Election ‘08 offers a rare window of opportunity for average Americans that will not come their way again for a long time: The American public has an opportunity to demand fairness and balance from a largely slanted mainstream media.
Public Broadcasting Service (PBS)—with an annual budget funded by both Federal and private donations—did not identify its host of tomorrow’s only, televised vice presidential debate as the author of a book touting the political power of Barack Hussein Obama!
Indeed, it was thanks only to enterprising journalist Bob Unruh of WorldNetDaily that Gwen Ifill, whose Inauguration Day slated book The Breakthrough argues the “black political structure” of the civil rights movement is giving way to men and women who have benefited from the struggles over racial quality”, would be hosting tomorrow’s PBS- televised vice presidential debate.
Canada Free Press (CFP) editors Judi McLeod and Arthur Weinreb advocate that Ifill and others of her ilk should be identified for what they are: propagandists not journalists; that “journalists” advocating for the election of Obama should be forced by the networks who hire them to wear buttons proclaiming them as “Propagandists”.
In short, in fairness to television viewers everywhere, the Katie Courics, Rachel Maddows et al should be forced to wear on-air the “Propagandist Button”, a sort of Fairness Doctrine that really works.
Tilting ever leftward, the hosts of major television outlets have now abandoned all pretenses of fairness and balance.
If television hosts wish to work for political campaigns, they should not be able to do so on air, and their networks should come clean before televised debates begin.
While television viewers don’t have to watch televised presidential and vice presidential debates, their interest in what is arguably the most important presidential race in American history will have them tuning in to the boob tube.
Droves of Americans are frustrated that the soured sisterhood of radical feminists are now writing and reading “The News”.
Katie Couric of CBS refuses to address Sarah Palin as “Governor”, MSNBC’s “progressive” Rachel Maddow ignored Obama’s financial advisors’ ties to Freddie Mac, using a New York Times’ story to attack Senator John McCain’s ties through an aide to the beleaguered financial institute.
With television hosts having abandoned journalism for entertainment and propaganda, television “interviewers” and debate “hosts” should be forced to wear buttons identifying for what they are.
This measure would not only pave the way for fairness in treating both candidates for election the same, but would go a long way in cleaning up the dying trade known as “journalism”.
Identity tags would also separate the real journalists from the propagandists.
Television viewers would then owe Barack Hussein Obama a debt of gratitude, because without Obama and his Hollywood herd of campaign zealots and swooning media hypsters, forcing the identification of media propagandists would never have happened.
Thanks to the real journalism of Bob Unruh at WorldNetDaily, we now know that the moderator of tomorrow’s vice-presidential debate has authored a book geared for publishing at about the time the next president takes the oath of office, that will “shed new light” on Democratic candidate Barack Obama and other “emerging young African American politicians” who are “forging a bold new path to political power”.
PBS, which rakes in 54.6% of its annual budget in private donations and 19% of its annual budget in Federal appropriations, was tapped by the Commission on Presidential debates (CPD) to handle all 2008 debates.
The Commission, whose Honorary Co-Chairman include former US presidents Jimmy Carter and William J. Clinton, should be forced to live up to its public mission statement: “The CPD was established in 1987 to ensure that debates, as a permanent part of every general election, provide the best possible information to viewers and listeners.” (Emphasis CFP’s). “The organization, which is a nonprofit, nonpartisan 501 ©(3) corporation, sponsored all the presidential debates in 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004.”
“Ifill declined to return a WND telephone message asking for a comment about her book project and whether its success would be expected should Obama lose.” ( WorldNetDaily.com, Sept. 30, 2008).
Ifill’s bias against Republican candidates is not new: Unruh writes that, “During a vice-presidential candidate debate she moderated in 2004—when Democrat John Edwards attacked Republican Dick Cheney’s former employer, Haliburton—the vice president said, “I can respond, Gwen, but it’s going to take more than 30 seconds”.
“Ifill told the Associated Press Democrats were delighted with her answer, because they “thought I was being snippy to Cheney.” She explained that wasn’t her intent.
“But she also was cited in complaints PBS Ombudsman Michael Geller said he received after Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin delivered her nomination acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minn., earlier this month.
“Some viewers complained of a “dismissive” look by Ifill during her report on Palin’s speech. According to Geller, some also said she wore a look of “disgust” while reporting on the Republican candidate.
“At that time she said, “I assume there will always be critics and just shut out the noise. It is surprisingly easy.”
With Ifill allowed to moderate tomorrow’s vice presidential debate, Americans are being propagandized with their own money by PBS.
It is time for the “Propagandist Button” to identify clearly biased television network election debate moderators.
Copyright © Canada Free Press
Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years’ experience in the print media. A former Toronto Sun columnist, she also worked for the Kingston Whig Standard. Her work has appeared on Rush Limbaugh, Newsmax.com, Drudge Report, Foxnews.com, and Glenn Beck.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2017 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2017 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement