Posted on 06/21/2007 7:45:45 PM PDT by lowbridge
Posted by Ken Shepherd on June 21, 2007 - 13:40.
Earlier today, NewsBusters contributor Pam Meister picked up on the MSNBC investigation into journalists' political contributions. Nearly 87 percent of the journalists gave exclusively to Democratic candidates.
Now some journos are reacting, and it seems the ones at Time magazine don't see the big deal.
Aside from Time.com Washington editor Ana Marie Cox's dismissive blog entry entitled, "OMG OMG TEH BIAS TEH BIAS," there's this gem from the magazine's James Poniewozik:
I haven't myself made any political donations since I've been with Time, as far as I remember, owing mostly to being a cheap bastard. (Time's policy allows political donations, although according to MSNBC's list, only one staffer has taken advantage of that, so I'm guessing most of my co-workers are as tightfisted as I am.) Scratch that: I did attend a fundraiser for John Kerry in 2004, which I believe Mrs. Tuned In paid for, that consisted of a $20-a-ticket concert in a friend's backyard by children's folk-rock musician Dan Zanes. There is probably no more yuppie-Brooklyn phenomenon than a Toddlers Against Bush concert.
Of course, I'm an opinion writer to begin with, and I don't think I'm especially coy about my political leanings, which are more or less on the libertarian side of liberal.
Gee, that wasn't Ana Marie Cox's position when she knew about Conservative media donating to Republican politicians:
Clear Channel maintains its stranglehold on the American market in large part due to the willful deregulatory campaign waged by FCC Chairman Michael Powell. For Clear Channel, the corporation behind Rush Limbaugh, the series of “support our troops” rallies it sponsored across the country might have just been a way of saying “thank you” to the administration that has helped them so much. Then again, it might be just more buttering up. Regulations on media ownership are under review this year, and ginning up support for the administration’s war is a good way to sweeten the $100,000 the company donated to Republican candidates in 2002.
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/439/the_un_american_media/
More about Ana Marie Cox:
Kind of expensive if you ask me. All she had to do was read them the Bush hating immigration threads on FR. For free.
BWAHAHAHA!
I thought the libertarian side of liberal was surgically removed? Or did it just shrivel up and die, becoming like a wart or something on the liberal body politic?
"..Her novel Dog Days, ISBN 1-59448-901-7, a satire of Washington D.C. for which she was reportedly paid $250,000, was published on January 6, 2006. As of March 2006, it had sold only 5,000 copies, according to Nielsen book sales tracking figures.[citation needed] On Thursday, July 27, 2006 she was named the Washington editor of Time.com. She also writes The Ana Log on the Time web site..."
Down the tubes faster than a greased hamster.
Dude, what are you talking about? Half of the parents at the Toddlers Against Bush concert were probably taking a break from posting here.
hipster Park Slope sanctimommy douchebags
Some liberals are hiding behind the libertarian label. :-)
I recall years and years ago, on a long since defunct message board on AOL, I debated a liberal who insisted on calling herself a libertarian (I insisted on calling her a liberal). The only thing libertarian about her was that she supported abortion. Unlike the libertarians, she supported bigger government, more government regulations, government controlled socialist health care, higher taxes, gun control, etc.
No, it’s the LIBERALtarian side ..... LOL!!!!
Bill maher also calls himself a “libertarian”. What a joke.
Some commies on MSNBC were having a big “so what” about the 10-to-1 contribution ratio. The standard RAT defense for any crime they’re caught in is “so what”? That little fag ellis hennican is the king of the “so what” defense.
Click here for Bush roast. It’s hilarious!
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/3946/
So political contributions are a crime now? Sounds like you’re subscribing to their line of thinking.
Bias bump.
The libertarian side of liberal is libertine.
[So political contributions are a crime now? Sounds like you’re subscribing to their line of thinking.]
I’m pretty sure the point of the story is that MSM journalists (87% of whom give exclusively to Democrats) are actually hypocrites (not criminals) for claiming that they’re politically unbiased.
Isn’t Wonkette.com her site?
I understand that. I just bristled at the phrase “crime”. Reminded me too much of this Fairness Doctrine crap.
Ahhhh, you’re correct. I didn’t catch that word “crime” when I read that post the first time. It’s wise to keep in mind that political advocacy by individuals, groups or the press should remain unregulated, else our freedoms erode.
McCain and Feingold are coming after political advocacy on the internet right now, and they’re specifically targeting people like us here on FreeRepublic as well as our friends over at the DemocraticUnderground and MoveOn.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.