In the earliest days of television, shows were often supported entirely by one sponsor. There was the "Texaco Star Theater" with Milton Berle. Remember "General Electric Theater" with Ronald Reagan? The corporate patron was held responsible for the content within the program. More to the point, the corporate patron wanted the association with the show it was sponsoring.

Perhaps the best branding of them all was, and is Hallmark, with its Hallmark Hall of Fame movies. When that movie airs you just know it’s a quality movie, because that’s all Hallmark will produce.

On today’s TV shows, it’s all changed. Today's sponsors run in large packs and appear to make no attempt to monitor shows and have no expectation of being held accountable for the "art" they’ve enabled. In fact, they insist they not be held accountable for that which they sponsor. They are the unsponsors.

The New York Times editorial page is a perfect weather vane for the way the liberal media's hot air is blowing. In an October 26 editorial called "Torching the Big Tent," they lamented: "The feeble pulse of moderation in the Republican Party is in danger of flat-lining in the Nov. 3 Congressional election in upstate New York."

The feeble "moderate" the Times was backing for Congress was Dede Scozzafava - pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-union power, pro-tax hike. The Times found these positions to be proof of "refreshing tinges of centrism." The Times lectured the conservative movement to embrace this candidacy, since "creative ideas and candidates, not right-wing zeal, are the obvious way to get back in the game of democracy."

Any New Yorker foolish enough to follow the political advice of The New York Times deserves what he gets.

What if the Times portrayed this battle for the 23rd District of New York the opposite way? What if the surging campaign of conservative Doug Hoffman was portrayed as "Revenge of the Irate Moderates?" Liberals would rub their eyes in utter disbelief. But just three years ago, the Times editorial page was using those exact words to describe the hard-left forces behind Ned Lamont, who upset moderate Democrat Sen. Joe Lieberman in the primary, only to lose to him in the general election.

Violence – especially grotesque, gory or bloody violence – has become a staple of network television during sweeps periods. But there’s a new kind of violence surging -- violence against women. A new study by the Parents Television Council called "Women in Peril" reveals that between 2004 and 2009, CBS, NBC, and Fox (but not ABC) all green-lighted a significant increase in the incidents – and degree – of violence against women.

On average, during the five-year span there was a two percent increase in overall violence during the prime time viewing hours. But during the same time period there was a 120 percent increase in the number of times the audience would be exposed to a violent scene with a female victim.

CBS, the "CSI" network, led with 118 violent storylines on women, but NBC had the largest increase, at 192 percent. The forms of violence depicted included rape, stabbing, dismemberment, electrocution, poisoning, shooting, beating, and torture. Death was regularly a result of the violence.

Congressman King's insistence for an apology yesterday is exactly what we have been calling on the media to do since they first misrepresented the fictitious, racist quotes attributed to Rush Limbaugh. Rep. King set the record straight, exposing the outright fabrications and distortions attributed to Limbaugh. [see our "Tell the Truth" Web page detailing the media's smears of Limbaugh] 

He was absolutely correct to hold the NFL accountable for caving to pressure from the left-wing extremists out to destroy a conservative leader - as well as the media who were complicit in these attempts.

The Congressman aptly noted that if the parsing of words was the real reason the NFL forbade Rush from placing a bid for the Rams, then they must hold all NFL owners to the same level of scrutiny.  For starters, Miami Dolphins owners Fergie and J-Lo should be among the first disqualified given the disturbing, violent and pornographic lyrics they publicly perform on a regular basis.

We offer our thanks and commendation to Rep. King for having the backbone to say enough is enough and call out the NFL for their cowardly hypocrisy.  We need more Congressmen like him to herald the truth for those who refuse to acknowledge it."  

The Left is ecstatic about the latest ABC News-Washington Post poll, which claimed a surge in public support for the so-called "public option," wrapped in the (insincere) rhetoric of "choice" and "competition." The poll asks if the government should "create a new health insurance plan to compete with private insurance plans," and 57 percent agree. Happy days are here again for liberals.

Liberals in the media found even better news to declare: a new low for the Republican Party, since only 20 percent of those surveyed "usually" think of themselves as Republicans. (Another 19 percent "lean more" toward the Republicans, but that number is being ignored because 20 percent sounds better.) MSNBC’s David Shuster openly hoped: "Have centrists been frightened away from the Republican Party by the right-wing birthers, Tenthers, and town hall screamers?"

The "Balloon Boy" hoax spellbound the entire country on October 15. Everyone empathized with the situation of the supposedly floating child or the supposedly distraught parents. But the real problem was different. It was the increasingly sickening blur between reality and "reality" TV.

Skepticism about the boy in the balloon should have begun – and coverage should have ended – the second journalists learned that the family had made two appearances on the ABC "reality" show called "Wife Swap," where families switch mothers to dramatic effect. But maybe it was hard to imagine that someone would be so desperate for attention that they would squander thousands and thousands of taxpayer dollars getting everyone from the county sheriff to the Federal Aviation Administration involved in a lie.

In the desperate search for the cliched fifteen minutes of fame, many Americans have gravitated to trying out for "reality" shows, often with the goal of parlaying an appearance into a broader television career – acting, hosting, perhaps losing dramatically on "Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader?"

Rush Limbaugh was convicted of racism in a kangaroo court of "objective" media and dropped as a potential owner of the St. Louis Rams football franchise. His accusers claimed he once said slavery "had its merits" and that the assassin of Martin Luther King deserved a "Medal of Honor." The story circulated on the Internet and was eventually picked up by the major media, including both CNN and MSNBC.

But no one bothered fact-checking. In fact, his accusers and those media that repeated the accusations never stopped to ponder there was no need to fact-check this, so obvious were the fabrications.

Start with this reality: One could clearly dismiss these quotes as fabrications based on the simple fact that Rush would never have uttered them, since he doesn’t believe them. Period.

Add to it this second piece of common sense: Were Rush guilty of uttering this garbage back in 1998, would we really be discussing it for the first time in October of 2009? Common sense tells us that if he made these comments on his show, his advertisers would dump him so quickly he’d be out of a job by sundown.

The programming gurus at MTV are basing their profit-making strategy on the viewer demographic of 12 to 34 – as if there’s no difference in maturity level between 12 and 34. MTV’s brand of sensationalistic "reality TV" was easily demonstrated on the night of October 5, when they aired a prime-time marathon (from 7 pm Eastern to 1 am) of their hour-long documentary series called "True Life." Just the episode titles were jaw-dropping.

1. "I’m Out."

2. "I’m Polyamorous."

3. "I’m Bisexual."

4. "I’m Changing My Sex." (This ran twice in a row.)

5. "I Work In The Sex Industry."

Like everyone else on the morning of October 9, the major media’s first reaction to Barack Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize was shock and disbelief. NBC’s Matt Lauer spoke for the pack when he said he didn’t want to be "rude," but how did Obama earn it? Washington Post columnist (and former reporter) Ruth Marcus was blunt: "This is ridiculous -- embarrassing, even." She said the award is supposed to be for "doing, not being."

That is true, but for the swelling group of Americans who are not enamored of Obama, that could easily be turned around on the media: why would you, of all people, question the inflated judgment of the five Norwegian prize pickers? They are merely doing the same thing you’ve been doing for five years: praising Obama far beyond his actual job experience or accomplishments, and building a powerful myth of a global savior in an effort to put the international socialist Left in power, eclipsing America once and for all.

In the wake of the arrest of director/rapist Roman Polanski comes the sex-with-subordinates scandal of David Letterman. The timing was a blessing for Letterman, since his aggressive excuse-makers now could quickly assert that the female employees he exploited were all adults and all gave their consent.

Letterman’s habit of engaging in sex with women who are his employees only emerged because of an ugly extortion threat from a longtime CBS News producer who lived with one of Letterman’s conquests. That’s doubly embarrassing for CBS, which has character problems coming and going. Letterman added to the embarrassment by revealing the extortion and his behavior in a jokey manner on his show. CBS had enough distaste for the explanation to have it pulled off YouTube and try to keep people from seeing it. (Wouldn’t it be nice if CBS had similar standards for its other programming, like, oh, most everything on MTV?)

In a second attempt at an apology, Letterman was more sincere. But in the morality-challenged entertainment community, Letterman knew he could surround himself with friends who found nothing to condemn, or even question.

