ABC's Plan Dashed

[rocknrod]

To ABC's Surprise, Katrina Victims Praise Bush and Blame Nagin

<!-- start main content --><!-- begin content -->http://newsbusters.org/media/2005-09-15-ABCPSPReynolds.jpgABC News producers probably didn't hear what they expected when they sent Dean Reynolds to the Houston Astrodome's parking lot to get reaction to President Bush's speech from black evacuees from New Orleans. Instead of denouncing Bush and blaming him for their plight, they praised Bush and blamed local officials. Reynolds asked Connie London: "Did you harbor any anger toward the President because of the slow federal response?" She rejected the premise: "No, none whatsoever, because I feel like our city and our state government should have been there before the federal government was called in.” She pointed out: “They had RTA buses, Greyhound buses, school buses, that was just sitting there going under water when they could have been evacuating people."

Not one of the six people interviewed on camera had a bad word for Bush -- despite Reynolds' best efforts. Reynolds goaded: "Was there anything that you found hard to believe that he said, that you thought, well, that's nice rhetoric, but, you know, the proof is in the pudding?" Brenda Marshall answered, "No, I didn't," prompting Reynolds to marvel to anchor Ted Koppel: "Very little skepticism here.”

Reynolds pressed another woman: “Did you feel that the President was sincere tonight?" She affirmed: "Yes, he was." Reynolds soon wondered who they held culpable for the levee breaks. Unlike the national media, London did not blame supposed Bush-mandated budget cuts: "They've been allocated federal funds to fix the levee system, and it never got done. I fault the mayor of our city personally. I really do."

[StevenJ]

Ah nothing new. The media is largely left, they hate corporate America and Republicans. What else is going on in the world today?

[hitchhiker]

Hello!

That is total hogwash!

You were apparently easily fooled by a selected audience rounded up by Bush's handlers in a feeble attempt to make him look good.

'W' has cut funding for the Corps of Engineers every year!

:D

[duhtroll]

The facts are in the link I am posting. I am sure everyone will read into it what they like.

http://www.factcheck.org/article344.html

This site is run by those who are about as close to non-partisan as you can get. Even in a nationwide survey of factcheck readers they came out pretty clean.

[StevenJ]

Oh no! Here come the febel minded liberals and their never ending pathetic argument! It's a conspiracy, Bush wants to ruin all of America! Move to Canada, leave the country and go to France! There's going to be a draft... oh no! :bs::lol::flamer:

[BruteForce]

Oh no! Here come the febel minded liberals...

Thanks for the informed and rational response. Got any more?

[twolow]

:sleepy: *yawn* :sleepy:

[StevenJ]

God, don't you people know the meaning of sarcasm? :help:

[hitchhiker]

Oh no! Here come the febel minded liberals and their never ending pathetic argument! It's a conspiracy, Bush wants to ruin all of America! Move to Canada, leave the country and go to France! There's going to be a draft... oh no! :bs::lol::flamer:
Another member of the flat-earth society heard from and this one can't spell either!



:D

[2003 MIB]

Canada is a nice place.

[Smokie]

Oh...oh...:eek: another political thread, being from the South I just plain don't...:dunno: so I better....:run: and go thump my Bible.:bows:

[StevenJ]

Canada is a great place and I think someone needs to take their meds.. :baaa:

[MAD-3R]

Another member of the flat-earth society heard from and this one can't spell either!

I'm more of a Hollow Earth beliver. :lol:

[BruteForce]

You all do realize that none of these discussions would exist on this CAR forum if the RushL bufu buddies would stop starting these threads.

[2003 MIB]

I'm more of a Hollow Earth beliver. :lol:
:bs: You're a Middle Earth person, Mad. We all remember how excited you were over the Lord of the Rings movie.:lol:

[StevenJ]

Well this isn't the board to really be discussing it on. I'd rather talk about politics on Crownvic.net ... Those guys are largely level headed and much more mature when it comes to talking about politics. Of course they are also obsessed with the NRA and the second amendment! They are also very right wing conservative but nothing wrong with that. I wouldn't care too much if this thread is locked. This board is too middle ground and not open minded enough when it comes to a true political discussion. Topics get locked too easily as well. But that's understandable sicne this a very car focused board. Some other boards, like Crown Vic.net and Blue Oval News, are tolerant about politics. Not here though and it's okay. That doesn't bother me too much.

