ABC News Credits Dems for Limbaugh Fundraiser; Reporter Botches Mission of MC-LEF Due to Laziness
Don Surber does an excellent job of reminding us why Americans have so little faith in the media:
Perhaps not surprisingly, crediting Democrats for something they didn't do isn't the only display of bias and incompetence in this ABC blog entry. The content of the seventh paragraph shows that ABC didn't even both to do the basic research necessary about the charity benefiting from Limbaugh's fundraiser:
Why do people absolutely detest the media? Is it the laziness? Is it the incompetence? Is it the bias? This report from the ABC News blog shows all 3 elements. The headline: ”Bidding Over $2M for Dems Anti-Rush Letter” It is not until Paragraph 7 that ABC bothers to mention that Rush put the letter on eBay. As Matt Drudge correctly pointed ABC was crediting the perpetrators instead of the victim, Rush. That letter was not written to raise money — it was written to get a man fired for broadcasting opinions that 41 Democratic Senators wanted censured. He dares to support a war that a Democratic Senate authorized in 2002. [snip] Now ABC credits these anti-constitutional senators with the $4.2 million Rush raised — half of it from his own pocket. Not one of those 41 senators — all of whom enjoy salaries that place them in the top 3% of the country — has matched that gift with 21 cents, let alone the $2.1 million Rush will give. ABC News knows what it can do with its blog entry.
All proceeds from the auction of the letter will go to the Marine Corps - Law Enforcement Foundation, which distributes aid to the families to the children of fallen Marines on behalf of law enforcement officers.
First--and this is just a pet peeve of mine-- all of Marine Corps - Law Enforcement Foundation should be in the link. That's just sloppy, amateur work. Second, the content of the ABC News claim is inaccurate. ABC claims that MC-LEF "distributes aid to the families to the children of fallen Marines on behalf of law enforcement officers." It would have taken reading all of seven sentences to get the basic mission of the foundation right:
It would have taken ABC News perhaps 10-15 seconds to read that far. Apparently ABC News felt that it wasn't worth spending those extra 10-15 seconds to get even one fact of their story correct. Update: ABC is also censoring comments on the blog (mine, among others) for content that is anything other than profane, simply rewriting or deleting comments they do not like on apparent whims. The former gatekeepers do not like to be told that they are wrong.
The recent war in Iraq has certainly illuminated America�s commitment to freedom. We are reminded that freedom is not free. The price is great. No one knows that better than the left-behind sons and daughters of America�s fallen heroes. Through the continuous support of our donors, we have distributed aid with a value of more than $29,000,000.00 to eligible children. This assistance was primarily rendered to children of Marines or Federal law enforcement personnel who were killed on duty or died under extraordinary circumstances while serving our country at home or abroad.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:01 PM
Comments
1
Magic word: ABC, Dumb as a sack of rocks.
Posted by: Scrapiron at October 19, 2007 11:19 PM (d/RyS)
2
Scrapiron said "Magic word: ABC, Dumb as a sack of rocks."
You don't know the half of it. They're butchering and deleting comments like mad on their blog. Some of those posts were mine.
Here's poster Reggie on the situation. "It is crap looking glass. I don't like what a lot of some have said tonight, and I know from the insults virtually no one (as a lot of the traffic here came from Drudge) liked what I said. But why are we spending time here saying anything if it is going to be removed or edited. What a joke."
That post has since been deleted. (I have the ability to save a webpage and I'm not afraid to use it.)
I've quoted a scathing comment from Timewaster on Don Surber's blog.
The original post from Timewaster may, or may not, still be up on the ABC blog.
You don't know the half of it. They're butchering and deleting comments like mad on their blog. Some of those posts were mine.
Here's poster Reggie on the situation. "It is crap looking glass. I don't like what a lot of some have said tonight, and I know from the insults virtually no one (as a lot of the traffic here came from Drudge) liked what I said. But why are we spending time here saying anything if it is going to be removed or edited. What a joke."
That post has since been deleted. (I have the ability to save a webpage and I'm not afraid to use it.)
I've quoted a scathing comment from Timewaster on Don Surber's blog.
The original post from Timewaster may, or may not, still be up on the ABC blog.
Posted by: Looking Glass at October 20, 2007 01:39 AM (42wFw)
3
A lot of the left extreme blogs are marching to the same spin that Rush is apologizing to the left by paying penance for his error.
The Kos kids even have a poll up about it.
The Kos kids even have a poll up about it.
Posted by: Lurker of sorts at October 20, 2007 03:48 AM (1aM/I)
Posted by: Purple Avenger at October 20, 2007 07:16 AM (6Yy5p)
5
Over the past generation, Americans have lost faith in the media. The ABC column shows one very good reason why.
