PDA

View Full Version : Uh Oh, Major News Outlets Didn't Have a Gannon Story Yet


KCWolfman
02-21-2005, 09:24 PM
When will this happen?

As I don't read blogs like Gannon for my news, I need to know when this crushing breaking story will flood the airwaves - Remember, 60 Minutes doesn't count.

Lefty_the_Right
02-21-2005, 09:36 PM
So what does?

Fox "news"?

CNN has talked about it, CBS has talked about it, MSNBC has talked about it..

What is your criteria?

KCWolfman
02-21-2005, 09:39 PM
So what does?

Fox "news"?

CNN has talked about it, CBS has talked about it, MSNBC has talked about it..

What is your criteria?
This is a breaking story per you extremists. This is NEWS!!! Where are the headlines? Where is the primetime coverage on non-cable news? Where is the feigned, er I mean outrage that we need to be displaying?

Tonight's coverage of local news started with a rock thrown into a car and ended with a dog that found his way home - nothing at all about gay prostitutes selling sex for news.

I just want to know when this big stuff gets off the blogs and Communist News Network and moves to mainstream?

KCWolfman
02-21-2005, 09:42 PM
Boy, USA Today missed the scoop. They have Jacques Chirac on the cover instead. Unless he is a gay prostitute, they have really screwed up, haven't they?

memyselfI
02-21-2005, 09:45 PM
So what does?

Fox "news"?

CNN has talked about it, CBS has talked about it, MSNBC has talked about it..

What is your criteria?

He must mean FOX News and Spewsmax haven't mentioned it...because most other major outlets certainly have. Even the RWNJ World Net Daily has.

Lefty_the_Right
02-21-2005, 10:08 PM
Wow, USAToday, you say?

I can't beleive that the journalistic equivilent of McDonalds hasn't reported the story yet.

KCWolfman
02-21-2005, 10:10 PM
He must mean FOX News and Spewsmax haven't mentioned it...because most other major outlets certainly have. Even the RWNJ World Net Daily has.
Actually, I meant the standard non-cable television outlets. Did ABC News report? I know NBC did not tonight. Did CBS?

And again, nothing in the headlines of the major newspapers?

Personally, I don't watch Fox, I don't know what spewmax is, and I don't waste my time with the Communist News Network either.

KCWolfman
02-21-2005, 10:11 PM
Wow, USAToday, you say?

I can't beleive that the journalistic equivilent of McDonalds hasn't reported the story yet.
Yet they report North Korea, Jacques Chirac, and the Lubbers Scandal.

I wonder how they missed such a big story?

SBK
02-21-2005, 10:40 PM
Bush is looking for good cowboys I heard tonight.

Missed the upcoming impeachment hearings for gay reporters.

Lefty_the_Right
02-21-2005, 10:42 PM
Watergate didn't get much mainstream coverage at first either....

Nor Teapot Dome.

KCWolfman
02-21-2005, 10:50 PM
Watergate didn't get much mainstream coverage at first either....

Nor Teapot Dome.
Yes, this is "Watergate" material, isn't it?

And you obviously are no history major, are you?

The Watergate Hotel was broken in on June 17, 1972. 5 men were arrested and the story broke on the Washington Post the very next day. It made national news on all three networks immediately thereafter.

Here is the original story:

Watergate Hotel Scandal (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/watergate/articles/061872-1.htm) 5 Held in Plot to Bug Democrats' Office Here



By Alfred E. Lewis
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 18, 1972; Page A01

Five men, one of whom said he is a former employee of the Central Intelligence Agency, were arrested at 2:30 a.m. yesterday in what authorities described as an elaborate plot to bug the offices of the Democratic National Committee here.

Three of the men were native-born Cubans and another was said to have trained Cuban exiles for guerrilla activity after the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion.

They were surprised at gunpoint by three plain-clothes officers of the metropolitan police department in a sixth floor office at the plush Watergate, 2600 Virginia Ave., NW, where the Democratic National Committee occupies the entire floor.


You will note the page number, A01, indicating it was the top story on the front section of the Post.

Lefty_the_Right
02-21-2005, 10:54 PM
I think you are wrong.

I don't think the networks covered it until weeks later.

Unless you are only talking about the break in itself.
And that would have been a minor story.

The real story didn't come out for quite a while.

KCWolfman
02-21-2005, 10:58 PM
I think you are wrong.

I don't think the networks covered it until weeks later.

Unless you are only talking about the break in itself.
And that would have been a minor story.

