Seems like more and more re=pub=lick=ans are being caught saying one thing to 'insiders' and something else to voters. Maybe their getting caught more due to the internet where something newsworthy comes out within minutes instead of being vetted for two days by network news organizations with limited time on the air and endless newsworthy stories that they have to prioritize.
By the time most old school news organizations have spent ten minutes talking internally about wether they want to air (on TV or Radio for example) or net-cast (post a story or blog on the internet) the story has already been posted and commented on by some one else.
About all the old school news organizations seem able to do is put their spin on the story. One problem is that the truth travels at the same speed as gossip and lies. There the old school news organizations sometimes have an advantage in that the're more likely to be able to find out if the story has a truthful basis.
Some organizations pick up any story that fits their agenda because the're not on the air to give unbiased news but only to push their owners political viewpoint as if it were regular news. These don’t care if the story is wrong or not accurate or tells only one side of a story. That's the market that many re=pub=lick=ans seem to be aiming their voter story too, knowing the inside part of the story will never be shown or told by the political agenda organizations. If the story turns out to be wrong in any way they'll just ignore that fact and let the story die. That way anyone swayed by their organizations agenda story will not be lost to them (unless they happen to listen to unbiased news organizations). That organization may even say they have never had to retract a story and maybe they haven’t in the legal sense. But it dirties the water for the moral high ground the're claiming to share with other real news organizations that do care if a story is true and in need of telling because it's news not because it fits a political agenda.
Some examples of this re=pub=lick=an tactic are shown for example in the recent diary by Joan McCarter
“Mr. 'Independent' Scott Brown promises endless obstruction of Obama in campaign pitch”
She points how he has told voters he's an independent but tells what he thought were all insiders that he'd be anti-Obama all the way no matter what the issue.
I'd never get this diary posted if I looked up all the recent stories I've seen like this so you’ll just have to google it if you want more examples. Bet it takes you less than a minute to find one or several. I’ll be checking the comments to see what new examples show up too.
I remember a few years ago a news organization was caught slanting stories out of Iraq the way Iraq wanted them slanted (before the Iraq war.) so that they'd be allowed access there now one else got. They claimed then and now that they can always be trusted. Yeah, right, like every time I hear the ‘The most trusted name in news’ I wonder how many people remember when they were outed on not being trustworthy at all. As I recall what got them outed was that we found internal documents telling about the deal the Iraqi’s had made with the news organization. We now know a lot of slanting went on in both Iraq and the United States. By political parties that had an agenda. Would the agenda’s have gotten legs as long as they did if ‘honesty is the best policy” was the moto?
What I love about KOS it gives us space to uncover these Republican liars and show them for what that are. Of course I doubt news organizations like F?X will report these events but I’m glad for one that KOS helps us spread the truth behind the lies.
PS It sure would be nice to be able to tune into the KOS news network on public TV, Radio, and more. Maybe if we can overcome the marbles rule in current politics if will happen. (marbles rule equals – The own with the most marbles (read that money) wins.)
Thanks for reading.