POLITICALPYRO CONTRIBUTORS

It took me a few minutes to get through this piece. Its nicely put together and does not miss anything.

Here is the Link: Barack Obama: The Naked Emperor

This offering was written and posted by the ‘Political Pyro‘ ~Jay Jaxxon~ a year ago… I wonder where he is today?

Who Will Police the Media?

Posted by Political Pyro in Media Firestorm May 25, 2008

In the consumer age of federally mandated regulation and transparency, no product can be released to the public without a series of intense evaluations, tests, labels, and warnings.

Make that: Almost no product.

Look on the back of a soda can, or a box of Twinkies, and you will find a federally mandated list of ingredients. In music, check out the latest releases by Lupe Fiasco or Ghostface Killah and you will see a parental advisory warning on the cover. In movies and television, look for a rating flashed before the credits. Video games are rated. Bags come with a suffocation warning. Small items are choking hazards. Coffee is hot. Don’t eat the lead paint. Not intended to be a cure…

So where is the list of ingredients for the television news media? Conservative talk radio is filled with hosts who proudly admit they are entertainers or commentators. They never pretend to be journalists. In fact, they are usually the ones screaming about the likes of CNN and MSNBC hiding behind a journalistic banner.

Almost no unbiased journalism is left in television news today. Political opinions and commentaries literally overwhelm the “news” airwaves 24 hours a day. What little journalism actually gets reported is highly filtered by network CEOs with a political agenda.

What is not reported is even more disturbing. “News networks” chose to ignore the Reverend Wright story until their hand was forced sometime after the Texas and Ohio primaries and the Barack Obama-William Ayers connection was completely ignored until George Stephanopoulos brought Ayers’ name up during a debate — and the media silence is perfectly legal.

Why has the news media been given a regulatory pass?

Another question: What is the standard journalism-to-opinion ratio that a network must live up to in order to call themselves a “news network”? Arguably, the History and Discovery Channels present far more unbiased information than CNN or MSNBC, and yet they do not purport to be “news”.

Maureen Dowd writes for the New York Times underneath the banner ‘Opinion’. There is nothing wrong or deceptive about that. I am not in favor of censorship. However, there is no ‘Opinion’ banner that flashes across the screen before Keith Olbermann launches into his pro-Obama tirade — or before Chris Matthews informs the world of some chills running up his leg. Why not? Are viewers expected to assume these men are merely offering an opinion, yet NOT expected to assume their cup of coffee is hot?

Americans hold the “fourth branch of government” up to a high standard. For decades, the words of Walter Cronkite or Peter Jennings were as sacred as the gospel. However, today’s news media is clearly different. Manipulation of public opinion — under the false banner of journalism — should be monitored by strict FCC guidelines with hefty penalties. Networks should never be allowed to have this amount of power again. Those who refuse to comply with these proposed new FCC standards should be forced to call themselves ‘Opinion’ networks…

In other words, CNN should be forced to call themselves what they really are… CON.

Now… Comments the post received.

11 Comments »

1.

FOX = FAUX

Comment by CHANGE — May 25, 2008 @ 6:20 pm

2.

Well stated! In essence we have no FREE media left - and this is a very dangerous place for our Country.

Comment by Typewriter — May 25, 2008 @ 9:20 pm

3.

Thank you for this articulate discussion of this very real problem with the media’s calculated and biased manipulation of the news. I fully support your suggestion of new FCC standards. Until that happens, I will continue to boycott CNN, NBC and MSNBC. I have switched to FOX news for more fair and balanced coverage. I would have never believed that the network I avoided for the last 8 years has been the most unbiased in their reporting.

Comment by dwilson — May 25, 2008 @ 11:52 pm

4.

I, too, have switched to Fox for the same reason. I avoided it for many years also…but am finding out that it is the only network where one can get real news and not just biased drama!

Comment by maggie — May 26, 2008 @ 12:47 am

5.

Wow, I too switched to Fox News, they should run a poll to track this phenonmenon.
Just finished watching Recount on HBO, eerily similar to our current situation with Florida and Michigan, I hope Clinton doesn’t back down.

Comment by Joe — May 26, 2008 @ 2:09 am

6.

