Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (305133)	10/3/2006 12:21:59 PM
From: SilentZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577902

>The media will try their very best to spin it that way, especially since they have a vested interest in seeing the Democrats win big this November. Ten, that's a f***ing canard. Why the hell does the media have a vested interest in seeing the Democrats win? Liberals do not own most of the media companies. ABC is owned by Disney, which tends to bend to the conservative establishment. Total crap. -Z

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (305133)	10/3/2006 2:12:11 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577902

Then tell me how long the ABC reporter sat on the e-mails. Here's an example of one paper that tried to run with the story. They either couldn't get a page to put up his name in support of his complaint or they couldn't get emails from other pages where the content sounded inappropriate and so they dropped the story. Only ABC pursued the issue by putting it out there on a blog. When it hit the blog, it was then that the IMs came to light. The ABC reporter has been quoted as saying he wished now he had moved faster in order to have stopped Foley earlier. "In November of last year, we were given copies of an email exchange Foley had with a former page from Louisiana. Other news organizations later got them,too. The conversation in those emails was friendly chit-chat. Foley asked the boy about how he had come through Hurricane Katrina and about the boy's upcoming birthday. In one of those emails, Foley casually asked the teen to send him a "pic" of himself. Also among those emails was the page's exchange with a congressional staffer in the office of Rep. Alexander, who had been the teen's sponsor in the page program. The teen shared his exchange he'd had with Foley and asked the staffer if she thought Foley was out of bounds. There was nothing overtly sexual in the emails, but we assigned two reporters to find out more. We found the Louisiana page and talked with him. He told us Foley's request for a photo made him uncomfortable so he never responded, but both he and his parents made clear we could not use his name if we wrote a story. We also found another page who was willing to go on the record, but his experience with Foley was different. He said Foley did send a few emails but never said anything in them that he found inappropriate. We tried to find other pages but had no luck. We spoke with Rep. Alexander, who said the boy's family didn't want it pursued, and Foley, who insisted he was merely trying to be friendly and never wanted to make the page uncomfortable. So, what we had was a set of emails between Foley and a teenager, who wouldn't go on the record about how those emails made him feel. As we said in today's paper, our policy is that we don't make accusations against people using unnamed sources. And given the seriousness of what would be implied in a story, it was critical that we have complete confidence in our sourcing. After much discussion among top editors at the paper, we concluded that the information we had on Foley last November didn't meet our standard for publication. Evidently, other news organizations felt the same way. Little bit of 'sour grapes' here at the end. October surprises have been orchestrated by the media before. So what? You shouldn't care when this story got out so long as it did. The L.A. Times tried to do a hit piece on (R)nold just one week before the 2003 California recall. It's likely that ABC did something similar with Mark Foley, knowing they had a story that could send Washington into a buzz, but also knowing that to do that, they'd have to get the timing of the story just right. Sorry, Ten, this would have been knews six months ago. Your argument is a tempest in a teapot. Either way, I don't believe it was just Republicans who knew something was up with Foley. The media will try their very best to spin it that way, especially since they have a vested interest in seeing the Democrats win big this November. Huh? Its become increasingly clear that the media heads like the GOP in power. I believe the only thing that keeps them honest is the Brit. press. Look how long it took them to come out against the war......and we now know that as long ago as two years, the violence in Iraq was much worse than the American media was presenting it. What was that all about? The GOP's ongoing complaints of the media favoring the Dems is another urban myth. In fact, the conservative press is coming down harder on Foley and the GOP leadership than the MSM. You should be grateful that the MSM has been so kind....they helped Bush get a second term.