what Helen Thomas has meant for female journalists.
Congrats to E.D. Hill. She has finally made it.
Maybe FOX is feeling a little pressured by Keith Olbermann and they're adding a touch of Republican humor to their broadcasts. Whereas KO's humor is sort of hip Republican humor seems more designed for the Lawrence Welk crowd. But I'll bet some of FOX's viewers busted a gut in the nursing home laughing at this segment.
First off I'd suggest that the 3 Stooges NOT give up their gig at Fox for Hollywood...they stink at "acting"
Secondly, E.D. Hill does a TERRIBLE impression of Helen Thomas. I've NEVER seen Ms. Thomas flail her arms and make faces. Then again, perhaps she does, and I've missed it??
Me? I chuckled, cause they are sooooooooooo bad at trying to be funny. Thanks for the video.
Maybe when she retires Ms. Hill is planning to get a gig in Branson, Missouri as the opening act for Tony Orlando and Dawn.
I've seen better comedy on the local public access channel. These guys aren't up to the high school drama club level, or even the current season of SNL.
Why are there no funny conservatives?
We are mean-spirited, hateful, terrible, greedy bastards. Except for when we vote against our own economic interests in which case we are just plain stupid. At least that's what I've read.
That was pretty funny.
And true, too... ;>)
... you know the rest.
To all you Bush loving, conservative thinking, right leaning, Fox "News" apologists--Get Over It! We get it.
We know you don't like that this is a place where we can read about your antics, and blow off a little steam. But, Get over it! This is a Progressive, Liberal, Left Leaning, Democratic party friendly, web site.
If you don't like the items they choose to highlight, go start your own site. Maybe you could call it--IThinkMediaMattersForAmericaRunsTooManyItemsWhichAreNotAboutRightWingMisinformationAs It SaysInTheirMissionStatement.com.
Your posts on this the past couple of months could provide reading until the next Presidential election. Problem is--they are all the same.
Perhaps you think it's funny for some morning dizbag with an IQ of 12 to make fun of a well respected and talented journalist, some of us don't. On the other hand, some of us think it's funny to refer to GWB as a "Retarded Cowboy," which some of you find offensive.
Your problem is--You don't like MMFA. That's alright, we do. So, by all means, show us where they have crossed the line by taking quotes out of context, spun the argument, or flat out misinformed. But for now, it's still a free country, and they can print what they wish. And until they lose their credibility by doing any of the above, you might try to limit you ad hominem attacks.
Try to remember that it was ED Hill who played an idiot, and MMFA who reported it.
the resident "concern trolls" who most need to heed your post will not read it.
Great moments in pundentry as read by... Fox News Hosts? Sadly, the Daily Show uses children to display the childishness of these debates and arguments.
So instead of "showing" the clip, they read a transcript poorly. Thus they made all of themselves look like morons.
For what it's worth, the "hair-do" Brian Kilmeade is a cowardly lion. He claims he lives and works in a war-zone (July 20, 2006 morning radio show, ~28 minutes into the second hour).
That is E.D. Hill's "O-face." And she always asked why I prefer to do it doggy-style.
...now that wasn't funny.
I wouldn't worry about it, though. I'm sure someone will flag the comment and it will disappear, never to offend again . . . until I repost it!
I just watched the clip. That was horrible! I've seen elementary school plays with better flow.
The only thing more ridiculous than that "skit" is mmfa reporting on it.
you ragging about MMFA !
not
it was all your comment was worth.
Ok, first here's the difference with KO's O'Reilly vs. this tw*t's stupid antics.
When KO does the O'Reilly voice, and put up the graphic of Billy's face, KO reads the script of what Bill said to a T. He doesn't make sh*t up, he reports exactly what is on the transcript.
E.D Hill on the other hand, or as I like to refer to as the Fluffer Girl for the Fox newsroom, DIDN'T DO ANYTHING TO REPRESENT THOMAS IN ANYWAY. PERIOD. If she read the script in a voice like an older women...that's cool. That's an impersonation.
I mean, Tommy, Jylon....whenever you saw someone do an impersonation of someone on TV, the commedian keeps it close to the subject to keep it RELEVANT.
Example, watch the Ares Spears (MadTV) impersonations of Shaq, Ah-nold, and Sly Stalone. Yes, he takes it over the top, but the voices are dead on, he mimics their character traits and/or catch phrases. Now, if Ares just flaied his arms around like EDiot and used his regular speaking voice to say "Look at me, I'm Shaq whoowhoo" You would think that impersonation sucks. I would.
WHEN DID HELEN THOMAS LOOK LIKE THIS 'ED'IOT? WHEN DID SHE EVER DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN PUBLIC?
"Oh it's not fair, whaaa" No, it's just straight up not funny and foolish. If this dumb b*tch was at an open mic she would have been booed of stage with the appropiate rain of beer bottles and tomatoes flying at her.
And let's look at the entire context of this whole "bit".
They were going after David Gregory for what.....asking tough questions. Why else would Fox news be concerned about this exchange on the floor other than to just throw more noise into the mix, and ignore the real issues that David brought up and Tony dodged.
'Nevermind the real substance of the questioning...we think David Gregory is being rude....whaaaaa'
tools.......
Now do your Les Kinsolving!
this wasn't howie mandell imitating larry king. this is an over mascaraed, foundation caked, fake blonde with no real press credentials attempting to humor, i think, its viewers. it certainly cracked up the hosts of the show. besides, she's ugly.
i say let it be. shed some light on it as another example of how conservatives behave when they can't bring you the truth and move on.
but don't be remiss -
those of you defending helen thomas obviously don't know who this reporter is...those who know helen thomas as a reporter (as it dates back some 8 presidents) know she neither wants you to defend her or needs you to defend her. she's doing the people's work.
"this is an over mascaraed, foundation caked, fake blonde with no real press credentials "
No more personal attacks on Steve Doocey!
good one.
I'm saying cut E.D. some slack for being born/named at the wrong time.
I had a friend when I was a kid, named after his dad, went by "B.J.", I guess when that abbreviation was first widely used, at least in my neighborhood.He had a tough time of it.
Imagine being a woman named for the condition that Viagra treats. Ouch, she's gotta be mean.
two things that are telling in this clip: 1)these guys read copy from a teleprompter every day, but they can't read from a sheet of paper 8 inches in front of their noses.
2)E.D. Hill was spaced out and obviously just waiting for her next cue and couldn't think of anything more clever to do as "Helen Thomas" than to just wave her arms around and make a funny face. no improve-ability - clear sign that she is just checked out mentally until the next time her initials roll down on the prompter.
unfortunately, this is representative of ALL news readers today. they are not real thinkers or good analysts. they are puppets with costumes and voices. there are very few who actually have the talent or intellect to do or say anything substantial. they are no different than the people you see on the metro or in line at starbucks - except they sit in front of a camera reading words from a screen. they are not special or important in any way. that is why they should not be believed, trusted, and you should all just turn off your F***ng teevees! please!!
Looked to me like E.D. Hill was caught on camera and just tried to make a weird face to "fill," rather than being an imitation of Helen Thomas. I like most of the reporting on this site, but I think you guys are R-E-A-L-L-Y reaching here. You should be careful or Jon Stewart will start making fun of you!
this is petty.
E.D. looked more like she was doing an impersonation of Ann Coulter.
she wasn't doing Jeff Gannon. That could have been really gross.
Who is the grand poobah that decrees what is newsworthy enough for MMFA to post? If you think this is not important or trivial go to another thread. Personally I am offended when an icon like Helen Thomas is belittled esp. when it's on Fox. As I said before in a previous post the more people complain about anything they feel is unworthy of MMFA's web space always have the most posts.
commend the morning people at Fox for attempting to do something human. Normally they are just robots read the company line and making fun of someone. This is truly a step in the LEFT direction. Maybe if they would realize that outside of their monitors exists a world full of other people and other ideas. They have had the stage for years and have done nothing constructive.
This face by E.D. Hill(there is a joke in there somewhere) should be held in esteem. And Ms. Thomas, if you are out there, we can give you a great line for E.D. Of course, that is the reason she is on the show...sort of keeps those other two prucks (sic) down in the gutter.
I guess trying to bring a "lighter" side to the news is good because it provides some entertainment. Since the average age of the FOX viewers is in the upper 70's it is likely that most of those watching REALLY THOUGHT it was Helen Thomas!!
Freaks, nuts, and GOP - Corporate shills, that is all that you see on Fox. Also alot and phoney and/ or whimpy so - called liberals.
show must be mentally retarded or something. Forget all the political stuff and just realize what morons these Fox morning people are. I can't believe these shaved apes make more money than I do.
It wasn't even remotely funny. If they didn't have the studio and fancy flashing lights, this would be scraping the bottom of the barrel on YouTube under the title "hellen thomas gets owned ***FUNNY!!!***".
Come on, I expect a little more out of my satire than middle-school improv night imitations.
for just a second there I thought it was Helen Thomas doing a remarkably good impression of E. D. Hill.
In a very real sense, it is fitting - a horrible impersonation is the closest E.D. Hill will ever get to being even a fraction of the journalist that Helen Thomas is...
where does FOX network find these ugly and stupid broads?
If you want ED Hill to have a sparkle in her eyes, be sure to aim a fill light at the back of her head.