HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » George Stephanopoulos dis...

Thu May 14, 2015, 04:41 PM

 

George Stephanopoulos discloses $75,000 contribution to Clinton Foundation

Source: Politico

ABC News chief anchor George Stephanopoulos has given $75,000 to the Clinton Foundation in recent years, charitable contributions that he did not publicly disclose while reporting on the Clintons or their nonprofit organization, the On Media blog has learned.

In 2012, 2013 and 2014, Stephanopoulos made $25,000 donations to the 501 nonprofit founded by former President Bill Clinton, the foundation's records show. Stephanopoulos never disclosed this information to viewers, even when interviewing author Peter Schweizer last month about his book "Clinton Cash," which alleges that donations to the foundation may have influenced some of Hillary Clinton's actions as secretary of state.

In a statement to the On Media blog on Thursday, Stephanopoulos apologized and said that he should have disclosed the donations to ABC News and its viewers.

"I made charitable donations to the Foundation in support of the work they’re doing on global AIDS prevention and deforestation, causes I care about deeply," he said. "I thought that my contributions were a matter of public record. However, in hindsight, I should have taken the extra step of personally disclosing my donations to my employer and to the viewers on air during the recent news stories about the Foundation. I apologize."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/05/george-stephanopoulos-discloses-contribution-to-clinton-207120.html

18 replies, 2659 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to 7962 (Original post)

Thu May 14, 2015, 04:45 PM

1. main thought--that news stuff pays damn good

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 7962 (Original post)

Thu May 14, 2015, 05:09 PM

2. Ehh.

Not even a surprise or even news.

Hell, he WAS in the Clinton Administration!

Next.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 7962 (Original post)

Thu May 14, 2015, 05:09 PM

3. BS story

 

There was no obligation to disclose it anymore than donations to the Red Cross or United Way.

The Clinton Global Initiative is a CHARITY and doesn't personally benefit the Clintons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cosmicone (Reply #3)

Thu May 14, 2015, 05:42 PM

7. If he was doing a story on United Way he would disclose. Its common.

 

Reporters always inform of their connections with people or companies that they do stories on. Even the networks mention companies they USED to be affiliated with. As the old real estate saying goes, when in doubt, disclose. He says he made a mistake.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 7962 (Reply #7)

Thu May 14, 2015, 06:02 PM

8. Only if there is potential for gain from the association

 

Donating to a charity gives the donor no gain except for a limited tax break.

In order to have a conflict of interest, there needs to be "interest." Now, if he was receiving any remuneration from the Clinton foundation as a consultant or for speaking engagement, he should absolutely disclose it.

To give an analogy, if I'm doing a story on cruel treatment of stray dogs, do I have to disclose that I donate to ASPCA?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cosmicone (Reply #8)

Thu May 14, 2015, 11:22 PM

18. Its not just conflict of interest, its also appearance of impropriety.

 

And yes, you WOULD be asked by your employer to disclose that you donated to ASPCA if you did a story on animals. I've seen reporters mention associations numerous times and there was nothing to be gained involved. For example, you do a story on casino gambling and you would disclose that you used to work as a dealer. You're not gaining anything from doing the story, but your boss doesnt want someone coming up saying the story was slanted because you used to be in the business. Certainly everyone knows Steph worked for the Clintons, but when he questioned the author of the book on the foundation he definitely should've told viewers he had donated.
I dont know of anyone in the business who has said he didnt have to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 7962 (Original post)

Thu May 14, 2015, 05:27 PM

4. am surprised Staphococcus gave the Clinton Foundation money

he has been as nasty to them as can be

watched him badmouth Clinton for years

am so glad I have not watched network snews for years

will prolly never go back

they suck

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UpInArms (Reply #4)

Thu May 14, 2015, 05:38 PM

6. "Staphococcus"? I cant believe I've never heard that one before right now.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 7962 (Reply #6)

Thu May 14, 2015, 08:12 PM

12. LOL

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 7962 (Reply #6)

Thu May 14, 2015, 09:06 PM

14. He was Carville's co-pilot in the Clinton campaign war-room wasn't he? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 7962 (Original post)

Thu May 14, 2015, 05:34 PM

5. The corporate media is already "playing the refs" by screaming "liberal bias!!11!1!"

As has already been mentioned, he spent eight years fellating W.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 7962 (Original post)

Thu May 14, 2015, 06:08 PM

9. He did not make a mistake, he hid it because he knew it would be a problem.

I sure he gave for the right reasons, but I also sure he new the optics and did not disclose it for the wrong reasons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 7962 (Original post)

Thu May 14, 2015, 06:56 PM

10. Clearly, he was buying access to the Clintons. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cigsandcoffee (Reply #10)

Thu May 14, 2015, 09:15 PM

15. Him and James Carville got Bill Clinton elected. They probably already have him on speed-dial. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Snotcicles (Reply #15)

Thu May 14, 2015, 09:37 PM

16. BINGO!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 7962 (Original post)

Thu May 14, 2015, 06:58 PM

11. And there it is.



The corporate politicians fellate Wall Street, and the corporate media service the corporate politicians.

But it's the 99 percent who get screwed.












Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #11)

Thu May 14, 2015, 08:13 PM

13. Smoking gun at the least.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #11)

Thu May 14, 2015, 10:04 PM

17. perfectly said n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread