Tag Archives: NPR

NPR Fact-checking Themselves to Prove They Are Not Biased

NPR, after the Big Bird thing, might have thought it would be a good idea to attempt to appear unbiased. Of course, the concept of bias-free journalism in America today is akin to the dinosaurs – as in extinct. But, Edward Schumacher-Matos decided to take a stab at it by fact-checking the NPR fact-checkers.

Mike Licht, NotionsCapital.com (CC)


Yes, that does smack of Monty Python’s “Department of Redundancy Department”, but hey, if that keeps Schumacher-Matos busy for a day, so be it. And, more importantly, his little exercise yielded some interesting statistics to consider. If you skipped the link above, that’s fine. I can understand if you don’t want to read liberal nonsense – that’s what I’m here for! Besides, what was written really wasn’t worth reading, until the end, when Schumacher-Matos presented his readers with some pie charts and bar graphs. See, it’s not just the liberal public that has trouble with words.

So, what was this great discovery he made? Low and behold, the NPR audience likes fact-checking interspersed with the reporting. At least that’s what the nifty pie charts indicated. Now, whether or not NPR could recognize a fact, even if it bit them, is a debate for another time. As for how often they want fact-checking, they want it daily, not just occasionally. I know, we’re talking about liberals here, but this is beyond political leanings – it is a matter of human nature. Yes, Schumacher-Matos and NPR took the time to poll their audience on something that theoretically should have been assumed by anyone that successfully completed Psychology 101 in college. Kudos guys, really!

But that’s just amusing. The really good stuff was in their nifty bar graph. On that one, they asked their audience what needed fact-checking the most. There were several categories, but the really striking thing is where liberal priorities lie. They want fact-checking of the candidates first – predictable. But, down near the bottom, just above fact-checking personal stories of voters, is fact-checking polls and national standings of the candidates. So, in liberal-land, it’s not really important if the polls are accurate (assuming that Obama is ahead, of course), and they really don’t care if people lie to them about where the candidates really stand on the electoral map. Thank you Schumacher-Matos! Really! That is very helpful information for us, on the conservative side of the spectrum. Carry on liberal comrades, and don’t worry if your left-biased polls are accurate or not!

Has Florida Prosecutor Ensured Zimmerman Acquittal?

041212-national-trayvon-martin-case-prosecutor-angela-corey

The host of NPR’s Tell Me No More – Michael Martin – interviewed Sybrina Fulton (mother of victim Trayvon Martin) on April 26. In the extensive interview, Ms.Fulton said she “can wait a year for justice” and that she feels the case is “moving in the right direction”. 

Click here to read more of the NPR interview with Sybrina Fulton.

Zimmerman has been released on bail and is awaiting trial on second degree murder. With no lesser charges of manslaughter included, I fear Ms.Fulton may never see the type of justice she is waiting on. Florida special prosecutor Angela Corey bowed to pressure from media and activist groups by refusing to include any weaker charges that might be easier on which to convict Zimmerman. By only allowing for second degree murder, Corey has now burdened the state with making their case for intentional murder beyond a shadow of a doubt. As we’ve see with the delay in Zimmerman’s arrest, a Stand Your Ground Law, and questions about Zimmerman’s injuries there already seems to be a plethora of evidence to at least suggest that Zimmerman’s actions were not intentional or cold-blooded. Even legal expert Alan Dershowitz has serious doubts about the success of that charge. “If there are riots, it will be the prosecutor’s fault because she overcharged, raised expectations,” Dershowitz said. “This prosecutor not only may have suborned perjury, she may be responsible, if there are going to be riots here, for raising expectations to unreasonable levels.” 

Oh, did I mention it was an election year for Ms.Corey?

