News travels slowly at Fox News and other mainstream media
Andy Martin on why the truth about Barack Obama is so slow to surface. Major media want to receive news tips in the form of e-mail, but then assign junior-level staff to screen and vet the mountain of e-mails that pours in.
ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com
“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”
AMERICA’S #1 POLITICAL
BLOG ON THE 2008 CAMPAIGN
NEWS TRAVELS SLOWLY AT FOX NEWS AND OTHER MAINSTREAM MEDIA
WHY THE TRUTH ABOUT OBAMA IS SO SLOW TO SURFACE
(NEW YORK)(May 8, 2008) We will have more to say about Tuesday night and the pressure on Hillary Clinton to withdraw, but first I want to address an issue that is constantly a topic of e-mails we receive: "Have you sent this to Fox? Why are the mainstream media not covering this?" In other words, why is the "truth" which we develop about Obama so slow to reach the mainstream media, led by Fox?
My experiences on Tuesday indicate why.
First, a little background. In the old days, we had to literally hand deliver news releases. Someone either had to go out and hand them out (the way I began 42 years ago) or mail them. FedEx had not yet been invented. I became technologically advanced 35 years ago when I added a TWX (telex) line to our office, allowing me to directly communicate with some media (mainly TV stations) and others by Western Union "Mailgram."
Thirty years ago, overnight delivery began for high value communications, but overnight charges were also high-cost. Then came e-mail. Today most communication is by e-mail. You press the "send" button and the message is delivered instantly. Or is it? You see, experienced editors do not read the mountains of e-mail that pours into mainstream media. Usually, sifting and filtering of the e-mail is done by interns and less experienced staff members. Seldom do TV personalities have contact with the raw e-mail pouring in. The individuals who first see the e-mail are well intentioned but lack the experience and knowledge to really separate the wheat from the chaff. Very few senior editors actually go through their own e-mail the way I do.
Now back to Fox and Tuesday's election as an example of why facts are so slow to reach the surface.
Late Monday evening/Tuesday morning I sent out my story on the actual links between William Ayers and Barack Obama. This was/is a rock-solid piece of hard news and investigative analysis, and answered the open question: what was the extent of the relationship between the two men, and was Obama lying, again, about one of his associates?
I also added my interpretation on the Ayers-Hugo Chavez link, and suggested how the Venezuelan dictator and American radical might be teaming up to influence our presidential campaign, which was exactly what Chavez is accused of doing in the Argentinean presidential election. So, we had a story that was mostly based on solid rock, and partially based on conclusions that used the known facts to speculate on what could be in store.
Eighteen (18) hours after my story was released I was watching Fox News where Sean Hannity and Karl Rove were discussing the future. Both suggested there was a need for more information about the Obama-Ayers connection. In other words, in eighteen hours my story had not germinated to the point where anyone who was actually on TV was aware of the evidence.
Likewise, by today, columnist Robert Novak was still speculating about the Ayers matter and was apparently unaware of the connections we had published. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/07/AR2008050703187.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
Yes, news travels slowly even when it is moving at the speed of light.
Is my story going to dynamite Obama at some point? Absolutely. But despite the immediacy of e-mail, actual facts travel a circuitous if not tortuous course to reach the scripts of on-the-air TV personalities.
Media other than Fox, many of which are unashamedly pro-Obama, are really not interested in unpleasant truths about Obama. More critically, Democrats themselves discourage and suppress truth-telling by asking their presidential candidates to avoid "personal attacks." Constant demands over the past year to "keep it positive" were directives to protect Obama from serious inquiry and exposure.
Tuesday night the cover-up was continuing. The airwaves were saturated with pundits saying it was "all right for Hillary to stay in the race," so long as she kept her comments "positive" and did not attack or expose Obama in any fashion. In other words, the mainstream media and leading Democrats have been in an active but informal conspiracy to suppress the truth about Obama.
Under these circumstances, ABC News deserves massive congratulations for allowing Gibson and Stephanopoulos to ask tough questions on matters of extreme relevance to Obama's character and fitness for office. In effect, Hillary was being told Tuesday night she can remain a candidate, but not be a "real" candidate that points out the weaknesses in her opponent's character and resume.
Today's Washington Post has an editorial calling on Obama for some truth-telling. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/07/AR2008050703271.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
Next week, starting Monday May 12th, we are going to begin "Obama Truth-Telling Week," in which we challenge Obama to tell the public the truth abut his links to the various unsavory characters in his life. The process of getting the truth to the surface may be slow, sometimes tedious, but over the past four years since we first exposed Barack Obama as a fraud I have not tired of the task or hesitated to put the truth before the American people. Whether Americans want to know the truth about Obama is another question. Stay tuned for "Obama Truth-Telling Week," starting next week.
-------------------------------------------------------------
We’re not always first because we are #1;
We are #1 because we're always first.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Martin, Chicago's #1 Internet columnist, broadcaster and media critic, is the Executive Editor and publisher of http://www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and world events with more than forty years of experience. He is a chronicler of all things Midwestern and the authentic Voice of Middle America. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. He has been a candidate for U. S. Senator from Illinois. www.AndyforUSSenator.com. Comments? E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com. Media contact: (866) 706-2639. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com. [Editing note: we make typos, and we can’t recall every posting or e-mail; but updated versions are usually found on our blogs and web site.]
