| Jul 20, 2007 @ 3:48 PM |
Accurate News Reporting
|
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 8,190
|
Does anyone know of an agency or entity that has done the research to find out who actually is Accurately reporting the news, and not just repeating speculation? (Wasn't the FCC supposed to be in charge of this at one time? You know, "If you lie all the time on the air, we can pull your license." ???)
|
|
  |
|
| Jul 20, 2007 @ 4:18 PM |
Accurate News Reporting |
|
eastham
Posts: 8,145
|
The FCC has been asleep at the switch for quite some time. They had to be forced to regulate the canned news feeds that the Administration had been producing and selling to local news. A quick perusal of the FCC's webpage today will show you an agency that is still fixated on Janet Jackson's exposed breast.
|
| |
|
| Jul 20, 2007 @ 5:44 PM |
Accurate News Reporting
|
|
SensualGemini
Posts: 7,533
|
East:
A quick perusal of the FCC's webpage today will show you an agency that is still fixated on Janet Jackson's exposed breast.
...Yes, I also heard the FCC was ran by lesbians... who woulda thought? 
.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 20, 2007 @ 8:34 PM |
Accurate News Reporting |
|
iam7545
Posts: 4,151
|
http://www.aim.org/ Check this site out
|
| |
|
| Jul 20, 2007 @ 8:49 PM |
Accurate News Reporting
|
|
eastham
Posts: 8,145
|
Some background on AIM from Media Matters for America. Interesting Tidbits on Scott Kincaid
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 20, 2007 @ 9:14 PM |
Accurate News Reporting |
|
iam7545
Posts: 4,151
|
MEDIA MATTERS - Tell the truth eastham - Soros runs that little liberal cluster f - LMAO - 
|
| |
|
| Jul 20, 2007 @ 9:33 PM |
Accurate News Reporting
|
|
eastham
Posts: 8,145
|
Democracy in America, which is supported by George Soros and his brother gave the initial start up grant to Media Matters, which garners much of its income from small donations. Here is their lastest 990: Media Matters Tax Return
AIM receives a good bit of its funding, from Richard Mellon Scaife. For those who might not remember scafe, he is the individual who bankrolled Paula Jones and a lot of the Right Wing Noise Machine.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 20, 2007 @ 9:35 PM |
Accurate News Reporting |
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 8,190
|
And ultra-conservative right wing influences control AIM.
I think the chances of just being told the FACTS, without a slant in either direction, and being allowed to make up my own mind, are growing slimmer by the day.
|
| |
|
| Jul 20, 2007 @ 9:59 PM |
Accurate News Reporting
|
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 8,190
|
Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.
From Media Matters' own "Who We Are" section. Sorry, East, but even they admit they are anti-conservative. I am not looking for information that is anti-anything. I just want the facts. The raw numbers, so I can decide for myself.
You know, I saved my old tax booklets. Some were damaged in some flooding while I was in Topeka, and some were damaged during my recent excess rain here, but one of the things I could always use them to argue was that if you had $40,000 adjusted gross income in 1995 and exactly the same amount in 1998, you paid more taxes in 1995 than in 1998. So much for the "Clinton tax increases" crappola! Working middle-class people had more money under Clinton to spend, and they spent it, and they bought things and the economy was better. Unfortunately, I can't find my entire collection right now, so I can't examined the criteria for the last few years. But those are the kinds of raw numbers that cannot be argued with that I want to find a source for. Don't tell me "Unemployment is 5.2%," without telling me the exact number of people who are not working, for WHATEVER REASON. (Reagan fought unemployment by changing the criteria of unemployed people, so that vast numbers of them were removed from the ranks of "unemployed." His numbers sure looked good, but the facts were that up to 10% of people in this country did not have a job at times during his presidency.)
Again, I can't seem to find anyone that is willing to just report the raw facts, without slanting it. There is of course the Congressional Budget Office, etc., most of which I don't particularly trust either, since they cook their books.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 20, 2007 @ 10:03 PM |
Accurate News Reporting |
|
eastham
Posts: 8,145
|
Well, if you want something in-between, you're just gonna have to look at both AIM and Media Matters and make a decision for yourself.
|
| |
|
| Jul 20, 2007 @ 10:22 PM |
Accurate News Reporting
|
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 8,190
|
lol. Well, Media Matter's stated aim is to correct conservative misinformation, whereas AIM's apparent objective is just to make up more anti-liberal stuff, as nearly as I can tell. (The belaboring the point that a memo regarding Terry Schiavo being a good political point being attributed to "liberal dirty tricks" even After a Republican came out and admitted the memo originated with one of his staffers, for instance.) I believe I would trust MM more than AIM to at least tell me the truth, but I wonder if I would get the Whole truth from anybody.
I do thank you for the MM link.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 20, 2007 @ 10:28 PM |
Accurate News Reporting |
|
eastham
Posts: 8,145
|
AIM's hiding behind someone's skirt. It's true mission is to move the debate so far to the right that they appear to be objective. Their primary funder is Richard Mellon Scaife, enough said.
|
| |
|
| Jul 21, 2007 @ 12:14 AM |
Accurate News Reporting
|
|
kjac
Posts: 8,163
|
You could always watch the Rupert Murdoch's opinion network.
And yes, I am biased against Rupert Murdoch. Being a dodger fan, I saw him almost destroy them while he owned them. He should have stuck with using networks to blast his opinion, and left baseball alone.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 21, 2007 @ 12:25 AM |
Accurate News Reporting |
|
eastham
Posts: 8,145
|
And now you get to watch him destroy the Wall Street Journal!
|
| |
|
| Jul 21, 2007 @ 12:30 AM |
Accurate News Reporting
|
|
kjac
Posts: 8,163
|
I read that they were discussing whether or not to allow him to buy them because of his interfering bias. Did they decide yet or has he not increased the $ amount enough?
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 21, 2007 @ 12:36 AM |
Accurate News Reporting |
|
iam7545
Posts: 4,151
|
eastham - destroy what????? - he is the most successful media man on earth - NBC is on the verge of bankruptcy - the NYT - WaPo and LA TImes are all going down the tubes - Massive layoffs and shareholder discontent! They will all soon be GONE! Murdocks papers are the only that continue to hold readership and make money - Pretty soon he will be able to buy them all! LMAO -
Sorry that you do not approve of him! Hey eastham - he even supports Billary - that alone should get you on Rupperts side
Dont worry - CNN will endure!
|
| |
|
| Jul 21, 2007 @ 12:51 AM |
Accurate News Reporting
|
|
kjac
Posts: 8,163
|
The subject is accurate news reporting. Adding Rupert Murdoch to this discussion is way off topic. I apologize. I should have given examples of accurate news reporting, instead of discussing the exact opposite.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 21, 2007 @ 2:44 AM |
Accurate News Reporting |
|
Paralegal_at_Law
Posts: 6,301
|
When I filed an official complaint with the FCC on the television broadcast license of a local CBS affiliate what I learned is that Congress has enacted a law that bans the broadcast of obscenity and that FCC broadcast licensees have a First Amendment right to lie.
It would take corrective legislation to make these public nuisance monsters accountable and the leftist-leaning Liberal and pro-socialist United States Congress is FAR MORE INTERESTED in finding ways to censor and impose some effective federal version of thought-control upon Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, the illustrious Mr. Savage, Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, George Will, and (insert here the names of the members of the entire Republican National Committee) and other "undesirables" than taking any notice, or interest in such phoney issues as the News Week Reporter printing an article, later retracted for falsehood, that American Guards in Guantanemo Bay had flushed some Al Qaeda detainee's Koran down the toilet, notwithstanding the fact that one single example of Anti-American false propaganda cost 15 lives when enraged Moslems abroad rioted and pulled Christians, including Nuns, into the streets and butchered them, just because foreigners like those "peace loving" Moslems simply do not understand that YOU CANNOT BELIEVE WHAT YOU READ IN THE PUBLISHED NEWS MEDIA OR EVEN WHAT YOU SEE ON THE TELEVISION BROADCAST NEWS MEDIA, because truth is an endangered species that is not protected by any United States public law.
Oh, private parties can sue for defamation of character, but not public figures. As if the news media political disinformation and political propaganda complex bothers with selecting totally obscure people to lie about, instead of seeking targets of opportunity among the active political personalities in the political center or on the political right to publicly skewer while engaging in the art and skill of practicing the broadcast politics of personal destruction and burying any news that would reflect badly on their darlings on the political left and also the socialists, extremists, that they "worship" on the political far left, or (gush) how about those lovely foreign tyrants who Hate America and say so loudly and often who need a sympathetic interview and can be relied upon to say something, anything, that makes America look like we are the world class problem on Planet Earth.
I would not be surprised on bit to eventually see all of the national news media outlets merge together in a corporate consolidation under the new name HATE SPEECH "R" US.
I wish you well my friends.
