START A PETITION 27,000,000 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x

What Would the Koch Brothers Do to the Los Angeles Times?


US Politics & Gov't  (tags: americans, business, investing, investors, money, news, politics, society, culture, ethics, freedoms, interesting, politics, society, republicans, propaganda )

Robert
- 604 days ago - washingtonpost.com
The Koch brothers want to buy The Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, the Baltimore Sun, the Orlando Sentinel and the Hartford Courant.



Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.

Comments

Robert Tomlinson (65)
Wednesday April 24, 2013, 6:32 am
This story should scare the Be Jabbers out of every liberal and moderate in this country. Here are some excerpts from the OP-ED:
. 1. it will come complete with a commitment to journalism as a branch of right-wing ideology.
2. Given the nature of the Kochs’ investment in grass-roots activism and politics, that doesn’t bode well for the kind of fact-based journalism that most American newspapers strive to practice.
3. the staffs at those papers fear that, once Kochified, the papers would quickly turn into print versions of Fox News. A recent informal poll that one L.A. Times writer conducted of his colleagues showed that almost all planned to exit if the Kochs took control (and that included sportswriters and arts writers).
 

Kit B. (276)
Wednesday April 24, 2013, 7:04 am

Between Murdoch and the Koch's newspapers would be worthless for information. Who has more sway? The left or the right? Consider this, even Fox is now running banners to support "green". It just might be that even the crazy right is realizing that a fight with history is a losing battle.

I would say that the FCC will stop this intrusion into the media, if we base that on past experience than that will not happen.
 

Patrick Donovan (319)
Wednesday April 24, 2013, 8:28 am
- nothing good for most of us. They are the core of Greedy Old Politicians club.
 

Dave C. (227)
Wednesday April 24, 2013, 11:38 am
the thought of the Koch Brothers owning any media outlets sickens and terrifies me.
 

Michela m. (3955)
Wednesday April 24, 2013, 12:13 pm
I already Posted a Petition in Orangutans: Men of the Forest
http://www.care2.com/c2c/groups/disc.html?gpp=28682&pst=1323252
136) New!! Pet.: Tell The Tribune Company: Stay Koch Free
http://current.com/16t4nkc
Tell Tribune Company CEO Peter Liguori: Do not sell the Tribune Company media properties to David & Charles Koch, or any other Climate-denying propagandists. Petrochemical billionaire brothers Charles & David Koch are vying to purchase the Tribune Company’s media assets, including the critically important Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, & the Spanish-language Hoy papers.
The communities served by Tribune’s properties are key stakeholders in the decision. That's why Forecast the Facts is joining the Courage Campaign to object to the Koch Industries bid.
 

Lynne Buckley (0)
Thursday April 25, 2013, 12:34 pm
I wouldn't read any paper tainted by the Koch Brothers. I refuse to read Murdoch rags because they're junk.
 

Stuart Thomas (519)
Thursday April 25, 2013, 2:45 pm
God help us if the Koch Brothers take over the LA Times and the Chicago Tribune - the 2nd and 3rd largest cities in the United States and other major cities as well.

Conservatives already have FOX, the New York Post, and the Wall Street Journal - all major news outlets.

Thank you, Robert, for the "heads up" on this matter.
 

Birgit W. (152)
Thursday April 25, 2013, 2:47 pm
Greed and power! The Koch Brothers are dangerous.
 

Sharon H. (290)
Thursday April 25, 2013, 2:55 pm
LA is a pretty liberal city and if no one bought or read the Koch rag, wouldn't it eventually go out of business? Also, if no one reads it, why would anyone want to advertise in it? Couldn't that apply to every other paper they want to buy? There are more liberals than Tbaggers and a lot of them never read anything much less a newspaper. A lot of them wouldn't be able to afford a daily paper even if they did read because they're the unemployed dummies who vote against their best interest. (Or am I just wishful thinking?)
 

Robert O. (12)
Thursday April 25, 2013, 3:41 pm
Thanks Robert. The Koch brothers (or as I call them the double hernia) in charge of the LA Times or any other news source would be nothing but a world of trouble. I can just imagine them slowly and insidiously indoctrinating people into their twisted doctrines.
 

Darren Woolsey (109)
Thursday April 25, 2013, 3:41 pm
Why do the rich and powerful want to control the flow of information? Nothing to do with the way we think and react in our daily lives and the choices we make, eh?
 

Patsy Olive (0)
Thursday April 25, 2013, 7:07 pm
we will be in a heap of trouble if the Koch buy thse news papers.
 

Kirsten Taufer (43)
Thursday April 25, 2013, 7:40 pm
Is it fair to say that print is dead?
 

Barbara V. (51)
Thursday April 25, 2013, 9:41 pm
The Koch-roach brothers would swing it around to their way of thinking. If you could CALL it thinking. Evil personified.
 

Fran away F. (117)
Friday April 26, 2013, 2:43 am
A horrifying prospect! The Kochs would hollow out the Tribune papers and turn them into nothing more than mouthpieces for their ultra-right ideology. (It's interesting that their father was a founder of the John Birch Society.) Thanks for this post, Robert, and thanks to Michela for the petition link to: Tell The Tribune Company: Stay Koch Free
http://current.com/16t4nkc
 

John Gregoire (262)
Friday April 26, 2013, 6:06 am
newspapers have largely ceded their independence already. Gannett and it's clones of short attention span writing, Murdocj and his chains of blather , etc. The media as a whole no longer reports and God forbid anyone should do any indepth reporting!
 

Robert K. (31)
Friday April 26, 2013, 9:17 am
Where's extraordinary rendition when it's needed? 8^)
 

Diane O. (167)
Friday April 26, 2013, 2:45 pm
Here's an eye opener for the liberals:

Liberal bias in the media occurs when liberal ideas have undue influence on the coverage or selection of news stories.

Conservative critics of the media say some bias exists within a wide variety of media channels including network news shows of CBS, ABC, and NBC, cable channels CNN, MSNBC and Current TV, as well as major newspapers, news-wires, and radio outlets, especially CBS News, Newsweek, and The New York Times.[21] These arguments intensified when it was revealed that the Democratic Party received a total donation of $1,020,816, given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks (NBC, CBS, ABC), while the Republican Party received only $142,863 via 193 donations.[22] Both of these figures represent donations made in 2008.

A study cited frequently by critics of a "liberal media bias" in American journalism is The Media Elite, a 1986 book co-authored by political scientists Robert Lichter, Stanley Rothman, and Linda Lichter.[23] They surveyed journalists at national media outlets such as The New York Times, The Washington Post, and the broadcast networks. The survey found that most of these journalists were Democratic voters whose attitudes were well to the left of the general public on a variety of topics, including such hot-button social issues as abortion, affirmative action, and gay rights. Then they compared journalists' attitudes to their coverage of controversial issues such as the safety of nuclear power, school busing to promote racial integration, and the energy crisis of the 1970s. The authors concluded that journalists' coverage of controversial issues reflected their own attitudes, and the predominance of political liberals in newsrooms therefore pushed news coverage in a liberal direction. They presented this tilt as a mostly unconscious process of like-minded individuals projecting their shared assumptions onto their interpretations of reality.

In a survey conducted by the American Society of Newspaper Editors in 1997, 61% of reporters stated that they were members of or shared the beliefs of the Democratic Party. Only 15% say their beliefs were best represented by the Republican Party.[24] This leaves 24% undecided or independent.

A 2002 study by Jim A. Kuypers of Dartmouth College, Press Bias and Politics, investigated the issue of media bias. In this study of 116 mainstream US papers, including The New York Times, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and the San Francisco Chronicle, Kuypers stated that the mainstream press in America tends to favor liberal viewpoints. They argued that reporters who they thought were expressing moderate or conservative points of view were often labeled as holding a minority point of view. Kuypers said he found liberal bias in reporting a variety of issues including race, welfare reform, environmental protection, and gun control.[25]

A joint study by the Joan Shorenstein Center on Press, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard University and the Project for Excellence in Journalism found that viewers believe that liberal media bias can be found in television news by networks such as CNN.[26] These findings concerning a perception of liberal bias in television news – particularly at CNN – are also reported by other sources.[27]

A study by political scientists Tim Groseclose of UCLA and Jeff Milyo of the University of Missouri at Columbia attempted to quantify bias among news outlets using statistical models.[28][29] The research highlighted surprising conclusions; the news pages of The Wall Street Journal are more liberal than The New York Times, and the news reporting of PBS is to the right of most mainstream media. The report also states that the news media show a fair degree of centrism, since all but one of the outlets studied are, from an ideological point of view, between the average Democrat and average Republican in Congress. This may be because organizations perceived to be extremist may have difficulty getting access to news material such as interviews.[30]

The study met with criticism from media outlets and academics, including the Wall Street Journal,[31] and Media Matters.[32] Criticisms included:

Different lengths of time studied per media (CBS News was studied for 12 years while the Wall Street Journal was studied for four months).
Lack of context in quoting sources (sources quoted were automatically assumed to be supporting the article)
Lack of balance in sources (Liberal sources such as the NAACP didn't have conservative or counter sources that could add balance)
Flawed political positions of sources (Sources such as the NRA and RAND corporation were considered "liberal" while sources such as the American Civil Liberties Union were "conservative".)

