Posts Tagged ‘objectivity’

On MLK’s Birthday, the MSM Tried to get MLK III to Turn On Trump After a Meeting. “The Best Laid Plans of Mice and Men…”

January 17, 2017

85-2The Main Stream Media attempted to intimidate the wrong American, yesterday.

Newsbusters.org reported that

On Monday afternoon, reporters stationed inside Trump Tower begged Martin Luther King III to attack President-elect Trump over tweets concerning Democratic Congressman John Lewis (Ga.) following a meeting on the day honoring King’s father, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

King began by stating that he and Trump had “a very constructive meeting” with most of the focus on voting rights, but reporters quickly shifted the topic to Lewis. 

ABC correspondent Tom Llamas snuck in the first pathetic question, trying to bait King into blasting Trump: “Mr. King, as you know, Representative Lewis still has the scars from the March on Selma. Were you offended by the President-elect’s tweet that Representative Lewis is all talk and no action?”

King responded by stating Lewis is, like “many others,” a “bridge builder” but added that “in the heat of emotion, a lot of things get said on both sides.”

With the press corps not satisfied, an unidentified male reporter trotted out this second-hand claim by a woman he said he saw last week at Trump Tower:

“Sir, you know many African Americans are very concerned about a Trump presidency. A woman came in here last week and told me he’s going to have black people up against the wall, both literally and figuratively. Did he allay your concerns that he’ll be a president for all people, black and white?”

Once again, King didn’t take the bait as he ruled “certainly he said that, that he is going to represent Americans” and he’ll “continue to evaluate that” throughout Trump’s presidency.

While Lewis has been in the spotlight, CNN’s Jim Acosta has been as well, following his well-publicized tussle with Trump.  Mediaite claimed that Acosta proceeded to “grill” King with this question, but that couldn’t have been further from the truth:

“Sir, but if I may follow up, isn’t there something that cuts to your core when you hear the President-elect refer to John Lewis as all talk and no action? I mean, nothing could be further from the truth, isn’t that right? John Lewis is not all talk and no action.”

“No, absolutely. I would say John Lewis has demonstrated that he’s action. As I said, things get said on both sides in the heat of emotion and at some point, this nation, we’ve got to move forward,” answered King.

Here’s the relevant portion of the transcript from Martin Luther King III’s January 16 press conference at Trump Tower:

MARTIN LUTHER KING III: Let me briefly not just reiterate but state that we did have a very constructive meeting. The seminal right of the modern civil rights movement was the right to vote. My father fought so diligently for it, certainly Congressman John Lewis and many others, Hosea Williams fought for as well. It is very clear that the system is not working at its maximum, and through an op-ed that you may have seen, we provided at least a solution to begin to address a broken voting system. That was the dialogue, most of the dialogue that we talked about constructively. We believe we provided a solution that at least will give everyone an I.D. 

TOM LLAMAS: Mr. King, as you know, Representative Lewis still has the scars from the March on Selma. Were you offended by the President-elect’s tweet that Representative Lewis is all talk and no action? 

KING: First of all I think that in the heat of emotion, a lot of things get said on both sides and I think that at some point, and I am, as John Lewis and many others are, a bridge builder. The goal is to bring America together and Americans. We are a great nation, but we must become a greater nation, and what my father represented — my mother represented through her life, what I hope that I’m trying to do is always bring people together. 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: Sir, you know many African Americans are very concerned about a Trump presidency. A woman came in here last week and told me he’s going to have black people up against the wall, both literally and figuratively. Did he allay your concerns that he’ll be a president for all people, black and white? 

KING: Well certainly he said that, that he is going to represent Americans. He said that over and over again, and I think that we will continue to evaluate that. I think that the nation supports — I believe that’s his intent, but I think also we have to consistently engage with pressure, public pressure. It doesn’t happen automatically. My father and his team understood that, did that, and I think that Americans are prepared to do that. 

JIM ACOSTA: Sir, but if I may follow up, isn’t there something that cuts to your core when you hear the President-elect refer to John Lewis as all talk and no action? I mean, nothing could be further from the truth, isn’t that right? John Lewis is not all talk and no action. 

KING: No, absolutely. I would say John Lewis has demonstrated that he’s action. As I said, things get said on both sides in the heat of emotion and at some point, this nation, we’ve got to move forward. We can’t stay on — I mean, people are literally probably dying. We need to be talking about how do we feed people, how do we clothe people, how do we create the best education system. That’s what we need to be focused on. 

LLAMAS: On this day, what would your father’s message would be to President-elect Trump? What do you think your father’s message would be to President-elect Trump? 

KING: This is the final answer I’m going to have because I’m going to reiterate what I just said. I think my father would be concerned about the fact that there are 50 million fact there are 50 or 60 million people living in poverty and somehow, we’ve got to create the climate for all boats to be lifted. In America, with a multi-trillion dollar economy — $20 trillion economy almost, it’s insanity we have poor people in this nation. That’s unacceptable and when we work together, we know we can roll up our sleeves. There’s nothing we as Americans can’t do. Thank you very much. 

As I have written in previous posts, America’s Main Stream Media abandoned their role as objective observers and reporters of the news a long time ago.

With the overwhelming majority of those in the MSM being Liberals, they no longer view their role in American Society as being simply news reporters. They view themselves as being advocates…Liberal activists with a camera and a microphone, whose job is to stir up trouble for those who do not follow in lockstep behind the Democratic Elite.

As shown in the above article, they are not above continuing and exacerbating the racial division which America has experienced during the presidency of Barack Hussein Obama.

Just like the out-of-touch Hollywood Celebrities, the infantile cry baby wannabe anarchists of #DisruptJ20, and the anti-Constitution Democratic Congressmen like John Lewis, America’s Main Stream Media are in the middle of an epic meltdown triggered by the legal election of Donald J. Trump as the 45th President of the United States of America.

As has been affirmed to me time and time again during my surfing of the web, including Facebook Political Pages and websites, Modern American Liberals, including those in the Main Stream Media, are living in a state of denial.

They respond as if you have told them that you shot Ol’ Yeller, when you inform them that Liberalism is still the minority political belief in America, even (and especially) after the 8-year reign of their fallen messiah, King Barack The First and the defeat of their political party’s hand-picked successor, the Queen of Mean, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

This salient fact explains why CNN and MSNBC constantly trail Fox News in the television ratings polls.

Well, that plus the fact, as President-elect Trump has so eloquently put it time and again, THEY ARE A BUNCH OF LIARS.

Americans are now living in a  time when the Main Stream Media’s blatant propaganda is no longer believed at face value, as the evidence which refutes it is appearing in the live videos and photographs being shared on Facebook and other Social Media.

And, in response to the fact that average Americans do not believe a thing that they report, the MSM has decided that their role is to move from being objective reporters to being the unashamed Propaganda Arm of the Democratic Party, pushing its progressive and disruptive agenda forward BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.

Hence, the attempted intimidation of Martin Luther King III yesterday, in a desperate attempt to produce the results that those “journalists” wanted.

King III refused to be intimidated, just as President-elect Trump has refused to allow them to report lies about him.

So, with average Americas receiving our news from alternate sources and a man being inaugurated as President of the United States in 3 days who refuses to play their games, that leaves the Democratic Sycophants of the Main Stream Media S.O.L.

…And, you know what than means.

The Liberals’ National Temper Tantrum will not end any time soon.

Pass the popcorn.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Advertisements

Blatant Unprofessional Objectivity Just Cost the Democrat Lackeys at NBC the Republican Primary Debates

January 19, 2016

ModeratorsAs I have related to you before, I was a Radio News Director during college from 1978-1980, with a staff of 20 student reporters, who each received credit for producing and delivering a 5-minute newscast, once a week, on our College Radio Station.

I can remember sitting in the lecture hall of the (then) Memphis State University Journalism Building, listening to Dr. Williams, whom we all swore did the first newscast of KDKA, America’s first radio station, in 1920.  The class was “Introduction to Journalism” and Dr. Van Williams was telling us that the ” key to being a good journalist was objectivity”.

