HuffPost: News Corp Donates $1 Million To Republican Governor's Association

[@DCGoldPants]

Disney who owns ABC has donated to Democrats.

GE who owns NBC has donated to Democrats.

Microsoft owns MSNBC, guess who they contribute to ....

ok, to be fair here.....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/17/AR2010081704338.html

It is hardly unusual for media companies to support candidates and political parties. General Electric, which owns NBC, has given $245,000 to the Democratic governors and $205,000 to the Republican governors since last year. Time Warner, which includes CNN, Time and Fortune, has given $70,000 to the Democratic governors and $50,000 to the GOP governors, sums matched by Time Warner Cable.

Disney, which owns ABC, donated $20,000 to committees associated with Republicans and $11,000 to Democratic committees. CBS gave $13,000 to Democratic PACs and $1,000 to Republican ones.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Your absolute hatred of anything "fox" is clearly and vociferously know around these parts. An objective commentator you're not. :pfft:

Ever wonder why I can't stand Faux News? Maybe, and I'm just going out on a limb here, but maybe it's because of the fact that for years they pulled the wool over my eyes and I bought their "fair and balanced" crap for too long. I don't like being duped and I resent Faux News for duping me, and I can't stand the fact that I allowed myself to be duped by them. And I want so badly for others to see Faux for exactly what they are, that's why I'm against Faux News. The entire network is a sham, and the worst part is that people eat it up like fillet mignon, when really it's the scum found on the bottom of a trash can that has been left in the sweltering summer heat.

Disney who owns ABC has donated to Democrats.

GE who owns NBC has donated to Democrats.

Microsoft owns MSNBC, guess who they contribute to ....

Hmmm, any difference between Disney, GE, Microsoft and NEWS Corp? News Corp which is specifically a "media" and journalistic conglomerate? Any difference there?

Nah...didn't think so. But keep rationalizing away.

[aREDSKIN]

ok, to be fair here.....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/17/AR2010081704338.html

Well a bigger picture here.........

A large segment of the television, movie and music industry consists of movie and television studios, producers, directors, and actors -- otherwise known as Hollywood. This category also includes the recorded music industry, commercial television and radio stations and networks, as well as cable and satellite TV operators.

In general, the entertainment industry leans Democratic in its political giving. In 2008, Democrats received 78 percent of the industry’s contributions. This continues the trend of the entertainment industry contributing more to Democrats during the past two decades with 70 percent of donations going to Democrats compared to 29 percent for Republicans.

Of the $48.7 million in total campaign contributions given by this industry during the 2008 election cycle, individuals associated with the industry contributed more than 80 percent, with political action committees accounting for most of the rest. Through their PACs, Comcast Corp. and Time Warner spent about $2.9 million and $2.7 million respectively during the 2008 election cycle.

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/background.php?cycle=2010&ind=B02

[AsburySkinsFan]

BTW, if you're going to cut and paste from a web site then please use the

tags.

Well a bigger picture here.........

A large segment of the television, movie and music industry consists of movie and television studios, producers, directors, and actors -- otherwise known as Hollywood. This category also includes the recorded music industry, commercial television and radio stations and networks, as well as cable and satellite TV operators.

In general, the entertainment industry leans Democratic in its political giving. In 2008, Democrats received 78 percent of the industry’s contributions. This continues the trend of the entertainment industry contributing more to Democrats during the past two decades with 70 percent of donations going to Democrats compared to 29 percent for Republicans.

Of the $48.7 million in total campaign contributions given by this industry during the 2008 election cycle, individuals associated with the industry contributed more than 80 percent, with political action committees accounting for most of the rest. Through their PACs, Comcast Corp. and Time Warner spent about $2.9 million and $2.7 million respectively during the 2008 election cycle.

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/background.php?cycle=2010&ind=B02

Entertainment vs. News; I guess if you're willing to say that Faux News is nothing more than entertainment then I will not disagree with you.

[Spaceman Spiff]

I don't see why anyones surprised or feigning outrage/schock.

[mardi gras skin]

QUOTE=AsburySkinsFan;7708585]Hmmm, any difference between Disney, GE, Microsoft and NEWS Corp? News Corp which is specifically a "media" and journalistic conglomerate? Any difference there?

Nah...didn't think so. But keep rationalizing away.

Read up on News Corp's assets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_News_Corporation

Now you know, News Corp is not just about news.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Hmmm, any difference between Disney, GE, Microsoft and NEWS Corp? News Corp which is specifically a "media" and journalistic conglomerate? Any difference there?