The real story didn't come out of quite a while.
It was FIRST PAGE MATERIAL. The link is DIRECT from the Washington Post. And it made national news IMMEDIATELY. The stories of people claiming to be "Anti-Communists" protecting us from the evil Democrats made the national news immediately. I saw Earl Silbert's face more in that week than I saw my own mother's.

Lefty_the_Right
02-21-2005, 10:59 PM
Of course it couldn't, because no one knew the whole story, it took two reporters that wouldn't drop the story to break it.

Gannon closing his website after being "exposed" was just the start.

Lefty_the_Right
02-21-2005, 11:01 PM
You're talking about the Washinton Post in 1973, KC.

In case you hadn't noticed, the media has changed a bit the last few decades.

I was only 6 years old at the time, but my mother is sitting in the room, and she isn't remembering it the way you say you do.

KCWolfman
02-21-2005, 11:02 PM
Of course it couldn't, because no one knew the whole story, it took two reporters that wouldn't drop the story to break it.

Gannon closing his website after being "exposed" was just the start.
That was not your original point. You stated Watergate didn't get much mainstream media at first. That is blatantly false. It got a huge amount of coverage and the details filtered out for months afterward.

Comparing a gay escort posing as a reporter to Watergate is akin to comparing a moped to a Formula One Race Car.

KCWolfman
02-21-2005, 11:04 PM
You're talking about the Washinton Post in 1973, KC.

In case you hadn't noticed, the media has changed a bit the last few decades.

I was only 6 years old at the time, but my mother is sitting in the room, and she isn't remembering it the way you say you do.
Thanks for the information regarding the change in news. Now, give me the Big 3 in coverage and some national newspapers and you have made a point.

We have been told by both D-enise and TJ that this will be breaking big. Blog sites and CNN are not breaking big to me. Obviously, if you are comparing this to Watergate, you certainly can't believe it has received the same coverage.

jAZ
02-21-2005, 11:05 PM
This is NEWS!!! Where are the headlines? Where is the primetime coverage on non-cable news?
Not that it needed your help, but good work shredding the myth of the "liberal" media.

Rep for you.

KCWolfman
02-21-2005, 11:07 PM
Not that it needed your help, but good work shredding the myth of the "liberal" media.

Rep for you.
The Communist News Network more than establishes the "myth", thank you very much.

Michael Michigan
02-21-2005, 11:09 PM
This is why there is no story here.

It cannot sustain itself outside the mouth breathers on the left.

Without a big name, or preferably big name(s) that are in some sort of Gannon "little black book" this story is going no where.

The moonbats wanted this so bad--but they just don't get this.

Mention Jeff Gannon or James Guckert and the news consumer says--who?

Moonbat: You know the guy from Talon News.

Consumer: Who?

Moonbat: He was in the WH press corps and asked the president a question one time on live TV.

Consumer: Which network is he with?

Moonbat: He's not with a network; he's with an online news service called Talon News.

Consumer: And I care about this--why?

Moonbat: It's a major breach of security, plus he's gay and a gay prostitute. He's really, really, really gay. A flamer. And he's a---gasp----conservative.

Consumer: Really, and he's with what newspaper?

Moonbat: He's not with a newspaper--it's an online Web site called Talon News.

Consumer: Never heard of it.

Moonbat: But he's a partisan hack, planted by the evil Karl Rove to take over the White House Press Corps to take over and run government propaganda. Donít you get it? Bush and Rove are trying to control all of the information coming from the White House.

Consumer: On what network?

Moonbat: He's not on a network, he wrote for a Web site called talon news.

Consumer: Yawn. Wake me when you get something interesting.


Good luck moonbats. Fight the good fight.

KCWolfman
02-21-2005, 11:10 PM
This is why there is no story here.

It cannot sustain itself outside the mouth breathers on the left.

Without a big name, or preferably big name(s) that are in some sort of Gannon "little black book" this tory is going no where.

The moonbats wanted this so bad--but they just don't get this.

Mention Jeff Gannon or James Guckert and the news consumer says--who?

Moonbat: You know the guy from Talon News.

Consumer: Who?

Moonbat: He was in the WH press corps and asked the president a question one time on libe TV.

Consumer: Which network is he with?

Moonbat: He's not with a network; he's with an online news service called Talon News.

Consumer: And I care about this--why?

Moonbat: It's a major breach of security, plus he's gay and a gay prostitute. He's really, really, really gay. A flamer. And he's a---gasp----conservative.

Consumer: Really, and he's with what newspaper?

Moonbat: he's not with a newspape--it's an online Web site called Talon News.

Consumer: Never heard of it.

Moonbat: But he's a partisan hack, planted by the evil Karl Rove to take over the White House Press Corps to take over and run government propaganda. Donít you get it? Bush and Rove are trying to control all of the information coming from the White House.

Consumer: On what network?

Moonbat: He's not on a network, he wrote for a Web site called talon news.

Consumer: Yawn. Wake me when you get something interesting.


Good luck moonbats. Fight the good fight.

Rep

Lefty_the_Right
02-21-2005, 11:11 PM
Yeah jAZ.
Didn't you know?

CNN was totally AGAINST the war in Iraq.
They focused primarily on the protestors, and really asked the tough questions about the reasons for the invasion.

How could you not know that?

Lefty_the_Right
02-21-2005, 11:13 PM
I could swear that Hannity had Guckert on Fox news..

And then there is Rush commenting on what Guckert asked the POTUS.

Are we talking about the same JD Guckert?

KCWolfman
02-21-2005, 11:14 PM
Yeah jAZ.
Didn't you know?

CNN was totally AGAINST the war in Iraq.
They focused primarily on the protestors, and really asked the tough questions about the reasons for the invasion.

How could you not know that?
Peter Arnett agrees with your sarcasm and hopes no one notices.

KCWolfman
02-21-2005, 11:16 PM
I could swear that Hannity had Guckert on Fox news..

And then there is Rush commenting on what Guckert asked the POTUS.

Are we talking about the same JD Guckert?
Talk to me when you are speaking of the 6:00 news on a national level from CBS, NBC, or ABC. Talk to me when major newspapers make it a front page story. Until then, your comments are nothing short of a joke.

I don't get my news from Hannity (I have never even seen him) nor Limbaugh. Nor does most of the United States.

Lefty_the_Right
02-21-2005, 11:18 PM
Alright, I asked you what your criteria was, and now I know.

And I'm glad to see that you are finally getting my sense of humor.

Joe Seahawk
02-21-2005, 11:43 PM
This is why there is no story here.

It cannot sustain itself outside the mouth breathers on the left.

Without a big name, or preferably big name(s) that are in some sort of Gannon "little black book" this story is going no where.

The moonbats wanted this so bad--but they just don't get this.

Mention Jeff Gannon or James Guckert and the news consumer says--who?

Moonbat: You know the guy from Talon News.

Consumer: Who?

Moonbat: He was in the WH press corps and asked the president a question one time on live TV.

Consumer: Which network is he with?

Moonbat: He's not with a network; he's with an online news service called Talon News.

Consumer: And I care about this--why?

Moonbat: It's a major breach of security, plus he's gay and a gay prostitute. He's really, really, really gay. A flamer. And he's a---gasp----conservative.

Consumer: Really, and he's with what newspaper?

Moonbat: He's not with a newspaper--it's an online Web site called Talon News.

Consumer: Never heard of it.

Moonbat: But he's a partisan hack, planted by the evil Karl Rove to take over the White House Press Corps to take over and run government propaganda. Donít you get it? Bush and Rove are trying to control all of the information coming from the White House.

Consumer: On what network?

Moonbat: He's not on a network, he wrote for a Web site called talon news.

Consumer: Yawn. Wake me when you get something interesting.


Good luck moonbats. Fight the good fight.

:clap: :clap:

Exactly!

alanm
02-22-2005, 02:22 AM
This is why there is no story here.

It cannot sustain itself outside the mouth breathers on the left.

Without a big name, or preferably big name(s) that are in some sort of Gannon "little black book" this story is going no where.

The moonbats wanted this so bad--but they just don't get this.

Mention Jeff Gannon or James Guckert and the news consumer says--who?

Moonbat: You know the guy from Talon News.

Consumer: Who?

Moonbat: He was in the WH press corps and asked the president a question one time on live TV.

Consumer: Which network is he with?

Moonbat: He's not with a network; he's with an online news service called Talon News.

Consumer: And I care about this--why?

Moonbat: It's a major breach of security, plus he's gay and a gay prostitute. He's really, really, really gay. A flamer. And he's a---gasp----conservative.

Consumer: Really, and he's with what newspaper?

Moonbat: He's not with a newspaper--it's an online Web site called Talon News.

Consumer: Never heard of it.

Moonbat: But he's a partisan hack, planted by the evil Karl Rove to take over the White House Press Corps to take over and run government propaganda. Donít you get it? Bush and Rove are trying to control all of the information coming from the White House.

Consumer: On what network?

Moonbat: He's not on a network, he wrote for a Web site called talon news.

Consumer: Yawn. Wake me when you get something interesting.


Good luck moonbats. Fight the good fight.
That's basically what I took away from the whole story so far. Nothing to see here, move along.

BigMeatballDave
02-22-2005, 05:37 AM
Wow, USAToday, you say?

I can't beleive that the journalistic equivilent of McDonalds hasn't reported the story yet.What is it with you and McDs?

Ultra Peanut
02-22-2005, 05:42 AM
Boy, USA Today missed the scoop. They have Jacques Chirac on the cover instead. Unless he is a gay prostitute, they have really screwed up, haven't they?Don't worry, he is.

BigMeatballDave
02-22-2005, 05:45 AM
Thanks to Dan Rather, I think News networks may have learned a little lesson here...

memyselfI
02-22-2005, 07:14 AM
Talk to me when you are speaking of the 6:00 news on a national level from CBS, NBC, or ABC. Talk to me when major newspapers make it a front page story. Until then, your comments are nothing short of a joke.

I don't get my news from Hannity (I have never even seen him) nor Limbaugh. Nor does most of the United States.


God grief Russ, the national news watching folks (those who rely on the national news for their news) are some of the most uninformed and generally apathetic folks around when it comes to national, international, and political news. So YOUR criteria of importance is really rather elementary.

The story could still be relevant and important if it's in the major newspapers and on the cable networks and never or much later makes the network news. The Network News is not the leader of the pack anymore and doing the hard investigative work (for various reasons)... they usually are the followers.

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 07:19 AM
God grief Russ, the national news watching folks (those who rely on the national news for their news) are some of the most uninformed and generally apathetic folks around when it comes to national, international, and political news. So YOUR criteria of importance is really rather elementary.

The story could still be relevant and important if it's in the major newspapers and on the cable networks and never or much later makes the network news. The Network News is not the leader of the pack anymore and doing the hard investigative work (for various reasons)... they usually are the followers.
Let the caveats begin.

This is not what you were stating a mere 24 hours ago.

memyselfI
02-22-2005, 07:23 AM
Let the caveats begin.

This is not what you were stating a mere 24 hours ago.

No, you are misstating what I said. I said it would remain a big story and likely get bigger when Gannon's clients started to talk or when his connection in the WH is uncovered.

The MSM just got wind of the story last week...give them some time.

IIRC, you were one who insisted Abu Ghraib wasn't going to be a big story either, and I said it would given time. Let's see how this one plays out.

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 07:41 AM
No, you are misstating what I said. I said it would remain a big story and likely get bigger when Gannon's clients started to talk or when his connection in the WH is uncovered.

The MSM just got wind of the story last week...give them some time.

IIRC, you were one who insisted Abu Ghraib wasn't going to be a big story either, and I said it would given time. Let's see how this one plays out.
Well, you remember incorrectly. I never stated thus.

This is only a "big story" in the blog world, D-enise. In the lives of the average Joe, no one knows who Jeff Gannon is, which means it is not a "big story" no matter how many threads you create.

And since we are straining our memories for "big stories" IIRC, you stated that the big NFL nationwide drug ring story would bust wide open one day many years ago.

memyselfI
02-22-2005, 07:45 AM
Well, you remember incorrectly. I never stated thus.

This is only a "big story" in the blog world, D-enise. In the lives of the average Joe, no one knows who Jeff Gannon is, which means it is not a "big story" no matter how many threads you create.


And Russ, as long as you have those in the WH who are going to parade about an anti-homosexual agenda (disgused as 'moral values') then this issue will remain relevant especially if they can tie JJGG's very existance to someone in the upper echalon of the WH. Like I said, it's been a week and the MSM needs time to play catch up.

http://americablog.blogspot.com/agendafinal.jpg

FWIW, it made it to a French newspaper when DUHbya was there... :hmmm:


http://translate.google.com/translate?sourceid=navclient-menuext&hl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Elemonde%2Efr%2Fweb%2Frecherche%5Farticleweb%2F1%2C13%2D0%2C36%2D399000%2C0%2Eht ml

Ambiguous relations between Bush and the journalists
THE WORLD|21.02.05
Washington correspondence

George W Bush does not have a great passion for the newspapers and the journalists. It is praised to read only the titles and it does not waste its time in press conferences. It is one of the presidents who gave some less, even if since his re-election it multiplies the talks.

At the time of a conference on January 26, a journalist pointed out himself while asking the president how it could work with democrats who " were disconnected from reality" .

The question did not frighten Mr. Bush, but bloggeurs of left dissected the curriculum vitae of the author, Jeff Gannon, which was constrained to resign of the Internet site which employed it: TalonNews.com . This site is the emanation of a Gopusa group, whose "mission" is "to spread the preserving message in all America".

