9 WSJ & 4 FOX Op-Ed Writers Who Weren't Disclosed As Romney Advisers

page: 1
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 04:25 PM
link   
Nine Wall Street Journal Op-Ed Writers Who Weren't Disclosed As Romney Advisers


The Wall Street Journal has published op-eds from nine writers without disclosing their roles as advisers to Mitt Romney's presidential campaign. The op-eds attack President Obama and his administration or discuss Romney on a range of topics like the economy, health care, education and foreign policy.

According to a Media Matters review, the Journal published a total of 20 pieces from the following Romney advisers without disclosing their campaign ties: John Bolton; Max Boot; Lee A. Casey; Paula Dobriansky; Mary Ann Glendon; Glenn Hubbard; Paul E. Peterson; David B. Rivkin Jr.; and Martin West. In several instances, the Journal failed to disclose an op-ed writer's connection despite its own news section reporting that the writer is advising Romney.


At Least FOUR Romney Advisers Work For Fox News




Outlining the many members of the Mitt Romney campaign who work for Fox News, and often aren't identified as Romney advisers or staffers


Among the Romney Advisors or staffers identified as Fox News of WSJ writers are:

Some of these names appear as both Fox "news" and WSJ op-ed writers, such as John Bolton (Fox News regular contributor and WSJ op-ed writer).

It should also be noted Fox News and the Wall Street Journal are both owned by News Corp.




posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Direct collusion between a presidential candidate and the News media who is supposed to remain unbiased...

What more would you expect though in this day and age, its all fake, from the candidates to the media.

just waiting for more Mitt gaffs in October to ensure he hands the election to obama.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Pot calling the kettle!


Pro Obama
Pro Isreal New York Times Writer, Obama Bundler's Wife Given Position in UN General Assembly!



Billionaire Democratic donor Haim Saban wrote an effusive New York Times op-ed praising
Obama’s Israel policy earlier this month. Today, the White House announced that Saban’s wife,
Cheryl, has been nominated to represent the U.S. at the upcoming UN General Assembly.


Oh, the irony, what a rub!


Saban, a major pro-Israel Democratic donor, has been critical of Obama in the past, and indicated last year that he might not donate to Obama because of his Israel policy. He changed his tune recently when he reportedly pledged $1 million to pro-Obama super PACs, and penned the fawning Times op-ed. Obama has tended to give the UNGA representative position to top bundlers in the past, notably Elaine Schuster in 2009 and Carol Fulp in 2010, so his appointment of Cheryl Saban isn’t a surprise. But it certainly does shed light on what Saban’s getting for his support.
edit on 20-9-2012 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 04:59 PM
link   
wsj and fox opinions are like a**holes, and so are the self-important op-editors that wrote them.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


I'm trying to recall but did Romney have any good speeches? I mean, has anyone posted a Romney speech in the same passion Ron Paul supporters post any one of Ron Paul's speeches? Does anyone have a link of a badass Romney speech?

If not, then these writers are terrible.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Report: Washington Times published Romney adviser op-eds without disclosing ties
(politico.com)


The conservative newspaper The Washington Times has published op-eds from five Mitt Romney campaign advisers without informing readers of their connection to the Republican nominee, according to liberal media watchdog organization Media Matters.

The liberal group is out with this new report just one day after publishing a similar round-up of Wall Street Journal op-ed writers with undisclosed ties to the Romney campaign. In the Washington Times’s case, the op-ed section did not disclose the campaign ties of writers Ken Allard, John Bolton, Mary Ann Glendon, Kim Holmes and Robert Joseph, Media Matters said.

“In total, the Times published at least 14 op-eds from these writers that were critical of President Obama and his administration's policies or supportive of Romney while they were serving on the Romney campaign,” the Media Matter report states. “In its straight news section, however, the Times has reported that three of those advisers -- Joseph, Bolton, and Glendon -- were working on Romney's behalf.”


