CNN has been paid by the Bush campaign for favorable coverage ?

[kentuck]

The facts have not been made public as yet, but this could be a scandal of the greatest magnitude. As if it is not bad enough, the bias of many networks already favor Bush, now it appears that one specific network, CNN, has accepted money for favorable coverage. How big of a scandal is this if it's proven to be true? Why would anyone make such a claim, one might ask?

Let's start with the special commentary show about Bush that CNN has agreed to show one day before the Convention in NYC. My money says that most of the "film" was created by the Bush campaign. And CNN has agreed to it as is for 30 pieces of silver from the Bush campaign. It will be on on the 29th. Watch for it.

And, from polls to everyday coverage, we have seen a marked increase in "good news" from the Bush campaign on the CNN network. I have not yet seen the numbers for the amounts spent, or if they are available, but when they are made public, I believe you will see that CNN received more ad dollars from the Bush campaign than did FOX TV.

It is my opinion, since I do not have the facts before me, that CNN is in cahoots with the Bush campaign and have agreed to assist them for an increase in campaign dollars. This could be a scandal of the Fourth Estate. I think it is true.

[vi5]

1. Is this anything other than speculation or theory?

Honestly.

[kentuck]

12. Since when are you holding me to a higher standard than CNN ??

:shrug:

[LoZoccolo]

15. You are being paid by Bush* to make us all look ridiculous.

:eyes:

[vi5]

17. Well you got my hopes up...

I thought you had some kind of information that was going to go public and cause a controversy for *.

[spanone]

31. OOh good one kentuck!

[hang a left]

2. I bet you are right Kentuck. n/t

[depakid]

3. Of course they have!

only in kind- through their failure to regulate in the public interest and prevent mega-mergers of the kind that gave rise to AOL/Time/Warner/CNN in the first place!

[still_one]

4. Doesn't mean sqwat unless there is proof

Incidently, I do not believe it could be kept under the radar if there was really a deal

All it takes is one person in CNN to expose it to the competition

[Melodybe]

5. Why would they have to be paid, Saudi's are the largest group of owners

Ted Turner is the single largest share holder in AOL Time Warner, but the Saudis as a group much more of the company than he does. In fact, Turner is totally pissed that he has no pull in the company. He also is a democrat and during his reign over CNN, they were actually news.

Media de-regulation is what they get with Bush, they don't need money from him because they make much more money with him in office.

[aden_nak]

6. Links? Facts? Financial Records? Proof of Any Kind?

What generally separates us (Al Franken, Michael Moore) from them (Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly) is that when we make an outrageous and dastardly claim, we have hard facts to back it up. We must never lose that, or else the line between what we fight against and what we are blurs to the point of inconsequentiality.

[Melodybe]

8. Moore mentions their owner ship in F9/11 and the WSJ has an article

about it. It has been awhile so I don't have a link, try googling it.

[aden_nak]

13. Oh yes, I know they own a portion of Time Warner.

I was talking about the starter post in this thread. It's one thing to say the Saudis exert influence over what is reported. It's another to claim a direct dollars-for-coverage ratio. My post wasn't in reply to what you said, but to the main post. Sorry if I wasn't clear. ;)

[Feanorcurufinwe]

30. vice versa They are wholly owned by AOL/TIme Warner

[kentuck]

16. I think I stated it fairly clearly ???

But a question? Since when are facts important to those at CNN ??

[LoZoccolo]

18. That's half of the problem.

You think you stated it fairly clearly.

[kentuck]

20. Which sentence was unclear to you??

Paste it.

[snyder]

21. Where's The Quid?

You've laid out a "pro quo," but there's no corrupt bargain without the quid.

[kentuck]

22. I never said it was a fact....

The headline itself ended with a question mark?? Did it not??

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[kentuck]

25. You people....

:) Yeah, you got me. Brilliant!

[LoZoccolo]

23. This has "long day" written all over it.

It's not that any one or more of your sentences was ambiguous, it's that your conclusion doesn't follow from your premises.

The disturbing thing is that I'm pretty sure you know this, because when someone calls you on it, you try to get them involved in tangential arguments about CNN or sentences.

[aden_nak]

19. That's my point.

Our opposition doesn't bother with facts, doesn't take the time to make sure they are correct. They just regurgitate partisan filth without much of anything to back it up. It is the reason that they infuriate so many of us. If we are going to claim that Bush $$$ = CNN Coverage in some direct manner, we need to have facts. Bank transation records. Witnesses. Verifiable confessions. Without something like that, we are little better than a blowhard like Limbaugh shouting the things he WANTS to believe, whether he can prove them or not.

[RodneyCK2]

7. I hope this breaks. It would finally prove the right-wing bias in the..

media. I am so sick of hearing the Repugs say that the media is liberal.

Please keep us posted of any links or breaking news on the subject.

[KurtNYC]

9. The conventional widsdom in cable news is that the

base of viewers who will watch for hours on end are right-leaning with above average incomes (cable costs $$).

Also Democrats will watch RW propaganda but RWers won't watch left-leaning stuff. I think CNN is just trying to outfox Fox in an effort to win back some of their viewers who went to Fox, as disgusting as that is.

[seabeyond]

10. and the one they put on about kerry

trashed him every way you turned. he was good in sports, no pat on back for that, he is an egomaniac. he is good in school, not to worry, he is haughty taughty

[blm]

11. Bush doesn't pay them. His Saudi friends own it. SNN - Saudi News Network.

Please get it straight.

[gardenista]

14. Yeah, they all are. It's called advertising $s nt

[redstateblues]

26. In The Music Biz We Call It Payola-The Modern Version

You blur the line between ads and promo-They agree to spend X dollars and you help them out with their promotions. They play the ads during their newscasts-explains why they show the whole ads during the news shows- and not kerry's

[newsguyatl]

27. ok, kentuck, i USUALLY really like your posts, but

:tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat:

[DemBones DemBones]

28. The Bush* special is title "The Mission of George W. Bush."

Bit of a contrast with their Kerry special's title: "Born to Run." The titles not too subtly suggest that Bush* was called to leadership by a Higher Authority whereas Kerry was simply born to run for office, I.e. born to be a politician.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

29. AOL/Time Warner is the world's largest corporation.

The don't need extra kickbacks to know where their corporate interests lie.