Media matters for America and others blogs showed that its articles were copy of reports/ratios of the republican Party, that Jeff Gannon was not its true name and that it had been related to sites pornographic.

The association of the correspondents of the White House had refused a permanent pass with Jeff Gannon, whose true name is James Guckert, because of the close link between its site and a tool of propaganda.

The blogs, the democrats, but also the correspondents are astonished by the facility with which it entered to the White House, which really does not resemble a mill.

In its points presses, the spokesman of the presidency, Scott McClellan, gave him readily the word, in delicate moments. Gannon then pointed out: " If you use qualifiers like nauseating, disgusting, reprehensible to describe the photographs of Abou Ghraib what will it remain to describe the rooms of rapes and tortures of Saddam Hussein ? " Scott McClellan answered, Thursday February 10, that its role was not that of a" critic media ": "A one time when the media landscape changes, it is not easy to decide or choose which is a journalist."


A PRECEDING SCANDAL

A democrat of the Room of the representatives, Louise Slaughter, wrote to the president to be astonished that the presence of Mr. Gannon "is used like a tool of propaganda of your government" .

It binds this business to a preceding scandal on the relationship between the White House and the journalists, when the USA Today revealed in January that a leader-writer, Armstrong Williams, had touched 240 000 dollars of the ministry for education to sing, in its chronicles and on the waves, the praises of the program "No child left behind" ( "No child left behind" ).

Two other chroniclers respectively touched 21 000 and 10 000 dollars of the ministry for health. Mr. Bush condemned this kind of payments. But the tension and incomprehension between the journalists and the Bush government remain sharp. A journalist of Washington Post had been in charge of the delicate mission of reporting the series of balls organized for the nomination of the president, January 20. In the heart of the action, it telephones the newspaper to dictate its first impressions, when a woman throws herself on him to tear off her portable to him.

The unhappy one had made a fault: it had left reserved space to the journalists. Beyond this limit, those were to be escorted, "dresser in the room of dance and even with the toilets" . It tells that a person with whom it spoke is solidified when she saw that it "was accompanied" . It is not known if Jeff Gannon, which made publicity for a site D ' escort servant boys , were with the "accompanied" ball.

Alain Salles

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 07:52 AM
And Russ, as long as you have those in the WH who are going to parade about an anti-homosexual agenda (disgused as 'moral values') then this issue will remain relevant especially if they can tie JJGG's very existance to someone in the upper echalon of the WH. Like I said, it's been a week and the MSM needs time to play catch up.


FWIW, it made it to a French newspaper when DUHbya was there... :hmmm:



D-enise, how often have you read that french newspaper before today? Your answer is the same as how important this is to the average people in the US and how big the story truly is.

As far as the "anti-homosexual agenda", your statement is a farce without a shred of proof.

Finally, how long do you predict it will take? How long before this is a cover story on The Wall Street Journal or the head story on ABC World News Tonight? I would love a prediction from you.

Cochise
02-22-2005, 08:03 AM
I've been sick the past few days so I've been watching a lot of tv, and all I have heard about is Bush mending fences with Chirac (Not that I care for that much, I'd have kicked him in his shrivelled french nuts)

Chief Henry
02-22-2005, 08:05 AM
MSNBC is now consider'd a MAJOR news outlet?
WTF, how many people actually watch that station? 129 households maybe. I would not clasify it as a MAJOR news outlet imo. The numbers don't justify it.

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 08:07 AM
I've been sick the past few days so I've been watching a lot of tv, and all I have heard about is Bush mending fences with Chirac (Not that I care for that much, I'd have kicked him in his shrivelled french nuts)
Obviously you haven't been reading the important news sites like bloggers 'r' us and blogs against Bush and bloggedity blog blog

What is sad is that you would think this is all D-enise has read about while she has not made a single post regarding the true news and the UN upheaval. Evidently a blog site asking easy questions of a POTUS is more important than a second sex scandal from the UN in only a few months on top of the UN Secretary's son embroiled in theft charges of his own.

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 08:11 AM
MSNBC is now consider'd a MAJOR news outlet?
WTF, how many people actually watch that station? 129 households maybe. I would not clasify it as a MAJOR news outlet imo. The numbers don't justify it.
The closest analogy I can come up with is that D-enise and Lefty are trying to tell me that Lars Gullin and his Jazz Band are mainstream rock and listened to daily by all kinds of casual fans.

A french newspaper? That was just horrid justification.

Cochise
02-22-2005, 08:14 AM
Obviously you haven't been reading the important news sites like bloggers 'r' us and blogs against Bush and bloggedity blog blog

What is sad is that you would think this is all D-enise has read about while she has not made a single post regarding the true news and the UN upheaval. Evidently a blog site asking easy questions of a POTUS is more important than a second sex scandal from the UN in only a few months on top of the UN Secretary's son embroiled in theft charges of his own.

I did see a story about some writer for The Nation being a paid UN consultant at the time he was supporting some initiative of theirs in his column, but I didn't really pay much attention to it. Your run-of-the-mill level of hypocrisy from the looney left I guessed.

But, I'm sure the world's coolest web blog (sic) would be quick to point out some semantic difference as to why it's only Evil BushCo doing this.

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 08:17 AM
I did see a story about some writer for The Nation being a paid UN consultant at the time he was supporting some initiative of theirs in his column, but I didn't really pay much attention to it. Your run-of-the-mill level of hypocrisy from the looney left I guessed.

But, I'm sure the world's coolest web blog (sic) would be quick to point out some semantic difference as to why it's only Evil BushCo doing this.
Oh, don't get me wrong. If the admin paid the guy, they are stupid and deserve to be berated, just not for the reasons mentioned here.

Why pay a blogger to ask easy questions? Why not get someone higher profile? If you are going to break ethics and be stupid, do it big.

I just don't think it is mainstream news. I could be wrong, but thus far it sure doesn't look like it.

Cochise
02-22-2005, 08:17 AM
The closest analogy I can come up with is that D-enise and Lefty are trying to tell me that Lars Gullin and his Jazz Band are mainstream rock and listened to daily by all kinds of casual fans.

A french newspaper? That was just horrid justification.

If foreign papers are unreproachable sources now, then I guess we'll see the straightjacket left finally come up with proof for their 'Bush let 9/11 happen on purpose' theory any minute, or, as soon as one of them can babelfish the Tehran Times

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 08:20 AM
If foreign papers are unreproachable sources now, then I guess we'll see the straightjacket left finally come up with proof for their 'Bush let 9/11 happen on purpose' theory any minute, or, as soon as one of them can babelfish the Tehran Times
Hell, Lefty tried to use the UK Guardian as the "Prescott Bush has Nazi Ties" story last night.

Cochise
02-22-2005, 08:22 AM
Oh, don't get me wrong. If the admin paid the guy, they are stupid and deserve to be berated, just not for the reasons mentioned here.

Why pay a blogger to ask easy questions? Why not get someone higher profile? If you are going to break ethics and be stupid, do it big.

I just don't think it is mainstream news. I could be wrong, but thus far it sure doesn't look like it.

I'm confused about it too. The whole period of my life leading up to this administration where I'd been old enough to watch the news, I was always being told that when something unethical appeared to be happening in the White House it was all a big misunderstanding, some kind of simple oversight, or a big conspiracy by the political badguys. But I guess the political landscape has changed remarkably in the past 5 years or so.

Cochise
02-22-2005, 08:23 AM
Hell, Lefty tried to use the UK Guardian as the "Prescott Bush has Nazi Ties" story last night.

The UK Guardian? And they always accuse us of getting stories from NewsMax... ROFL

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 08:25 AM
The UK Guardian? And they always accuse us of getting stories from NewsMax... ROFL
NEWSMAX!!! That must be what D-enise meant when she said spewmax and stated I must be considering them as mainstream media.

Well, at least I am not trying to pass of a French paper as justification.

memyselfI
02-22-2005, 08:29 AM
D-enise, how often have you read that french newspaper before today? Your answer is the same as how important this is to the average people in the US and how big the story truly is.

As far as the "anti-homosexual agenda", your statement is a farce without a shred of proof.

Finally, how long do you predict it will take? How long before this is a cover story on The Wall Street Journal or the head story on ABC World News Tonight? I would love a prediction from you.

I don't know that it will ever be a lead story on ABC World News Tonight or the WSJ but I do believe the story will continue to unfold and as events warrant the 'major' media outlets will either report or ignore it.

I've read that French newspaper (and others) on a number of occasions and have recently because DUHbya was there. I wanted to see if they were covering the story the same way our media said they were covering the story.

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 08:38 AM
I don't know that it will ever be a lead story on ABC World News Tonight or the WSJ but I do believe the story will continue to unfold and as events warrant the 'major' media outlets will either report or ignore it.



That is about as vague as it gets, isn't it?

Nor does it mirror your sentinment only a few scant hours ago when you stated this was big news. Or perhaps your version of Big News is something vastly different from the American public?

