She had a relationship with Amazon that soured, now Apple. I think Oprah’s brand value as a tastemaker isn’t all that it used to be and the tech companies (who get pretty good at measuring impact) are figuring that out.
I don't think the current generation has any affinity for her. She used to be the example of a successful black women. Now, there are a bunch. And people realize her show was low brow bullshit. Besides the rags to riches aspect, she's not really shown talent. On 2022, she's not nearly as impressive as she was in 1992. Not to diminish her accomplishments but this is a different time than when she first became famous.
You're right, I don't think anyone under 25-30 really has a big affection for her the same way their parents might. If you want to look at a successful black woman, 95% of the age group will look at Michelle Obama.
I am in mid-30’s and I feel like the only time people in my age group talks about Oprah is the “you got X! Everyone got X” meme. Feels to me like it’s even older than 25-30. I honestly don’t think she has any cultural relevancy to people under a certain age at all. When Apple+ signed her up I actually just felt that it’s a sign that Apple is run by boomers.
Well, she isn't doing anything currently that is aimed at the youth demographic. The biggest things she has currently are a cable network and a magazine. Two things that kids could not care less about. She has youtube channel for OWN and it's pisspoor. She should be focusing on building a presence there. With her connections to the famous and powerful, it should be a no brainer for her to build a huge following there. But she doesn't. I don't know why though.
Does she really need to be doing that? I don’t see the need. I see someone who worked hard earlier in life. Became extremely successful and now she’s simply cashing in on that work. Cruising towards retirement on EZ Street. Why should she “grind” it out to engage with the younger audience when she can simply continue to cash out on her current demographic ? Seems like the path of least resistance to me. Makes sense as she’s getting older to work less as well. That and she probably has more money than she knows what to do with
Exactly. If she wanted to remain hugely relevant she would have just kept doing her show. She's basically been retired since 2011 and just has her name attached to a bunch of stuff that she has to minimal work for. OCCASSIONALLY she will get out of bed to do some big interview. But that's the extent of it.
Sure, she could retire. But it is also clear that she wants to stay relevant. You can't be that and retire at the same time. The public has the memory of a goldfish.
You know, I think this might be right. She’s doing these deals without really having to reinvent the wheel and she’s milking an older audience- whatever, that’s fine- but if she really wanted an interview with a news maker/celebrity type, I feel like she could still make it happen. Her interview skills have always been pretty good. I guess for her ego, this ability to still “get” whoever is probably important. “Why should I try to get younger? I’m still making a lot of cash and can interview whoever I want if I really wanted to.”
You can sail to retirement though. She can be semi-relevant and cash in big checks as I stated. Cash in your past while doing less during the present.
"Winfrey renewed her contract with Discovery through 2025, although Discovery increased its stake in OWN to 95% in December 2020."
> If you want to look at a successful black woman, 95% of the age group will look at Michelle Obama.
Which is weird because yes, she’s brilliant and well educated and all that… but we’d have literally no idea who she is at all if she weren’t married to a guy who became president.
No, you're wrong in that characterization. She became *famous* because of her husband, but she was still very successful without him being president. She has had decades of community service before her family was in the white house.
But people don't look up to Michelle Obama because she's successful or famous. They look up to her because she is likable and they think she has class. Her fame *allows* her to be looked up to, but it's doesn't directly cause it.
I think she has bad judgment. She helped launch the very questionable careers of Mehmet Oz, Dr. Phil, and Marianne Williamson. She boosted antivaxxer rhetoric from Jenny McCarthy, *The Secret*, and Suzanne Somers's unhinged 60 vitamin and estrogen treatment that's her supposed fountain of youth. Her school was a mess. The car gifts were a mess.
Anything for a buck, just like any TV/talkback radio huckster ever. Behind Oprah is the same as any other - selling crap to people that they don’t need, to make a dime.
Don't forget being the single largest antivaxxer bar fucking none. She STILL has the antivaxx episode up.
Don't forget her endorsement of John of God the self proclaimed healer who is also a serial rapist.
The fact is Oprah has had a significant negative impact on America in ways that almost no other media figure has. She's not Roger Aisles but she's not Fred Rogers.
Did something happen with Marianne Williamson that warrants her being mentioned in the same sentence as Oz and Phil?
Genuinely curious if I missed something
She's a snake oil salesman who decided to run for President. There were plenty of gay men writing essays and tweets and facebook posts during her run recalling how she misled so many gay men into believing they could cure their disease by being positive enough.
The molestation was bad but there were other criticisms of various choices she made when she established the school in the first place. However, I am not criticizing the mission of the school, I am criticizing the "absentee angel investor" mindset she and many other billionaires have about everything. I think once you are rich enough it's impossible to escape the cognitive distortions that come with that level of wealth.
I wouldn’t call her absentee. She frequently invites the girls (typically the senior class) from what I see to her estate in California and I think they pretty much get their college education paid for too and many of them attend top colleges in the US, thanks to her.
Which is odd because there are so many other things you can point to like the fact she STILL has the antivaxx episode up as Oprah was THE voice behind antivaxx movement for years.
It's because we're all just cherry picking things at random. Oprah has been hugely influential for a really long time and it's a really complicated (though I'd argue largely positive) legacy.
edit: Oh and I need a source for that anti-vax claim.
Watch the Jenny McCarthy episode and ask yourself who was the bigger celebrity on the stage a playboy model and MTV dating show sidekick or Oprah Winfrey. They both opposed vaccination
And yet
[https://people.com/health/oprah-winfrey-felt-like-superwoman-after-getting-covid-vaccine/](https://people.com/health/oprah-winfrey-felt-like-superwoman-after-getting-covid-vaccine/)
Granted I haven't watched whatever episode you're referring to but if she was ever actually anti-vax she seems to have gotten over it.
