posted on December 11, 2003 04:47:41 AM new
This article bothers me. Not just because it has to do with DJK, but also Sharpton and Mosely-Braun and the fact that the media has for years attempted (and in most cases succeeded) to influence the way we think and act. "I want the American people to see where media takes politics in this country," Kucinich said to cheers from the crowd. "We start talking about endorsements, now we're talking about polls and then talking about money. When you do that you don't have to talk about what's important to the American people." This article should anger everyone - right and left - because it's not about Dennis it's about honest and fair reporting.
ABC News Pulls Reporter off Kucinich Campaign
For Immediate Release: December 10, 2003
The day after Presidential Candidate Dennis Kucinich took ABC debate moderator Ted Koppel to task for avoiding questions that would be useful to voters in favor of questions about endorsements, money, and polls, ABC pulled its fulltime "embedded" reporter from the Kucinich campaign, a reporter who had been given no warning that such a move was coming and who had discussed at length yesterday with the Kucinich campaign staff her plans and her needs for the coming months.
ABC has reportedly also pulled its reporters from covering the presidential campaigns of Rev. Al Sharpton and Ambassador Carol Mosley-Braun.
This appears to be another instance of what Kucinich criticized at the debate, namely the media trying to pick candidates, rather than letting the voters do so. In a democracy, it should be voters and not pundits or TV networks who narrow the field of candidates.
This move, before any state's caucus or primary, appears based on a belief that viable candidates can be predicted 11 months prior to an election, a belief that flies in the face of the historical record. Time and again candidates dismissed as "fringe" have wound up either with the nomination or with a significant impact on the convention and in the primaries.
This action by ABC, as well as Koppel's comments during the debate, can only serve to disempower Americans, communicating to them that someone other than they is deciding elections and that their votes don't mean much.
This action also seems to conflict with the network's interest in boosting ratings and Koppel's expressed interest in making the debate exciting, given that Kucinich received the loudest applause of the evening.
ABC presumably has no vested interest in discouraging voting or in lowering its ratings. It may, however, have an interest in whether Koppel's prediction of the viability of various candidacies proves true.
Edited to add: You can let them know how you feel about their "reporting" [email protected]. I did!
posted on December 11, 2003 07:25:37 AM new
LOOKING FOR LIMELIGHT
At the close of a Wednesday forum in New Hampshire, while most candidates were fielding questions from the media, Kucinich found himself with nary a reporter approaching him. He pushed through the crowd — while even Braun conducted interviews — looking for a microphone or camera to get himself in front of. When Kerry left a group of hungry reporters, Kucinich immediately stepped in and began talking up his own platforms. Most journalists stuck around before politely backing away. Later on, Kucinich managed to engage a few reporters on his own with his Iraq exit strategy: They were from the Korean Broadcasting System.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/952444.asp
Positions of candidates are simply not being covered by media who exist to elect George Bush. The media's deficient coverage of the candidates positions will continue because they and their corporate owners are backing George Bush.
But the media will not be able to overcome the reality that exists in America...economic failure, bungled foreign policy, a bungled and illegal war and ignored domestic issues. The media can't hide the broken promises of this administration or the deception, secrecy and lies that have framed Bush policy. George Bush will be defeated no matter what the press prints or broadcasts.
posted on December 11, 2003 07:34:40 AM new
OH puhhhleeeeeez! These 3 "candidates" have about as much chance of election as the Grand Wizard does of heading the NAACP.
Time is growing shorter and the "cuts" are being made. It costs a lot to support reporters attached to people who are in it for their own personal little agendas.
posted on December 11, 2003 08:05:04 AM new
To get elected a candidate must be able to make themselves--and their viewpoints--known. And these days that is done through the media.
Maybe these candidate are unlikely to win. We'll never know, because they aren't allowed the same media privileges as more prominent candidates.
One of the things that has always ticked me off is the way everything is focussed on the Democrats and Republicans. I've always thought that other candidates should be allowed to participate in debates, have airtime, etc. Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
posted on December 11, 2003 08:08:44 AM new
I'm interested in what each of the candidates has to say - that's responsible voting. I could care less who has more money, who has more endorsements or who is or is not liked by ABC. So, desquirrel, maybe you should get your head out of the sand. The media tells you what it WANTS you to know. Fair reporting is dead and has been for a long time. Ask me, I know. I live in a one newspaper town. If the PD makes a mistake, you are lucky to get them to print a retraction if that retraction takes away from their agenda.
posted on December 11, 2003 09:10:21 AM new
Blame the DNC for it. They or the RNC know who they really want in there at every primary election, and they get them in.
Helen, what hysterical woman is that?
I've never said that!!!!!!!!!!!! I am NOT hysterical!
(besides, I've never said OH puhhhleeeeeez!" here anyway )
Wanna Take a Ride? Art Bell is Back! Weekends on C2C-www.coasttocoastam.com
posted on December 11, 2003 09:24:42 AM new
LOL nearthesea...
Don't be so paranoid...This woman doesn't have sense enough to use a computer. She watches TV sitcoms a lot and I think that's where she learned that silly expression.
posted on December 11, 2003 07:16:52 PM new
Cheryl - Here's my take on this. It's not so much the media as it is the inner workings of the democratic party and their top leaders. I do agree that the media is biased, and imo, it's biased towards/in favor of the left.