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/04/25/dershowitz-trayvon-prosecutor-overreached-with-murder-charge/#ixzz1tAGyx3lm

As a mother I share Ms.Fulton’s sadness and desperation. I certainly don’t blame her for wanting Zimmerman to pay for the death of her son. I do, however blame special prosecutor Corey, Al Sharpton and an irresponsible media complex for clouding the facts of this case to the point that Martin’s family may never see real, true justice.  I hope a judge and/or jury will be more impartial than the goons at NBC, for Zimmerman’s sake and the sake of the Martin family. However, I’m with Dershowitz on this one – if there are riots after Zimmerman is acquitted of second degree, Corey should hire her own lawyer.

cross-posted at kiradavis.net

 

More D.A.M. Lies and Media Manipulation of the Masses

  After watching the true American Republican Patriots at the GOP Presidential debate in New Hampshire on Monday, the leftists were left scrambling for ways to bring out the Democratic Attack Machine and denounce them, as has been their repeated method of operation for decades. Once again the liberal media was leading the way, with nasty tidbits from the Soros paid propaganda puppets at various copy and paste Democratic talking points moronic Internet sites thrown into the mix for added ignorance promotion. As the wonderful Ann Coulter explains in her new book “Demonic”, talk about your mob mentality! The only thing that rivals the Liberal ignorance when bashing conservative values, is their ignorance when begging for more handouts for the non-producing parasites of American society. FYI sheep, there is no money tree, there is no Obama stash, and soon there will be no money left to cash those welfare checks, pay those bloated Union pensions, or dish out those race-based educational grants and student loans to illegals and high school grads who can’t even read or write at a ninth grade level. America is on the verge of bankruptcy, plain and simple.

 Only the dumbest of the dumb do not realise the dangers of $15 trillion dollars of debt, let alone the debt to GDP ratio predicted to be over 120% for the next five straight years. Not to worry though, as the fake academics and media arms of D.A.M. are right in your faces every day to tell you how everything will be OK,  just keep on electing the Liberal Socialist Democrats and they will plant more money trees for you.

So, on Monday night we saw seven true American Patriots show the courage to go on national TV, ( even if it was only the low-rated CNN ) and try to educate the masses about their understanding of America’s problems today, and to offer up plausible solutions that they would bring to the office of the President of the United States if elected in 2012. Despite the elitists and assorted pundits who have nothing better to do than to try to divide America further with childish back-biting and petty rhetoric, this group in N.H. made a very strong showing of conservative principles. This can be evidenced by the pathetic attempts of some in the media and on the Internet in trying to denounce the 2012 Republican candidates messages we heard on Monday night:

From the George Soros/AOL/ Huffington Post’s leftist latrine we see the following headline: New Hampshire Debate: Short-Sighted Candidates Miss Opportunity to Rebrand GOP . What more would you expect from Maegan Carberry, who has the audacity  to brag about being a co-host over at Variety’s very own “Wilshire and Washington.”  Just in case you are just like me and have never heard of this obscure arm of D.A.M., here is their explanation of what they supposedly do from their very own website:

Wilshire & Washington highlights the enduring relationship between entertainment and politics. More than a mere curiosity, the intersection of these worlds play out daily in fund raising, celebrity causes, show business lobbying and creative expression.

Considering that most of what goes on in Washington D.C. today is nothing more than a poorly written theatrical drama being played out by a bunch of bought-out tyrants and power-seeking politicians, the last thing we need is to inject more Hollywood-style celebrity(ism). So Ms. Carberry thinks the GOP debate failed to re-brand the GOP. Silly me, and here Ithought the debate was about the individual candidates and what they would do to stop the debt-bleeding that will bankrupt America soon. Then again, Ms. Carberry is using a very old D.A.M. tactic here her semi-hidden message that this debate was somehow a failure by ALL candidates, as the headline states. Ms. Carberry is an unbiased political expert who reports the facts without bias right?  Well, not quite, as the following paragraph from umd.edu explains:

“Location data is an important social media tool that is currently in early-adopter phase, but that will likely play a major role in 2012,” said Rock the Vote spokeswoman Maegan Carberry. “We’re excited to see how it comes together in 2010 and learn from that going forward. (note: concerned grassroots American voters rose up and stomped the liberal agenda in the 2010 elections, and booted a record number of Liberal fake Democrats out of our governments at all levels)

In case our readers are unfamiliar about the Rock the Vote  non-profit youth organising arm of D.A.M. that claims to be non-partisan, we see once again that they are in fact just the opposite of an innocent educate the youth non-partisan group:

According to the Los Angeles Times, Rock the Vote experienced financial problems in the aftermath of the 2004 election. It emerged from the election $700,000 in debt, and its president resigned in the summer of 2005 “amid disagreements about the organization’s direction.”Working with founder Jeff Ayeroff, political director Hans Riemer lead the effort to rebuild for the 2007-2008 presidential cycle before leaving the organization to become the youth director for Senator Barack Obama‘s Presidential Campaign.