Now, in 2016, one Broadcast/Cable News Organization has become so blatantly objective, that one of America’s two political parties has had no choice but to fire them from hosting their Presidential Primary Candidate Debates.

Breitbart.com reports that

The Republican National Committee (RNC) officially voted on Monday afternoon to sever its business relationship with NBC News for the previously-scheduled Feb. 26, 2016, GOP presidential primary debate, Breitbart News has learned.

The Debate Committee for the RNC met via conference call and after hearing updates from RNC chairman Reince Priebus officially voted to cancel the partnership with NBC, according to sources on the call. The vote was unanimous.

After the October debate hosted by NBC partner CNBC—in which co-moderator John Harwood was roundly criticized for a poor performance—the RNC suspended its relationship with NBC News over that upcoming Houston debate.

“I write to inform you that pending further discussion between the Republican National Committee (RNC) and our presidential campaigns, we are suspending the partnership with NBC News for the Republican primary debate at the University of Houston on February 26, 2016,” Priebus wrote to NBC News chairman Andy Lack back in late October. “The RNC’s sole role in the primary debate process is to ensure that our candidates are given a full and fair opportunity to lay out their vision for America’s future. We simply cannot continue with NBC without full consultation with our campaigns.”

In response, NBC News signaled in a statement at the time that it thought the situation could be resolved.

“This is a disappointing development,” NBC News said in a statement. “However, along with our debate broadcast partners at Telemundo we will work in good faith to resolve this matter with the Republican Party.”

This process also sparked an unprecedented meeting of top officials with almost every GOP presidential campaign, in which campaign managers represented most of the 2016 GOP candidates to fight for better representation in the debate process. Donald Trump’s team and Dr. Ben Carson’s team, as well most of the rest of the campaigns, huddled together to wrest control away from the mainstream media—which has been, until now, dominating the process.

Clearly, however, despite NBC’s previous hopes that the RNC would reinstate the network as a moderator of the upcoming debate, the RNC has officially moved forward with formal actions to end the network’s plans for the Houston debate.

NBC News moderated Sunday evening’s Democratic debate between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley.

The move by the RNC to formally extricate NBC News from the process is sure to seriously harm the media organization’s reputation, and its financial bottom line. Typically, networks make millions of dollars in ad revenue with debate moderation due to the extraordinarily high viewership.

The debate is still on the schedule–it would come after Iowans, New Hampshire citizens, South Carolinians, and Nevadans vote, heading into the all-important SEC Primary of which Texas is a part on March 1–but it’s unclear as of yet who will moderate it or where it will air.

For years, the Main Stream Media has been in bed with politicians and business moguls. While, touting objectivity, they have often fallen way short of that goal.

The Media really came into its own during the 80’s, with the advent of Cable Television, the First Iranian Hostage Crisis, and the ascension and election of President Ronald Wilson Reagan. Their advocacy of all things Liberal became very apparent, as they attacked the greatest president of this generation, mercilessly, giving no quarter.

I believe that Reagan’s election was a wake up call to the MSM. They realized that, if let to their own devices, the American Public would elect a Conservative as president, every time. And, they just couldn’t have that. They were already in too deep to their Democratic, Progressive Masters.

So, America’s Media forsook their objectivity, choosing to help to shape current events, instead of just reporting on them, in an effort to produce outcomes which would be most beneficial to the Progressive Cause.

Now, in 2015, after propping up Barack Hussein Obama and getting him re-elected, their own hubris has given them an exaggerated sense of self-importance, as to their role in our society.

Their Achilles’ Heel , the before-mentioned hubris, blinded them to the potential of the upstart Fox News Channel in informing America’s population in the Heartland, and that has been their undoing, much to Obama’s consternation.

Every night of the week, the Fox News Channel beats the mainstream outlets in popularity. There is a reason for that.

Fox News is exactly what it claims to be: fair and balanced.

The Mainstream News Channels are so far up Obama’s and the Democratic Party’s backsides that they wouldn’t know the truth if it French-kissed them.

Just as it was during the Russian Revolution, when Vladimir Leninn seized control of Russia from the Czar, and just as it was during the era of the National Socialist Party in Germany, when a former altar boy and house painter named Adolf Hitler took over, the first thing that totalitarian governments do is to take control of media, for propaganda purposes.

Through threats, coercion, and promises of reward, that is exactly what Obama did when he took office.

Of course, he did not have to try very hard. The Main Stream Media were already Obama Fanboys, their staffs being made up of a majority of Liberals.

Heck, they were posting fictitious propaganda about Barack Hussein Obama, before he was even elected president.

The election of Barack Hussein Obama is the best thing that ever happened to the Fox News Channel. It has solidified their position as the Leader in Cable News.

And, the thing about it, is the fact that Fox News is not the only source by which average Americans can obtain the truth about Obama and his administration. The New Media, the Internet, has proven to be an invaluable source for dissemination of information.

Principled reporters, such as the late Andrew Breitbart and Michelle Malkin, turned up the heat on both Obama and the MSM, by providing an alternative source through which Americans can receive news, unfiltered by those in the Halls of Power.

All during the Republican PreFsidential Primate Candidate Debates, which they have had the privilege of hosting, the NBC Debate Moderators, while doing the will of their Masters at the Network and the Democratic Party, the self-proclaimed “Broadcast Journalists” allowed the entire country to witness them practice, on live television, their actual jobs: being junkyard dogs and purveyors of propaganda , in service to a political party and ideology, who once stood for the “Working Man and Woman”, but who now stand for the worst kind  of state-sponsored fascism, racial division exacerbated by the Rhetoric of Class Warfare, and greed-inspired socialism.

It was refreshing to actually see the Republican National Committee tell them to go take a long walk off of a short pier.

It is time to take our country back.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Full Story of “Politico’s” Attempt to “Politically Assassinate” Dr. Ben Carson

November 7, 2015

th (46)When I was a Collegiate Radio News Director from 1978-1980, I made sure that my on-air staff, including myself, maintained our objectivity in our reporting.

Since the Carter years,  political ideology has slowly replaced objectivity, among the ranks of America’s Main Stream Media, until, as was demonstrated by http://www.politico.com yesterday, “reporters” don’t even try to hide their loyalty to the Democratic Party, anymore.

Yesterday, Dr. Ben Carson was the target of a failed ‘Hit Piece” by the Liberal Political Website.

Before we look at the details of that attempt at “Political Assassination”, let’s look at his TRUE Biography, first, courtesy of achievement.org

Benjamin Carson was born in Detroit, Michigan. His mother Sonya had dropped out of school in the third grade, and married when she was only 13. When Benjamin Carson was only eight, his parents divorced, and Mrs. Carson was left to raise Benjamin and his older brother Curtis on her own. She worked at two, sometimes three, jobs at a time to provide for her boys.Benjamin and his brother fell farther and farther behind in school. In fifth grade, Carson was at the bottom of his class. His classmates called him “dummy” and he developed a violent, uncontrollable temper.

When Mrs. Carson saw Benjamin’s failing grades, she determined to turn her sons’ lives around. She sharply limited the boys’ television watching and refused to let them outside to play until they had finished their homework each day. She required them to read two library books a week and to give her written reports on their reading even though, with her own poor education, she could barely read what they had written.

Within a few weeks, Carson astonished his classmates by identifying rock samples his teacher had brought to class. He recognized them from one of the books he had read. “It was at that moment that I realized I wasn’t stupid,” he recalled later. Carson continued to amaze his classmates with his newfound knowledge and within a year he was at the top of his class.

The hunger for knowledge had taken hold of him, and he began to read voraciously on all subjects. He determined to become a physician, and he learned to control the violent temper that still threatened his future. After graduating with honors from his high school, he attended Yale University, where he earned a degree in Psychology.From Yale, he went to the Medical School of the University of Michigan, where his interest shifted from psychiatry to neurosurgery. His excellent hand-eye coordination and three-dimensional reasoning skills made him a superior surgeon. After medical school he became a neurosurgery resident at the world-famous Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore. At age 32, he became the hospital’s Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery, a position he would hold for the next 29 years.

