Bias, a CBS Insider Exposes How the Medi a Distort

“LOL!”

“I hate public liars and pity the fools who fall for their falsehoods. Really, strat, I'm looking out for you”


I'm looking out for myself now. I used to think I was a liberal...but then I decided I would look into things for myself instead of taking my college professors word or the medias version...Then I realized that it's a grand illusion.

Here's what I think...people like you, who really truely hate the "other side", have a stake in it...in other words, you have somehting to gain if the progressives get their way.

What do you do for a living Pepsi?”

“You mean free thinking can lead to something besides radical liberalism? No way!”

“Who'd a thunk it?

IThat's what's happening now on a National basis, IMO. People are waking up a little bit and looking into things and they're like...."Wait...They're doing what?"

That why Beck is getting so mush attention, he's exposing a lot of crap. I don't always agree with him, but I always see real stories that no other outlet will show you...”

“Anyone that questions the democraps and their messiah must be silenced. Just ask peps or squealerpoo.”

“They are working right-straight outta Saul Alinsky's Rules For Radicals....something that BEck largly exposed...It's basically a book to teach liberals how to lie, cheat, and steal their way into complete power and how the end justifies any means to get there.

Obama and his Chicago thugs are masters at it...”

“what do I do for a living? I'm chair of the local black panther board, and I have several thousand shares in Fascistamerica, a budding company founded by Joe Biden. So no, I have nothing to gain from this ;-)

I'm a writer and web designer for a banking corporation (one that didn't get any bailout money). I don't really think I have much to gain or lose by any of the governmental decisions at hand...”

“I'd take it one step further - we were doing a hell of a lot better with Bush in office”

“These stock rallies are biz saying they have won over the gov, yes , biz is in charge, no need to even vote anymore ,unless you're on one of the board of directors.”

“I don't really think I have much to gain or lose by any of the governmental decisions at hand...

More money maybe?”

“pepsi...I am going to agree that the Dems did MUCH better with Bush at the helm much like Republicans (started Conservative then fell apart) did better with Clinton in the White House.

But other than Bush actually prosecuting the war on Islamo Fascisim he was a total and complete disappointment (much like Poppie was).”

“More money maybe?”
Nigal
10:31:25 AM
8/21/09

The only way I stand to benefit financially is if the economy turns back up. So, in that sense, I do have something vested in the government's decisions, sure... we all do. Other than that, nope”

“But other than Bush actually prosecuting the war on Islamo Fascisim he was a total and complete disappointment (much like Poppie was).

See XL, that's why I like talking with you - you live in the real world and can admit the faults of both sides.”

“http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/27/abc-nbc-refuse-air-advertisement-critical-obamas-health-care-plan/

STATE RUN MEDIA...

The refusal by ABC and NBC to run a national ad critical of President Obama's health care reform plan is raising questions from the group behind the spot -- particularly in light of ABC's health care special aired in prime time last June and hosted at the White House.

The 33-second ad by the League of American Voters, which features a neurosurgeon who warns that a government-run health care system will lead to the rationing of procedures and medicine, began airing two weeks ago on local affiliates of ABC, NBC, FOX and CBS. On a national level, however, ABC and NBC have refused to run the spot in its present form.”

“We need to ask the liberals like Geobeet, who has stated that there is no bias in the media. LOL”

“stovie doesn't have the intellectual or verbal ability to contribute to a conversation, so he just posts comics and retarded pictures, then claps his hands gleefully because he's taking part”

“*snicker*”

“I think it is amazing how he can find such germain cartoons....”

“They do the best they can, given what they have to work with.”

“Conversely, they need a thread to post to when Fox reports the truth.

SHORT THREAD, eh?”

“Is there a thread for posting when they don't or is there just that thread that claims it without any examples?

Which brings up the question: how does the average "moonbat" (lol) know when it's true and when it isn't?”

“Anytime a moonbat Dim gets caught, the Party won't be found in the news.
If a Repug gets caught, the Party will be in BOLDFACE about twenty times.
last edited: 8/27/09 1:48:27 PM”

“Which brings up the question: how does the average "moonbat" (lol) know when it's true and when it isn't?”
Nonconformist
2:00:01 PM

Mother Jones tells our little t*ltypoo what's true and what's not. LOL
last edited: 8/27/09 1:52:48 PM”

“Oh jeeze, I am really saddened by poor widdle Repubs who can't get a break. Cry me a river.”

“Hey nc, remember that Greg Palast guy that t*lty used to post about all the time, and he was clearly in LOVE with?

Do you think Palast may have posted a little bit to much about some of The Messiah's 'doings'? Perhaps even Palast did some investigating about Obamy?
T*lty sure has fallen out of LOVE with Palast. LOL”

“Shh! You know the drill Stovie: we all only post what we like. For crying out loud you almost gave away TTs most closely guarded secret.”

“Whether connie or commie, no truth here or anywhere-just pictures.

Republican Pottie needs a shoe shine.”

“AND NOW Tilty's head explodes.

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2008/11/internet-fox-ne/

Fox ruled with 39.3 percent of those polled beating out CNN at 16 percent and MSNBC at 15 percent.

These results are good fodder for Fox in defending its claims of being "Fair and Balanced" — it’s also interesting to note that more people in the poll described themselves as Democrats than Republicans — but the majority of Americans seem to also have little faith in the media at all.

The online survey of 3,472 adults two days after the election found that three out of four people think that the media influenced the outcome, and about the same number also think that the media in general is biased.[i]”

“

http://www.daybydaycartoon.com”

“Connies watch TV and clean guns, Commies have real lives.”

“NBC and ABC both have gone over the edge, Refusing to run an ad they didn't like on healthcare. Staterun media never turns out well....If Mark Lloyd gets his way, you left-o-cons won't have to worry anymore.

Why does the FCC need a diversity czar anyway?”

“FCC Diversity Chief Asked Liberals to Copy FDR, Take on Limbaugh, Murdoch, Supreme Court
Thursday, August 27, 2009
By Matt Cover




FCC seal(CNSNews.com) – Federal Communications Commission Chief Diversity Officer Mark Lloyd called on fellow liberals to follow the model of former President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and challenge conservative media moguls and station owners, particularly figures such as Rush Limbaugh, Rupert Murdoch, and “a pro-big business Supreme Court aligned” with them.

Lloyd made the call in a 2007 article for the liberal Center for American Progress while he was a senior fellow there.

Entitled “Media Maneuvers: Why the Rush to Waive Cross-Ownership Bans,” the article ostensibly talks about the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) decision to allow Chicago real estate mogul Sam Zell to purchase the then-failing Chicago Tribune Co., owner of the Chicago Tribune newspaper.

Lloyd, however, uses the Zell case, in which Zell ultimately prevailed, to make a broader argument that liberals should look to the tactics employed by FDR to combat his conservative critics in the media, saying that liberals must challenge outspoken conservatives who own media outlets.

“Progressives should take a page from FDR’s media diversity playbook,” Lloyd wrote. “[A]t the end of a second FDR administration [in 1940] when the New Dealers were still battling a conservative print media and a conservative Supreme Court to fix the great debacle of American capitalism – the Great Depression.

“FDR’s fireside chats and his ready access to radio allowed him to speak directly to Americans and continue to push a progressive agenda,” said Lloyd. “But FDR was becoming increasingly concerned about the purchase of radio operations by the newspaper publishers.”




Former President Franklin Delano Roosevelt Lloyd highlights one Roosevelt tactic in particular, using the Justice Department to take his conservative media critics to court on anti-trust grounds. He highlights the case of then Chicago Tribune publisher Col. Robert R. McCormick, a stalwart Roosevelt critic.

Says Lloyd: “One of the most vehement Roosevelt-haters was Col. Robert R. McCormick, the longtime editor and publisher of the Chicago Tribune. McCormick considered it his duty to remove Roosevelt from office and he used every means at his disposal to further this aim, including his radio station WGN (AM).

“But there is little doubt that FDR understood what he was up against,” wrote Lloyd. “He understood not only how to use media effectively, but also the importance of media ownership and the rules that determined media ownership.”

Roosevelt took the Associated Press and McCormick, an AP member, to court, alleging that they were engaged in illegal, monopolistic practices. Ultimately, a then Roosevelt-friendly Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment did not give newspapers the right to be monopolies.

Lloyd referenced the case to call on liberals to act like Roosevelt and challenge what he saw as conservative dominance in media.

“Just as FDR and the New Deal Progressives understood that media consolidation posed a major problem in a democracy, modern progressives need to understand the importance of this battle,” said Lloyd.

He warned that Zell, who tended to support conservative politicians, could be a modern-day McCormick, ready to ally with other conservative media moguls such as Rupert Murdoch and Rush Limbaugh against liberals.

“[T]he vast majority of Zell’s political contributions go to support conservative candidates and causes,” wrote Lloyd. “Is Zell a modern Col. McCormick waiting in the wings to join forces with Rupert Murdoch and Rush Limbaugh?”

Lloyd said such conservatives were “frantic” to get favorable ownership regulations in place before liberals could re-take Congress and the White House in 2008.

“Conservatives, including conservatives in media, are frantic to get a wide range of regulations that favor the interests of big business in place as soon as possible,” wrote Lloyd. “They are justifiably concerned that a public fed up with seven years of failed conservative policies in Iraq, a souring economy, and rising health care costs will put a stronger progressive voice in Congress and in the White House.”

Lloyd warned that conservatives such as Limbaugh and Murdoch were in league with a “pro-big business” Supreme Court and ready to battle the incoming liberal majority, just like in FDR’s day.

“A pro-big business Supreme Court aligned with Murdoch, Limbaugh, and Zell and ready to battle a progressive in the White House begins to sound a lot like the early years of the FDR administration,” said Lloyd. “Will progressives sound like FDR and commit to creating a media policy that actually serves democracy and promotes diverse and antagonistic sources of news?”



Media policy? Geesh, so much for the free market. Look up the Center for American Progress, you wanna talk about some radicals. LLoyd was a senior fellow there...”

“Inspired by Saul Alinsky, FCC 'Diversity' Chief Calls for ‘Confrontational Movement’ to Give Public Broadcasting Dominant Role in Communications
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
By Matt Cover




Federal Communications Commission headquarters in Washington, D.C. (Photo courtesy of FCC)(CNSNews.com) – Mark Lloyd, chief diversity officer of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), called for a “confrontational movement” to combat what he claimed was control of the media by international corporations and to re-establish the regulatory power of government through robust public broadcasting and a more powerful FCC.

Lloyd expressed his regulatory call to arms in his 2006 book, “Prologue to a Farce: Communications and Democracy in America” (University of Illinois Press).

In the book, Lloyd also said that public broadcasting should be funded through new license fees charged to the nation’s private radio and television broadcasters, and that new regulatory fees should be used to fund eight new regional FCC offices.

These offices would be responsible for monitoring political advertising and commentary, children’s educational programs, number of commercials, and content ratings of the programs.

Frequently referencing one of his heroes, left-wing activist Saul Alinsky, Lloyd claims in his book that the history of American communications policy has been one of continued corporate control of every form of communication from the telegraph to the Internet.

“Citizen access to popular information has been undermined by bad political decisions,” Lloyd wrote. “These decisions date back to the Jacksonian Democrats’ refusal to allow the Post Office to continue to operate the telegraph service.”

Lloyd claimed that neither technology nor liberal reforms have been able to overcome the damage caused when government fails to give everyone an equal voice.

Throughout history, Lloyd said, “[t]he most powerful communications tool was deliberately placed in the hands of one faction in our republic: commercial industry.”

“Neither Progressive era reforms nor new communications technologies have been able to correct the problems resulting from government abdication of a responsibility to advance the equal capability of citizen discourse,” Lloyd added.

“Corporate liberty has overwhelmed citizen equality,” he wrote.

Government, Lloyd said in his book, is the “only” institution that can manage the communications of the public, arguing that Washington must “ensure” that everyone has an equal ability to communicate.

“The American republic requires the active deliberation of a diverse citizenry, and this, I argue, can be ensured only by our government,” he says. “Put another way, providing for the equal capability of citizens to participate effectively in democratic deliberation is our collective responsibility.”




FCC sealLessons for Radicals

Lloyd relies heavily on the left-wing radical Saul Alinsky in explaining his strategy.

Alinsky (1909-1972) was a community organizer and activist from Chicago and the author of the book, Rules for Radicals, which opens with an acknowledgment "to the very first radical ... Lucifer." As for political tactics, Alinsky said, “The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away. In this book we are concerned with how to create mass organizations to seize power and give it to the people. This means revolution."

With Alinsky as the political guide, Lloyd outlines nine “lessons” that people can draw on when trying to combat international businesses.

1. “Organizing people must be a priority. In order to counter effectively the power of major corporations we understood that we had to be able to demonstrate the support of hundreds of thousands of people. As Alinksy wrote: ‘Change comes from power, and power comes from organization. In order to act, people must get together.’”

2. “Understand where people stand on your issue. Once we were clear that we needed to drum up the support of people, we needed to understand what people knew about our issues. As Alinksy wrote, ‘if people feel they don’t have the power to change a bad situation, then they do not think about it.’”

3. “Connect with groups that have already organized the community. Our means of reaching local communities was through existing national organizations. We reached out to groups that had large constituencies and articulated our message by identifying how our goals fit their core interests.”

4. “The strategy must have an inside and an outside game. For media reform, this means we needed to embrace the necessity of operating both in and outside Washington [D.C.].”

5. “Don’t wait for events to unfold on their own. Pressure, pressure, pressure. If we wanted events to work in a direction that would benefit us, we knew we needed to push. We needed to apply pressure and to direct that pressure not at the government, but through the government at our true opposition – the broadcasters. Alinsky again: ‘The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain constant pressure upon the opposition.’”

6. “Communications is a priority. Again drawing from Alinksy, we understood that ‘one can lack any of the qualities of an organizer – with one exception – and still be effective. That exception is the art of communication.’ It is not just a matter of getting media to cover your campaign. That is, undoubtedly, a part of it, but it is also about getting the sort of attention you want, so the public and your opposition see you and your issues the way you want to be seen.”

7. “Research is key. We took not only message and public opinion research seriously, we took seriously our obligation to research the activity of our opposition. Our research entailed not only public opinion polling, but academic papers presenting economic and social analysis, legal research…and grassroots research involving the inspections of dozens of televisions station’s public files.”

8. “Establish a broad base of funding and never stop raising money. Alinksy is right that people are a source of power, but without adequate funds organizing people effectively cannot be accomplished.”

9. “Find allies in power. If civil rights leaders such as King had the Kennedys and Johnson, and the anti-Bork campaign had Ted Kennedy, our main ally was [FCC Chairman] Bill Kennard.”

The solution

To combat the control of international business and restore government to what he sees as its rightful place in managing public communications, Lloyd calls for a “confrontational movement” to protest the present order and organize a political movement that could force government to rein the businesses in.

“If our republican form of government is perishing because communications – the infrastructure of that republic – is under the yoke of international business how, at last, do we save it?” he asks. “We must build a confrontational movement to reclaim our democracy, a movement committed to active and sustained protest against the present order.”

To do this, Lloyd draws on his experience lobbying the FCC during the Clinton administration, counseling would-be revolutionaries to follow the tactics used by other left-wing movements, such as the followers of Saul Alinsky and the people who ran the campaign to block Republican Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork.

"We understood at the beginning, and were certainly reminded in the course of the campaign," wrote Lloyd, "that our work was not simply convincing policy makers of the logic or morality of our arguments. We understood that we were in a struggle for power against an oppenent, the commercial broadcasters ...."

"We looked to successful political campaigns and organizers as a guide, especially the civil rights movement, Saul Alinsky, and the campaign to prevent the Supreme Court nomination of the ultra-conservative jurist Robert Bork," wrote Lloyd. "From those sources we drew inspiration and guidance."

Lloyd proposes six initial goals for wresting control of communications from the corporate interests he claims control it. As his book details:

1. “End the federal subsidy of commercial media, particularly cable and broadcast television. Broadcasters should pay for the great privileges of a federally protected license to operate a business by using the publicly owned [radio or television] spectrum.”

2. “The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) must be reformed along democratic lines and funded at a substantial level. The CPB board should be elected, [with] eight members representing eight regions of the country (New England, Mid-Atlantic, Southeast, Midwest, Plains States, Southwest, Mountain States, and the Pacific Coast) and a chairman appointed by the president, with the advice and consent of the Senate.”

“Federal and regional broadcast operations and local stations should be funded at levels commensurate with or above those spending levels at which commercial operations are funded,” said Lloyd.

“This funding should come from license fees charged to commercial broadcasters. … Local public broadcasters and regional and national communications operations should be required to encourage and broadcast diverse views and programs. … Spectrum allocations should be established that create clear preferences for public broadcasters ensuring that regional, local, and neighborhood communities are well served,” he added.

3. “The FCC should be fully funded with regulatory fees from broadcast, cable, satellite, and telecommunications companies. The FCC should be staffed at regional offices, matching those CPB regions, at levels sufficient to monitor and enforce communication regulation.

“Clear federal regulations over commercial broadcast and cable programs regarding political advertising and commentary, educational programming for children, the number of commercials, ratings information about programs before they are broadcast, and the accessibility of services to the disabled should be established and widely promoted.”

4. “Universal service support provided by all commercial telecommunications providers (whether they are classified as information services or not) to fund access to advanced telecommunications services should be expanded to all nonprofit organizations, including higher-level academic and vocational schools, community centers, and 501(c) (3) organizations unaffiliated with either business or government.”

5. “Postal subsidies should be fully restored to small independent nonprofits presses. Postal subsidies should be reduced for commercial and business operations. The postal service should be returned to congressional control with the central mission of ensuring that all Americans have access to the post.”

6. “Public secondary schools should be required to include civics and media literacy as part of their core curriculum. Testing on civic, media, and computer literacy should be required and national standards set.”

For those who think any or all of these recommendations might infringe on the free speech rights of broadcasters, Lloyd says his concern is not the “exaggerated” concerns over the First Amendment.

“It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press,” he said. “This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies.”

“[T]he purpose of free speech is warped to protect global corporations and block rules that would promote democratic governance,” said Lloyd. “[T]he problem is not only the warp to our public philosophy of free speech, but that the government has abandoned its role of advancing the communications capabilities of real people.”



Did you catch that? “It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press,” he said. “This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction..."

Oh no radicals here...Prolouge To a Farce indeed”

“If you are serious about getting corruption out of congress you should be for getting government subsidies out of the system-- they are the corruption. Didn't Glen tell you that?”

“I guess we're supposed to know where Matt Cover is published by telepathy.


OOOOh ---- If I was shilling for Brent Bozell I wouldn't want to advertise it either.”

“So you fellers are in favor of Government control of media outlets?”

“Of course t*ltypoo is.”

“LOL...Tilty is very busy with his boy friend this week....

Tilty..Underwood goes, then the private firms begin working with Lee's widow to bring the bulldozers into Harrisburg...”

“LOL

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/07/major-news-outlets-largely-ignore-van-jones-controversy/

Americans who rely on the network broadcasts or the nation's top newspapers for their news may have just learned about the weekend resignation of President Obama's "green jobs czar" or the firestorm of controversy that was set off weeks ago by the revelation of his past provocative statements.

Most of the major news outlets, like The New York Times, The Washington Post and CBS ignored the swelling heat surrounding former White House environmental adviser Van Jones and the videos surfacing of his controversial statements.

For weeks, conservative media led by FOX News commentator Glenn Beck has been criticizing Jones, a former self-avowed Marxist and anarchist, for his remarks and radical views, including his February denunciation of Republicans as "#&%!$s" -- a statement that came to light on Wednesday.

Because FAIR AND BALANCED for most of the media means reporting only "STATE SANCIONED NEWS"”

“"STATE SANCIONED NEWS" Jones' problem was he didn't have 'State Sanctioned Views', isn't that what really happened.”

“Obama hired and fired him. You need to ask the president if Jones views were state sanctioned or not.”

“I was trying to point out the frame of reference between 'State Sanctioned' and 'Fox Sanctioned', which is code for 'Fair and Balanced', but as usual, didn't spend time to make the point.”