Mark Liberman, a professor of Computer Science and the Director of Linguistic Data Consortium at the University of Pennsylvania, critiqued the statistical model used in this study.[33][34] The model used by Groseclose and Milyo assumes that conservative politicians do not care about the ideological position of think tanks they cite, while liberal ones do. Professor Liberman characterizes this unsupported assumption as preposterous, and argues that it leads to implausible conclusions.[33]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias_in_the_United_States
 

Scott haakon (4)
Friday April 26, 2013, 5:55 pm
Most information is slanted right or left or to praise the Tea Bagger or the leftist anyway. The whole fact is rarely presented. The politicians all all using emotional divisions to gain power. Look at the Videos half the information in 30 sec.
 

Diane O. (167)
Saturday April 27, 2013, 2:51 am
That is true. We have biased reporting on both sides. However, my post was aimed at listing the many biased left wing newspapers. Koch buying the LA Times wouldn't make a bit of difference on the media stage. He would still be far out numbered by the left wing media outlets.
 

Past Member (0)
Saturday April 27, 2013, 8:47 am
Great article. Thanks for sharing. They would probably harass the workers that work for that newspaper.
 

David King (3148)
Saturday April 27, 2013, 10:16 am
Notorious billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch reportedly want to buy some of America's biggest newspapers to push their extremist political agenda.

The bankrupt Tribune Company is selling its eight daily newspapers, including the Chicago Tribune and the Los Angeles Times. According to the New York Times1, the Kochs want to buy these media properties to expand their corporate power and to push their anti-environment, anti-labor and anti-democracy agenda.

We don't need more corporate control of our media and our politics. We need journalism that uncovers corruption — not hack writing that covers it up.

Act Now: Stop the Koch Brothers

By taking action, you’re telling the Tribune Company to put these influential newspapers in the hands of someone — or, better yet, several different someones — who will promote quality journalism. That's not the Koch brothers. And it's not Rupert Murdoch, either.

This is not about partisan politics. Stopping the Koch brothers’ bid for the Tribune Company is about supporting the kind of journalism that acts as a watchdog against the wealthy and powerful.

We can still stop the Koch brothers if we act now.

PLEASE CUT AND PASTE THE LINK TO SIGN THE PETITION:

http://act.freepress.net/go/14351?t=2&akid=4210.9909201.uP87yN
 

Elle B. (82)
Saturday April 27, 2013, 10:49 am
Thank-you for posting this important article Robert.

Expect the usual. If purchased by Kochs, Murdochs or conglomerates and/or subsidiaries of either. . .the L.A. times would most likely be maintained in place for a year [plus or minus--give or take] then merged, moved, melted-down and/or all of the forementioned as media attention is cycled and diverted. Concurrently increasing an abundance of "not" news on "magical market" enterprises, "limited" government, anti-union, "starve-the-beast" activities generated by a few paragraphs rapidly released from "sponsored" institutions and affiliates ie. CATO, Mercatus, The Heritage Foundation, e al to Newsmax, Fox, WND, et al then "sourced" immediately by the same groups to be published, blogged and cited globally as non-partisan, unbiased research references of sorts and professed widely by members of Club for Growth...written into "carbon-copy" legislative bodies across the nation by ALEC...preached in pulpits and praised in pews across the nation as God Given. . .in complete antipathy and mockery of all genuine attempts at "free speech" and "freedom of the press" and a fully participatory democracy. . .

NOTE: Above referenced SOP, strategem and logistics can be revised, participants rebranded and products repackaged without notice. . .of course original ingredients will not change. . .continue to purchase with confidence. . .buy the bull. . .in perpetuem

"The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information." ― Henry A. Wallace, Fmr. U.S. Vice Pres.

"Freedom of the press is not just important to democracy, it is democracy." ―Walter Cronkite, 1980

"If you don't have this freedom of the press, then all these little fellows are weaseling around and doing their monkey business and they never get caught." ―Harold R. Medina

"Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one." ―Abbott Joseph Liebling

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ―Mark Twain, Author

“Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.” ―Aldous Huxley

"As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand." ―Josh Billings
 

Elle B. (82)
Saturday April 27, 2013, 11:14 am
Thank-you for posting Robert.