In 1987, Carson made medical history with an operation to separate a pair of Siamese twins. The Binder twins were born joined at the back of the head. Operations to separate twins joined in this way had always failed, resulting in the death of one or both of the infants. Carson agreed to undertake the operation. A 70-member surgical team, led by Dr. Carson, worked for 22 hours. At the end, the twins were successfully separated and can now survive independently.Carson’s other surgical innovations have included the first intra-uterine procedure to relieve pressure on the brain of a hydrocephalic fetal twin, and a hemispherectomy, in which an infant suffering from uncontrollable seizures has half of its brain removed. This stops the seizures, and the remaining half of the brain actually compensates for the missing hemisphere.

In addition to his medical practice, Dr. Carson has long been in constant demand as a public speaker, and devotes much of his time to meeting with groups of young people. In 2008, President George W. Bush awarded Dr. Carson the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian honor.

…Dr. Carson opposed passage of the federal Affordable Care Act of 2010, often called the ACA or Obamacare. After retiring from his position as Director of Pediatric Neursurgery at Hopkins in 2012, Carson began to speak more frequently on other public issues and emerged as a vocal critic of the Obama administration. In the news media and political circles, he attracted considerable attention as a possible candidate for public office. In May 2015, he ended several months of speculation by announcing his intention to seek the Republican Party’s nomination for President of the United States. 

Now, let’s look at the LIE that Politico published online yesterday, in order to attempt to politically “assassinate” Dr. Carson.

Mollie Hemingway, the Senior Editor at thefederalist.com, summarized the whole sorry story late yesterday afternoon…

Politico‘s Kyle Cheney admitted that he fabricated a negative story about Ben Carson. At least, according to his own standards, he admitted the grievous journalistic sin.

In a story published early on Friday, Politico’s Kyle Cheney authored a piece headlined “Ben Carson admits fabricating West Point scholarship” with a subhed “Carson’s campaign on Friday conceded that a central point in his inspirational personal story did not occur as he previously described.”

There were at least five major problems with the story:

The headline was completely false
The subhed was also completely false
The opening paragraph was false false false
The substance of the piece was missing key exonerating information
The article demonstrated confusion about service academy admissions and benefits
But other than that, A+++ work, Kyle Cheney and Politico.

It could take all day to parse the problems with Kyle Cheney’s now-somewhat-cleaned-up hit piece on Carson, but let’s just look at his original introductory claims:

“Ben Carson’s campaign on Friday admitted, in a response to an inquiry from POLITICO, that a central point in his inspirational personal story was fabricated: his application and acceptance into the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. The academy has occupied a central place in Carson’s tale for years. According to a story told in Carson’s book, “Gifted Hands,” the then-17 year old was introduced in 1969 to Gen. William Westmoreland, who had just ended his command of U.S. forces in Vietnam, and the two dined together. That meeting, according to Carson’s telling, was followed by a “full scholarship” to the military academy. West Point, however, has no record of Carson applying, much less being extended admission…When presented with this evidence, Carson’s campaign conceded the story was false.”

Roughly none of this is true. Ben Carson’s campaign did not “admit” that a central point in his story “was fabricated.” Quite the opposite. The central point of the story is falsely described by Cheney/Politico as being that he applied and was accepted at West Point. Carson, in fact, has repeatedly claimed not to have applied. So any claim regarding the absence of West Point records of such an application would not debunk Carson’s point. And, again, Carson’s campaign never “conceded” the story was false at least in part because the story, as characterized by Politico, is not one he told. Further, Cheney is unable to substantiate his claim that Carson told this story. Nowhere in the article does he even explain, with facts, where he came up with the idea that Carson has ever made this claim.