Tens of millions of Americans witnessed these events first-hand, from hearing Rush's 'phony soldiers' remark - in real time, in context - through the demagoguery of his critics to the auction and its aftermath. We know more than the reporter does, and can judge for ourselves his accuracy and professional discipline.
It's fair to say that ABC deserves a D or an F.
There was a time when reporters were the gatekeepers. We knew what we knew only because they allowed us to know it. Those days are gone. News consumers often have access to the same or better sources than reporters do. We are often better and more deeply informed than they are.
The credibility of CBS and the New York Times disintegrated in sudden and public conflagrations, but this kind of column reveals something just as ruinous: the slow, inevitable rot of arrogance, incompetence, and bias.
Tens of millions of Americans witnessed these events first-hand, from hearing Rush's 'phony soldiers' remark - in real time, in context - through the demagoguery of his critics to the auction and its aftermath. We know more than the reporter does, and can judge for ourselves his accuracy and professional discipline.
It's fair to say that ABC deserves a D or an F.
There was a time when reporters were the gatekeepers. We knew what we knew only because they allowed us to know it. Those days are gone. News consumers often have access to the same or better sources than reporters do. We are often better and more deeply informed than they are.
The credibility of CBS and the New York Times disintegrated in sudden and public conflagrations, but this kind of column reveals something just as ruinous: the slow, inevitable rot of arrogance, incompetence, and bias.
Posted by: lyle at October 20, 2007 07:27 AM (0LZe8)
6
This is not surprising. First there was a near media back out of this story. Little Green Footballs did a great job of covering it...
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=27598_Reuters_Notices_the_Rush_Limbaugh_Story_-_Update-_New_York_Times_Blatantly_Lies&only
Then, as you point out, when they do cover it, it is blatantly biased.
I don't think it matters much. Rush has a huge microphone and the media is no longer monolithic so of they want to lie about and ignore the story, it will merely give the new media, like this site, an opportunity to report on it before them. People aren't stupid. They can smell a rat. There was a great piece in the American Thinker about this.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/10/the_medias_dilemma.html
Of course, the Dems, if they are foolish, will try and scream Fairness Doctrine in light of this incident. I hope they do because nothing is a better issue for the reps than the Fairness Doctrine. Here is how I see that playing out.
http://proprietornation.blogspot.com/2007/10/can-conservatives-turn-rush-fiasco-into.html
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=27598_Reuters_Notices_the_Rush_Limbaugh_Story_-_Update-_New_York_Times_Blatantly_Lies&only
Then, as you point out, when they do cover it, it is blatantly biased.
I don't think it matters much. Rush has a huge microphone and the media is no longer monolithic so of they want to lie about and ignore the story, it will merely give the new media, like this site, an opportunity to report on it before them. People aren't stupid. They can smell a rat. There was a great piece in the American Thinker about this.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/10/the_medias_dilemma.html
Of course, the Dems, if they are foolish, will try and scream Fairness Doctrine in light of this incident. I hope they do because nothing is a better issue for the reps than the Fairness Doctrine. Here is how I see that playing out.
http://proprietornation.blogspot.com/2007/10/can-conservatives-turn-rush-fiasco-into.html
Posted by: Mike Volpe at October 20, 2007 10:46 AM (xGGYx)
7
When I first heard Harry Reid's comments I thought "What a fool!". Fool he may be but he's not stupid. He probably knew full well that he'd have the MSM running interference for him and spining it to his advantage.
Posted by: Tbird at October 20, 2007 12:12 PM (2XO+i)
8
Of course, dems follow the left wing tendency of rewritting history to fit their dogma.
Posted by: Mats at October 20, 2007 12:14 PM (Txg4w)
9
Confederate Yankee--you are way too kind ABC. Cordiality is one thing, passivity is another.
ABC wasn't merely lazy. They weren't simply wrong. The truth is of no importance to them.
The blog post in question illustrates a hostility toward the truth.
Maybe you'd prefer to chalk it up to being lazy or uninformed. I prefer words like malice, malevolence, maliciousness, meanness, spitefulness, venomousness, and viciousness. I could be wrong but I'm not.
Let me ask you this; Why even write the post in the first place if the authors interest is such that the minimal of fact checking is of little desire?
The gall is inconceivable.
ABC wasn't merely lazy. They weren't simply wrong. The truth is of no importance to them.
The blog post in question illustrates a hostility toward the truth.
Maybe you'd prefer to chalk it up to being lazy or uninformed. I prefer words like malice, malevolence, maliciousness, meanness, spitefulness, venomousness, and viciousness. I could be wrong but I'm not.
Let me ask you this; Why even write the post in the first place if the authors interest is such that the minimal of fact checking is of little desire?
The gall is inconceivable.