Expect the usual. If purchased by Kochs, Murdochs or conglomerates and/or subsidiaries of either. . .the L.A. times would most likely be maintained in place for a year [plus or minus--give or take] then merged, moved, melted-down and/or all of the forementioned as media attention is cycled and diverted. Concurrently increasing an abundance of "not" news on "magical market" enterprises, "limited" government, anti-union, "starve-the-beast" activities generated by a few paragraphs rapidly released from "sponsored" institutions and affiliates ie. CATO, Mercatus, The Heritage Foundation, e al to Newsmax, Fox, WND, et al then "sourced" immediately by the same groups to be published, blogged and cited globally as non-partisan, unbiased research references of sorts and professed widely by members of Club for Growth...written into "carbon-copy" legislative bodies across the nation by ALEC...preached in pulpits and praised in pews across the nation as God Given. . .in complete antipathy and mockery of all genuine attempts at "free speech" and "freedom of the press" and a fully participatory democracy. . .

NOTE: Above referenced SOP, strategem and logistics can be revised, participants rebranded and products repackaged without notice. . .of course original ingredients will not change. . .continue to purchase with confidence. . .buy the bull. . .in perpetuem

"The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information." ― Henry A. Wallace, Fmr. U.S. Vice Pres.

"Freedom of the press is not just important to democracy, it is democracy." ―Walter Cronkite, 1980

"If you don't have this freedom of the press, then all these little fellows are weaseling around and doing their monkey business and they never get caught." ―Harold R. Medina

"Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one." ―Abbott Joseph Liebling

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ―Mark Twain, Author

“Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.” ―Aldous Huxley

"As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand." ―Josh Billings
 

Barbara V. (51)
Saturday April 27, 2013, 12:30 pm
You already asked this, and I answered that the Kochroach brothers would twist that paper to their own way of thinking--if you could call it thinking.
 

Sharon H. (290)
Saturday April 27, 2013, 1:12 pm
@David....signed.
 

Diane O. (167)
Saturday April 27, 2013, 1:44 pm
I don't know why the liberals are worried about this.

"In a survey conducted by the American Society of Newspaper Editors in 1997, 61% of reporters stated that they were members of or shared the beliefs of the Democratic Party. Only 15% say their beliefs were best represented by the Republican Party.[24] This leaves 24% undecided or independent."

Looks like the liberal reports far outnumber the conservatives. You have nothing to worry about. Besides, Californians are fleeing to more tax friendly states by the thousands.

Here's an interesting article:

"Cost of Living Sucks Everyone Leaving California"

LOS ANGELES -- Mike Reilly spent his lifetime chasing the California dream. This year he's going to look for it in Colorado.

With a house purchase near Denver in the works, the 38-year-old engineering contractor plans to restart his family's future 1,200 miles away from his home state's lemon groves, sunshine and beaches. For him, years of rising taxes, dead-end schools, unchecked illegal immigration and clogged traffic have sapped the allure of the place writer Wallace Stegner once described as "America only more so."

Is there something left of the California dream?

"If you are a Hollywood actor," Reilly says, "but not for us."

Since the days of the Gold Rush, California has represented a sort of Promised Land, an image that fair or not is celebrated in the songs of the Beach Boys and embodied in the stars that line Hollywood Boulevard. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger calls the state the "golden dream by the sea."

But for many California families last year, tomorrow started somewhere else.

The number of people leaving California for another state outstripped the number moving in from another state during the year ending on July 1, 2008. California lost a net total of 144,000 people during that period -- more than any other state, according to census estimates. That is about equal to the population of Syracuse, N.Y.

The state with the next-highest net loss through migration between states was New York, which lost just over 126,000 residents.

California's loss is extremely small in a state of 38 million. And, in fact, the state's population continues to increase overall because of births and immigration, legal and illegal. But it is the fourth consecutive year that more residents decamped from California for other states than arrived here from within the U.S., according to state demographers.

A losing streak that long hasn't happened in California since the recession of the early 1990s, when departures outstripped arrivals from other states by 362,000 in 1994 alone.

In part because of the boom in population in other Western states, California could lose a congressional seat for the first time in its history.

Why are so many looking for an exit?

Among other things: California's unemployment rate hit 8.4 percent in November, the third-highest in the nation, and it is expected to get worse. A record 236,000 foreclosures are projected for 2008, more than the prior nine years combined, according to research firm MDA DataQuick. Personal income was about flat through three quarters last year.

With state government facing a $41.6 billion budget hole over 18 months, residents are bracing for higher taxes, cuts in education and postponed tax rebates. One multibillion-dollar project in downtown Los Angeles has stalled, and office vacancy rates there and in San Diego and San Jose surpass the 10.2 percent national average.

Median housing prices have nose-dived one-third from a 2006 peak, but many homes are still out of reach for middle-class families. Some small towns are on the brink of bankruptcy. Normally recession-proof Hollywood has been hit by layoffs.

"You see wages go down and the cost of living go up," Reilly says. His property taxes will be $1,300 in Colorado, down from $4,300 on his three-bedroom house in Nipomo, about 80 miles up the coast from Santa Barbara.

California's obituary has been written before -- "California: The Endangered Dream" was the title of a 1991 Time magazine cover story. The Golden State and its huge economy -- by itself, the eighth-largest in the world -- have shown resilience, weathering the aerospace bust, the dot-com crash and an energy crunch in recent years.

But the grim economic news of recent months begs questions about what's to come, even if the reality of life in the nation's most populous state has always been different than the myth.

"That's what dreams are about -- they don't always come true and there can be a light and dark side to them," says historian William Deverell, director of the Huntington-USC Institute on California and the West. "At any given moment, California can reflect the best and worst of American possibility."

Lately, it seems more of the worst.

A state board halted lending for about 2,000 public works projects in California worth more than $16 billion because the state could not afford them. A report by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., last month said the state lost 100,000 jobs in the last year and the erosion of home prices eliminated over $1 trillion in wealth. Census data for 2005 through 2007 shows nearly one in five people in California did not have health insurance, ranking it seventh nationally in the percentage of residents lacking coverage, just behind Mississippi.

There's no dictionary definition for the California dream. It's typically depicted as an enviable quality of life where prosperity is within easy reach, sunshine is abundant and harmony prevails. It's idealized in the "Gidget" movies of another generation and today's magazine spreads of celebrities in Malibu. California often shows up in extremes, paradise or hell, "Baywatch" or "Blade Runner."

"I don't think the California dream, per se, is over. It has become and will continue to become grittier," says New America Foundation senior fellow Gregory Rodriguez. "Now, perhaps, we have to reassess the California of our imagination."

Schwarzenegger is among those who say the state needs to create itself anew, rebuilding roads, schools and transit.

"We've lived off the investments our parents made in the '50s and '60s for a long time," says Tim Hodson, director of the Center for California Studies at California State University, Sacramento. "We're somewhat in the position of a Rust Belt state in the 1970s."

Financial adviser Barry Hartz lived in California for 60 years and once ran for state Assembly before relocating with his wife last year to Colorado Springs, Colo., where his son's family had moved.

"The saddest thing I saw was the escalation of home prices to the point our kids, when they got married, could not live in the community where they lived and grew up," Hartz says. "Some people call that progress."

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/business/Cost-of-Living-Sucks-Everyone-Leaving-California.html

Seems to me that a conservative point of view in California is needed.
 

Birgit W. (152)
Saturday April 27, 2013, 2:01 pm
They would be just brainwashing us, what else?
 

Diane O. (167)
Saturday April 27, 2013, 2:06 pm
Birgit, the majority of journalists in America are liberals. That suggests that they've been brainwashing quite a majority of Americans. We can see what this has done for California. People are leaving in record numbers. Why? You really should ask yourself why Californians are leaving their state.
 

Charlie Rush (65)
Saturday April 27, 2013, 7:53 pm
FORGET, NOT~ Any paper product from Georgia-Pacific is, the Koch Brothers.
Purchase at your own risk.
 

Diane O. (167)
Sunday April 28, 2013, 9:13 am
Based on the current results of the biased left wing media in California, it appears that many Californians have thrown their papers in the trash can and have relocated to more tax friendly states. Guess all that kum bah ya has taken a financial toll on everyone....hence the exit.
 

Robert Tomlinson (65)
Sunday April 28, 2013, 12:06 pm
Diane, there is a big difference between - for example - The NY Times and FOX.
FOX has a hard time passing fact checks In fact, I cannot remember when it actually passed one. The NYT has had a sometimes spotty record, but it is far more reliable than FOX. The "Liberal Main Street" media is also more aware of telling the truth than most of the right wing leaning outlets.
 