Politico stealthily edited the inflammatory headline and lede, after the damage was done. They made changes without adding a note about what was corrected. They didn’t update the piece or add an editor’s note. The new headline is very much toned down to “Exclusive: Carson claimed West Point ‘scholarship’ but never applied.” This is a claim not exclusive to Politico and not newsworthy in the least. Carson himself broke this news 23 years ago when he said he was offered a scholarship to West Point but never applied. The cleaned-up story still says that Carson “conceded that he never applied nor was granted admission to West Point.” To concede is to admit that something is true. But, again, Carson himself made this claim more than two decades ago, so he’s not conceding the point to Kyle Cheney or Politico simply because Kyle Cheney and Politico misread him.

The Washington Post‘s Dave Weigel, who immediately expressed skepticism about the significance of the Politico hit that was taking everybody by storm, has a balanced take on the kerfuffle here. He also noted (on Twitter):

daveweigel ‏@daveweigel 15 hours ago

“Also, taking “fabrication” out of that headline is like taking uranium out of an A-bomb.”

One other quick point to make about Politico and Kyle Cheney’s piece. The original story claimed that Carson also lied by claiming he was offered a full scholarship to West Point since the service academy is entirely taxpayer funded. Or, as Politico put it: “indeed there are no ‘full scholarships,’ per se.” The only problem with this is that the academy itself describes this benefit as a “full scholarship.”

Ben Carson was a brilliant student who had already shown an interest in the military and had demonstrated leadership skills. It would be weirder if West Point hadn’t tried to recruit him than tried to recruit him. This doesn’t happen to we journalists, for obvious reasons, but exceptional students are recruited by top colleges and universities all the time.

Now, as for Kyle Cheney’s concession that he fabricated his piece on Carson. He didn’t. That’s how I’m interpreting his decision to stealthily edit his piece to remove much of the error. But Ben Carson didn’t “admit” or “concede” to fabrication and he’s been tarred by Cheney as if he had. So I’ll keep the headline.

Other critiques of Cheney and Politico are available from across the political and media spectrum here, here, here, here, and here.

At a time when the media need to demonstrate good faith efforts to cover Republicans and conservatives with even a modicum of fairness, Kyle Cheney and Politico have done a tremendous disservice to their brands.

Indeed.

Last night, Dr. Carson showed why he is one of the top two Candidates for the Republican Presidential Nomination, as he let the assembled members of the Main Stream Media know how he felt about their “lack of subjectivity”.

Mediaite.com reported that

Ben Carson faced some combative reporters during a press conference in Florida tonight about the various issues in his background that have been raised this week.He dismissed Politico‘s report about him not being formally offered a West Point scholarship, simply insisting it was relayed to him that he could get one with the kind of accomplishments in his background.

He declared, “There is a desperation on behalf of some to try to find a way to tarnish me… Next week it’ll be my kindergarten teacher who said I peed in my pants.”

As the reporters at his Florida presser continued to press Carson, he got pretty steamed and denounced the “witch hunt,” saying, “I do not remember this level of scrutiny for one President Barack Obama.”

In a very mocking voice, Carson brought up a lot of issues from the president’s past before turning the tables on the reporters and asking them point-blank why they’re not interested in Obama’s sealed college records.

The assembled reporters kept pressing Carson and he told them, “My job is to call you out when you’re unfair.”

Yesterday afternoon, before Politico admitted to lying, Rush Limbaugh, the Godfather of Conservative Talk Radio said the following on his program:

I think what we have here is an electronic lynching.  We have an electronic lynching being conducted against a Republican African-American candidate by a majority white, mainstream American liberal media where — if you’re not a good liberal and a good African-American on their plantation — they are gonna take you out.  And we are witnessing it.  It’s the same thing, folks, that happened to Clarence Thomas back in 1990 I believe it was. Again, back in 1990 there wasn’t any Fox News. There wasn’t a blogosphere.There were just the beginnings of the conservative presence on the web — and there was me, talk radio. But there was nothing else.  This is the kind of thing they used to get away with. This used to be the standard way news happened.  This is not character assassination.  This goes way beyond character assassination.  This is an attempt to destroy Carson’s reputation, his political future, his career, his credibility, all of it.  This is intended to destroy him.  Like just told our liberal caller: It’s the only way these people can win.  They think Carson’s a lunatic and they still can’t — or are not comfortable taking him on in the arena of ideas.  They have to character assassinate and destroy. 

