Skip to comments.The list: Journalists who wrote political checks: ‘They’re all in somebody’s pocket’...."YIKES!"
Posted on 06/21/2007 6:49:30 AM PDT by rface
The following 144 journalists made campaign contributions from 2004 through the first quarter of 2007, according to Federal Election Commission records studied by MSNBC.com.
Key: (D) contributed to Democrats or liberal causes, (R) to Republicans and conservative causes.
9 : 1 to Democratics
START HERE and scroll on down.......to read "Journalists'" comments.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
The Fifth Column.
The pattern of donations, with nearly nine out of 10 giving to Democratic candidates and causes, appears to confirm a leftward tilt in newsrooms...
Lordy, lordy, lordy, never thought Id see it confirmed in print. I dont have a problem with them donating money, its free speech and their right. Im just glad its being reported.
Hey Libs - take all that talk about the Fairness Doctorine over talk radio and shove it.
Under Radio - Is Air America considered Journalism?
In other words, they be col' busted.
(D) The New York Times, Randy Cohen, ethics columnist, $585 in three donations in August 2004 to MoveOn.org, which conducted get-out-the-vote drives to defeat President Bush. In addition to the syndicated column "The Ethicist" for the Times Magazine, Cohen answers ethics questions for listeners of NPR....
Cohen said he thought of MoveOn.org as nonpartisan and thought the donation would be allowed even under the strict rule at the Times.
Shocking that all the Bloomberg news people donated to Democrats, isnt it?
(R) Fox News Channel, Ann Stewart Banker, producer for Bill O’Reilly’s “The O’Reilly Factor,” $5,000 in June 2006 to Volunteer PAC, which gave to Republican candidates. Her father was once a campaign treasurer for former Republican Sen. Bill Frist of Tennessee.
Banker didn’t return calls.
This is surprising to me......I’ve always considered O’Reilly a liberal who disguises it well, primarily by his heavy emphasis on morals in a degree and manner that is uncharacteristic for liberals.
Compared to his political positions, I'm sure that he sees MoveOn as a middle-of-the-road organization. Of course it's in the middle, just like he is. Just ask him. No bias there, just objective journalism.
I don’t think the news outfits can legally prohibit their employees from contributing to the candidates of their choice; that’s their constitutional right. However, I do believe that they should drop their pretense of being objective news agencies. We should go back to the way newspapers used to be for the first hundred or so years of this country, where they proudly declared their political leanings in their names, such as “The Arkansas Democrat,” The Missouri Independent,” “The Republican Statesman,” etc.
No surprises here. That said, thank goodness for the Internet and talk radio so that these facts out....
Fox affiliate in Minneapolis, KMSP, Alix Kendall, morning anchor, $250 in September 2006 to Midwest Values PAC, which gave to Democratic candidates. Kendall said she opposes the war and thought that her donation was anonymous. "I also believe that the station doesn't own my political views and values. Did I make the contribution? I did. We all have political opinions in this business. A lot of us want to be politically active. But marching in a war protest isn't an option, being a recognizable person, so we give with our checkbook.
I think they should all be allowed to contribute - Fox does it right. They should just have to disclose.
That reminds me of ex-NJ Governor McGreevey - he’s teaching “ethics, law and leadership” at Kean University.
Generally, employment at private companies is "at will" for both the employer and employee. That means the employee can quit at any time and the employer can fire the employee at any time. No reason required.
Now, there are certain areas that are protected. For example, if the employee is covered by a collective bargaining agreement or if the employee alleges various kinds of discrimination based on minority status, "whistleblower" activities, or the like.
There's nothing in there about political activities. Just as Ford can demand that their employees not buy foreign cars, a liberal organization could demand their employees not be conservative (or vice-versa).
After all, though you have a constitutional right to free speech, there's no constitutional obligation on anyone to give you a job.
So, basically what you’re saying is that media ownership is overwhelmingly liberal and that the owners want their employees to reflect their liberal political views too, and attempt to effect this by their hiring and firing practices.
So much for the “objectivity” of the press. The problem is, some people understand the liberal media bias, but most people do not.
I scanned it. Any recognizable names?
I never thought I would see it confirmed in print, either. Just imagine, when I was in journalism school, I argued that there was a left tilt in journalism until I was blue in the face, and my professors wouldn't listen . . .