Posted by: Andy B at October 20, 2007 12:37 PM (q1S2A)
10
You know, I try to be charitable with those I disagree with. But this is utterly foul.
Posted by: Grey Fox at October 20, 2007 04:29 PM (AP5e0)
11
Didja ever notice that the guilty dog barks first? Kinda like when the right wing was tabbed by some First Lady as a "vast conspiracy?" I think ABC had its membership papers all filled out for the opposite side of the vast conspiracy thingy-bob...and maybe they upped the ante.
Pretty neat that they're dealing with the likes of Rush who has more savvy and common sense than the whole left wing put together.
I say: let the lefties rip, and all they'll come home with is torn trousers. They are working so hard to sink themselves...let's let 'em.
Pretty neat that they're dealing with the likes of Rush who has more savvy and common sense than the whole left wing put together.
I say: let the lefties rip, and all they'll come home with is torn trousers. They are working so hard to sink themselves...let's let 'em.
Posted by: Lee W. Dodson at October 20, 2007 05:46 PM (2mrFg)
12
The only thing the dhimmi's did was violate the constitution and put forth a Communist/Nazi style rant against a private citizen. Who will take these traitor to task and demand they all resign from the Senate, or better who will file charges and put them in jail? Dirty Harry Reid and company went beyond stupidity.
Posted by: Scrapiron at October 20, 2007 06:30 PM (d/RyS)
13
I sent each and every one of Reid's office a fax asking him if he was going to match Rush's contribution. Not really expecting an answer!
Posted by: Bob at October 20, 2007 06:41 PM (pE8st)
14
Comments that I made earlier are completely removed.
This is SOP for these liberal leftist twits that gatekeep any comment that may offend their ilk.
If I recall accurately, I do believe that any time I have posted a comment to this ABC blog it has always been removed.
Just reinforces our position regarding free speech and further demonstrates their willingness to squelch any opinion that does not tilt toward their inbred ideology.
Just like dogs who return to eat their own vomit ..... they just cannot help themselves.
This is SOP for these liberal leftist twits that gatekeep any comment that may offend their ilk.
If I recall accurately, I do believe that any time I have posted a comment to this ABC blog it has always been removed.
Just reinforces our position regarding free speech and further demonstrates their willingness to squelch any opinion that does not tilt toward their inbred ideology.
Just like dogs who return to eat their own vomit ..... they just cannot help themselves.
Posted by: D.T. Miller at October 21, 2007 04:22 AM (5Wu5r)
15
I would have no problem with ABC removing comments that were profane, highly inflammatory or off-topic. Most corporate blogs meeting those standards, as do many other blogs.
It is when they start removing relevant, on-topic, non-inflammatory comments, and appear to be removing reasonable comments simply because they do not like how the logical criticism undermines their position, that I get irritated.
If you run a blog with comments section, you have an obligation to allow a reasonable level of discourse. To so heavily censor critical comments as ABC News has done in this instance is the mark of amateurs.
It is when they start removing relevant, on-topic, non-inflammatory comments, and appear to be removing reasonable comments simply because they do not like how the logical criticism undermines their position, that I get irritated.
If you run a blog with comments section, you have an obligation to allow a reasonable level of discourse. To so heavily censor critical comments as ABC News has done in this instance is the mark of amateurs.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at October 21, 2007 08:28 AM (HcgFD)
16
To so heavily censor critical comments as ABC News has done in this instance is the mark of amateurs.
Or professional propagandists...
Or professional propagandists...
Posted by: Purple Avenger at October 21, 2007 08:33 AM (6Yy5p)
17
Last night I turned on ABC myself. From listening to them you could almost believe that a man-child had drawn us into a bloody, expensive quagmire where there's no hope of reconciling factions who loathe eachother, and that only Iran stood to profit. They painted a picture of greed, sadism, and corruption run amok. They didn't even mention the plentiful schools that have been painted. The nerve of some people!
Posted by: Claude Nuggets at October 21, 2007 12:06 PM (dB5s8)
Posted by: Claude at October 21, 2007 12:33 PM (Ohkx7)
19
A compliant congress has given Bush everything he asked for. That would have been enough, nay more than enough. The war would long be over. The only thing missing was that elixir, the Special Sauce if you will: support. ABC, C.N.N., NYT and their liberal cohort refuse to support the troops. They have sapped the will our troops. There is much blood on the hands of MoveOn.
Posted by: Clarl Nugent at October 21, 2007 04:23 PM (r7W6b)
20
So, Congress can win a war? Interesting.
Posted by: Pablo at October 21, 2007 04:29 PM (yTndK)
Posted by: toby928 at October 22, 2007 09:17 AM (PD1tk)
Processing 0.01, elapsed 0.0113 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.0072 seconds, 29 records returned.
Page size 18 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.