Public Broadcasting System acts like an affiliate of the DNC

 Newsbusters:

Since the late 1960s, public broadcasting has been funded by individuals, foundations, corporate grants — and by enormous sums from U.S. taxpayers. Given this government funding, citizens should expect public broadcasting’s news coverage to be scrupulously neutral, since Republicans, Democrats and independents are all helping to foot the bill.

Yet an exhaustive Media Research Center study of PBS’s flagship newscast, NewsHour, found coverage of the first months of the new 118th Congress has been heavily slanted against Republicans:

■ By a five-to-one margin, NewsHour promoted controversies involving congressional Republicans over those involving Democrats.

■ Discussion of the most-covered policy issues (the debt ceiling, gun rights and immigration) was skewed heavily against Republicans.

■ Republicans were often (20 times) branded as extremists (“far right,” “hard right,” etc.) by NewsHour correspondents or commentators; left-wing Democrats were never so labeled.

■ Overall, congressional Republicans faced 85% negative coverage, compared to 54% positive coverage of congressional Democrats. (Methodology is described below.)

For this report, MRC analysts examined each (weeknight) edition of PBS NewsHour from January 3 through May 2, the first four months of the 118th Congress. Total coverage of the Congress — both the institution itself as well as individual members — was 484 minutes, an average of 5 minutes, 37 seconds per broadcast.
 
By far, most coverage zeroed in on House Republicans, with 212 minutes of airtime compared with just under 54 minutes for House Democrats. Senate coverage was more balanced, with Senate Democrats slightly edging Senate Republicans for attention (58 minutes vs. 41 minutes). The remaining 119 minutes consisted of discussions of both parties, or the Congress generally without regard to party.
...

Why should tax money from Republicans be spent in this manor?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more

Bin Laden's concern about Zarqawi's remains

James Robbins: ... Bin Laden suggests that President Bush should allow Zarqawi’s body to be returned to his family in Jordan, but this is a matter that is up to the Jordanian government, which so far has not shown much interest in facilitating a homecoming. Bin Laden mocks King Abdullah II, calling him a Coalition minion, and asking “w hat scares you about Abu Musab after he’s dead? You know that his funeral, if allowed to happen, would be a huge funeral showing the extent of sympathy with the mujahedin.” A large crowd would definitely turn out, though most people would be on hand to demonstrate their anger and disgust. Last November’s hotel bombings in Amman , masterminded by Zarqawi, are still fresh in people’s memory, and mentioning them to Jordanians has the same visceral impact as memory of the 9/11 attacks does here. Jordan has adopted a zero-tolerance policy towards those who choose to mourn the country’s least favorite son, and four opposition members of parliament who paid con
Read more