Is the Media Rigging the Election for Hillary?
-Did CNN Rig Debate Questions for Hillary? Yes.
-Is the mainstream media rigging the election for Hillary? Yes.
-Is Hillary a "moral conservative." No.
-Did Hillary received extensive media coverage for accepting illegal campaign money or receiving hefty contributions from a convicted criminal? No.
-Would the media cover up for any other candidate as it does for Hillary? No.
Fred
[http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/11/bozell_says_media_in_lockstep.php]
Bozell says media 'in lock-step' with Clinton campaign
Jim Brown
OneNewsNow.com
November 16, 2007
The president of the Media Research Center says most members of the mainstream media -- especially female journalists -- want Senator Hillary Clinton (D-New York) to win the presidency.
Brent Bozell contends Hillary Clinton told a "bold-faced lie" in her best-selling book by claiming she was "gasping for breath" when she learned the truth about the Monica Lewinsky allegations on August 15, 1998. But the head of the Media Research Center notes Clinton's claim is simply untrue because all of America learned about Lewinsky's blue dress on July 29 of that year.
In his new book Whitewash: What the Media Won't Tell You About Hillary Clinton, but Conservatives Will, he and co-author Tim Graham document instances of how the media has buried stories that would negatively impact Clinton or her husband. Bozell says everything about Hillary Clinton is scripted, including all of her media appearances.
"It is stunning what we found," Bozell shares. "I mean we thought that we knew everything until we started looking at the research -- and it was stunning. Every time she gets into trouble she goes running to her friends in the media who just pitch her softball after softball that she can hit out of the park -- instead of confronting her with the scandal," he points out.
The media monitor says such interviews are "controlled" and that Mrs. Clinton has friends in the press that will help her "whether it's Katie Couric, or Maria Shriver, or Margaret Carlson in TIME Magazine -- she can go to them." Bozell notes that this week a TIME editor on CNN called Hillary Clinton a "moral conservative."
In similar fashion, Bozell contends the mainstream media has repeatedly downplayed or ignored fundraising and other political scandals involving the New York senator. He notes that after the Los Angeles Times broke a story regarding a Chinatown fundraiser in which Clinton received campaign donations from illegal immigrants, the story was dropped and nobody covered it. The media analyst says if Rudy Giuliani had accepted illegal campaign money or received hefty contributions from a convicted criminal like Norman Hsu, the story would have received extensive exposure.
[[http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/11/bozell_says_media_in_lockstep.php]]
Did CNN Rig Debate Questions for Hillary? Yes.
CNN and the Questionable Question
By Tobin Harshaw
The New York Times
Friday 16 November 2007
Most observers feel that Hillary Clinton aced the "diamonds or pearls" question at last night's Las Vegas debate, and many feel that the question was "frivolous," "trivial," and "sexist."
Now the Atlantic's Marc Ambinder tells us that "Maria Luisa, the UNLV student who asked Hillary Clinton whether she preferred ‘diamonds or pearls' at last night's debate wrote on her MySpace page this morning that CNN forced her to ask the frilly question instead of a pre-approved query about the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository." Ambinder continues:
"Every single question asked during the debate by the audience had to be approved by CNN," Luisa writes. "I was asked to submit questions including "lighthearted/fun" questions. I submitted more than five questions on issues important to me. I did a policy memo on Yucca Mountain a year ago and was the finalist for the Truman Scholarship. For sure, I thought I would get to ask the Yucca question that was APPROVED by CNN days in advance."
Sam Feist, the executive producer of the debate, said that the student was asked to choose another question because the candidates had already spent about ten minutes discussing Yucca Mountain.
"When her Yucca mountain question was asked, she was given the opportunity to ask another question, and my understand[ing] is that the [diamond v. pearls] [question] was her other question," Feist said. "She probably was disappointed, but we spent a lot of time with a bunch of different candidates on Yucca Mountain, and we were at the end of the debate."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Go to Original
CNN Spokesman Confirms Network Chose "Diamonds and Pearls" Question
By Greg Sargent
TPM Election Central
Friday 16 November 2007
Okay, we've got some more detail for you on the controversy surrounding CNN and the girl who asked Hillary whether she prefers "diamonds or pearls" at the close of last night's debate.
Specifically, a CNN spokesperson confirmed to me that the network chose that question and asked her to ask it.
But in the network's defense the spokesperson also says that the girl wasn't "forced" to ask it. She submitted the question in advance - it was her question - and voluntarily agreed to ask it. CNN selected the question and asked her towards the close of the debate if she wanted to ask it. She said yes.
As you may have heard by now, the girl said on her MySpace page that she was forced to ask this question and that she would have preferred to ask one about Yucca Mountain. She said this in response to the storm of criticism and ridicule the question has since received.
And it looks like the girl is right: Though she did submit the question, CNN did select it and ask her to pose it.
Hillary's rivals are accusing CNN of going soft on the frontrunner, and they're pointing to this question, among other things, as proof of this.
Here's how the whole thing unfolded, according to the spokesperson. Questioners were told in advance that they didn't want duplicate questions to be asked on topics that were already covered. The spokesperson argues that Yucca Mountain had already been discussed for some time as the debate wound down last night.
According to the spokesperson, as the debate drew to a close, CNN wanted to ask one last question. A CNN employee (it's unclear who) asked the girl if she wanted to ask the "diamonds and pearls" question. She said yes.
A CNN official is already on record telling Marc Ambinder that she chose the question. But as the above makes clear, CNN's spokesperson is confirming that the network in fact chose it.
So this is both better and worse for the network. On the one hand, it's better because the question was originally submitted by the girl, and it's obvious that the girl was hardly "forced" to ask this; rather, she was offered the opportunity and took it. The network wanted to close on a light question, and they chose this one.
On the other hand, the network is confirming that it did in fact choose a question that quizzed the first credible female Presidential candidate on her taste in jewelry. That's confessing to some pretty questionable taste.
[http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111707Y.shtml]
posted by Fred Martinez @ 8:04 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home