[MAD-3R]

Most people know me as one NOT to stir the pot o' trouble, but this quote just sent me on a mild "WTF?" trip


This board is too middle ground and not open minded enough when it comes to a true political discussion.

Discusions and debates have raged for days, but when one side or the other degrades and starts slinging mud, and it comes from BOTH sides!!, thats when threads get closed.

[MAD-3R]

:bs: You're a Middle Earth person, Mad. We all remember how excited you were over the Lord of the Rings movie.:lol:


Yeah yeah yeah, I read the books once a year weather I need to or not...

[2003 MIB]

Of course they are also obsessed with the NRA and the second amendment!
Isn't everybody?:confused:

[duhtroll]

Exactly what I thought. Too middle ground and not open minded eh?

How's that again?

We have far too many people who only see one side of any argument. We can use some open-mindedness.

Though I agree we could use fewer political threads, or at least ones that are tantamount to "liberals suck" or vice-versa.


Most people know me as one NOT to stir the pot o' trouble, but this quote just sent me on a mild "WTF?" trip

[2003 MIB]

Yeah yeah yeah, I read the books once a year weather I need to or not...
Never show up to a Marauder event in a "Frodo Lives" T-shirt.
So endth the lesson...:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[MAD-3R]

I NEVER!!! and all photographic evidance has be destroyed.

[Mad1]

The media is largely left, they hate corporate America and Republicans.

For the learning disabled, I'll repeat myself.

The majority of newspaper publishers and television station owners in this country are massive corporations with major-league profits, hardly a picture of "left-leaning" bias.

Here's just a sample off the top of my head of the "corporations" and their media properties. Financial reports and holdings were confirmed using public filings researched through Hoovers.com.

Gannett (USAToday, tens of major newspapers and dozens of TV stations) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $1,317.2

Knight-Ridder (Owns more than 30 daily and 50 non-daily newspapers in the U.S., including the Philadelphia Inquirer and Miami Herald) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $326.2

Tribune Corp. (Chicago Tribune, Newsday, and the Los Angeles Times. More than 25 TV stations, cable network Superstation WGN, the WB Television Network and the TV Food Network) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $555.5

Meredith Corp. (Readers Digest, Better Homes and Gardens, Ladies' Home Journal, Parents, Child, Fitness, and Family Circle magazines, as well as a dozen or so TV stations in major markets) -- 2005 Net Income (mil.) $129.0

Liberty Media Group (Owns Court TV and 17% of News Corp., parent of Fox Broadcasting) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $46.0

The McClatchy Co. (Owns about 30 daily including the Minneapolis Star Tribune, Sacramento Bee and Raleigh, N,C.'s News & Observer) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $155.9

Belo Corp. (Dallas Morning News and Providence (R.I.) Journal and 19 TV stations) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $132.5

NY Times Corp. (NY Times, Boston Globe and many TV stations) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $292.6

Dow Jones Co. (Owns Wall Street Journal and its various incarnations and financial magazines, Barron's and SmartMoney) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $99.5

Disney (ABC) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $2,345.0

Viacom (CBS, MTV, VH1, BET & UPN networks, Paramount Studios, 40 TV stations, publisher Simon & Schuster, Infinity Broadcasting's more than 180 radio stations) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) ($17,462.2)

General Electric (One of the laregst corporations in the world, NBC Network) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $16,593.0

News Corp. (Owns The Times of London and book publisher HarperCollins, Fox Entertainment Group, who's significant holdings including the FOX network with 200 U.S. affiliates, Twentieth Century Fox, and a 34% stake in DIRECTV. It also owns 35 U.S. TV stations.) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $1,607.0

If you think the media is liberal ... Why don't you add up all the profits from these media giants and then come back and tell me what liberal agenda is driving these companies. Perhaps you'd better reconsider whose information is being pushed in your direction and by what companies.

I'd love to work for liberal-agenda media company, but I've never seen one, so back up your argument with more than "Rush/Bush,Rove ... said so and I believe them."
:stupid:

Mad1
Jeremy

P.S. For those that can't add ... I've done that too. Total profits ... $6,137.2 (mil.) and that includes the massive loss from Viacom. You can read that number as this $6,137,200,000 if it helps you grasp the total size of their combined profits. Next time you see media giants laying off people from the newsrooms, remember it's all about more profits ... not better news gathering regardless of its perceived "liberal" bias.

