Posted on 12/18/2004 9:11:20 AM PST by CHARLITE
Proud to be part of the 'problem' for the old media!
The pint-sized, bearded 'intellectual' was non other than David Brock, head-honcho for Media Matters, a left-wing organization in cahoot's with Franken and the rest of the PC nazi's.
Lehrer was really bonding with him too... you could see it in his eyes... he despises the conservative right the Internet and talk-radio!
CBS is providing an old and unregulated medium for politically motivated attacks.
Even to it'll get a knee-jerk "He's just a liberal" rteaction. Letterman Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Dave came across a head-scratcher earlier today. The film The Aviator has been nominated for six Golden Globe Awards even though it hasn’t even been released yet. Paul doesn’t understand it either. And there’s more who don’t get it. We watch the trailer for the film, The Aviator. “On December 17th, see Martin Scorcese’s ‘The Aviator’, nominated for six Golden Globe Awards.
Peter Travers calls ‘The Aviator’ ‘the finest movie I have not yet seen.’
Rex Reed says, ‘It looks like it may be a pretty good movie, but I really don’t know yet. I haven’t seen it.’
And Roger Ebert says, ‘I don’t know if the movie is any good, but Alex Baldwin is in it and he was good in the submarine movie, so that’s cool.’
‘The Aviator’: Coming soon to a theater near you.”
No. Their problem is that they know, but don't *care* what you think. They view their job as being to educate the unwashed masses (read: brainwashing) to the "correct" way of progressive international thinking.
For instance, the Sioux Falls Argus Leader, South Dakota's only statewide newspaper, *knew* that Senator Daschle gave a pro-choice speech at an Emily's List soire. The Sioux Falls Argus Leader's editors simply spiked that story because it inconveniently exposed Senator Daschle's "pro-life" lies.
Daschle was telling Dakota citizens one thing, but telling his fellow progressives something different altogether, and that specious, evil duplicity was consciously aided and abetted by the Sioux Falls Argus Leader.
It is only through sycophantic liberal news media complicity that Democrats can say one thing to their constituents, yet vote entirely differently in Washington. Daschle claimed to be "pro-life" to his Dakota voters (because they are overwhelmingly pro-life), yet he voted *against* President Bush's ban on Partial Birth Abortion.
...And the news media *knew* that fact. Contrary to your claim above, the news media also knew that Dakota voters think of themselves as pro-life.
So the liberal news media simply omitted Daschle's voting history from the public record that they published.
So it isn't as you claim above that the news media doesn't *know* what the Heartland thinks. No, it's much more insidious than that. The news media knows what we think, they simply don't care. Moreover, they are on a conscious mission to *change* how we think whether we like it or not, and they are quite willing to lie (Dan Rather) or spike stories (content of Democratic Senate Intelligence Committee memos) or omit facts like voting records and speeches that portray their fellow progressives in a bad (read: accurate) light (e.g. Sioux Falls Argus Leader not mentioning Daschle's pro-abortion record that contradicted his pro-life campaign claims).
The liberal news media is the *opposite* of being insulated and isolated as you imply above. They have their reporters in every town in the U.S. They know full well what is going on and how we think. So their behavior is not explained by simply claiming that they don't "know."
It's much more evil than that.
Good heavens! I don't know why they persist in acting like their loss of power is something new. Ah yes, they must. My mistake, excuse me. Everything, everything that goes wrong is OUR fault, 'cause they never do anything wrong.
Years ago, Ken Auletta wrote a popular book entitled, Three Blind Mice: How the TV Networks Lost Their Way. Believe it was published in the late 80s. Haven't a clue what Auletta's politics are but I do know he predicted the coming (continuing) demise of broadcast news organizations. And, it didn't have a blasted thing to do with blogs, bloggers or bulletin boards on the Internet.
The carpet, too, is moving under you.
Thief is to Fence, as Forger is to Rather.
That's why the LA Times, Washington Post, and former President Clinton White House staff sued FR back in 1998. Heck, they probably audited Jim Robinson's taxes, too (he's just not the overly-chatty type to broadcast such attacks on his own self).
Going after FR back in 1998 when it had fewer than 20,000 members, versus today when it is approaching 200,000, should tell you that they saw from Day One that Alternative news sources posed a serious threat to their political power.
This is the thing that bothers me the most. "The same First Amendment protections as newspapers"?!
The first amendment applies to ALL people Mr. Kuhn, not just newspapers. Newspapers are not an offcial arm of the government. I can start a newspaper, does that give me some special privelege?
The problem the MSM doesn't recognize is that they are NOT special. They have no more legitimacy than bloggers or sites like FR. They just don't understand it. They don't own the first amendment.
Indeed!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1224680/posts?page=155#155
To: MeekOneGOP; Slip18; Argh; xsmommy; Gabz; VRWCmemberBALLAD OF DAN RATHER(Think "Beverly Hillbillies" theme song)
Come and listen to my story 'bout a man named Dan,
The documents were fake and he didn't give a dam*;
He put 'em on the air, an' he thought he'd done the job,
But up from the web come a howlin' mob.Blogs, that is.
Web logs.
Checkin' facts.Well, the first thing you know ol' Dan's a-runnin' fast;
Made a false report an' it bit him in the a$$;
He said 'dog-gonnit, I done thought I'd get away!'
But it turned out to be his a-reckonin' day.Busted, that is.
Red-faced.
Mud in the eye.Well, now it's time to say goodbye to Dan and all his men;
And they would like to shoot you folks for turnin' them in;
You're all invited back next week to watch the Evening News,
And see which correspondent's picked to fill Dan's empty shoes.Y'all come back, now, hear?
155 posted on 09/23/2004 4:15:51 PM CDT by TheGrimReaper
What is CBS?
AS I see it, it all stems from the "rather" quaint notion that the media should be an "agent for change."
Whose change? Their's or mine?
What ever happened to *reporting* the news and letting us decide?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