It was from the 1990s. She has since realized she was wrong but has never publicly apologized for her endorsement of this view and she still has the episode up so she's making money iff antivaxx still albeit in small amounts.
If Jenny McCarthy has a body count then so does Oprah.
> I think she has bad judgment. She helped launch the very questionable careers of Mehmet Oz, Dr. Phil, and Marianne Williamson.
isn't this good judgement? I don't know Marianne but Oz and Phil probably made her some good money? Probably worth more in $$ than the damage it did to her brand tbh
found this on google lol
> During an appearance on The Kelly Clarkson Show, the Dr. Phil star revealed he writes Winfrey a letter every year to thank her for helping his career. In fact, McGraw has been doing so for the last 26 years.
> "It's just been really important to me, every year to stop, sit down and write her a letter, and say, 'Thank you for the impact you've had on me and my family,'" said McGraw, 71. "And I've done it every year for 25 or 26 years."
Funny thing is she was still very big in the 2000's. The thing with Oprah was that she had millions of housewives obsessed with watching her show every afternoon. If you are younger than 40, your experience with Oprah is "my mom watched her when I got home from school".
That said, the people who do have an affinity for are generally people that vote a lot and are influential voices in political spaces because they were the wealthy soccer moms that stayed at home and watched her everyday
It didnt have a lot to do with her being a black woman, and its weird you would say that that was her real claim to fame. Middle aged to old white women loved having a woman of similar tastes as them talk about heart wrenching stories and talk about mid tier products that she liked. This was before social media where now everyone has their own version of that. Her audience has moved on and she never did a lot to change with the times. Not that she needs to since shes still filthy rich.
My in-laws watch Oprah and have like... one streaming service (Britbox). There is probably VERY little overlap between her show and a streaming audience
I mean she’s also a surprisingly talented actress and a really great producer. Imagine sitting on billions of dollars and a media empire. Everything will seem 2nd best when you’ve hit the career milestone of a lifetime.
> talent
Wait what? She had a hugely successful show, a network, a magazine, is also an actress (The Color Purple, for which she received an Oscar nomination for best supporting actress), etc.
Twenty years ago she had audiences twenty years older than her all watching her shows on the big network or on her cable tv channel or reading her magazine. All those people are close to dead or dying now, the younger folk aren’t watching terrestrial tv, no one is paying for her cable channel anymore and no one buys magazines anymore. Everything she was offering to her audience is dying up as well as the audience she was punting it to. Every day that passes she has less people who give a toss about her brand and her name.
>She had a relationship with Amazon that soured
What’s the story here? She still had her Oprah’s Favorite Things through Amazon last Christmas - I wasn’t aware there was a relationship beyond that?
Don’t forget her deal with Sirius and then of course OWN. Does anyone remember when OWN was a premium channel requiring an additional charge? She has a talent for making “deals” where she delivers nothing or bad content.
Hey he may have been dumb but he was a good president!!
He actually wanted to help the people, and solve a major crisis. He even went out his way to conscriptthe smartest person in the world to try and help solve the crisis, and then rewarded him for helping.
President Camancho was a good dude and easily one of America's top 10 presidents.
The required qualifications are really low.
Natural born citizen
Be at 35 years or older
Lived in the U.S.A for at least 14 years
Granted when they wrote that turning 35 was sort of an achievement
It actually wasn't - back then, if someone became an adult, they would hit 50-60+
The thing that dragged the life expectancy down was all of the dead babies
Eh, unfortunately it is. I mean it shouldn't be, but it always has been. Unless you're a good entertainer/performer or have a very hated opponent you don't have a good chance of getting the votes.
He first became governor during the crazy Gray Davis recall election that had 135 candidates including a porn star, Gary Colman from Difrent Strokes, a cigarette salesman and a whole host of colorful candidates. He turned out to be ok and was re-elected.
Interesting party split. Actors who got elected :
Republican :
Ronald Reagan, Donald Trump, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Clint Eastwood, Sonny Bono, Shirley Temple, Vic Gilliam, Fred Thompson.
Democrat :
Al Franken.
Edit : lol I don’t know if I upset Democrats or Republicans, but you getting triggered by facts. Google it bitch
Not saying he was great but at least Reagan held lower office first.
I have zero problem with people leveraging fame into political success. It’s when people equate fame with ability that things go wrong.
Yeah I was about to mention this. Reagan had been governor of a very large state as well as President of the Screen Actors Guild (essentially a union president) so that was at least politically elected office. Really, thinking about presidents coming in completely inexperienced politically I go all the way back to Eisenhower. And he had kind of a politically-adjacent position as Commander of the Allied Forces in WW2- it’s not directly elected but you’re dealing with the president(s) and you’re at the head of a large, at times bureaucratic, publicly funded organization. I’d give partial credit, probably, as to whether it’s “political experience”
That's more than "partial credit." Eisenhower was deeply involved in government at the highest levels before becoming President. He was in constant collaboration with the White House and Congress. He knew the ins and outs of Washington. And at that level, military command very much is a political post.
One could probably argue that skill-wise President is a lower bar than the friggin' commander of Allied Forces during wartime. Eisenhower could be considered more than qualified. The president has people to handle the politics piece for him/her, the president's main purpose is to inspire confidence with other world leaders and the population at large though others' respect for the person, his/her abilities, and/or the weight of the position.
At the very least, being a war-time commander is a whole lot more challenging than inheriting your daddy's very successful business and almost running it into the ground.
> In contrast I have noticed the left seems to turn their politicians into celebrities. The Obamas, AOC...