Right now there's an inner-party struggle going on between the DNC chairman, Terry McAuliffe and the clintons on one side, and Al Gore, Dean on the other. Should Dean win this nomination, and at this point it looks likely that may happen, Terry McAuliffe is out. Many democrats think he should have been forced out after loosing the 2000 elections and the seats the party lost in 2002. But somehow he hung on to his leadership role. Many believe that happened because of the clinton's influenence.
But rather than the media being at fault for 'neglecting' the candidates, like your Mr. K, Ms. Braun and Al Sharpton, it's the *in-house democratic leaders that are calling these shots*. They're fighting for the party's power and are supporting the candidates who are showing high numbers and those who aren't showing strong numbers are considered in the way.
posted on December 11, 2003 11:14:55 PM new
Cheryl, I would like to take this time to complement you on your work for Mr.. K.. He is very consistent with his views and seems to be the only one with some sort of plan and having one so loyal as you is a plus for his campaign. I did watch the debate, as I have most them. Your Mr K did very well, he needs to get more forceful as he did with Koppel. Kick Butt & not worry about names. He has everything to gain & nothing to loose. I also hope you get to be a delegate. People like you make our election process work.
I agree with Linda about the Democratic Party leadership & the media. both are so far left that even those on the left have lost the party.
posted on December 12, 2003 12:46:24 AM new
Well Cheryl we do agree again...
I think ALL the candidates should have their "time" becuase as others here have pointed out, the election is a year away and still no one from the Democratic side is a sure bet.
Linda may of hit upon the point of some inner squabbles going on and them already setting up the candidate they want to see run against President Bush.
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
Kucinich, the one that you complement, is the most liberal candidate in the group. It's typical for a Republican to admire a loser on the Democratic side. I'll bet you have similar feelings about Al Sharpton and Carol Moseley Braun. And you wouldn't mind if Cheryl worked for the few candidates that the press considers irrelevant either.
It's orwell time again...losers are winners and winners are losers.
posted on December 12, 2003 08:34:07 AM new "He is very consistent with his views and seems to be the only one with some sort of plan"
Thanks for those good words, Fred.
BTW...Of course you knew that when I said, "It's typical for a Republican to admire a loser on the Democratic side." that I was referring to Kucinich. How ludicrous that you would find the need to mention that Cheryl is not a loser.
posted on December 12, 2003 09:51:55 AM new
Twelve
The world must have spun backward for a couple of seconds. We need to agree (that is, you with me) more often so the world can spin Ohio right back into Summer). Yes, all candidates should have equal media time. I also think that all candidates should have free air time on the major TV stations - unedited. Newspapers should also be more willing to print retractions when what they say is wrong. The Cleveland Free Press has been wrong a lot lately and although it's been pointed out to them (by you'll never guess who - me), I've yet to see them print a correction.
Linda
I don't like the party system to begin with and when there is bickering within each party, that only makes the system seem more useless. I've often thought that anyone who wants to run for president and can afford it, should run. I'd like a choice of more than two (or three with an Independent) candidates. What happens when you don't like either one? You're stuck with the lesser of two evils.
Fred
Thanks for the kind words. I've known about Dennis since he was mayor of Cleveland. I watched him handle the bad rap like a man. And I watched him pull himself together and trudge onward. People fail to realize that Dennis did not bankrupt Cleveland. When he refused to sell Muni Light to CEI, the banks (who all had vested interests in CEI) called the loans. Extortion didn't work and Dennis took the rap. We now have one of the most reliable and cheapest utility companies in the country - Cleveland Public Power. Isn't funny that the main bank, Cleveland, Trust, was sold shortly afterward. There are many reasons I support him - his humanity, his convictions, his passion for what he believes and his unwaivering willingness to fight for his constituents.
posted on December 12, 2003 10:15:52 AM new
NTS - helen, negative??? Oh...come on She's told us ALL that just isn't so.
-------
But this takes the cake: "My interaction with Fred is frankly none of your business" ROFLMHO. Another example of how it's okay for helen to do this, but NOT okay if someone else does. LOL
posted on December 12, 2003 10:26:37 AM new
Cheryl - Lesser of two evils....yes there are times I've felt that way.
I've twice voted for Independent candidates....feeling I just could NOT accept either choice [between the dem and rep candidate]. But what history shows is that they don't stand a chance for many reasons.
I think the most an Independent has ever received was 15% of the vote. So...voting for an Independent is just like throwing ones vote away. It makes a statement, but has no end benefit.
I have recently read, however, that Nadar is allowing a committee to be formed to see IF there's enough support for him to throw his 'hat' into the mix. Time will tell.
posted on December 12, 2003 10:38:10 AM new
Come on Helen, when your 'interacting' with another poster, is that a private thing here, and I am not supposed to read it?
As far as I know, anyone can read here, and comment on whatever... you, yourself have made mention that you will post whatever you like, whenever you like, but of course that does not apply to anyone else, according to- you?
Wanna Take a Ride? Art Bell is Back! Weekends on C2C-www.coasttocoastam.com
posted on December 12, 2003 10:41:25 AM new
Now we sound like my family around the holidays! Helen, you and Linda are me and my sister-in-law. Helen and Fred can represent me and my younger brother. And twelve? He's more like my step-father than anyone else here - a very opinionated, chauvinistic Italian! No, twelve, not referring to your age.
She's told us ALL that just isn't so.