“Manipulation of public opinion — under the false banner of journalism — should be monitored by strict FCC guidelines with hefty penalties. Networks should never be allowed to have this amount of power again. Those who refuse to comply with these proposed new FCC standards should be forced to call themselves ‘Opinion’ networks…”

If this would apply equally to Fox and CNN and MSNBC and all the rest, that would be fine. I don’t think you really want that - you have singled out only the so-called “liberal” media for criticism, but the same can be said about Fox et al.?

***[Yes, equality for all. Not censorship, just accurate labelling. I omitted Fox because they have the best track record so far this year, but things change, so everyone should be included. — Political Pyro]

Comment by Mark In Irvine — May 26, 2008 @ 2:30 am

7.

Excellent perspective. The media’s spite this weekend over the 1968 analogy was illogical and ludicrous. They clearly got ‘played’ by Senator Obama who needed a headline this weekend. The media now looks baited and foolish.
I too have stopped most mainstream TV and their associated internet activity with the exception of foxnews.com. I’m bored by NBC /Newsweek / MSNBC / CNN, I already know what is going to be said. My main source for substantive information now is smaller journals and investigative blogs.

Comment by EyesOpen — May 26, 2008 @ 5:22 am

8.

If you’re interested in policing the public airwaves through making accountable the federal agency responsible for regulating such things, you will support Senator Clinton’s run for the White House. Because she will win in the general election. And that will be her job.

Comment by jbjd — May 26, 2008 @ 7:41 am

9.

What we have is a bunch of socialists media sucm bags who are ruining this country.

Comment by Waldo Smith — May 26, 2008 @ 10:58 am

10.

The elites in the media, DNC and elsewhere DECIDED who they wanted WITHOUT (public) vetting of THEIR nomineee by the press. The media has thus reduced itself to functioning as propaganda zealots of their owm making for their own agendas of radical leftism and diguised it in a person who is a perfect example of the meaning of the word charalatan; Barack Obama.

CHARLATAN: A flamboyant deceiver; one who attracks sutomers with TRICKS (deception) or (jokes.

Obama=CHARLATAN

Comment by Denny — May 26, 2008 @ 1:37 pm

11.

the sickening way the media has promoted obama 24/7 is proof that political campaign reforms need to include the media too. even if clinton raised $2 billion if the media still endorsed obama 24/7 and ignored clinton that money would not help her much.

even when the media said it was all over for clinton she still had stunning wins in kentucky and west virginia proving how disconnected and manipulative the media is.

they have too much power and they have abused this power and used it against hillary. there needs to be more federal regulation of the media.

the dnc wants to roll the dice and run a black man at the expense of a more electable woman since everyone is disgusted with the bush years but i will vote for mccain if clinton isn’t running and if mccain wins i will call the dnc and laugh at them for running obama.

mccain’s hands will be tied with a democratic congress and he won’t be able to do anything unless the democrats let him. don’t be fooled into thinking you have ot vote for obama. that is more manipulation by obama and the dnc. punish the DNC by voting for mccain and ridiculing them when obama loses.

Comment by d-guy — May 29, 2008 @ 7:22 am

In a world where the power to influence and control the thoughts of the people reside in the governments power to control and influence media, true freedom of speech and democracy can not exist.

Lanciotti 2009

Ann Coulter is being probed. Following our Jan. 11 column, Connecticut’s Elections Enforcement Commission is making a “thorough investigation” of whether the conservative pundit broke the law by voting in the Nutmeg State while living in New York City, according to a commission spokeswoman.

Officials are responding to a formal complaint filed by Coulterwatch.com blogger Dan Borchers. “For over 10 years, Ann Coulter has gotten away with illegal, immoral and unethical behavior, ranging from plagiarism to defamation, perjury to voter fraud,” claims the conservative Borchers. Coulter declined to comment, but in the past has branded Borchers a stalker. He says the FBI has determined he poses no threat.

We here at Politicalpyro Contributors have done extensive work on the questions surrounding Obama and his birth records. Below is a link that puts our thoughts together, please have a look.

Is He or Isn’t He? The Obama Birth Certificate Drama Continues…

By the way… the site where I found the Ann Coulter article I did a search for Obama and birth records and could not find ONE reference. Funny what we find more important… A place where a person votes is somehow more important then a question of what a presidential candidates birth records may tell us.

And now… the Liberal Reaction

More to Follow…..

Ann Coulter on The View