This is despicable, despicable stuff.  

Yes, it is.

The Democratic Party and their Liberal Minions are desperate to somehow stop the momentum of America’s Political Pendulum, which is in the process of swinging execrably to the Right, or Conservative side.

We witnessed it with the debacle that was the Republican Candidate Debate on CNBC, in which the Junkyard Chihuahuas, that are the Min Stream Media, were loosed on the Republican Candidates, a laughable attempt, just like yesterday’s slander of Dr. Carson, which failed miserably. 

The thing about it is: We still have a year to go before the Presidential Elections.

How much more “yipping at the heels” of those who dare oppose “The Old White Folks From the Northeast” who comprise the Democratic Presidential Hopefuls, are the Junkyard Chihuahuas of the Liberal Main Stream Media capable of?

How much food can Rosie O’Donnell put away at an all-you-can-eat buffet?

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Rolling Stone Lied About UV “Rape” Story

April 5, 2015

 

 

Media Bias MeterHonesty…is such a lonely word. – Billy Joel

The New York Times reports that

Rolling Stone magazine retracted its article about a brutal gang rape at a University of Virginia fraternity after the release of a report on Sunday that concluded the widely discredited piece was the result of failures at every stage of the process.

The report, published by the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism and commissioned by Rolling Stone, said the magazine failed to engage in “basic, even routine journalistic practice” to verify details of the ordeal that the magazine’s source, identified only as Jackie, described to the article’s author, Sabrina Rubin Erdely.

On Sunday, Ms. Erdely, in her first extensive comments since the article was cast into doubt, apologized to Rolling Stone’s readers, her colleagues and “any victims of sexual assault who may feel fearful as a result of my article.”

In an interview discussing Columbia’s findings, Jann S. Wenner, the publisher of Rolling Stone, acknowledged the piece’s flaws but said that it represented an isolated and unusual episode and that Ms. Erdely would continue to write for the magazine. The problems with the article started with its source, Mr. Wenner said. He described her as “a really expert fabulist storyteller” who managed to manipulate the magazine’s journalism process. When asked to clarify, he said that he was not trying to blame Jackie, “but obviously there is something here that is untruthful, and something sits at her doorstep.”

The Columbia report cataloged a series of errors at Rolling Stone, finding that the magazine could have avoided trouble with the article if certain basic “reporting pathways” had been followed. Written by Steve Coll, the Columbia journalism school’s dean; Sheila Coronel, the dean of academic affairs; and Derek Kravitz, a postgraduate research scholar at the university, the report, at nearly 13,000 words, is longer than the 9,000-word article, “A Rape on Campus.”

After its publication last November, the article stoked a national conversation about sexual assault on college campuses and roiled the university.

The police in Charlottesville, Va., said last month they had “exhausted all investigative leads” and found “no substantive basis” to support the article’s depiction of the assault. Jackie did not cooperate with the police and declined to be interviewed for the Columbia report. She also declined, through her lawyer, to be interviewed for this article. She is no longer in touch with some of the advocates who first brought her to the attention of Rolling Stone, said Emily Renda, a rape survivor working on sexual assault issues at the University of Virginia.

Mr. Wenner said Will Dana, the magazine’s managing editor, and the editor of the article, Sean Woods, would keep their jobs.

Since the 1960s, America’s newsrooms have been overwhelmingly staffed by Liberals.

However, nowadays, a Conservative watchdog organization keeps an intense watch on the antics of the Main Stream Media:

The Media Research Center, headquartered in Alexandria, VA, began modestly with a handful of employees, a black and white TV, and a rented computer. The first order of business was to organize a research operation second to none. For years, conservatives could only present the anecdotal evidence of liberal journalists’ bias — a question in this interview, a statement in that report. However, anecdotal examples of bias do not prove a liberal agenda. Only through thorough, comprehensive, and ongoing analysis based on quantitative and qualitative research can one document liberal bias in the media.