The "Utopia-American" viewpoint. Good night and good luck.
|
| |
|
| Jul 21, 2007 @ 8:37 AM |
Accurate News Reporting
|
|
iam7545
Posts: 4,151
|
para - posts here remind me of what Chavez is doing in Venezuela - let's just shut down what we do not want to hear- it is only fair media when liberals hear what they want to hear! Then of course they take the intellectual condescending position that anything else is unenlightened - - Thus Ruppert Murdoch's outlets are not accurate and CNN is! THis is after CNN admits to biased reporting to appease Sadaam Huessein. CNN is so biased that Orthodox Jews have completely boycotted the network - they too will not last long!
Now the Marxist Dems are trying to use the fairness doctrine to solve their problem. OH what is their problem? Most liberal newspapers are on the verge of bankruptcy as they have lost all credibility due to their consistent inaccuracies that become exposed. All the while other papers that do not have an admitted liberal slant are doing fine. Their Soros funded radio debacle failed and then failed and then failed! Books like Goldberg"s "Biased" have exposed their liberal agenda, brought it out in the open and detailed how they get away with it! FOX News Ratings are equal to or greater than CNN and MSNBC combined! Hmmmmmmmmm
Same thing happens here - folks like eastham and kjac take the classic position - they are enlightened and all others are rednecks! If they read Goldbergs book they would understand how others view their non sense! So NPR - CNN and Keith Olberman are intellectual enlightened journalists and anyone else is a beer drinking redneck! Correspondents like Michael Yon are quickly discredited - WHY? because the Marxist network - NPR doesn't use his reports - . And they cannot corroberate his reports - Of course not - they are in Hotels in Baghdad using local stringers to get their new - many of these stringers have been proved to be terrorists! So here is a man that is retired Special Forces - has access to places few others ever will and eastham calls him a soldier - says that is not a career path to journalism and asked if he has a "Congressional Press Pass!" Well Michael Yon dont need no stinkin Congressional Press Pass - And he doesn't need small minded peoples approval to earn the respect those seeking the truth! Reminds me of John Kerry's slip of the tongue when he had a liberal College crowd cheering to the sounds of "Iraq is where you go when you cant go to college" Same attitude here!
Republicans do not want to shut down the liberal media - nature is taking its due course! This is America - let Freedom Speak!
Lord save our Country!
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 21, 2007 @ 12:54 PM |
Accurate News Reporting |
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 8,190
|
When I filed an official complaint with the FCC on the television broadcast license of a local CBS affiliate what I learned is that Congress has enacted a law that bans the broadcast of obscenity and that FCC broadcast licensees have a First Amendment right to lie.
Now, see, Para. I was with you on this paragraph. And frankly, I'm a little torn about the "Fairness:" legislation some of the liberals are trying to get re-instated. I'm not so sure that "equal time" is called for. But then you cite jerks like Limbaugh, Hannity and Coulter, who are precisely the reason I am torn about the issue. Their half-truths, outright lies and slanted "reporting" are some of the instances I WOULD like to see them taken to task for. It is not news.
Incidentally, I used to read George Will when he had a regular column in Time magazine. (Was it Time or Newsweek? I used to take both, many years ago.) I no longer subscribe to either and haven't for years, but I will say I never thought Mr. Will was out and out lying about anything or twisting facts. I didn't always agree with his interpretations, but he could be counted on back then for at least a fair debate and what he presented as facts I usually believed Were facts. I do not see him in broadcast media as often as I used to. I guess his honesty doesn't draw as large an audience as the above-named people, who appear to me to be pandering to people who don't question for themselves and seek sensationalism more than facts.
I can stand O'Reilly some of the time. I like his outlook on some things. (Paraphrasing: "'My guy isn't doing anything your guy hasn't done!' doesn't make either of them a good guy!" ) But O'Reilly has been caught in many, many misstatments and exaggerations. Still, he isn't quite as avidly rabid in knocking people without appearing to at least say, "What are your arguments? We'll check that out." Which is more than Sean, Rush or Ann dismissively waving their hand and saying "There you go with your liberal lies again!" when THEY are caught spreading disinformation.
I would just like to find a neutral, objective source of information, that lays out the FACTS. No interpretation. For every fact they cite, they can cite their source, and it's a source I can check. Or perhaps they can explain how the sources came by their information. "This came from the CBO (Congressional Budget Office), but the CBO in the past has been noted to be inaccurate in estimating whatever, and they arrived at this figure by projecting that thus and so will happen, and if that doesn't happen, then their figures will not be accurate."
I just want to be able to make up my own mind.
|
| |
|
|
|
|