Sunday, June 29, 2008

In the Tank, Corrupt Media, Who is paying the media to lie and how do we expose it and stop the lies?

Original Link:

Throughout the campaign, the media lied, did not report objectively, honestly fairly. They were smearing Hillary as they are now doing wtih McCain, while Obama gets away with anything and everything. Not only are the media corrupt, but they help make Obama more corrupt when he doesn't have to answer anything. They allow him to hide behind race, but in the end, Obama will turn on the hand that fed him. He has a history of throwing everyone udner the bus, including his biggest supporters, the people who helped him get where he is. Rev Wright.

A list of ways to stop the corrupt media and the people they sometimes support.

Wednesday, March 28, 2007
AntiSemetic BBC: Corrupt Media Pays to Cover-up

This is a stunning story. We are used to seeing a media hell bent on pursuing their agenda no matter the cost to journalism standards. Code of ethics ha! Running Abu Gharib on the front page of the New York Slimes every day for 44 days is more subtle as is ignoring the Oil-for-food scandal (the largest scandal in human history) but running false stories knowingly, KNOWINGLY, as the Times did this week in the case of the soldier alleging she was raped in Iraq (and she had never been to Iraq), lat year's fauxtography scandal, the staged AP photos,- each incident moves the line in the sand. Lying deceiving the American people has become a daily occurrence.

The latest ought to be the nail in the coffin of a corrupt, dishonest, malevolent power without accountability. It ought to be,but it won't

BBC pays £200,000 to 'cover up report on anti-Israel bias'
by PAUL REVOIR hat tip Zall

The BBC has been accused of "shameful hypocrisy" over its decision to spend £200,000 blocking a freedom of information request about its reporting in the Middle East.

The corporation, which has itself made extensive use of FOI requests in its journalism, is refusing to release papers about an internal inquiry into whether its reporting has been biased towards "palestine".

BBC chiefs have been accused of wasting thousands of pounds of licence fee payers money trying to cover-up the findings of the so called Balen Report into its journalism in the region, despite the fact that the corporation is funded by the British public.

The corporation is fighting a landmark High Court action, which starts next week, in a bid to prevent the public finding out what is in the review, which is believed to be critical of the BBC's coverage in the region.

Is the Media Morally Corrupt? Do they need Moral policing?
Television is probably one of the most powerful media today.

So the decision makers sitting at pivotal positions in this industry have got to be level headed persons. They are the one's who decide what incidents are to be reported and how.

Every successful channel is running on a carrot/stick policy with political parties. A clear you scratch my back & I will scratch yours policy is being followed. In the recently concluded Tamilnadu elections both the major parties used their individual channels to wash dirty linens.

What is "News" - News is first hand reporting of facts, however nowadays we see more of Opinions from these news channels than News. Most of these Opinions are Biased depending upon their individual Favorites.

During a recent fashion show there was a wardrobe tragedy when a couple of models lost some critical portion of their dress on the ramp. "What did the media do".....There was a non-stop video telecast for 3 days of this embarassing incident. "Where did the morals of the channels go". This entire incident was used by the media for monetory benefit without delving deep into the actual morals of the issue. I remember one of the popular English news channel actually selling advertisement time before telecast of this video. "Did they share any of this money with the poor embarassed models"

Do you think if the media is left totally out of control then with the amount of Power they carry in terms of reach to this massive population it could be used as a tool for all the wrong purposes.

Do they need moral policing?

Short answer: more corrupt than you could ever guess.


So far, the biggest political story of the year has been the racist-lite Photoshop scandal by C. Virginia Fields, a story I and I alone broke. The entire media got the jpeg from me and NONE would mention that I was the one who broke it, because that would've given my candidacy even more credibility and attention. (Only the NYObserver's blog gave me credit!)

HOW is it not 1% "relevant" that the man who ruined her campaign was her Democrat opponent, CXB???


The "Polls" they are using to tell you which candidates your neighbors really like are TOTALLY FAKED and every journalist knows this but won't tell you the truth. Because they use these fake polls to SCAM you in a thousand ways. EX: they used them to exclude me from ALL articles and ALL debates about the mayor's race, by saying I wasn't "popular" like 10% Weiner and Miller! (They gave Weiner and Miller over 50 million dollars in free advertising and STILL voters don't like them.) (YET the entire media covered Thomas Ognibene and Steve Shaw who were not polling at even 1%, proving every jounalist and debate sponsor was LYING to the people of NYC.)

A Corrupt Media.
by canadian gal, Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:02:43 PM EST

Cross posted at Kickin it With CG

I originally wrote this about a month ago - but am hoping that this now gets a bit more attention.

As some will note I have written several diaries now on the failure of the fourth estate during this primary season. The reactions to these pieces were mixed from agreement, indifference and denial of any bias in the coverage. But with the recent feeding frenzy of the press in response to former White House press secretary Scott McClellan's new book - nothing could be clearer: A CORRUPT MEDIA HAS FAILED.

Amongst other things, McClellan's asserts that the media's failings are primarily responsible for the rush to war in Iraq and complicit in enabling the Bush administration.

And through it all, the media would serve as complicit enablers. Their primary focus would be on covering the campaign to sell the war, rather than aggressively questioning the rationale for war or pursuing the truth behind it... the media would neglect their watchdog role, focusing less on truth and accuracy and more on whether the campaign was succeeding. Was the president winning or losing the argument? How were Democrats responding? What were the electoral implications? What did the polls say? And the truth--about the actual nature of the threat posed by Saddam, the right way to confront it, and the possible risks of military conflict--would get largely left behind...

Corrupt polling and the media:

It's amazing how a debate that no one saw can have such an impact on regional and national polls. Perhaps this is what they mean when they say that the Obama Camp and the Edwards Camp are going to get aggressive. Debates that every one watches in which one candidate blasts another candidate out of the water usually have marginal repercussions in the polls. You're telling me there was a thirty percent shift in the polls after the last debate which no one saw. Give me a break!

Obama's secret weapon: The media
By JOHN F. HARRIS & JIM VANDEHEI 4/18/08 7:05 PM EST Text Size:

Are journalists not merely observers but participants in the Obama phenomenon?

My, oh my, but weren’t those fellows from ABC News rude to Barack Obama at this week’s presidential debate.

Nothing but petty, process-oriented questions, asked in a prosecutorial tone, about the Democratic front-runner’s personal associations and his electability. Where was the substance? Where was the balance?

Where indeed. Hillary Rodham Clinton and her aides have been complaining for months about imbalance in news coverage. For the most part, the reaction to her from the political-media commentariat has been: Stop whining.

That’s still a good response now that it is Obama partisans — some of whom are showing up in distressingly inappropriate places — who are doing the whining.

The shower of indignation on Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos over the last few days is the clearest evidence yet that the Clintonites are fundamentally correct in their complaint that she has been flying throughout this campaign into a headwind of media favoritism for Obama.

Last fall, when NBC’s Tim Russert hazed Clinton with a bunch of similar questions — a mix of fair and impertinent — he got lots of gripes from Clinton supporters.

But there was nothing like the piling on from journalists rushing to validate the Obama criticisms and denouncing ABC’s performance as journalistically unsound.

The response was itself a warning about a huge challenge for reporters in the 2008 cycle: preserving professional detachment in a race that will likely feature two nominees, Obama and John McCain, who so far have been beneficiaries of media cheerleading.

But America isn't the only country with media that are corrupt:

January 18, 2008...11:27 am

Corrupt Barbados Media Stand Charged With Unforgivable Deceit
Jump to Comments


How do we stop the corruption, their lies, what they are doing?

1 comment:

Dawn Shepherd said...

Are you sure the media has been easy on Obama?

Regardless I'm with you on the need to end corporate control over the media.