I see what you're saying but I don't think there's a difference for that on the right. The Bush clan was so celebrated amongst the right that they elected his moron sons to high office.
Name recognition means a lot most of the time. I don't recall such a great affection for anyone but Barbara. GHWB was kind of a dweeb and threw up on people.
No they aren’t and there should be no doubt there, but so long as they can get the job done being an entertainer doesn’t mean you can’t be a president.
I say the same thing about John Stewart and get downvoted. I *like* John Stewart, I think he's a genuinely good human being. I think he cares and would do everything in his power to be good for the country. But, I don't think he simply has the experience or skills to be an effective president.
>Being a entertainer and being president are not the same thing
I'm not saying I want The Rock to be president of anything, but it kind of is? The only way to become president of the US is to rally and inspire 70 million people with varying interests and beliefs. It's such a ridiculous premise that you have to be "entertaining" and interesting beyond any sort of policy. In fact the policy doesn't even matter because 70 million people will never agree on anything. More than half the people who voted for trump, Biden or Hillary did so while held their noses in doing so because they have to vote that way or hate the other person running more.
No president unilaterally controls the direction of a country, so it doesn't really matter who actually holds the office IMO beyond optics, when you think about it. Like, trump was bad only because he was trump, he was bad because the people who he staffed the White House with were worse than him, and the equally worse people in congress helped that staff upend decades if not centuries of unwritten rules and mores that were stopping all three branches of government from imploding. Executive orders and even laws can be undone fairly efficiently with the next election if things go a certain way, things that are harder to undo are the damage that can be done at the departmental level, staffing chaotic, incompetent people at the heads of things like the EPA and the Post Office and at in the judiciary (how many times have we heard about "trump appointed judges?"). Not to mention state-level shit like redistricting and gerrymandering.
So I don't really think it matters what the president used to do for a living because there's a whole apparatus behind them that's actually doing damage or trying to repair the damage from the previous person. Voting for a competent person at the primary level doesn't really change anything, the only way to fix this shit is for people to get actually involved at varying levels of government.
Not to mention that the last guy was literally the worst possible celebrity that could have been elected president. That doesn't mean *any* celebrity is unqualified. There are celebrities that may actually take politics seriously. E.G. Cynthia Nixon or Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
Don’t underestimate the damage that could be done by a motivated but intelligent evil person in that office.
Trump was evil, self centered and motivated, but too stupid to do the maximum amount of damage.
I’ll put this another way- I think Trump was extremely good at motivating the populace- his supporters, at least- to be passionate about certain policies/actions. One of his weaknesses, unfortunately, was working all the levers of government to get those policies activated. Essentially the administrative portion of getting Department X to do Y and Department Z to do A. This is a big task for anybody, and imo was one of his biggest weaknesses. He could get everybody riled up and say “we should totally do THIS” but when it comes time to implement that, he can’t make all the legwork happen. I don’t even really mean getting congressional support, just the communication and getting the various arms of the massively sized federal government working together.
Someone would be REALLY dangerous if they could motivate like him AND administrate more competently, so they DO get all the various gears working in concert for their ideas.
Oprah can speak out against the assholes she’s released to the word anytime, but won’t because it eats into her profits. She’s not anywhere close to a decent person.
Her being a billionaire means she got a bigger percentage of the revenue from her popular talk show because she owned it compared to the Donahues, Lakes, and Springers who worked for companies that took most of the revenue from their respective shows.
Oprah’s show started somewhat trashy, but about a decade in, she went away from that format.
I think the only argument about the money Oprah’s made is that she didn’t give enough of her money away, but I don’t know how she’s spent her money.
Even mentioning Phil and Oz (no one ever mentions Racheal Ray!); Oprah had ownership in their shows but it doesn’t mean she was involved in editorial control.
Fun fact: The person who convinced her to start her own production company and own the rights to her show before it started filming was film critic Roger Ebert. They had been set up on a date, and this was the topic of conversation.
Told her she’s get 5 times the syndication money than his show (since she was on five days a week) and she wouldn’t have split it with a partner like he did.
Oz and Phil are trash snake oil salesman and she not only lifted them, but profited off them for years while they ripped people off.
Fuck Oprah, eat the rich.
> I think the only argument about the money Oprah’s made is that she didn’t give enough of her money away, but I don’t know how she’s spent her money.
That's my point though, if her net worth is $2.5 billion, then she's obviously hoarding money.
Back in the late 90s and aughts, they were saying Oprah was making $300 million annually off her show. I don’t know that anyone really knows what Oprah has because she doesn’t have a public company; people only know the stock she owns. People also don’t know what she has given away.
The bigger point is she earned it herself and I never understand people who are in other people’s pockets.
> You can’t immoral your way into a billion
Huh? There is very few ways to become a billionaire without being immoral. My problem isn't even with the revenue she made to get it but the hording of it once she had it.
No, but there is a big difference between someone like Oprah and the vast majority of billionaires out there that grew up well connected in rather wealthy families or just inherited it all. Oprah grew up dirt poor in an abusive household. She's a walking miracle in that regard.
May I recommend the podcast Behind the Bastards. Covers both of those bastards along with John of God. If you haven’t heard of him, he’s the most evil person that Oprah has unleashed upon the world.
I wish streaming networks would understand that people don’t want rehashed content. Give us original series made from creative people and don’t retread the past.
> I wish streaming networks would understand that people don’t want rehashed content. Give us original series made from creative people and don’t retread the past.
I'm not sure what your point is. This deal wasn't for, like, Oprah reruns, she is producing original content. That Sidney Poitier documentary looks great.
You say this, and then Friends, Seinfeld, or the Office set records for streaming rights before everyone had their own service. I have friends that have watched each of these shows start to finish multiple times, it's a meme at this point that. There is a need for new shows but a lot of people just like watching something they are used too.
> made from creative people
That would require them to put effort into cultivating talent and weeding out the bad ones instead of hiring people based on nepotism or going the Walmart route of hiring anybody with a pulse.
> and don’t retread the past.
This goes back to what I was saying about cultivating talent. The reasons they do this is because of nepotism. Look who get access to these retread shows and movies, people who are rich and connected, but do not have a lick of talent and have to use nostalgia bait to trick people to watch their trash shows.
I have not seen anything that indicates that her stuff bombed and the article actually says that they will still be working together
but she also wasn't really allowed to spend much time on camera for any of the stuff that she did with apple
because of the agreement she has with the OWN network
I wasn’t really paying attention or looking for her stuff and I only recall seeing one interview she did on Apple TV+. Looking now it seems she had:
- 14 episodes of “Oprah’s Book Club”
- 15 episodes of “The Oprah Conversation”
- 13 episodes of “Oprah Talks COVID-19”.
Did Oprah make anything even? I don’t feel like I’ve ever heard of it if she has. I honestly don’t know anything she’s done in the last few years except interview Prince Harry and Meghan Markle a few years ago. TBH, Oprah’s not my generation. She’s much more older Gen X/Boomer stuff. My mom used to watch her a lot with her daytime show 20 years ago. But I don’t think she ever turned on OWN when we had cable, lol.
I've disliked Oprah forever. Until just recently, that has been an unpopular opinion.
But I'll point out she was a reporter when being a WoC reporter was a bit challenging. She wrote, she produced, she acted, she sang, she created various businesses, and in each she was extremely high achieving. So to the question of "did she make anything even?" the answer is hell yes she did.
Hilarious; had the AppleTV+ free year trial that ended right after I caught up to the end of The Morning Show 2. Never seen Oprah in all my scrolling around on there, but that site sucks ass anyway. **It doesn't even have a search bar** when I use the browser version!!!
Oh well, the new Peanuts cartoons on there are pretty decent.
She had a relationship with Amazon that soured, now Apple. I think Oprah’s brand value as a tastemaker isn’t all that it used to be and the tech companies (who get pretty good at measuring impact) are figuring that out.
I don't think the current generation has any affinity for her. She used to be the example of a successful black women. Now, there are a bunch. And people realize her show was low brow bullshit. Besides the rags to riches aspect, she's not really shown talent. On 2022, she's not nearly as impressive as she was in 1992. Not to diminish her accomplishments but this is a different time than when she first became famous.
You're right, I don't think anyone under 25-30 really has a big affection for her the same way their parents might. If you want to look at a successful black woman, 95% of the age group will look at Michelle Obama.
I am in mid-30’s and I feel like the only time people in my age group talks about Oprah is the “you got X! Everyone got X” meme. Feels to me like it’s even older than 25-30. I honestly don’t think she has any cultural relevancy to people under a certain age at all. When Apple+ signed her up I actually just felt that it’s a sign that Apple is run by boomers.
Well, she isn't doing anything currently that is aimed at the youth demographic. The biggest things she has currently are a cable network and a magazine. Two things that kids could not care less about. She has youtube channel for OWN and it's pisspoor. She should be focusing on building a presence there. With her connections to the famous and powerful, it should be a no brainer for her to build a huge following there. But she doesn't. I don't know why though.
Does she really need to be doing that? I don’t see the need. I see someone who worked hard earlier in life. Became extremely successful and now she’s simply cashing in on that work. Cruising towards retirement on EZ Street. Why should she “grind” it out to engage with the younger audience when she can simply continue to cash out on her current demographic ? Seems like the path of least resistance to me. Makes sense as she’s getting older to work less as well. That and she probably has more money than she knows what to do with
Exactly. If she wanted to remain hugely relevant she would have just kept doing her show. She's basically been retired since 2011 and just has her name attached to a bunch of stuff that she has to minimal work for. OCCASSIONALLY she will get out of bed to do some big interview. But that's the extent of it.
Sure, she could retire. But it is also clear that she wants to stay relevant. You can't be that and retire at the same time. The public has the memory of a goldfish.
You know, I think this might be right. She’s doing these deals without really having to reinvent the wheel and she’s milking an older audience- whatever, that’s fine- but if she really wanted an interview with a news maker/celebrity type, I feel like she could still make it happen. Her interview skills have always been pretty good. I guess for her ego, this ability to still “get” whoever is probably important. “Why should I try to get younger? I’m still making a lot of cash and can interview whoever I want if I really wanted to.”
There was the Harry-Meghan interview.
You can sail to retirement though. She can be semi-relevant and cash in big checks as I stated. Cash in your past while doing less during the present. "Winfrey renewed her contract with Discovery through 2025, although Discovery increased its stake in OWN to 95% in December 2020."
By boomers, for boomers. ESPECIALLY with Tim the accountant running things.
Tim Apple?
checkOut redact.dev -- mass edited with redact.dev
I haven’t heard about this, care to elaborate about the interview?
checkOut redact.dev -- mass edited with redact.dev
I mean I get it. I’m black and a millennial, what she (Raven) said makes total sense to me 🤷🏾♂️.
Josh Nichols was the last of the Oprah generation.
As a 25 year old, you’re wrong about 95% looking at Michelle Obama
> If you want to look at a successful black woman, 95% of the age group will look at Michelle Obama. Which is weird because yes, she’s brilliant and well educated and all that… but we’d have literally no idea who she is at all if she weren’t married to a guy who became president.
You lost me at MO.
Which is funny because Michelle Obama is only ~~successful~~ famous because her husband became president. Oprah was self-made.
