YOU Can Easily Counter The Pro-Kerry Bias of Rogue Reporters at The Associated Press

[Doctor Raoul]

Tom Hays' story that fabricated "boos" in response to Bush wishing Clinton a safe and speedy recovery is just the latest example of bias FOR John Kerry by rogue reporters at AP.

When the Swift Boat Veterans launched their campiagn for John Kerry to tell the truth, they held a formal press conference in DC, in the National Press Building, the home of many Washington news bureaus and close to the others.

The Associated Press signed the media attendance log, yet their reporter did NOT file a story at all. Many other media outlets did, including the LA Times. The Swift Vets had over two hundred people in Kerry's Costal Division and 18 out of 21 of those in the chain of command above him sign that they considered him Unfit For Command, but no AP story.

Kristinn Taylor called the Washington AP bureau and asked for the editor on duty. She told him that no story was filed "because it doesn't advance the story about the anti-Kerry Vietnam Veterans any", whatever that means.

So here's what you can do to bring pressure to bare on the Kerry supporters at Associated Press. Not all the people at AP are partisan, they will clean up the "dirty tricks" Terry Hunt's crowd are pulling if it's brought to their attention.

Click here and enter your zipcode. You'll get your local media. Check your local paper to see if they use AP stories, it will usually be listed under the reporter's name if it is an AP story. If they do, politely call your paper and ask to speak to the "Wire Editor" if they have someone by that title, if not, ask for the "National Editor". Explain to them the extreme bias exhibited by the pass on the Swift Boat Vets press conference and the fraudulant "boos" story. Let them know that the AP's bias reflects on them and influences your decision to buy or not buy their paper when you pass the newsstand. Bias doesn't count as news, and if the paper doesn't have news, you won't buy it.

Ask them to research your complaint and if they agree, make the AP aware that subscribes have called and made their case of AP bias to the AP's customer, an editor.

I have calmly and politely laid out the facts on a few AP stories in the past, and on their own initiative, editors have said they'd be calling their AP point of contact.

So good luck and get your your voice on the record with your local paper. If your local TV station's website uses AP stories, call them too.

[Cboldt]

I'm glad you noted that. This is where some of my confusion rests.

My pleasure. It seems the majority of FReepers are attributing the story to Hays. Even if that attribution is incorrect, the AP deserves to get buried with complaints.

Really good letters here ... http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1206812/posts?page=89#89

"Thank you for your quick response, but damage has already been done. How about your local news dept. doing a story about the error, why and how it happened, and who is responsible. National media need to be held accountable for errors like this, this should not just be pulled. If you listen to the audio of the rally, this is not just a simple mistake, it is a fabrication. Are you comfortable having reporters feed you stories containing this kind of error? It also affects your credibility and reputation when it's posted on your site, and you can get out ahead of it by making the error itself the story."

By FReeper 'mongrel'

[bert]

Au contraire my friend.(a little French lingo there)

I have spent months doing just that and the result is not perceptable. Perhaps the most blatent storys are edited out, but since almost all AP stories are extremely biased and since the paper has no other source for national and international news.... the AP rules.


After the election, a few good and dedicated souls need to get our heads together and go after the AP.

[doug from upland]

Good post and info, Doc.

[Arizona Carolyn]

Thank you for the email address. This is the email I just sent: I'm well aware the AP is biased towards John Kerry in this current election cycle. I am, however, extremely upset that your reporter Tom Hayes filed a blatantly false report that when President Bush told the crowd about President Clinton's illness yesterday, your reporter reported "the crowd booed and President Bush did nothing to stop them." In fact I have heard an audio tape of this and the crowd in fact applauded for President Clinton, there was no boo's heard. Since this made it's way around all mainstream media yesterday, putting an undeserved black eye on our President, I am requesting the AP not only issue a retraction but it be done on the front pages in BOLD letters. I would like to point out we expect fair and accurate reporting from our print news, whether that report is in keeping with the reporters own political views or not. You are expected to be neutral and keep personal emotion out of print. Respectfuly yours,

[jimbo123]

The person who wrote the false story:

Tom Hays Associated Press
212-587-8035
thays@ap.org

Tom Hays' boss:

Tom Curley, President, CEO
450 W. 33rd Street
New York, NY 10001
Phone: 212-621-7550
Fax: 212-621-6108
Email: tcurley@ap.org

[JoJo Gunn]

This is the part that bothers me, where some are saying without doubt they know who wrote it.

