Posted on 10/14/2004 6:59:47 AM PDT by Terrence DoGood
IS THE ESTABLISHMENT MEDIA BIASED against conservatives? Dan Rather remains in the anchor chair at the CBS Evening News despite his involvement in recent news stories based on dishonest reporting, fabricated documents and even Internet gossip falsely alleging that President George W. Bush secretly intends to begin the military conscription of students. These stories were obviously designed to damage Mr. Bush in the final weeks before a national election.
And now ABC News has left in place its Political Director Mark Halperin. ABC has done this despite the networks acknowledgement that Halperin wrote a memo that to many seems to direct ABC reporters, anchors and producers to slant its coverage by downplaying the misstatements of Democratic presidential candidate Senator John Kerry and by viewing negatively any misstatements by Republican candidate Bush.
Halperins directive reached ABC people on October 8, the very day that ABC Good Morning America co-host Charlie Gibson would be selecting questions for and moderating the second presidential debate between Bush and Kerry. Did Halperin intend to influence Gibsons decisions in this debate?
Who is Mark Halperin, and does his memo reflect leftwing bias in his shaping of the news at ABC? To find answers to these questions, we need to consider the details of this memo-gate controversy in the light of Halperins past and of the famous radical left-wing father who shaped his political values. As we shall discover, Halperin has veered Left and crossed the line of ethical journalism many times.
Mark Halperin has been the Political Director of ABC News since 1997 and has covered politics and campaigns through four election cycles, reads one of his 2004 biographies posted by the American Broadcasting Company (ABC). As Political Director, Halperin is responsible for the planning and editorial content of all political news...
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemagazine.com ...
Halperin Memo Dated Friday October 8, 2004
It goes without saying that the stakes are getting very high
for the country and the campaigns - and our responsibilities become quite grave
I do not want to set off (sp?) and endless colloquy that none of us have time for today
- nor do I want to stifle one.
Please respond if you feel you can advance the discussion.
The New York Times (Nagourney/Stevenson) and Howard Fineman
on the web both make the same point today: the current Bush attacks
on Kerry involve distortions and taking things out of context in a way
that goes beyond what Kerry has done.
Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his (ed. ABC-supported) efforts to win.
We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest,
but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides
"equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that.
I'm sure many of you have this week felt the stepped up Bush efforts
to complain about our coverage.
This is all part of their efforts to get away with as
much as possible with the stepped up, renewed efforts
to win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions.
It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course.
But as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the
candidates are saying to serve the public interest.
Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right.
It just disgusts me to no end....the control by the left at the networks and in Hollywood...... If they painted an honest picture and investigated both sides of stories this Presidential race wouldn't be one.....
bump for later read
see the new Anti-DNC portal
http://www.noDNC.com/
BTTT
Thanks for posting this. The name Halperin rang a loud bell but searches didn't yield much.
Yes, it is.
Glad you posted it.
True. The media are our #1 practical enemy in this country. If the news was covered simply in an evenhanded, unbiased fashion, this country would move to the right to the tune of about 65%-70%. The only remaining liberals would be the diehard core plus the odd splinter groups.
MM
Interesting article. Sure explains Halperin's inability to be objective. It is people like him who pose a danger to freedom of speech. There must be quite a few skeleton's in his private and public life that have not yet been exposed. Who is responsible for hiring him?
Correct. There would be few Democrats if the news and political/social issues and stories were written objectively. The press is as powerful and unaccountable as ever. We've had a few small victories, mainly thwarting the impact of their lies, but when push comes to shove, communists like Rather and Halperin remain in power, thumbing their noses at us and all that is truthful, while being protected by a broad network of liars, charlatans, and wicked frauds just like themselves.
Kerry is a communist hack, but the press had helped him package himself in a way that I never would have believed possible. I thought we were finally beating them back at last, but the old media is still very much alive and shilling for their Soviet style pals. This is very frustrating. But in the old days we didn't even have others to commiserate with and the media's last,leftist word on everything and every issue was all that was ever seen, heard, or discussed. Progress is slow, but it is there.
Like father like son. Harvard men !
WHEN ARE WE GOING TO PUNISH ABC?? they are LAUGHING AT US and doing exactly what they said they would do....DOG our PRESIDENT and give Kerry a pass!!
WE NEED TO MAKE THEM SUFFER!!.....where is our OUTRAGE???
Leo Garza's 'Nacho Guarache'
http://www2.mysanantonio.com/opinion/cartoonarchive/leo.cfm
Bravo on your post. I am so thankful to see I am not the only one who is calling these people exactly what they are, Communists.
BTTT
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.