freerepublic.com/focus/fr/621896/posts
Newscorridor ^ | February 2, 2002 | By Doug Schmitz Posted on 02/04/2002 6:17:06 PM PST by 8 Lockbox The notable absence of a late-breaking news story from mainstream media Web sites Tuesday afternoon spoke volumes about the blatant liberal bias that saturates most of the nation's newsrooms. As details surfaced about another major corporation filing Enron-style Chapter 11 bankruptcy, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC and CBS never saw fit to give the pivotal news story any place in cyberspace, much less on their TelePrompTers. The reason: This latest bankruptcy filing links a prominent Democratic figurehead to possible insider trading. That's reason enough for the liberal press to ignore it. Reminiscent of Dan Rather's 36-day refusal to report on the Chandra Levy case, none of the liberal media Web sites covered Democratic National Convention chief Terry McAuliffe's connection to Global Crossing, the newly collapsed company that reportedly netted him $18 million worth of stock from an initial $100,000 investment he made in the late 1990s. Global Crossing, headquartered in Bermuda, is an undersea fiber-optic cable owner and operator. According to published reports, Global Crossing CEO Gary Winnick gave McAuliffe a chance to invest in the start-up company in 1997. When the stock soared to $18 million in value, McAuliffe got out and cashed in, leaving thousands of employees not only pink-slipped, but holding worthless company stock. Equally, shareholders' suffered the same fate as Global Crossing Stock plunged from $61 in value to 51 cents a share. Now McAuliffe, who's been crying foul over the Bush administration's alleged financial ties to Enron, is the one eating crow. Washington Times reporter Ralph Hallow spoke with Republican consultant Craig Shirley, who suggested that the Global Crossing fallout might temporarily diffuse the Democrats' relentless haranguing of Republicans over the Enron probe--especially if impending Global Crossing investigations start with the DNC head. The Washington Times reported that the former president received a sizable political gratuity from McAuliffe's Global Crossing windfall. Let McAuliffe explain to Global Crossing employees and shareholders how he could unashamedly--and suspiciously--get $18 million in company stock, while many employees are left financially destitute. Let's hear him tell them to go to Cuba, where he's been telling everyone else to go whenever he's confronted with the issue. So where were the mainstream media when all of this was going down? With 89 percent admitting to being registered Democrats according to a 1996 Freedom Forum survey, they've proven where their loyalties lie and how much partisan biases taint their news judgment. The Media Research Center's Brent Bozell said of the liberal media establishment: "With the political preferences of the press no longer secret, members of the media argued while personally liberal, they are professionally neutral. They argued their opinions do not matter because as professional journalists, they report what they observe without letting their opinions affect their judgment. Journalists make subjective decisions every minute of their professional lives. Rather than give air time or Web space to a late-breaking story implicating a Democrat in another Enron-like scandal--one that could have widespread ramifications, the liberal press decided the late-breaking story about President Bush's niece took precedence. Tuesday night was President Bush's State of the Union address. Always on the lookout for salacious news that could possibly hurt Bush's soaring job-approval ratings, the liberal press wasted no time slapping up the latest Web text about his niece's recent arrest. When the story broke, that's all the political fodder the liberal press needed to add insult to injury. But the question now is: Would they have done the same thing if Gore or Clinton were president? In fact, when allegations surfaced about Chelsea Clinton's public intoxication last year, few, if any, liberal media outlets bothered to carry the story. However, when President Bush's twin daughters were in trouble with the law last year, every morning and evening news talkinghead was all over it--with non-stop coverage. The mainstream media are free to express themselves, no matter how jaded the reporting. But when it comes down to brass tacks, most really aren't responsible enough to deserve the privilege of press freedom. The mainstream media should spend more time reporting the facts instead of playing politics. People are sick and tired of the liberal, one-sided slant that pervades the majority of our newsrooms. Perhaps that's why media bellwether Fox News Channel recently knocked CNN off its left-leaning perch to become the nation's number one-rated cable news network. For years, people have hungered to hear both sides of an issue from a fair, balanced, and objective viewpoint. After all, that should be a news organization's mandate. The Katie Courics of the liberal media shouldn't receive huge paychecks to editorialize the news to suit their personal biases. Their pay rate should be based on how fairly and accurately they report the news, despite the individual's celebrity status or income demand. Moreover, anything that would taint or distort the way they disseminate the news should be left at home. In turn, if McAuliffe and fellow Democrats are guilty of wrongdoing with Global Crossing, the liberal press should hold them just as accountable as they've held the Bush administration concerning Enron; As with the important news stories of the day, these are also important facts that shouldn't be ignored.
|
http://csua.com/feed/