Diane O. (167)
Sunday April 28, 2013, 12:32 pm
Fox News is doing fine, Robert. They have enjoyed another year of the top rating in cable news. They have an enormous viewer rating and have maintained that for many years. It is no secret that nearly 65% of the journalists in our country, perhaps higher today since the study was posted, are liberals. The biased left wing media takes the prize in the brainwashing department IMO.

Now....let's address the LA Times and the Koch brothers buying that newspaper. What I attempted to do on this thread was show that the biased left wing news outlet failed in California. Many Californians aren't buying the high taxes, the massive illegal immigration funding and the outrageous pensions being paid and funded by their taxpayers. What are they doing? They are leaving the state of California and moving to more tax friendly, more reasonable governing states where they can SURVIVE.. They can no longer survive financially in California.

California should become a country and be stripped of their state status IMO. That's a liberal cesspool IMO and it has done nothing but ruin the beautiful state of California. I base my judgement on the number of people leaving.
 

Jason R. (66)
Sunday April 28, 2013, 1:15 pm
This... They are all...FOX...
The Right Wing Cult Machine Exposed
People are waking up and recognizing the far right-wing media for what it is, and the dangers it poses to this country.
April 26, 2013

Far right Conservatism has become a cult, and Rush Limbaugh is its leader.

By definition, a cult is a group or sect bound together by adoration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.

A cult promises you redemption. It tells you that if you do what it says, and as it believes, you will be protected from the evil people that are out to get you and the rest of society.

A cult purges the non-believers. And it actively tries to vilify all those who are not part of the cult, saying that they're doomed and destined to go to hell.

So how did Limbaugh become the leader of such a large, and influential, cult? ...

http://www.alternet.org/media/right-wing-cult-machine-exposed?akid=10374.296374.FqWget&rd=1&src=newsletter831565&t=12
 

Robert Tomlinson (65)
Sunday April 28, 2013, 7:44 pm
Diane, I did not say that FOX is not doing well. Although, it had lost over 26% of its viewers since the election.
(That was as of February) My point is that it cannot pass fact checks. It has failed one after another.
 

Diane O. (167)
Monday April 29, 2013, 2:33 am
Their ratings have gone back up. The majority of journalists in our country are liberals. All news outlets get things wrong from time to time and have to go back in and admit they were wrong and set the record straight. None of the news channels are 100% accurate because that's impossible to maintain. I not only watch Fox I watch the biased left wing channels as well to see how they cover a story/breaking news and read their opinion articles. The only way for any of us to actually obtain some semblance of truth is to research the comments and then make our own decisions.

I am not interested in fact check. That's not my "go to" website. Personally, Ii enjoy reading the opinion articles which for the most part are well researched.

The liberals can be "up in arms" over the Koch brothers buying the LA Times but what they need to understand is that they own the majority of biased news channels and newspapers. Now....that's a fact I don't have to fact check.
 

Robert Tomlinson (65)
Monday April 29, 2013, 10:19 am
Diane, Facts Are Important!! While no one expects all the media outlets to be 100% correct.....FOX ought to be able to pass a majority of fact checks. It has a hard time passing one.
 

Jason R. (66)
Monday April 29, 2013, 11:49 am
"We have biased reporting on both sides. However, my post was aimed at listing the many biased left wing newspapers"

The hater fascists have many programmed to compare news outlets as biased. That's how they keep their viewers. In fact, they own, employ and control content of more than 91% of the media.
http://www.projectcensored.org/

What is Left wing media? Basically, it's the media of pre 1980. Before the buy off. It's people reporting on the matters most important to the people. It only seems biased because the fascist right is so busy making news. If it's not countered by people like at ...
http://mediamatters.org/

What we are up against is a small, wealthy, multi national group, controlling and shaping an alter reality with lies and deception, for the purpose of getting more wealth. We have their supporters swearing the opposite is occurring. We're in very big trouble if we can't convince the voters of this truth.
 

Jason R. (66)
Monday April 29, 2013, 12:09 pm
"Their ratings have gone back up. The majority of journalists in our country are liberals"

That is 100% as false a statement as one could make. The majority of Liberal journalists were fired. Right to the last one, Dan Rather.

You can find them writing for newspapers and blogs. Away from the rights base. As designed.

You can see what they don't want you to see on free speech TV. Thom Hartmann is talking about things important to us for the next 3 hours. He will be on RT TV in a few hours.

http://rt.com/
https://www.freespeech.org/tv-schedule/day

Do you ever wonder why you haven't found them? Ever wonder what holds you back?
 
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story


Loading Noted By...Please Wait

 

 
Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of Care2.com or its affiliates.