[duhtroll]

Thank you.


For the learning disabled, I'll repeat myself.

The majority of newspaper publishers and television station owners in this country are massive corporations with major-league profits, hardly a picture of "left-leaning" bias.

Here's just a sample off the top of my head of the "corporations" and their media properties. Financial reports and holdings were confirmed using public filings researched through Hoovers.com.

Gannett (USAToday, tens of major newspapers and dozens of TV stations) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $1,317.2

Knight-Ridder (Owns more than 30 daily and 50 non-daily newspapers in the U.S., including the Philadelphia Inquirer and Miami Herald) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $326.2

Tribune Corp. (Chicago Tribune, Newsday, and the Los Angeles Times. More than 25 TV stations, cable network Superstation WGN, the WB Television Network and the TV Food Network) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $555.5

Meredith Corp. (Readers Digest, Better Homes and Gardens, Ladies' Home Journal, Parents, Child, Fitness, and Family Circle magazines, as well as a dozen or so TV stations in major markets) -- 2005 Net Income (mil.) $129.0

Liberty Media Group (Owns Court TV and 17% of News Corp., parent of Fox Broadcasting) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $46.0

The McClatchy Co. (Owns about 30 daily including the Minneapolis Star Tribune, Sacramento Bee and Raleigh, N,C.'s News & Observer) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $155.9

Belo Corp. (Dallas Morning News and Providence (R.I.) Journal and 19 TV stations) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $132.5

NY Times Corp. (NY Times, Boston Globe and many TV stations) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $292.6

Dow Jones Co. (Owns Wall Street Journal and its various incarnations and financial magazines, Barron's and SmartMoney) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $99.5

Disney (ABC) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $2,345.0

Viacom (CBS, MTV, VH1, BET & UPN networks, Paramount Studios, 40 TV stations, publisher Simon & Schuster, Infinity Broadcasting's more than 180 radio stations) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) ($17,462.2)

General Electric (One of the laregst corporations in the world, NBC Network) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $16,593.0

News Corp. (Owns The Times of London and book publisher HarperCollins, Fox Entertainment Group, who's significant holdings including the FOX network with 200 U.S. affiliates, Twentieth Century Fox, and a 34% stake in DIRECTV. It also owns 35 U.S. TV stations.) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) $1,607.0

If you think the media is liberal ... Why don't you add up all the profits from these media giants and then come back and tell me what liberal agenda is driving these companies. Perhaps you'd better reconsider whose information is being pushed in your direction and by what companies.

I'd love to work for liberal-agenda media company, but I've never seen one, so back up your argument with more than "Rush/Bush,Rove ... said so and I believe them."
:stupid:

Mad1
Jeremy

P.S. For those that can't add ... I've done that too. Total profits ... $6,137.2 (mil.) and that includes the massive loss from Viacom. You can read that number as this $6,137,200,000 if it helps you grasp the total size of their combined profits. Next time you see media giants laying off people from the newsrooms, remember it's all about more profits ... not better news gathering regardless of its perceived "liberal" bias.

[Mike M]

I love when the media can't get John Q. Public to criticize President Bush. God knows they try! If Clinton was still in office they would have at least rephrased the questions.

[MikesMerc]

If you think the media is liberal ... Why don't you add up all the profits from these media giants and then come back and tell me what liberal agenda is driving these companies.


LOL...that's easy....GREED. The left is just as money and power hungry as the right. Hollywood makes a ton of money too. Are you gonna tell me they're not liberal either...ha ha ha.

[Petrograde]

:bs: You're a Middle Earth person, Mad. We all remember how excited you were over the Lord of the Rings movie.:lol:

hmm,.. wait a sec,... Phil?
http://www.rav-ished.net/gimli/images/01.jpg

naw,... can't be.


:D :D :D

[Leadfoot281]

There's no left leaning media? Ok, two words; Dan Rather! How about two more? FORGED DOCUMENTS!

Republicans, or anyone that makes serious money, have to be greedy. Look at the taxes they have to pay!