Cochise
02-22-2005, 08:39 AM
NEWSMAX!!! That must be what D-enise meant when she said spewmax and stated I must be considering them as mainstream media.

Well, at least I am not trying to pass of a French paper as justification.

Speaking of 'unconventional' news sources that I've read a time or two in the past so that makes them valid - I have it on good authority that the NYT and company should be reporting this week that a statue of Elvis was found on Mars, and that satan has joined forces with aliens to conquer earth! It's going to be huge! breaking news!! stop the presses!!!

Cochise
02-22-2005, 08:40 AM
That is about as vague as it gets, isn't it?

Nor does it mirror your sentinment only a few scant hours ago when you stated this was big news. Or perhaps your version of Big News is something vastly different from the American public?

I guess we'll see if this story 'has legs'.

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 08:40 AM
Speaking of 'unconventional' news sources that I've read a time or two in the past so that makes them valid - I have it on good authority that the NYT and company should be reporting this week that a statue of Elvis was found on Mars, and that satan has joined forces with aliens to conquer earth! It's going to be huge! breaking news!! stop the presses!!!
If it is on BLOG WORLD it must be BIG

Lefty_the_Right
02-22-2005, 12:44 PM
KC wrote: Oh, don't get me wrong. If the admin paid the guy, they are stupid and deserve to be berated, just not for the reasons mentioned here.

Why pay a blogger to ask easy questions? Why not get someone higher profile? If you are going to break ethics and be stupid, do it big.

Did you miss the other stories about paid "journalists'"?

This is just part and parcel of the propaganda that the Bush administration has been pushing for years.

Like when they convinced useful idiots that Iraq posed a credible threat to the US?

Lefty_the_Right
02-22-2005, 12:48 PM
I think you guys are downplaying the story because you feel used by the adminitration.

Everytime they push your buttons, you've leapt out of your seat to defend Bush and his minions.

memyselfI
02-22-2005, 12:55 PM
Did you miss the other stories about paid "journalists'"?

This is just part and parcel of the propaganda that the Bush administration has been pushing for years.

Like when they convinced useful idiots that Iraq posed a credible threat to the US?


I guess they also missed this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/19/politics/19gao.html?8br&oref=login

Administration Is Warned About Its 'News' Videos
By ANNE E. KORNBLUT

Published: February 19, 2005


WASHINGTON, Feb. 18 - The comptroller general has issued a blanket warning that reminds federal agencies they may not produce newscasts promoting administration policies without clearly stating that the government itself is the source.

Twice in the last two years, agencies of the federal government have been caught distributing prepackaged television programs that used paid spokesmen acting as newscasters and, in violation of federal law, failed to disclose the administration's role in developing and financing them.

And those were not isolated incidents, David M. Walker, the comptroller general, said in a letter dated Thursday that put all agency heads on notice about the practice.

In fact, it has become increasingly common for federal agencies to adopt the public relations tactic of producing "video news releases" that look indistinguishable from authentic newscasts and, as ready-made and cost-free reports, are sometimes picked up by local news programs. It is illegal for the government to produce or distribute such publicity material domestically without disclosing its own role.

Mr. Walker, who as comptroller general is chief of the Government Accountability Office, Congress's investigative arm, said in his letter: "While agencies generally have the right to disseminate information about their policies and activities, agencies may not use appropriated funds to produce or distribute prepackaged news stories intended to be viewed by television audiences that conceal or do not clearly identify for the television viewing audience that the agency was the source of those materials."

"It is not enough," he added, "that the contents of an agency's communication may be unobjectionable."

Mr. Walker's letter was made available late Friday afternoon by Democrats on Capitol Hill. Asked for a response Friday night, the White House had no immediate comment.

The two best-known cases of such video news releases - one concerning the new Medicare law, the other an antidrug campaign by the Bush administration - drew sharp rebukes from the G.A.O. after separate investigations last year found that the agencies involved had violated the law.

Those cases were followed by disclosures that the government had paid at least one conservative commentator, Armstrong Williams, to promote the administration's No Child Left Behind education measure and had put two other conservative writers on the federal payroll to help develop programs. These episodes have prompted calls from Democrats for stricter oversight of the administration's publicity practices, which have cost millions of dollars of federal revenue.

In the Medicare case, a video made in the style of a newscast featured a spokeswoman named Karen Ryan who claimed to be reporting from Washington on Medicare law changes strongly backed by the administration but opposed by many Democrats, who consider them a windfall for the pharmaceutical and insurance industries. In part of one script, she said that "all people with Medicare will be able to get coverage that will lower their prescription drug spending."

Often there is an intermediary in the process: a public relations firm hired by a government agency to produce a polished video and direct other aspects of a publicity drive.

One centrally involved firm is Ketchum, a giant in the public relations industry whose representatives arranged for both the Medicare video and the contract with Mr. Williams, a pact that is now under investigation by three government agencies. Ketchum has received $97 million in government public relations contracts since 2001.

The G.A.O. letter did not caution agencies to curtail their publicity practices, telling them simply to adhere to disclosure requirements.

"Prepackaged news stories," Mr. Walker wrote, "can be utilized without violating the law, so long as there is clear disclosure to the television viewing audience that this material was prepared by or in cooperation with the government department or agency."

But Democrats said they hoped the letter would lead to tougher scrutiny of what they describe as an aggressive publicity machine within the administration.

"The G.A.O. is sending a clear message to the Bush administration: shut down the propaganda mill," Senator Frank R. Lautenberg of New Jersey said in a statement on Friday. "The G.A.O. is simply telling the White House to stop manipulating media, stop paying journalists and be straight with the American people."

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 09:05 PM
Wow, Lefty banned?

I called that one first!

I win.

alanm
02-23-2005, 01:13 AM
I don't know that it will ever be a lead story on ABC World News Tonight or the WSJ but I do believe the story will continue to unfold and as events warrant the 'major' media outlets will either report or ignore it.

I've read that French newspaper (and others) on a number of occasions and have recently because DUHbya was there. I wanted to see if they were covering the story the same way our media said they were covering the story.
Denise, It's doubtful that I'm the first one to come to this conclusion. But... You need to get out from in front of the computer and get a life. :)

Ultra Peanut
02-23-2005, 01:14 AM
.

alanm
02-23-2005, 01:17 AM
Speaking of 'unconventional' news sources that I've read a time or two in the past so that makes them valid - I have it on good authority that the NYT and company should be reporting this week that a statue of Elvis was found on Mars, and that satan has joined forces with aliens to conquer earth! It's going to be huge! breaking news!! stop the presses!!!
I won't believe it untill there's a line in Vegas. When they come out with the point spread and over/under I'll believe it then. :thumb:

memyselfI
02-24-2005, 07:47 AM
FYI, JJGG was on the Today Show this morning...

KCWolfman
02-24-2005, 05:02 PM
FYI, JJGG was on the Today Show this morning...
LOL - Yup, real time news. Was it after after the oriental salad recipe or the guy with strange animals?

memyselfI
02-24-2005, 05:34 PM
LOL - Yup, real time news. Was it after after the oriental salad recipe or the guy with strange animals?

Ah, somehow I knew you'd find the Today Show less than MS...so did you catch it on FOX News website this evening?

Cochise
02-24-2005, 05:59 PM
So does this 'have legs' yet?

memyselfI
02-24-2005, 06:01 PM
So does this 'have legs' yet?


For some, it won't have legs even if DNA or photos are uncovered.

KCWolfman
02-24-2005, 06:14 PM
Ah, somehow I knew you'd find the Today Show less than MS...so did you catch it on FOX News website this evening?
Nope, don't watch Fox News. I know you neeeeeeed this to be big time, but it really isn't until it hits the six or is in the paper.

memyselfI
02-24-2005, 06:19 PM
Nope, don't watch Fox News. I know you neeeeeeed this to be big time, but it really isn't until it hits the six or is in the paper.

Ok, keep moving the goalposts and keep telling yourself that...

Michael Michigan
02-24-2005, 06:26 PM
For some, it won't have legs even if DNA or photos are uncovered.

DNA and photos of what?

KCWolfman
02-24-2005, 06:36 PM
Ok, keep moving the goalposts and keep telling yourself that...
I have changed my original statement?

Cool, can you quote me to prove your point, or are you just addled once again?

memyselfI
02-24-2005, 06:44 PM
DNA and photos of what?

Maybe a blue dress? With this group, who knows. ROFL

http://photos1.blogger.com/img/95/2541/480/caine.1.jpg

KCWolfman
02-24-2005, 06:47 PM
Maybe a blue dress? With this group, who knows. ROFL

http://photos1.blogger.com/img/95/2541/480/caine.1.jpg
This is not about being gay

memyselfI
02-24-2005, 06:48 PM
Exactly, I think the cartoon was about a bald head fetish...

Michael Michigan
02-24-2005, 06:50 PM
Maybe a blue dress? With this group, who knows.



You'll need that, and it will need to belong to someone with a big name.