I feel there could be a lot more than those ten labels.
So who's with me in lobbying to have these included in every newspaper's distribution? Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
Those are awesome. And yeah, there need to be a lot more of them.
Posted by Cookie Crisp (Member # 12312) on :
I wish I had those labels when I was still at university, our school "newspaper" could have been plastered with these.
I came across these earlier today and posted them on facebook then noticed them on here (serves me right to go away for a couple days!)
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Love these. Could use similar ones for broadcast news. (I'll even buckle down and say the Daily Show should have one).
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
Life imitates satire. But I have no idea what that last bit (in bold) means.
quote:(CNN) - With the knowledge that Fox News' parent company recently cut a $1 million check to the Republican Governors Association, the leader of the Democratic Governors Association is calling on the cable news network to run a "formal disclaimer" when it covers gubernatorial races.
...
A CNN review of financial contributions made by media corporations showed that the parent companies of CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC have all made at least six-figure contributions to political parties and candidates. But none of them have given one organization so much money relative to its equivalent association on the other side of the aisle.
--j_k
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
it means that the non-fox companies usually donate equivalently to both republican and democratic associations. Like, MSNBC would give 100k to both the Democratic and Republican governor's associations. Here, it's murdoch just flat-out giving a million dollars to the republican association and zero dollars to the democratic equivalent.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: it means that the non-fox companies usually donate equivalently to both republican and democratic associations. Like, MSNBC would give 100k to both the Democratic and Republican governor's associations. Here, it's murdoch just flat-out giving a million dollars to the republican association and zero dollars to the democratic equivalent.
On the other hand, employees of MSNBC (and most other major news networks,) from execs to reporters, contributed overwhelmingly to the Democrats.
I'm not saying they shouldn't, mind you. They're individuals and can contribute based on their own political opinions. But I think it says just as much as the Fox contribution with regards to what sort of biases you can expect when you get your news from these networks.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
But the employees do decide what stories to pursue...
I'm skeptical of these links.
We've got Dan Rather whining because CBS made him retract his fabricated story... but it's not like they didn't let him run the obviously fabricated story, did they?
Also... conspiracy theories. Hurray?
Oh, yeah, and Media Matters complaining about ABC reporting on the reprehensible behavior of ACORN as... reprehensible behavior. Oh that terrible Right Wing ABC! How terrible!
I'm sure of these are legitimate examples of news stations suppressing stories. I'm sure that happens. I will admit I have not examined every link in depth, but so far, I'm not overwhelmingly impressed.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)