[MarauderMike]

We all know how unbiased the New York Times is!
The people selected to be on camera were selected by the on site producer, not the Bush people, guess the couldn't help it if they couldn't find people who promoted the ABC agenda.

[rookie1]

[QUOTE=Mad1]For the learning disabled, I'll repeat myself.

The majority of newspaper publishers and television station owners in this country are massive corporations with major-league profits, hardly a picture of "left-leaning" bias.

Here's just a sample off the top of my head of the "corporations" and their media properties. Financial reports and holdings were confirmed using public filings researched through Hoovers.com.

Gannett (USAToday

Knight-Ridder (Owns more than 30 daily and 50 non-daily newspapers in the U.S., including the Philadelphia Inquirer and Miami Herald)

Tribune Corp. (Chicago Tribune, Newsday, and the Los Angeles Times.

NY Times Corp. (NY Times, Boston Globe and many TV stations) --


Disney (ABC) --

Viacom (CBS, MTV, VH1, BET & UPN networks, Paramount Studios, 40 TV stations, publisher Simon & Schuster, Infinity Broadcasting's more than 180 radio stations) -- 2004 Net Income (mil.) ($17,462.2)


If you think the media is liberal ... Why don't you add up all the profits from these media giants and then come back and tell me what liberal agenda is driving these companies. Perhaps you'd better reconsider whose information is being pushed in your direction and by what companies.

I'd love to work for liberal-agenda media company, but I've never seen one, so back up your argument with more than "Rush/Bush,Rove ... said so and I believe them."
:stupid:


So let's see, I am trying to understand your point. Your point must be that profitable companies cannot possibly be left leaning. So, from this point. I am supposed to understand that profit is the exclusive province of conseratives. Ergo; Ted Turner and Jane Fonda and Oprah must be conservatives also. That's fine I was previously blindly assuming that those folks were a little on the left of political spectrum and I'm glad you straightened that out for me.
Come to think of it, Barbara Streisand and Bruce Sprigsteen both sell records and make profits so they must be conservative also. As I ponder this further my head is beginning to swim, I mean, I just realized that NOW and PUSH both made profits last year so they must be conservative organizations also. I'm sinking really fast here, it just dawned on me that Planned Parenthhod must be profitable to fund all their legal issues and lobbying efforts so they must be conservative also.

I'd like to thank you for opening my eyes here.

[duhtroll]

You haven't answered his question.

He did not say "they are not liberal because they make money" but rather that they are large corporations and those tend to be run by conservatives. And he's right.

He also never said there are no rich liberals, nor did he say that all rich people are conservative.

Show us the agenda being promoted by the liberal media. It should be obvious, what with the hundred thousand times I have heard people spout how left-wing the media is.

If you intend to fall back on Bush-bashing: Tell me that were Kerry elected "they" would leave him alone. If you believe that, you really are beyond help. Tell me "they" didn't rake Clinton over the coals every chance they got.

If you intend to fall back on any other liberal program and its promotion or media attention, I'll show you just as much that is slanted conservative from the number one rated "news" network in the country, Fox News.

You say New York Post, I say Wall Street Journal.

I've asked this several times and no one seems to ever have the answer.

Truth is the motive is PROFIT, not politics. People just believe what they want to believe regardless of the facts.

The media has a PROFIT bias. It matters not who is in control of our government. They are the targets, no matter what. It gets ratings and sells papers.

It's time to put away the "left wing bias" argument, because it's :bs: There's just as much conservative drivel out there for anyone who is willing to open their eyes and look.

-A

[Mad1]

I was responding to stupidity of lumping all media into a "left-leaning" conspiracy that "hates" big corporations and Republicans, when most publication/media organizations are in fact "massive" corporations the leadership of which is hardly a picture of liberal solidarity.

I've been in a newsroom, where the publisher was pressuring the editorial staff to layoff offending an ad-spending client that is blatently ripping off customers/endangering the public. I've also worked with publishers that were adamant that editorial focus its priorities on their idealogical agenda, whether liberal or conservative. It hardly should come as a surprise that companies follow the concerns of their leaders, who exercise the greatest control over hiring, spending and company priorities.

Also, it should be noted that successful (i.e. profitable) companies are usually by their nature considered "conservative" because they typically benefit greatest from the status quo. Raise your hand if you remember Metallica testifying before Congress about file-sharing detracting from sales of their copyrighted musical performances. If you want to debate the proper usage of "conservative vs. liberal" labels we should probably start a new topic.