The Wall Street Journal Ran 20 Op-Eds Without Disclosing the Authors' Ties to Romney
(villagevoice.com)

BREAKING: A lot of the people who write op-ed pieces for The Wall Street Journal are in the tank for Mitt Romney.

That information might not come as a shock to anyone possessed of basic media literacy. But a report released today documents 20 different instances in which the Journal ran columns by nine different authors without disclosing that each of them has formal ties to the Romney campaign.



Here's what Media Matters found:

  • Two op-eds by John Bolton, one of Romney's foreign policy advisers.
  • Four op-eds by Max Boot, a defense adviser for Romney
  • Nine op-eds by Lee A. Casey and David B. Rivkin Jr., members of Romney's Justice Advisory Committee.
  • An op-ed by Paula Dobriansky, special adviser to Romney's Foreign Policy and National Security Advisory Team
  • An op-ed by Mary Ann Glendon, co-chair of Romney's Justice Advisory Committee
  • An op-ed by Glenn Hubbard, a leader of Romney's Economic Policy Team.
  • Two op-eds by Paul E. Peterson, one written with Martin West, both of whom are members of Romney's Education Policy Advisory Group.


Media Matters has in this case lived up to it's mission statement.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


Yeah it is the pot calling the kettle black considering that GE, which owns NBC and MSNBC right up until well after the election of 2008 put the current potus in power.

Back to the vilification of Romney and ignore what put the other guy in office.
edit on 20-9-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   
edit on 20-9-2012 by neo96 because: double post sorry



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Screw em both I say, and so do a lot of folks, I guess. Obama, Romney, same poop, different day. Washington DC is a scam, the political parties are a sham and so are their candidates.

F em', Gary Johnson 2012
edit on 20-9-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


I see you have nothing specific to refute the OP, just some vague rant about GE. Fox "news" is practically campaign headquarters for Mitt Romney. The least they can do is inform their readers of the connection between the many op-ed writers they pay and their formal roles in the Romney campaign, so readers and viewers can make an informed decision about their opinion - unless they want them to be misinformed.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
The least they can do is inform their readers of the connection between the many op-ed writers they pay and their formal roles in the Romney campaign,


Oh, and we assume you think Obama should do the same?



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Here more, another Journalist begging for Obama ....please send money!


CNN Reporter Sends Obama Donation Request Form to Twitter Followers

newsbusters.org...



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


CNN’s Peter Hamby Explains Why He Tweeted Link To Obama Campaign Donation Site


At issue: Hamby links to a donation page for President Obama’s reelection campaign, a page which also notes that the campaign is planning an event in Wisconsin. Some online pundits argued that this one tweet proved that Hamby (and the media as a whole) is in the tank for President Obama.

There is just one problem: Hamby was breaking news, namely that the Obama campaign decided that Wisconsin was now in play politically. The camaign made no announcement of its Wisconsin push, only releasing information on the donation page. The AP published a story at about the same time Hamby did, also based on the event on the campaign website.



Hamby himself took to Twitter to explain:

It’s news that Obama is returning to Wisc. I linked to page where the trip was first revealed, which happened to be a fundraising page (1/2)

— Peter Hamby (@PeterHambyCNN) September 17, 2012




News can often be found on fundraising pages – I was simply alerting people to Obama’s change in strategy (2/2)

— Peter Hamby (@PeterHambyCNN) September 17, 2012


Compare this to the list of PAID Romney Advisors or those named to be among his foreign policy team that are ALSO writing op-ed pieces for publication in the WSJ, Fox, and Washington Times, without ever disclosing the formal connection to the Romney team.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Its said that many Obama supporting Journalists just make up fake names....


Were journalists using fake names to make Obama donations at the convention


So, Romney has paid advisors. Does Obama have paid advisors?

And I noticed that you comepleley ignored my first post.
Where is the "disclosure" from Obama on Saban?

