The Numbers Speak for Themselves

All right, enough.

While reading these various stories on rival CNN's travails and what the recent management shakeups mean there, I catch this comment from Teya Ryan, CNN's executive vice president, commenting on this channel.

"I don't think FOX has an impressive news-gathering operation at all," she tells the New York Daily News.

But she's not finished, adding, "I think they've appealed to a fairly narrow group with a narrow view of the world and a specific political opinion."

This coming from the same person whose own impeccable journalistic triumphs included hiring an actress to read the news at CNN.

Well, news flash, Ms. Ryan: That narrow group with the so-called narrow view isn't so narrow. It's big and it's getting bigger.

Fair and balanced are buzzwords to you. But they are gospel to us.

I guess if you can't beat 'em, then bash 'em and trash 'em.

The problem is, when you marginalize what we do, you marginalize the large number of viewers who apparently like very much what we do.

Ms. Ryan, I don't know you from Adam. But I take great exception to someone who trashes our news gathering skills here.

I don't think what I do is fluff.

I don't think what Brit Hume does is fluff.

I don't think the scandals that Bill O'Reilly has uncovered are fluff.

And I don't think the nightly grilling rendered by our own legal eagle and your former star Greta van Susteren is fluff.

I call it news. Hard-hitting, in-your-face news.

You define "true news" by what you do. Our audiences in record numbers apparently define it by what we do.

No matter, we don't need your rich praise. We just don't think we warrant your cheap shots.

You shouldn't be focused so much on why people are watching us.

You should be very worried why they aren't watching you.

Watch Neil Cavuto's Common Sense weekdays at 4 p.m. ET on Your World w/Cavuto.