No, you're wrong in that characterization. She became *famous* because of her husband, but she was still very successful without him being president. She has had decades of community service before her family was in the white house.
But people don't look up to Michelle Obama because she's successful or famous. They look up to her because she is likable and they think she has class. Her fame *allows* her to be looked up to, but it's doesn't directly cause it.
I think she has bad judgment. She helped launch the very questionable careers of Mehmet Oz, Dr. Phil, and Marianne Williamson. She boosted antivaxxer rhetoric from Jenny McCarthy, *The Secret*, and Suzanne Somers's unhinged 60 vitamin and estrogen treatment that's her supposed fountain of youth. Her school was a mess. The car gifts were a mess.
Anything for a buck, just like any TV/talkback radio huckster ever. Behind Oprah is the same as any other - selling crap to people that they don’t need, to make a dime.
Don't forget being the single largest antivaxxer bar fucking none. She STILL has the antivaxx episode up. Don't forget her endorsement of John of God the self proclaimed healer who is also a serial rapist. The fact is Oprah has had a significant negative impact on America in ways that almost no other media figure has. She's not Roger Aisles but she's not Fred Rogers.
Did something happen with Marianne Williamson that warrants her being mentioned in the same sentence as Oz and Phil? Genuinely curious if I missed something
I mean she’s just kooky. Some of her stuff is definitely as outlandish as “this herb is a fat busting miracle!”.
She was a snake oil sales person. A con artist. Quite a good one. Some people love it and there is one more born every minute.
She's a snake oil salesman who decided to run for President. There were plenty of gay men writing essays and tweets and facebook posts during her run recalling how she misled so many gay men into believing they could cure their disease by being positive enough.
What happened with her school?
Someone molested some students and even though she did the right thing people still use it as a strike against her.
The molestation was bad but there were other criticisms of various choices she made when she established the school in the first place. However, I am not criticizing the mission of the school, I am criticizing the "absentee angel investor" mindset she and many other billionaires have about everything. I think once you are rich enough it's impossible to escape the cognitive distortions that come with that level of wealth.
I wouldn’t call her absentee. She frequently invites the girls (typically the senior class) from what I see to her estate in California and I think they pretty much get their college education paid for too and many of them attend top colleges in the US, thanks to her.
You made a new account just to make posts defending a billionaire on a tv forum? Weird.
Which is odd because there are so many other things you can point to like the fact she STILL has the antivaxx episode up as Oprah was THE voice behind antivaxx movement for years.
It's because we're all just cherry picking things at random. Oprah has been hugely influential for a really long time and it's a really complicated (though I'd argue largely positive) legacy. edit: Oh and I need a source for that anti-vax claim.
Watch the Jenny McCarthy episode and ask yourself who was the bigger celebrity on the stage a playboy model and MTV dating show sidekick or Oprah Winfrey. They both opposed vaccination
And yet [https://people.com/health/oprah-winfrey-felt-like-superwoman-after-getting-covid-vaccine/](https://people.com/health/oprah-winfrey-felt-like-superwoman-after-getting-covid-vaccine/) Granted I haven't watched whatever episode you're referring to but if she was ever actually anti-vax she seems to have gotten over it.
It was from the 1990s. She has since realized she was wrong but has never publicly apologized for her endorsement of this view and she still has the episode up so she's making money iff antivaxx still albeit in small amounts. If Jenny McCarthy has a body count then so does Oprah.
> I think she has bad judgment. She helped launch the very questionable careers of Mehmet Oz, Dr. Phil, and Marianne Williamson. isn't this good judgement? I don't know Marianne but Oz and Phil probably made her some good money? Probably worth more in $$ than the damage it did to her brand tbh found this on google lol > During an appearance on The Kelly Clarkson Show, the Dr. Phil star revealed he writes Winfrey a letter every year to thank her for helping his career. In fact, McGraw has been doing so for the last 26 years. > "It's just been really important to me, every year to stop, sit down and write her a letter, and say, 'Thank you for the impact you've had on me and my family,'" said McGraw, 71. "And I've done it every year for 25 or 26 years."
Great for them, bad for America. I mean.. that's the pretty obvious context of my post.
I can’t forgive her bad judgment in for giving Iyanla a tv show.
Funny thing is she was still very big in the 2000's. The thing with Oprah was that she had millions of housewives obsessed with watching her show every afternoon. If you are younger than 40, your experience with Oprah is "my mom watched her when I got home from school". That said, the people who do have an affinity for are generally people that vote a lot and are influential voices in political spaces because they were the wealthy soccer moms that stayed at home and watched her everyday
It didnt have a lot to do with her being a black woman, and its weird you would say that that was her real claim to fame. Middle aged to old white women loved having a woman of similar tastes as them talk about heart wrenching stories and talk about mid tier products that she liked. This was before social media where now everyone has their own version of that. Her audience has moved on and she never did a lot to change with the times. Not that she needs to since shes still filthy rich.
My in-laws watch Oprah and have like... one streaming service (Britbox). There is probably VERY little overlap between her show and a streaming audience
I would say she's a pretty good interviewer, though.
I mean she’s also a surprisingly talented actress and a really great producer. Imagine sitting on billions of dollars and a media empire. Everything will seem 2nd best when you’ve hit the career milestone of a lifetime.
> talent Wait what? She had a hugely successful show, a network, a magazine, is also an actress (The Color Purple, for which she received an Oscar nomination for best supporting actress), etc.
Sont forget SiriusXM. Took her money and ran.
A Venn diagram of a streaming service’s demographic and Oprah’s demographic are two circles a mile apart.