Don't get me wrong. I would love to do nothing more than go after the sewer diver who did this. But I want official confirmation.

In the meantime, however, we can hammer mercilessly the Disassociated Press for protecting it's blatantly biased scrivener.

I hope Rush and Hannity and Boortz and the rest will go after this in the next week.

[blackie]

We are winning ~ the bad guys are losing ~ trolls, terrorists, democrats and the mainstream media are sad ~ very sad!

~~ Bush/Cheney 2004 ~~

[MplsSteve]

For what it's worth, I e-mailed Tom Hays a short while ago and expressed by displeasure.

I was polite but used the words "biased", "ridiculous" and "irresponsible" in my short missive to him.

Maybe you're right. Maybe it's high time to go straight to the top on things like this.

I am gonna e-mail the CEO of AP!

[Cboldt]

This is the part that bothers me, where some are saying without doubt they know who wrote it.

It bothers me a little bit, too, but hey, whatcha gonna do? We all make mistakes.

[JoJo Gunn]

That little voice in one ear says to do the right thing, to not fall to their level. But in my other ear something tells me let's make the light so unbearable that the cockroach will confess or out the one who did it.

I never was good on the tightrope. I wanna mash a bug!

[Dont Mention the War]

My call was in reference to AP writer Ron Fournier's "Analysis" of GWB's convention acceptance speech. This "analysis" was prominently positioned on the front page of yesterday's Breeze. Granted it was labeled "Analysis", but it was the one and only "analysis" anywhere to be seen.

Whenever you're talking to a newspaper editor, you should always make the point that a "news analysis" on the front page, or any other news page, is an editorial disguised as news, and the objective thing to do would be to label it "Editorial."

[Cboldt]

That little voice in one ear says to do the right thing, to not fall to their level. But in my other ear something tells me let's make the light so unbearable that the cockroach will confess or out the one who did it.

Ohh .. I'll take the evil side of that for 100, Alex. The sentiment I was trying to express was that FReepers might be incorrecty picking on Hays as the author of the lie (hey, we all make mistakes), but in the end, that error should not be significant. At worst, it shows inattention to detail.

I advocate putting heat on all of them, knowing that the heat is incorrectly placed on all but one.

The nit I am picking is that letters to AP and Hays would be more powerful if rooted in fact. E.g. "One of your reporters authored a lie" can't be refuted -- but "Hays authored a lie" might be.

[Tabi Katz]

She told him that no story was filed "because it doesn't advance the story about the anti-Kerry Vietnam Veterans any", whatever that means.

Translation: "We don't want it to advance the story about the anti-Kerry Vietnam Veterans, because it may turn some voters against our guy." How blatant can they be in their bias?

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[mtntop3]

If the reporter were in a genuine search for truth, this might work. But if he were, he would have never written this blatant falsehood in the first place. There is nothing ambiguous about what he did.

Contact the CEO and, respectfully, request a report on the outcome. It's not our place to say he should be fired; but it is our duty to stand up for, and defend, truth. Words have consequences. Actions have consequences. When they don't, we're in trouble.

[mtntop3]

"Whenever you're talking to a newspaper editor, you should always make the point that a "news analysis" on the front page, or any other news page, is an editorial disguised as news..."
Indeed - and often having "high-level (and anonymous) observers" as the source(s). The situation today is that this degenerate "news" (oxymoron) policy has become prevalent - the media no longer even noting it as being "analysis."
And it is all glaringly apparent to ordinary people - who are not going to pay 50 cents or a dollar daily for opinionated rot put forth for ulterior motives (except in NY and L.A. and some other places inhabited by superior beings). Blessed is FR.

[fetts]

"all Ketchup and no beef!"


or "all Ketchup and no eggs!"

[doblin]

lol

[JoJo Gunn]

I agree, which is why I still want confirmation. In the meantime I'm going to fire off a couple of letters to the AP later today.

[sevry]

can we start calling them neocoms?

Just LM. Leftwing 'mainstream' - cause they aren't mainstream. Instead, that would be FR.