Mad1
Jeremy

[David Morton]

There's no left leaning media? Ok, two words; Dan Rather! How about two more? FORGED DOCUMENTS!

Republicans, or anyone that makes serious money, have to be greedy. Look at the taxes they have to pay!Yeah. Too bad the forged documents were absolutely true.

The telling fact about the media is that they scripted the whole thing. They fooled Rather into coming out with documents that show the truth about Georgie dodging his service commitment, and then out the fact that they're forgeries. Didn't matter that what the documents told us was the truth.

Bush is a partying, drug taking, drunken rich boy and his daddy made him into what he is today, a menace to humanity. He's a failed businessman and couldn't even manage the oil company that his daddy set up for him because of his cocaine habit. So he then became a welfare cheat with his daddys help, bought into the Texas Rangers for a song, got daddys cronies get the Texas legislature to build them a stadium at taxpayers' expense, and then sold the franchise for millions. Corporate welfare at it's stealthiest.

And those media corporations that were mentioned don't pay taxes. They let fools like you that run the small businesses and farms that supply and feed the world pay them, all the time telling you they're gonna cut your taxes. Well, roads gotta get paved and schools built and staffed, and NOW the feds have no block grant money for the states so guess what, YOUR property taxes go up. They give you a tax cut for one pocket and then increase the tax coming out of the other to make up the difference. Some states fare better than others, red states (R) are getting more federal money than blue ones (D). Go figure.

Then you go out and campaign for those guys because you won't see the truth, you've been played the fool all along. But you're such a sick crowd you don't see the immorality of putting the debt for all your selfishness on the future economic security of your children and mine. Fiscal conservatives my a$$.

You republicans are thieves, using a future generations' stolen credit card.

[rookie1]

I was responding to stupidity of lumping all media into a "left-leaning" conspiracy that "hates" big corporations and Republicans, when most publication/media organizations are in fact "massive" corporations the leadership of which is hardly a picture of liberal solidarity.

I've been in a newsroom, where the publisher was pressuring the editorial staff to layoff offending an ad-spending client that is blatently ripping off customers/endangering the public. I've also worked with publishers that were adamant that editorial focus its priorities on their idealogical agenda, whether liberal or conservative. It hardly should come as a surprise that companies follow the concerns of their leaders, who exercise the greatest control over hiring, spending and company priorities.

Also, it should be noted that successful (i.e. profitable) companies are usually by their nature considered "conservative" because they typically benefit greatest from the status quo. Raise your hand if you remember Metallica testifying before Congress about file-sharing detracting from sales of their copyrighted musical performances. If you want to debate the proper usage of "conservative vs. liberal" labels we should probably start a new topic.

Mad1
Jeremy

I have to apologize to you Mad1. Your post that I responded to came across to me as a "let me throw some numbers out and mine is the only opinion that counts" sort of post like so many other posts involving this issue. I can see from this last post that I was wrong and my apologies.

Let me state that I am an independent and certainly lean rightward on most issues. That being established, aside from Fox news you would still have a difficult time disproving a liberal bias in the media. I don't believe that there is a hidden agenda in the media just as I don't believe that there is such thing as a vast right wing conspiracy. I do believe that the majority of our universities, especially those known for journalism are inarguably bastions of liberalism. That would almost certainly explain the leftward leanings of most editorial staffs. I believe that Rupert Murdoch is savvy enough to realize that his news channel(Fox) can reap the most profit by offering a distinctly different(blatantly conservative) alternative.

As I read the posts in this topic it is astounding to see how much President Bush is both reviled and supported. In my humble opinion he is too vanilla to inspire either of these emotions and will ultimately make an average grade in the presidential history book as will his predecessor. I am also surprised at the assumption that Rush Limbaugh listeners are all idiots. I've listened to Mr. Limbaugh on occasion and didn't feel any less intelligent for the experience. I listen to PBS news on occasion also and don't feel different afterward either.

There is no room in any intelligent debate for blind assumptions. The bottom line in all politics, especially American politics is follow the money. In a capitalist world money and profit are key components in all decisions. The advent of true multi-national corporations that essentially answer to no one merely highlight this.

just my $.02.