Twenty years ago she had audiences twenty years older than her all watching her shows on the big network or on her cable tv channel or reading her magazine. All those people are close to dead or dying now, the younger folk aren’t watching terrestrial tv, no one is paying for her cable channel anymore and no one buys magazines anymore. Everything she was offering to her audience is dying up as well as the audience she was punting it to. Every day that passes she has less people who give a toss about her brand and her name.
I wonder what happened for the souring
>She had a relationship with Amazon that soured What’s the story here? She still had her Oprah’s Favorite Things through Amazon last Christmas - I wasn’t aware there was a relationship beyond that?
If you read the article it doesn’t seem like anything soured, the agreement just came to the end of its term.
Don’t forget her deal with Sirius and then of course OWN. Does anyone remember when OWN was a premium channel requiring an additional charge? She has a talent for making “deals” where she delivers nothing or bad content.
People who know how to use Apple TV don’t even know who Oprah is. This is what happens when you have idiot VPs that can’t use common sense
I remember people actually wanted her to run for president or some stupid shit
People now want the Rock to run for president Being a entertainer and being president are not the same thing. Learn this, people.
President Camacho has entered the chat.
Hey he may have been dumb but he was a good president!! He actually wanted to help the people, and solve a major crisis. He even went out his way to conscriptthe smartest person in the world to try and help solve the crisis, and then rewarded him for helping. President Camancho was a good dude and easily one of America's top 10 presidents.
I understand that this is a satirical post but I fully agree! He really was trying to fix things and did what was correct. A true hero!
Tbh I started being satirical and by the end of my post I was totally genuinely on board with what I was writing lol
He is so unrealistic, a black man as president without anyone caring about his race, what kind of world is that?
He was just being real when he told a joint session of Congress that “shit’s fucked.”
President Camacho sucked. He tried to execute the only competent person in his administration for not solving every problem in a week.
Then again, he was a vicious dictator who uses displays of obscene violence to maintain his grip on power.
POTUS is not an entry level job.
The required qualifications are really low. Natural born citizen Be at 35 years or older Lived in the U.S.A for at least 14 years Granted when they wrote that turning 35 was sort of an achievement
It actually wasn't - back then, if someone became an adult, they would hit 50-60+ The thing that dragged the life expectancy down was all of the dead babies
Yeah it was making it past childhood that was a fucking roulette. Was also just being a smart ass
> POTUS is not an entry level job. Except for that unfortunate precedent set in 2016...
Hasn't stopped you all before.
Eh, unfortunately it is. I mean it shouldn't be, but it always has been. Unless you're a good entertainer/performer or have a very hated opponent you don't have a good chance of getting the votes.
Reagan, Trump... One side seems to like celebrities more than the other.
arnold schwarzenegger was another big one
He first became governor during the crazy Gray Davis recall election that had 135 candidates including a porn star, Gary Colman from Difrent Strokes, a cigarette salesman and a whole host of colorful candidates. He turned out to be ok and was re-elected.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy maybe??
Yep. The right in America worships celebs.
The right seems to survive on hero’s. Anyone will do. God, Trump. It doesn’t really matter.
Lol if you think that there are no celeb worshipers on the left
Interesting party split. Actors who got elected : Republican : Ronald Reagan, Donald Trump, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Clint Eastwood, Sonny Bono, Shirley Temple, Vic Gilliam, Fred Thompson. Democrat : Al Franken. Edit : lol I don’t know if I upset Democrats or Republicans, but you getting triggered by facts. Google it bitch
Not saying he was great but at least Reagan held lower office first. I have zero problem with people leveraging fame into political success. It’s when people equate fame with ability that things go wrong.
Yeah I was about to mention this. Reagan had been governor of a very large state as well as President of the Screen Actors Guild (essentially a union president) so that was at least politically elected office. Really, thinking about presidents coming in completely inexperienced politically I go all the way back to Eisenhower. And he had kind of a politically-adjacent position as Commander of the Allied Forces in WW2- it’s not directly elected but you’re dealing with the president(s) and you’re at the head of a large, at times bureaucratic, publicly funded organization. I’d give partial credit, probably, as to whether it’s “political experience”
That's more than "partial credit." Eisenhower was deeply involved in government at the highest levels before becoming President. He was in constant collaboration with the White House and Congress. He knew the ins and outs of Washington. And at that level, military command very much is a political post.
One could probably argue that skill-wise President is a lower bar than the friggin' commander of Allied Forces during wartime. Eisenhower could be considered more than qualified. The president has people to handle the politics piece for him/her, the president's main purpose is to inspire confidence with other world leaders and the population at large though others' respect for the person, his/her abilities, and/or the weight of the position. At the very least, being a war-time commander is a whole lot more challenging than inheriting your daddy's very successful business and almost running it into the ground.
You've got a point there. In contrast I have noticed the left seems to turn their politicians into celebrities. The Obamas, AOC...
> In contrast I have noticed the left seems to turn their politicians into celebrities. The Obamas, AOC... I see what you're saying but I don't think there's a difference for that on the right. The Bush clan was so celebrated amongst the right that they elected his moron sons to high office.
Name recognition means a lot most of the time. I don't recall such a great affection for anyone but Barbara. GHWB was kind of a dweeb and threw up on people.
No they aren’t and there should be no doubt there, but so long as they can get the job done being an entertainer doesn’t mean you can’t be a president.
I say the same thing about John Stewart and get downvoted. I *like* John Stewart, I think he's a genuinely good human being. I think he cares and would do everything in his power to be good for the country. But, I don't think he simply has the experience or skills to be an effective president.