Pro Obama
New York Times Writer Wife Given Position in UN General Assembly After Large Donations



Billionaire Democratic donor Haim Saban wrote an effusive New York Times op-ed praising
Obama’s Israel policy earlier this month. Today, the White House announced that Saban’s wife,
Cheryl, has been nominated to represent the U.S. at the upcoming UN General Assembly....
Saban, a major pro-Israel Democratic donor, has been critical of Obama in the past, and indicated last year that he might not donate to Obama because of his Israel policy. He changed his tune recently when he reportedly pledged $1 million to pro-Obama super PACs, and penned the fawning Times op-ed.


edit on 20-9-2012 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


I didn't reply to your first post because it seems to be nothing more than an unsubstantiated rumor attacking Cheryl Saban, implying she only got the nomination because her husband wrote a piece praising Obama's Israel policy. I would assume she got the nomination because she and Obama share a similar philosophy on foreign policy. You will also notice that her husband is not a paid advisor for the Obama campaign (nor is Cheryl Saban). Unlike the individuals listed in the OP, ALL of whom are PAID advisors or named as part of the Romney cabinet.

I have no problem with op-ed pieces written by any campaign staffer or advisor, so long as it is disclosed. What the news organizations above did was give their editorial pieces over to a candidates campaigners without informing the reader/viewers of this connection. It calls into question the journalistic integrity of those organizations.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


And just where are Obama's "disclosures" ?
If, as accused Democrat Journalists just use fake names well that pretty much takes care of it.

Journalists in Television Media too, not just in print.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


Are you going to make specific allegations or are you just going to make vague insinuations?

Read the article in the OP - very specific names are given, their role in the news agency, their formal role in the Romney campaign, and the specific op-ed pieces, names/titles/dates are given. Can you address that or can you only deflect?



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Forgive my ignorance, but if someone is writing an "Opinion" piece, is it essential that they print that person's associations? I can see it for a news piece, but when they announce "Here is somebody's opinion," isn't that enough warning in itself?

On a side issue, I keep seeing on ATS, and in the various media, dinky little issues that have nearly nothing to do with the Presidency. It seems as though there is an unwillingness for the current administration to outline it's future policies, and to defend it's past ones, in areas such as the economy, foreign relations, citizen's rights, etc.

It may very well be that we continue in office a man we still don't know about. Our ignorance should be denied, not encouraged, by pretending that major issues aren't important and that trivial issues are key.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 09:38 PM
link   
This is great news!! Looks like the media is finally turning on Obama....


The only one I'm really familiar with is John Bolton when he appears on Fox. Fox has mentioned many times that he is an advisor for Romney. Big Whoop. One tiny dent in obama's vast msm armor. Correct the error... blame an intern and move on...
My god we have entire networks dedicated to Obama's preservation....



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Media Matters living up to there mission statement?? That's funny. Part of their mission must involve colluding with the Department of Justice to control the news flow and to out and taint Obama's dissenters in Media.

That's just negates this whole thread. Read for yourself

Internal Department of Justice emails obtained by The Daily Caller show Attorney General Eric Holder’s communications staff has collaborated with the left-wing advocacy group Media Matters for America in an attempt to quell news stories about scandals plaguing Holder and America’s top law enforcement agency.

Dozens of pages of emails between DOJ Office of Public Affairs Director Tracy Schmaler and Media Matters staffers show Schmaler, Holder’s top press defender, working with Media Matters to attack reporters covering DOJ scandals. TheDC obtained the emails through a Freedom of Information Act request.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Media Matters is a NONPROFIT getting involved where they have no place to be. Strip their 501c 3 status they are so proud of immediately. Funny how they point a finger when three more are pointing back at themselves... Oh.. the hypocrisy.


Section 501(c)(3) organizations are subject to limits or absolute prohibitions on engaging in political activities and risk loss of status as tax exempt status if violated.[28]
edit on 20-9-2012 by jibeho because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join