Nothing to see there folks, just move on. When Barack Obama brags about capturing the majority of the youth vote to push him to his win in 2008,  it is largely due to these types of groups working as an arm of today’s  D.A.M., and their mastery of false propaganda and misinformation promotion. What I also  find disgusting to the tenth degree today, is how the majority of the non-profit arms of the D.A.M. love to put the word “non-partisan” in their mission statements! Nothing like lying to the youth of America to keep them ignorant and misinformed  to promote the Liberal agenda. Pay attention kids, you are being used, and will regret it eventually, if you don’t inform yourselves about today’s situation in American politics.

Over at the always non-partisan, taxpayer funded NPR, we can always expect unbiased, truthful reporting, right?  Well not exactly as you can see from this article:

Headline: GOP Hopefuls Target Obama, Not Each Other. FYI NPR, the candidates were not “targeting Barack Hussein Obama,”  (They werein fact  pointing out his failed Socialistic, unAmerican far left Liberal agenda and policies. There is a big difference, and you people are disgusting with that headline suggesting it was all nothing more than a personal attack on Mr. Hope n Change.)

The typically verbose Texas Rep. Ron Paul, a leading figure in the Tea Party movement, was stumped when the moderator asked whether Obama had “done one thing right when it comes to the economy.” ( emphasis mine)

 FYI again NPR: While many Tea party groups and grass roots concerned citizens agree with Ron Paul’s Libertarian message of a limited government, he is not in fact considered a leading figure of the Tea party. Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin and Senator Jim DeMint are however, considered to be respected leaders in Tea Party ideology, which happens to be based on obeying our Constitution,  limiting the scope and size of our government, along with fiscal responsibility by OUR government. maybe if the NPR propagandists would actually talk to some real grass roots Tea party members, they wouldn’t look so foolish in their total misunderstanding of them. Of course, this would go against the NPR agenda of promoting the Liberal agenda as we have seen time and time again. NPR is nothing more than another arm of the D.A.M., period.

In the following lead paragraph of the NPR’s latest attempt to denounce conservative principles we see this:

The field of GOP presidential contenders appeared onstage for their first major debate in New Hampshire, taking aim at President Obama, criticizing his handling of the economy and vowing to repeal his health care overhaul. (emphasis mine)

After the shooting of Rep. Giffords, NPR, along with the rest of the D.A.M. were calling for a new civil discourse in politics, yet in their headline about the GOP debate here we see the words “Target“, and now we see in the lead paragraph that Republican candidates are “taking aim” at Barack Hussein Obama. Is this what the new NPR civil discourse looks like today? Not only is this a pathetic form of hypocrisy, it is also in keeping in line with standard Liberal propaganda that tries to subliminally paint  the far left Barack Obama as some kind of victim here. The real victims here are the future generations of Americans that will be oppressed and freedom-less under the weight of an all controlling, over-sized too powerful government hell bent on destroying American freedoms and prosperity. That is why I shall expose and denounce The Democratic Attack Machine’s propaganda, misinformation and fake democracy at every chance I get. Please join us in fighting and exposing the D.A.M , and share this information with as many concerned Americans as you can.

What’s So Scary About NPR? Nothing!

Joe Conason, a full-on liberal journalist and writer asked the question, “What’s So Scary About NPR?”. There doesn’t seem to be any relevance to the play “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf” other than possibly the first act where Goerge tells a story of a college buddy that “accidentally” killed his own mother and father. Here, Joe is possibly putting the last nail in NPRs coffin “accidentally”.

Mr. Conason’s article wrests with the recent video where NPR executives are exposed as willing to accept $5 Million from the Muslim Brotherhood. Not only would they take the money, they joked about most Americans and their constitutional rights. What’s worse is that they may well have offered to shield the donors from American law.

When a man posing as Ibrahim Kasaam asked, “It sounded like you were saying NPR would be able to shield us from a government audit, is that correct?” NPR’s senior director of institutional giving, Betsy Liley, responded, “I think that is the case, especially if you are anonymous.[1]

Where Joe’s article takes the ridiculous and pushes it right off the ledge of sanity is when he first makes the assertion that NPR is fair and balanced:

It has been decades since NPR — one of the least-slanted and best-reported news sources in the country — depended for a significant part of its revenue on federal funding. The amount that congressional Republicans suddenly decided to ax on an “emergency” basis, around $5 million, represents not only a tiny fragment of the network’s own financing..[2]

NPR hosted animation - Learn to Speak Tea Bag

First, anyone that thinks NPR is the least-slanted and best-reported news sources in the country… is clearly a liberal – oh wait.. we have to remember that Mr. Conason’s most-known work is a book about Conservative lies about liberals (Big Lies – 2003). Secondly, what great news!! Here’s more corroboration that NPR does indeed NOT need taxpayers to pay for the content that most of us do not want. I guess the Republicans will have no trouble axing that funding since even liberal agree that NPR doesn’t need it.

To answer Joe’s bigger question – what’s so scary about NPR?  I say, nothing.  Nothing at all.  It’s not about fear. We aren’t scared of the imbalanced coverage, leftist drivel and liberal bias of much of the media and certainly not one mainly on AM radio. We don’t want NPR de-funded because we are scared of it, we want it de-funded because it’s our money and we no longer wish to pay for programming that we don’t like. I know this might be a surprise to you Mr. Conason, but that’s how free markets work. Create products or services that consumers want, or go out of business.

Sources:
[1] http://dailycaller.com/2011/03/10/new-video-npr-was-going-to-accept-muslim-education-action-center-donation-and-hide-it-from-the-government/#ixzz1HIH5LZvW
[2] http://www.creators.com/opinion/joe-conason/what-s-so-scary-about-npr.html

FCC Gameplans to Shut Down Patriot Talk Radio

The FCC is quietly planning an all out assault on free speech and Conservative/Patriot talk radio in America. In a report from DickMorris.com, Mr. Morris outlines how the FCC, with the blockage of the Fairness Doctrine by Congress, will once again do an end around Congress and try to silence free speech through regulatory gimmickry. Mr. Morris makes 3 very valid points on their plans in his new book REVOLT! :

First, the FCC led by another Obama appointed Czar named Mark LLoyd*   Who just  happens to be another radical along the lines of one self-avowed Communist Van Jones, will attempt to shorten the radio license period from the now required renewal of 8 years, to requiring re-licensingevery 4 years. This would give the radical progressives under LLoyd’s direction life and death decision-making powers over all radio stations before the people get rid of Obama and all of his appointed radical cronies. Time is of the essence here, and they know it. These types of actions have been commonplace from within the Obama administration and his radical lapdogs for the entire time he has been in office. They are trying to make Congress powerless, and to an extent they already have. These radicals are not elected by the people, therefore have no authority to create laws that support their progressive agenda of stifling any opposition to their Socialist utopian ideology.

Next up in the FCC”s game-plan to stop Americans from speaking up against their agenda is in requiring all radio stations to produce 25% of their programming locally.  This would make it economically impossible for stations to be broadcast nationwide for free, therefore shutting a number of them down. Talk radio listeners have every right to listen to the station of their choice, regardless of what Mr. Lloyd’s Socialistic wishes are in this situation. keep in mind that while all of this is going on, NPR and PBS suck off millions of taxpayer dollars to basically promote the Democratic agenda  on a yearly basis. The wife of  Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller,  Sharon Percy Rockefeller, is CEO at WETA, the Washington DC PBS affiliate, and her compensation for 2009  was a very capitalistic $447,166.00. Her husband votes and lobbies for funding for PBS, a direct conflict of interest that is illegal at its base. So anyone trying to say PBS and NPR aren’t politically biased towards Democrats, needs to see that documented reality check I just laid down there. Why would the taxpayers allow the wife of a Democratic Senator, who also happens to already be filthy rich, bilk the taxpayers for a salary larger than the President of the United States?

The last set of  illegal plans coming out of the FCC and the radical FCC czar Mark Lloyd to shut down free speech in talk radio seem to come right out of Obama’s fake social justice scams using the very same community organizing scheme that allowed him to lie his way into the White-house in 2008.  The FCC wants to establish “Community Advisory Boards” to report on whether the radio stations are “satisfying the needs of the community.”  More illegally appointed “advisors” would be given the authority to provide the basis for denying radio broadcasting licenses to anyone who doesn’t agree with the Liberal agenda, and of course the Democratic Party that they have heavily infested today.

To top the agenda off, the FCC wants the power to fine stations for failing to “comply with the community advisory boards” with the fines being paid directly to the FCC ! This would be the final piece in making Liberal ideology the de-facto law in radio broadcasting across the land! In a country where the radical Liberals already control the Main Stream media which receive their talking points memo’s from the Obama administration Liberal Democratic propaganda operatives, the censoring and financial threats to free speech and talk radio represent a very clear and present danger to America today. The FCC must be stripped of this false, self-appointed authority today, whether it takes de-funding them, or deleting this tyrannical band of radical misfits program all together.

Congress needs to get on this situation and do it today, instead of letting it sneak by while the Liberals put up the distraction of the phony budget debate that is going on now.

* http://www.nevilleawards.com/obama_marklloyd.shtml

Dangerous Precursors to Censorship: Government Stepping In

During President Obama’s election bid, the fairness doctrine garnered some of the spotlight.  Conservatives warned that the doctrine would censor the media and filter it of any messages the administration did not agree with.  The liberals.. well, that’s what they were hoping would happen.

Liberal media is facing the end of an era.  The three-network liberal oligopoly that owned nightly news broadcasts for decades is serving fewer and fewer news consumers, the left-biased newspaper industry is losing papers one-after-another, liberal radio shows such as Air America have been falling off the dial due to lack of interest and MSNBC’s heavily left-leaning messaging is falling on deaf ears.  The most-obvious liberal mass-media outlet, MSNBC, is facing ratings shortfalls and they are not improving.  MSNBC’s viewership is one third of Fox News and losing ground constantly.  From Mediabsitro.com:

All MSNBC programming was down double digits compared to Q1 of ’09. Monday to Sunday, MSNBC’s primetime for the quarter was down -15% in Total Viewers compared to Q1 of ’09 (-22% demo). “Countdown” was down -26% in Total Viewers (-42% demo), and “Rachel Maddow” was down -25% (-38% demo).

America is a right-of-center country and it should be no surprise that they prefer messaging that is in-line with their core beliefs.  Unions, community organizations, and other liberal groups would prefer the old days of liberal networks and print media being the only mass-media available.  To push for a return, those groups are asking the FCC to censor what we see and hear.  It’s clear that these groups believe that people are too stupid to discern good news from hate speech and that the government will need to do that for them:

A coalition of more than 30 organizations argue in a letter to the FCC that the Internet has made it harder for the public to separate the facts from bigotry masquerading as news. .. The groups argue the Internet has made it harder for the public to separate the facts from bigotry masquerading as news..

Although MSNBC is an obvious underdog to other less-liberal TV news outlets, it’s still an outlet and has opinion shows to balance those of more Conservative programming.  NPR isn’t dead by any stretch of the imagination and offers some left-of-center programming in that medium – the far left find that NPR isn’t near left enough, ya’ can’t please everyone).  Why the need to label anything they disagree with as hate speech?  Because, that’s what Alinskey told them to do.

If one government assault on new media wasn’t enough, the Federal Trade Commission is chiming in.  Now why would so many in the government, led by those chosen by President Obama, all be working towards the same end?  Mull it over.

The FTC published a discussion memo which it hopes to lead discussions on how government policy could save the print media industry.  Even though the introduction tries to say that all forms of media are equal, the entire memo documents the plight of newspapers.

The memo has some strange motives.  In one section, the letter actually discounts the tactic of taking newspapers to an online only model:

..many newspapers still receive approximately 90% of their advertising revenues from print advertising, with somewhat less than 10% coming from online advertising. Print advertising revenues still account for more than half of newspapers’ revenues. Thus, even though, in theory, newspapers could move to online-only and save approximately 50% of their costs (due to printing and distribution), such a move would not make economic sense.

What a catastrophically misguided assessment that is.  If a newspaper went online only, their print advertising revenues should convert at better than a 0% rate.  Does this socialistic, self-preoccupied gang of over-thinkers really believe that a newspaper that goes online couldn’t get at least a small percentage of their local, online ad customers to pay for online exposure?  Secondly, that comment dictates that they would only gain savings from print and distribution.  What about a modern, non-office workforce?  Think of all the office space not necessary as journalists, editors, formatters, ad salespersons, etc all don’t need a desk.  Think how small the office would be, how furniture costs, computer, phone, electricity… one could go on.   This comment is meant to provide protection for the dearest of liberal special interests .. unions.  If newspapers go all online, newspapers will have little use for union labor, and a work-at-home workforce will be nearly impossible to organize.

Another questionable entry states that newspapers are struggling do to manpower issues:

Staff downsizing has caused significant losses of news coverage. For example, coverage of state houses and state perspectives on news from Washington, D.C. has declined, as has coverage of local government issues, foreign affairs, and specialty beats such as science and the arts.

Imagine how many journalists they could add if they didn’t have to afford those expensive unionized print and distribution employees.

Ultimately, liberal media realize that they need a government bail-out.  The free-market system isn’t working for them (the demand part).  If they need to abuse federal hate speech laws to get a hand-out, they have no problem with that at all.

Next the memo seeks to demonstrate how news media that has gone online has not been able to create a sustainable business model.

Although dozens of newly created online news sites have found sufficient funds to keep going through the early years of their existence, virtually no sites have yet found a sustainable business model that would allow them to survive without some form of funding from non-profit sources.

Well this article demonstrates that not only did a formerly print newspaper go online, it’s online arm is much more profitable:

The Wall Street Journal Online has 731,000 paid subscribers, up 5.2% from the previous quarter, at $84/year. Yes, that’s a $61.4 million annual revenue stream.

Of course, liberals aren’t even going to discuss the success of the Wall Street Journal, they don’t believe it matches their messaging.  Then again, that may be why it’s also successful.  Well, what about The Guardian in the U.K.?  It turned a profit in … 2006!  It is not impossible to create profitable online news content, it just requires that there is a market for your style of content.

Now that the memo has worked so hard to put it’s ill-conceived justifications, here come the brain-trust that is the FTC’s recommendations.

Thus, this speaker suggests amending the copyright laws to create a content license fee (perhaps $5.00 to $7.00) to be paid by every Internet Service Provider on eaaccount it provides. He suggests creating a new division of the Copyright Office, would operate under streamlined procedures and would collect and distribute these fees. Copyright owners who elect to participate would agree to periodically submit records of their digitized download records to the Copyright Office.

Sure, at first, the submission of digitized download records is only those who “elect to participate”.  What happens when the government sees the benefit in having everyone do this?  Not everyone wants big brother watching everything they do online.  Highly-critical Conservative media could well be silenced by fears that submitted critiques of the government may bring down the wrath of the U.S. Government.  It could limit the “fair-use” of copyright material as fears of accidentally stepping over some subjective line could bring lawsuits or worse if the content isn’t favorable to the government.

Another recommendation should be no real surprise, give more direct federal dollars (read: your money) to *drum roll* NPR:

Public radio and television should be substantially reoriented to provide significant local news reporting in every community served by public stations and their Web sites. This requires urgent action by and reform of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, increased congressional funding and support for public media news reporting, and changes in mission and leadership for many public stations across the country

In the same FTC memo, the point had just been made that these subsidies get too expensive and are unsustainable:

Since that time, the amount of subsidies for newspapers and periodicals has substantially decreased. According to some, if the federal government in 2008 had “devoted the same percentage of the Gross Domestic Product to press subsidies as it did in the early 1840s, it would have spent some $30 billion to spawn journalism.

Several of the remaining proposals are just ways for the greedy government elitists to get their hands on more money:

  • Tax credits for hiring journalists
  • Citizen news vouchers only payable to non-profit media sources
  • Journalism grants to universities
  • Increase the postal subsidies for newspapers – remember that $30 Billion umber a few paragraphs ago?  This was the subsidy that would have caused it.
  • Tax on airwaves – had to know this would come
  • Additional taxes on consumer electronics – not sure what my PS3 has to do with journalism..
  • Spectrum tax – a tax on the way they sell the airwaves they are already planning to tax – these guys have no limits
  • Advertising taxes
  • ISP-cell tax – I think this is a tax on mobile phone data plans

Giant surprise, they have proposed more taxes than good ideas.  Give the money to the government so they can fix private entities.  That’s been working.  These taxes are intended to allow the government to funnel more money into the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (e.g. NPR).  In fact, this whole memo is a brainstorming document for how the government can get left-leaning, union-fed news media to be popular again.

People are going to watch what they want to watch, read what they want to read, and as they become more informed, the majority are turning away from the.  This tactic is just another attempt to force-feed the public their viewpoint.  If readers, listeners and viewers believed their commentary, they wouldn’t be in trouble.