Andy Martin on why the truth about Barack Obama is so slow to surface. Major media want to receive news tips in the form of e-mail, but then assign junior-level staff to screen and vet the mountain of e-mails that pours in.
ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com
“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”
AMERICA’S #1 POLITICAL
BLOG ON THE 2008 CAMPAIGN
NEWS TRAVELS SLOWLY AT FOX NEWS AND OTHER MAINSTREAM MEDIA
WHY THE TRUTH ABOUT OBAMA IS SO SLOW TO SURFACE
(NEW YORK)(May 8, 2008) We will have more to say about Tuesday night and the pressure on Hillary Clinton to withdraw, but first I want to address an issue that is constantly a topic of e-mails we receive: "Have you sent this to Fox? Why are the mainstream media not covering this?" In other words, why is the "truth" which we develop about Obama so slow to reach the mainstream media, led by Fox?
My experiences on Tuesday indicate why.
First, a little background. In the old days, we had to literally hand deliver news releases. Someone either had to go out and hand them out (the way I began 42 years ago) or mail them. FedEx had not yet been invented. I became technologically advanced 35 years ago when I added a TWX (telex) line to our office, allowing me to directly communicate with some media (mainly TV stations) and others by Western Union "Mailgram."
Thirty years ago, overnight delivery began for high value communications, but overnight charges were also high-cost. Then came e-mail. Today most communication is by e-mail. You press the "send" button and the message is delivered instantly. Or is it? You see, experienced editors do not read the mountains of e-mail that pours into mainstream media. Usually, sifting and filtering of the e-mail is done by interns and less experienced staff members. Seldom do TV personalities have contact with the raw e-mail pouring in. The individuals who first see the e-mail are well intentioned but lack the experience and knowledge to really separate the wheat from the chaff. Very few senior editors actually go through their own e-mail the way I do.
Now back to Fox and Tuesday's election as an example of why facts are so slow to reach the surface.
Late Monday evening/Tuesday morning I sent out my story on the actual links between William Ayers and Barack Obama. This was/is a rock-solid piece of hard news and investigative analysis, and answered the open question: what was the extent of the relationship between the two men, and was Obama lying, again, about one of his associates?
I also added my interpretation on the Ayers-Hugo Chavez link, and suggested how the Venezuelan dictator and American radical might be teaming up to influence our presidential campaign, which was exactly what Chavez is accused of doing in the Argentinean presidential election. So, we had a story that was mostly based on solid rock, and partially based on conclusions that used the known facts to speculate on what could be in store.
Eighteen (18) hours after my story was released I was watching Fox News where Sean Hannity and Karl Rove were discussing the future. Both suggested there was a need for more information about the Obama-Ayers connection. In other words, in eighteen hours my story had not germinated to the point where anyone who was actually on TV was aware of the evidence.
Likewise, by today, columnist Robert Novak was still speculating about the Ayers matter and was apparently unaware of the connections we had published. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/07/AR2008050703187.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
Yes, news travels slowly even when it is moving at the speed of light.
Is my story going to dynamite Obama at some point? Absolutely. But despite the immediacy of e-mail, actual facts travel a circuitous if not tortuous course to reach the scripts of on-the-air TV personalities.
Media other than Fox, many of which are unashamedly pro-Obama, are really not interested in unpleasant truths about Obama. More critically, Democrats themselves discourage and suppress truth-telling by asking their presidential candidates to avoid "personal attacks." Constant demands over the past year to "keep it positive" were directives to protect Obama from serious inquiry and exposure.
Tuesday night the cover-up was continuing. The airwaves were saturated with pundits saying it was "all right for Hillary to stay in the race," so long as she kept her comments "positive" and did not attack or expose Obama in any fashion. In other words, the mainstream media and leading Democrats have been in an active but informal conspiracy to suppress the truth about Obama.
Under these circumstances, ABC News deserves massive congratulations for allowing Gibson and Stephanopoulos to ask tough questions on matters of extreme relevance to Obama's character and fitness for office. In effect, Hillary was being told Tuesday night she can remain a candidate, but not be a "real" candidate that points out the weaknesses in her opponent's character and resume.
Today's Washington Post has an editorial calling on Obama for some truth-telling. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/07/AR2008050703271.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
Next week, starting Monday May 12th, we are going to begin "Obama Truth-Telling Week," in which we challenge Obama to tell the public the truth abut his links to the various unsavory characters in his life. The process of getting the truth to the surface may be slow, sometimes tedious, but over the past four years since we first exposed Barack Obama as a fraud I have not tired of the task or hesitated to put the truth before the American people. Whether Americans want to know the truth about Obama is another question. Stay tuned for "Obama Truth-Telling Week," starting next week.
-------------------------------------------------------------
We’re not always first because we are #1;
We are #1 because we're always first.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Martin, Chicago's #1 Internet columnist, broadcaster and media critic, is the Executive Editor and publisher of http://www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and world events with more than forty years of experience. He is a chronicler of all things Midwestern and the authentic Voice of Middle America. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. He has been a candidate for U. S. Senator from Illinois. www.AndyforUSSenator.com. Comments? E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com. Media contact: (866) 706-2639. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com. [Editing note: we make typos, and we can’t recall every posting or e-mail; but updated versions are usually found on our blogs and web site.]
posted by Andy Martin | 12:02 AM
1 Comments:
So where's the Truth-Telling Week?
Post a Comment
<< Home