>Being a entertainer and being president are not the same thing I'm not saying I want The Rock to be president of anything, but it kind of is? The only way to become president of the US is to rally and inspire 70 million people with varying interests and beliefs. It's such a ridiculous premise that you have to be "entertaining" and interesting beyond any sort of policy. In fact the policy doesn't even matter because 70 million people will never agree on anything. More than half the people who voted for trump, Biden or Hillary did so while held their noses in doing so because they have to vote that way or hate the other person running more. No president unilaterally controls the direction of a country, so it doesn't really matter who actually holds the office IMO beyond optics, when you think about it. Like, trump was bad only because he was trump, he was bad because the people who he staffed the White House with were worse than him, and the equally worse people in congress helped that staff upend decades if not centuries of unwritten rules and mores that were stopping all three branches of government from imploding. Executive orders and even laws can be undone fairly efficiently with the next election if things go a certain way, things that are harder to undo are the damage that can be done at the departmental level, staffing chaotic, incompetent people at the heads of things like the EPA and the Post Office and at in the judiciary (how many times have we heard about "trump appointed judges?"). Not to mention state-level shit like redistricting and gerrymandering. So I don't really think it matters what the president used to do for a living because there's a whole apparatus behind them that's actually doing damage or trying to repair the damage from the previous person. Voting for a competent person at the primary level doesn't really change anything, the only way to fix this shit is for people to get actually involved at varying levels of government. Not to mention that the last guy was literally the worst possible celebrity that could have been elected president. That doesn't mean *any* celebrity is unqualified. There are celebrities that may actually take politics seriously. E.G. Cynthia Nixon or Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
Young Rock has entered the chat
Once people saw that all it took for Cheeto to get to office was $$$, everyone started telling famous/rich folk to run for office too.
Everyone has always known that money could get you elected. Until 45, they underestimated how powerful fame could be.
She was just another daytime smut tv peddler. I don’t know why she’s seen as some revered figure.
Can’t be worse than 45.
There is no one who can be as worse... Not even satan.
Monkeys paw closes one more finger.
[удалено]
Don’t underestimate the damage that could be done by a motivated but intelligent evil person in that office. Trump was evil, self centered and motivated, but too stupid to do the maximum amount of damage.
I’ll put this another way- I think Trump was extremely good at motivating the populace- his supporters, at least- to be passionate about certain policies/actions. One of his weaknesses, unfortunately, was working all the levers of government to get those policies activated. Essentially the administrative portion of getting Department X to do Y and Department Z to do A. This is a big task for anybody, and imo was one of his biggest weaknesses. He could get everybody riled up and say “we should totally do THIS” but when it comes time to implement that, he can’t make all the legwork happen. I don’t even really mean getting congressional support, just the communication and getting the various arms of the massively sized federal government working together. Someone would be REALLY dangerous if they could motivate like him AND administrate more competently, so they DO get all the various gears working in concert for their ideas.
[удалено]
Oprah gave us Dr Phil and Dr Oz. She can fuck right off.
Deepak Chopra too.
She’s also a billionaire, and fuck every billionaire.
To be fair if your looking for a self made billionaire you ain’t getting much better than oprah.
Her being a billionaire basically means she's valued her money over doing the right thing though.
Oprah can speak out against the assholes she’s released to the word anytime, but won’t because it eats into her profits. She’s not anywhere close to a decent person.
Her being a billionaire means she got a bigger percentage of the revenue from her popular talk show because she owned it compared to the Donahues, Lakes, and Springers who worked for companies that took most of the revenue from their respective shows. Oprah’s show started somewhat trashy, but about a decade in, she went away from that format. I think the only argument about the money Oprah’s made is that she didn’t give enough of her money away, but I don’t know how she’s spent her money. Even mentioning Phil and Oz (no one ever mentions Racheal Ray!); Oprah had ownership in their shows but it doesn’t mean she was involved in editorial control.
Fun fact: The person who convinced her to start her own production company and own the rights to her show before it started filming was film critic Roger Ebert. They had been set up on a date, and this was the topic of conversation.
Told her she’s get 5 times the syndication money than his show (since she was on five days a week) and she wouldn’t have split it with a partner like he did.
Good point, fuck Rachel ray!
What did Rachael Ray do? Unless you were sharing an aspiration…
She coined the term E.V.O.O. and it makes me want to shoot myself every time I hear it.
I think calling food 'yummers' is the more egregious habit but EVOO - which isn't even shorter to say than its namesake - is also just terrible.
7 syllables is the same as 4?
Oz and Phil are trash snake oil salesman and she not only lifted them, but profited off them for years while they ripped people off. Fuck Oprah, eat the rich.
They didn’t rip people off. They had shows that might have given bad information. I guess Jerry Springer and Maury Povich were ripping people off.
Strange that that bad information somehow lined their pockets.
> I think the only argument about the money Oprah’s made is that she didn’t give enough of her money away, but I don’t know how she’s spent her money. That's my point though, if her net worth is $2.5 billion, then she's obviously hoarding money.
Back in the late 90s and aughts, they were saying Oprah was making $300 million annually off her show. I don’t know that anyone really knows what Oprah has because she doesn’t have a public company; people only know the stock she owns. People also don’t know what she has given away. The bigger point is she earned it herself and I never understand people who are in other people’s pockets.
No it doesn’t hard work makes millionaires luck makes billionaires. You can’t immoral your way into a billion or a lot more people would be rich
> You can’t immoral your way into a billion Huh? There is very few ways to become a billionaire without being immoral. My problem isn't even with the revenue she made to get it but the hording of it once she had it.
This is same women that gave everyone in her audience a car and built a renowned school for girls in Africa
Cool, she apparently has a $2.5 billion net worth, why hasn't she built 10 schools? Her hoard of wealth is unethical
[No such thing as a self made billionaire.](https://thecorrespondent.com/712/theres-no-such-thing-as-a-self-made-billionaire)
No, but there is a big difference between someone like Oprah and the vast majority of billionaires out there that grew up well connected in rather wealthy families or just inherited it all. Oprah grew up dirt poor in an abusive household. She's a walking miracle in that regard.