Nah...didn't think so. But keep rationalizing away.

Read up on News Corp's assets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_News_Corporation

Now you know, News Corp is not just about news.

Interestingly enough, if you are going to try and throw my words back into my face, then you might want to use what I said rather than parts of what I said, and since I said "specifically a 'media' and journalistic conglomerate" I think I already addressed the full nature of their assets; which are media and journalistic companies.

[mardi gras skin]

Interestingly enough, if you are going to try and throw my words back into my face, then you might want to use what I said rather than parts of what I said, and since I said "specifically a 'media' and journalistic conglomerate" I think I already addressed the full nature of their assets; which are media and journalistic companies.

Then what's your point?

Hmmm, any difference between Disney, GE, Microsoft and NEWS Corp?

Obviously, the answer is "no". The word NEWS in NEWS Corp does not mean there is a difference between the companies.

[Thiebear]

Next you'll tell me the Wash Post will endorse the democrat

Or that WSJ opinion page picks a repub..

shocked.

[Johnny Punani]

Wow another non-story....

[MEANDWARF]

What is the Huff Post. Ohhh, a liberal rag!

[mjah]

Entertainment vs. News; I guess if you're willing to say that Faux News is nothing more than entertainment then I will not disagree with you.

Fox News won't necessarily disagree with that either -- as long as they're in front of a judge. In fact, in court they'll eagerly argue that they have a Constitutionally protected right to deliberately lie while calling it "news." Have, and will again.

It's only when they're on the air, in front of the viewers to whom they wish to feed those Constitutionally protected lies, that they offer up any real pretense off being a bona fide news organization, much less "fair and balanced."

Of course, they aren't the only cable network benefiting from the current state of things. They're just the network that takes the fullest and most cynical advantage.

[Landryslegend]

I cant resist, whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Like those who SHRIEK out...." What about Bush, what about Bush, what about Bush" Every time Obama gets nailed on something, now its my turn.

All hail MSNBC, Champion of unbiased reporting!

[JimboDaMan]

Well a bigger picture here.........

A large segment of the television, movie and music industry consists of movie and television studios, producers, directors, and actors -- otherwise known as Hollywood. This category also includes the recorded music industry, commercial television and radio stations and networks, as well as cable and satellite TV operators.

In general, the entertainment industry leans Democratic in its political giving. In 2008, Democrats received 78 percent of the industry’s contributions. This continues the trend of the entertainment industry contributing more to Democrats during the past two decades with 70 percent of donations going to Democrats compared to 29 percent for Republicans.

Of the $48.7 million in total campaign contributions given by this industry during the 2008 election cycle, individuals associated with the industry contributed more than 80 percent, with political action committees accounting for most of the rest. Through their PACs, Comcast Corp. and Time Warner spent about $2.9 million and $2.7 million respectively during the 2008 election cycle.

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/background.php?cycle=2010&ind=B02

Wait, what? Are you making the connection that media=Hollywood? That's really not a strong argument.

[commyderm2]

If anybody here thinks that all forms of mainstream media are not bought and paid for and brought to you by some kind of agenda (or in the Republican's case, power grab), then you are a moron who deserves exactly what's coming to you.. Its the helpless minority, who know the truth about what the result of the ignorance that the masses have clamoured for is, that I truly feel bad for.. Keep blaming the other party for all of your problems.. and giving "your" party a pass on everything.. The only person you should blame for the mess that this country is in is yourself.

[Burgundy Burner]

If the dems got rid of the "Fairness" Doctrine forever, then News Corp might show a little love for them as well.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

If the dems got rid of the "Fairness" Doctrine forever, then News Corp might show a little love for them as well.

I doubt it.

[Bang]

I cant resist, whats good for the goose is good for the gander.

I'm not sure who the geese and ganders are, but this **** isn't good for anyone.

This argument has stuck in my craw ever since the GOP decided that "two Wrongs make a Right" was part of their political agenda.

I don't know what's worse... news organizations who are nothiong but propaganda arms of these parties, or the morons who happily listen to them, believe them, excuse and enable them.

We lose. They've pushed us past the edge of decency, and we'll never get back. We've allowed this, and not only have we allowed it, we've decided that this is what we WANT.

I've said for a long time that the largest threat this country faces is the propagandists masquerading as news. Now they don't even pretend anymore, and as we can see, not only do we accept it, but the polarization that it has fed is now so thorough that I believe the well is forever poisoned.

Truth is gone. Any pretense of it is long crushed, and any attempt at it in the future will be lost in the swirl of lies that makes up our "information".

Game over. We lose.

~Bang

[Burgold]

I think your post is a bit extreme. Truth isn't dead. It's just in the hospital and a lot of people don't care and don't even both to visit or send flowers.

Otherwise, I agree with your frustration about the way people shrug these things off.

[aREDSKIN]

Fox News won't necessarily disagree with that either -- as long as they're in front of a judge. In fact, in court they'll eagerly argue that they have a Constitutionally protected right to deliberately lie while calling it "news." Have, and will again.

It's only when they're on the air, in front of the viewers to whom they wish to feed those Constitutionally protected lies, that they offer up any real pretense off being a bona fide news organization, much less "fair and balanced."

Of course, they aren't the only cable network benefiting from the current state of things. They're just the network that takes the fullest and most cynical advantage.

Wow you must not like any news organization because everything you vent about predates News Corp by decades. They learned from the originators. Muckrakers and Charlatans of the News "business" have been around since the country's inception. It even predates that too. Choose your propagandists carefully.

[aREDSKIN]

I don't know what's worse... news organizations who are nothiong but propaganda arms of these parties, or the morons who happily listen to them, believe them, excuse and enable them.

~Bang

It's been that way since the founding of this country IMO. The most recent glaring examples are the "media's" complicit cover-ups of the multitude of Kennedy's escapades- (drug use and womanizing) and the total blackout of any semblance of truth when it came to FDR's health issues. Rationalize it however you want, the press was just another cog in the duplicitous US gov't. There are many many more but those two are the most glaring, concerted and now most obvious.

[Bang]

It's been that way since the founding of this country IMO. The most recent glaring examples are the "media's" complicit cover-ups of the multitude of Kennedy's escapades- (drug use and womanizing) and the total blackout of any semblance of truth when it came to FDR's health issues. Rationalize it however you want, the press was just another cog in the duplicitous US gov't. There are many many more but those two are the most glaring, concerted and now most obvious.

I don't think hiding Kennedy's womanizing or covering up FDRs handicap is anything remotely close to the flat out propaganda of today.

In those days philandering was considered a minor issue, something most men did or wanted to do.

Besides, I believe that ALL presidents have had their mistresses. Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac, and I very much doubt that the most powerful men in our country have been able to resist that most basic pull. After all, they're all politicians, too.. by nature honey tongued and persuasive. Adultery is a given. In fact, if any of them ever denied it, I'd never believe it.

I think this "coverup" had always existed, and now I think that is gone,, a sex scandal is ratings and a chance to really shove the agenda into the forefront. I think Clinton taught them to be more careful.

Hiding FDRs handicap was because in those days handicapped = incapable. People didn't understand it or accept it like we do now and given that, you certainly didn't let the enemy see that. German propaganda operated very much the same way our current media does, and they'd have definitely capitalized on confirmation that the President was "feeble".

The media hid a lot of things during the war, and they did it for several reasons. First and foremost was they reognized that winning the war was more important than blowing the lid off of some stupid poltical scandals.

They hid atrocities, they hid collossal mistakes, they allowed themselves to be used to send disinformation to the enemy, all sorts of things they'd never consider now.

Nowadays they literally give troop positions away on live television. Nowadays they hunt for things that absolutely will disrupt the war efforts and very much aid the enemy and put our soldiers in harms way.

the motivations for these particular "coverups" are not close to the motivations for the modern media... otherwise known as the information arm of whichever party they espouse.

I must disagree with your comparison.

~Bang

[Dan T.]

But the overriding argument that the press was never really all that pristine is a valid one. There have been agenda-driven, slanted news outlets in the U.S. from the get-go.

The core principles of journalism - accuracy, objectivity, fairness, truth - still stand as an ideal to be strived for. How soon and to what degree that ideal gets muddled or lost varies among journalists, editors, producers, and CEOs.

[Thiebear]

The press can't be all that bad.

Even I can find the truth in about 3 minutes on the "internets".

We someone manage to flesh it all out for those that read more than the first and their own post.

I bet the fairness doctrine would be back with the Dem supermajority, last i checked it didn't work out so well for me .

[Larry]

They've pushed us past the edge of decency, and we'll never get back. We've allowed this, and not only have we allowed it, we've decided that this is what we WANT.

You trying to take away my porn?