New York Times, Washington Post, Fox News strike deals for anti-Clinton research

[kpete]

By DYLAN BYERS | 4/20/15 12:22 PM EDT
The New York Times, The Washington Post and Fox News have made exclusive agreements with a conservative author for early access to his opposition research on Hillary Clinton, a move that has confounded members of the Clinton campaign and some reporters, the On Media blog has confirmed.

"Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich" will debut on May 5. But the Times, the Post and Fox have already made arrangements with author Peter Schweizer to pursue some of the material included in his book, which seeks to draw connections between Clinton Foundation donations and speaking fees and Hillary Clinton's actions as secretary of state. Schweizer is the president of the Government Accountability Institute, a conservative research group, and previously served as an adviser to Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin.

Fox News' use of Schweizer's book has surprised no one. The bulk of the network's programming is conservative, and the book's publisher, HarperCollins, is owned by News Corporation. But the Times and Post's decision to partner with a partisan researcher has raised a few eyebrows. Some Times reporters view the agreement as unusual, sources there said. Still others defended the agreement, noting that it was no different from using a campaign's opposition research to inform one's reporting -- so long as that research is fact-checked and vetted. A spokesperson for the Times did not provide comment by press time.

.................

MORE:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/04/new-york-times-fox-news-strike-deals-for-conservative-205791.html

[global1]

1. Freedom Of The 'Full Court Press"......nt (sarcasm)

[JaneyVee]

2. the axis of evil.

[onecaliberal]

3. Naked politics by the so called 4th estate. The founders

are surely rolling in their graves.

[DetlefK]

4. To quote "The Interview":

"The audience wants shit! They eat up this shit and they love it! Gimme shit! Mangia! Mangia!"

[fredamae]

5. It is time "we" toss a "wet blanket"

over the "electronic instruments of propaganda" and unplug it all.

I plan to Not read, listen to or view Any of the BS! I refuse to give Any of them One Iota of a Return on their Political Interference Investments.

I KNOW I am Not the only one who is capable of decision making without Corporate influence/buyouts aka: Interference between a government and her people.

Are we/have "we" already, while simultaneously complaining about our "bought off" politicians allowed Ourselves to be subtlety "bought off" also? Do we Not notice them donning US with Puppet Strings via MSM tools/gadgets and other such things?
That's why there are so many "circle-jerk" distractions, perhaps?
"They" can go to Hell.

[Oktober]

7. You have no interest in determining what is true and what isn't?

... or are you just dismissing anything out of hand as 100% lie that comes from those sources?

[fredamae]

8. I'm saying...

"we" can do our Own research, talk amongst ourselves, review their votes/speeches/actions on matters of actual Importance to the American People. We are then...a real Informed Voter.
We need to vet our candidates without corporate influence.
What "THEY" produce about candidates "A/B/C" is Rarely relevant to the Cause of suffering for the general population (99%) and the votes those candidates have taken. We have Already, over the past several elections allowed corporate theater to Heavily influence our decisions at the voting booth. Why not try something different and rely upon Ourselves this time? That's "Main Street" issues/news...not "Main Stream News".

They can invest in all the theatrical scripts they want...it's all theater, not reality. Many campaigns have revealed, over the years their consultation and training with actors/acting lessons.
It's time, imo...that "we, the people" think for Ourselves and leave the actors...masters of illusion(s) to Hollywood.

[Jackpine Radical]

6. A bunch of thoughts on this--

First, it strikes one as unfair, sorta like a reporter negotiating with a hitman to find out in advance who his targets are so they can scoop the murder stories.

Then I thought, "Well, at least this way Schweizer's attack-dog work will get a little vetting."

Followed immediately with "Who am I kidding? Both of these outlets (NYT, WaPo) have piss-poor track records on shining the light on RW bullshit. Judy Miller & the Iraq War, for example. Or the way they participated in the Bush AWOL coverup by diverting attention onto Dan Rather."

And then more globally, the news media are supposed to be the "sense organs" of the body politick. In that analogy, our "sense organs" are--well, "increasingly untrustworthy" seems a gross understatement. More like "co-opted by the predators and parasites who prey on us, the better to lead us to the slaughter."