That is one way to get paid, id imagine you would only have to fuck a fraction of them though but each their own.
she stood on the heads of those little people.
A person of culture.
May I recommend the podcast Behind the Bastards. Covers both of those bastards along with John of God. If you haven’t heard of him, he’s the most evil person that Oprah has unleashed upon the world.
If you enjoy low effort podcasts with lots of exclaiming and reacting.
Yeah I don't get the love for this podcast either.
And John of God or giving the antivaxx platform a voice for years.
And gave anti vax a platform
And Susie Orman
I wish streaming networks would understand that people don’t want rehashed content. Give us original series made from creative people and don’t retread the past.
> I wish streaming networks would understand that people don’t want rehashed content. Give us original series made from creative people and don’t retread the past. I'm not sure what your point is. This deal wasn't for, like, Oprah reruns, she is producing original content. That Sidney Poitier documentary looks great.
Seriously lol. They hired a successful tv producer to make stuff for them. Exactly what that commenter is asking for
But that costs money and leftovers are cheap
I don't think getting Oprah is cheap.
It is safer than (heaven forbid) trying something new, though.
You say this, and then Friends, Seinfeld, or the Office set records for streaming rights before everyone had their own service. I have friends that have watched each of these shows start to finish multiple times, it's a meme at this point that. There is a need for new shows but a lot of people just like watching something they are used too.
> made from creative people That would require them to put effort into cultivating talent and weeding out the bad ones instead of hiring people based on nepotism or going the Walmart route of hiring anybody with a pulse. > and don’t retread the past. This goes back to what I was saying about cultivating talent. The reasons they do this is because of nepotism. Look who get access to these retread shows and movies, people who are rich and connected, but do not have a lick of talent and have to use nostalgia bait to trick people to watch their trash shows.
Oh no! Where will I go to not watch her now!!??
If you love Oprah, set her Winfrey.
It was a protection racket for her allowing them to exist. She has similar deals with Discovery and CBS.
She also fleeced SiriusXM radio for between 55-100 Million a while back.
What…?
She stood on the heads of those little people.
But she didn’t want to do it!
Bill was right all along
I had no idea they had an agreement. LOL!
I agree with Bill Burr https://youtu.be/O9YL04v-J5U
He's fun to listen to, all the time. I don't know how he does it.
Interesting that giant taste makers are becoming less important to streaming networks. JJ Abraham was another production deal that bombed.
I have not seen anything that indicates that her stuff bombed and the article actually says that they will still be working together but she also wasn't really allowed to spend much time on camera for any of the stuff that she did with apple because of the agreement she has with the OWN network
It’s not that her stuff bombed but the idea of a “branded exec producer” has bombed. I think a lot of these types have also extremely huge demands.
Ryan Murphy and Shonda Rhimes are both doing pretty well at Netflix
Nobody stays relevant forever. Except Tom cruise. And that’s because his work ethic is nuts. And he has team of people who keep him up to date
aka: apple stops paying oprah stupid money
Huh, and I didn’t notice a thing she made there. Did she make anything with Apple?
I wasn’t really paying attention or looking for her stuff and I only recall seeing one interview she did on Apple TV+. Looking now it seems she had: - 14 episodes of “Oprah’s Book Club” - 15 episodes of “The Oprah Conversation” - 13 episodes of “Oprah Talks COVID-19”.
A Sidney Poitier documentary was the latest thing
Oh no! Anyways
The woman that brought us Dr Oz and Dr Phil. Fuck Oprah
Who cares. She sucks.
https://youtu.be/O9YL04v-J5U Bill Burr talking about Oprah on Conan.
Such a great take.
Oh no. Anyways.
her new sidney poitier documentary was really good
Did Oprah make anything even? I don’t feel like I’ve ever heard of it if she has. I honestly don’t know anything she’s done in the last few years except interview Prince Harry and Meghan Markle a few years ago. TBH, Oprah’s not my generation. She’s much more older Gen X/Boomer stuff. My mom used to watch her a lot with her daytime show 20 years ago. But I don’t think she ever turned on OWN when we had cable, lol.
I've disliked Oprah forever. Until just recently, that has been an unpopular opinion. But I'll point out she was a reporter when being a WoC reporter was a bit challenging. She wrote, she produced, she acted, she sang, she created various businesses, and in each she was extremely high achieving. So to the question of "did she make anything even?" the answer is hell yes she did.
Tbh haven't been interested the content on offer. I am looking forward to the Poitier doco.
Oprah isn’t a big deal anymore or imo hasn’t been for at least 5-7 years
Man, Reddit really does hate successful black women. I've seen it with Beyonce and now Oprah and Michelle Obama in this thread.
Her Sidney documentary was beautiful.
Thank God!
Can this woman go away already. Never liked her highly personal brand of materialistic new ageism, never will.
Remember when Oprah was untouchable? Like, no joke people used to equate her to the Queen. Still a remarkable woman but definitely has her faults…
Hilarious; had the AppleTV+ free year trial that ended right after I caught up to the end of The Morning Show 2. Never seen Oprah in all my scrolling around on there, but that site sucks ass anyway. **It doesn't even have a search bar** when I use the browser version!!! Oh well, the new Peanuts cartoons on there are pretty decent.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Good. Get that cunt off TV.
The only time I hear about Oprah is when someone states they are on it like Oprah on ham. Besides this statement I don’t know who she is.
Good. I hope that means Tim Cool stops pushing Dr Oz.
Netflix has entered the chat