From a $339,000 initial annual budget, the MRC has grown to be the nation’s largest and most sophisticated television and monitoring operation, now employing 60 professional staff with a $10 million annual budget.

The result of the MRC’s work is a mountain of evidence to use in combating the undeniable bias. The key to the MRC’s effectiveness is the ability to prove bias by using scientific studies and word-for-word quotes from the media.

For example, the MRC reports that:

In May 2004, the Pew Research Center for The People and The Press (in association with the Project for Excellence in Journalism and the Committee of Concerned Journalists) surveyed 547 journalists and media executives, including 247 at national-level media outlets. The poll was similar to ones conducted by the same group (previously known as the Times Mirror Center for the People and the Press) in 1995 and 1999. The actual polling was done by the Princeton Survey Research Associates.

KEY FINDINGS:

Five times more national journalists identify themselves as “liberal” (34 percent) than “conservative” (just 7 percent). In contrast, a survey of the public taken in May 2004 found 20 percent saying they were liberal, and 33 percent saying they were conservative.

The percentage of national reporters saying they are liberal has increased, from 22 percent in 1995 to 34 percent in 2004. The percentage of self-identified conservatives remains low, rising from a meager 4 percent in 1995 to a still-paltry 7 percent in 2004.

Liberals also outnumber conservatives in local newsrooms. Pew found that 23 percent of the local journalists they questioned say they are liberals, while about half as many (12 percent) call themselves conservative.

Most national journalists (55 percent) say the media are “not critical enough” of President Bush, compared with only eight percent who believe the press has been “too critical.” In 1995, the poll found just two percent thought journalists had given “too much” coverage to then-President Clinton’s accomplishments, compared to 48 percent who complained of “too little” coverage of Clinton’s achievements.

Reporters struggled to name a liberal news organization. According to Pew, “The New York Times was most often mentioned as the national daily news organization that takes a decidedly liberal point of view, but only by 20% of the national sample.” Only two percent of reporters suggested CNN, ABC, CBS, or NPR were liberal; just one percent named NBC.

Journalists did see ideology at one outlet: “The single news outlet that strikes most journalists as taking a particular ideological stance — either liberal or conservative — is Fox News Channel,” Pew reported. More than two-thirds of national journalists (69 percent) tagged FNC as a conservative news organization, followed by The Washington Times (9 percent) and The Wall Street Journal (8 percent).

The way the Main Stream Media views themselves is quite different from the way Americans view them.

On July 25th of 2011, thehill.com published a poll focusing on voters’ perceptions of Media Bias:

A full 68 percent of voters consider the news media biased, the poll found. Most, 46 percent, believe the media generally favor Democrats, while 22 percent said they believe Republicans are favored, with 28 percent saying the media is reasonably balanced.

The share of voters who believe the media are too friendly with politicians is almost twice as large as those who find their coverage of politicians appropriate. Forty-four percent of voters assert the former; only 24 percent believe the latter.

The picture is not much brighter on the general question of ethics. Fifty-seven percent of voters think of the news media as either somewhat or very unethical, while only 39 percent see them as somewhat or very ethical.

With more and more news stories, such as this one, turning out to be outright lies, it has become very apparent that, the Main Stream Media’s “broadcast journalists” don’t feel that they have to feign objectivity anymore.

The majority of the “News Operations” in our country long ago sold out to the Democrat Party and their own Liberal Ideology. Sensationalism, propaganda, and toeing the Party Line, have replaced Journalistic Ethics and objectivity.

And, all too often, as in the case of the Duke Lacrosse Players and, almost, these young me from the University of Virginia, the Main Stream Media can irreparably damage people’s lives.

…And, shape the destiny of a country through lies, innuendo, and cover-up.

“And, that’s the way it is, April 6th, 2015.”

Until He Comes,

KJ