In the category of "intentional misunderstandings" about the political fiasco over the 2016 Summer Olympics, liberals win the gold medal. Cheers and laughs broke out in conservative offices and radio studios on the morning of October 2 when Chicago’s bid came in dead last. This was not an exercise in behavior so flagrantly unpatriotic that it’s almost like a flag-burning indoors. It was rejoicing over a come-uppance for the massive, media-enabled egomania of the Obamas and their team of so-called political geniuses inside the White House.

As the Drudge Report and Rush Limbaugh put it: "The Ego Has Landed."

Let’s not kid ourselves: The embarrassment over Chicago finishing dead last in Copenhagen was also felt by the multitude of Obama promoters in the media that almost unanimously jumped to the supine conclusion that victory for Chicago was assured once the president announced his plan to bless the International Olympic Committee with his presence.

Something wildly unexpected happened the other day: film director Roman Polanski was taken into custody in Switzerland for his rape of a 13-year-old girl at Jack Nicholson’s house in 1977. The grand jury transcript is stomach-turning. His victim, Samantha Gailey, said the director plied her with champagne and drugs and asked her to remove her clothes for pictures in a hot tub. Polanski then had sex with her despite her resistance and requests to be taken home. He pleaded guilty to the lesser offense of sex with a minor, but fearing a prison term, he fled the country.

Now something utterly expected is happening: morally bankrupt libertines in Hollywood and other artistic banana republics are rushing to Polanski’s defense.

Welcome to the world of Roman Polanski, Child Rapist/Victim.

Has-been actress Debra Winger joined the first line of ludicrous defense, since she was president of the jury of the Zurich Film Festival, where Polanski was headed to receive a lifetime achievement award when he was apprehended. Let’s hope Winger is never allowed to serve on a real jury. She simply doesn’t care about Polanski’s guilt. He is a filmmaker and an artist, and for this crowd anything and everything goes.

Radical-left protesters outside the G-20 summit meeting in Pittsburgh last week underlined once again that our friends in the news media see no real enemy or extremist to their left. But conservative protests against Team Obama are an ugly sign of incivility, and according to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, even impending violence.

HBO talk show host Bill Maher exemplified the liberal-media atttitude on his Twitter page on September 24: "Even with a face full of tear gas, these G-20 protesters [are] better looking than the teabaggers."

But there’s a big difference between the sea of tens of thousands of conservative protesters in Washington on September 12 and the three thousand anti-capitalist radicals in Pittsburgh. The tone from the podium in Washington was happy and patriotic, which meant nothing to The Washington Post, which covered it as an outpouring of a "spectrum of conservative anger."

During his 20-year reign at Disney, Michael Eisner’s commitment to family values was viewed with suspicion by many. The worries apparently were well-founded. His animation studio, Tornante, has a new clay-animated cartoon on Nick at Nite called "Glenn Martin, DDS." Eisner and Nick at Nite executive Cyra Zarghami claim it’s a show for the entire family.

Even TV critics – the crowd always wanting to applaud anything pushing the cultural envelope – think it’s outrageous to make that claim. "You know you’re in for a bumpy ride when the first joke has to do with killing prostitutes," wrote Mike Hale of the New York Times. He wanted out of the dental chair when a tasteless joke about a "blood bath" of a circumcision by a "rabbi with Parkinson’s" arrived.

Yes, this is the same Nick at Nite whose original 1985 lineup included Donna Reed and Dennis the Menace reruns.

Following his usual mantra that "to watch me is to love me," Barack Obama appeared on five Sunday interview shows and since that wasn’t enough, then the David Letterman show on Monday night. He remains convinced that the more he plays dust speck in the national eye, the further he’ll get in passing his leftist agenda. He’s also confident our media won’t hold him accountable. They just hold him.

"I can't tell you how satisfying it is to watch you work!," a beaming Letterman gushed to Obama. Even during that show, Letterman was still whacking away at George W. Bush as an idiot, unctuously currying favor with the new president. Letterman doesn’t pretend to be an objective journalist, of course. But can you recall him ever voicing his satisfaction with conservatives?

Perhaps the most amazing thing Obama did – over and over – on Sunday was to scold the media for making the national dialogue coarser by allowing his critics to have a voice on the networks. "Let's face it, the easiest way to get on television right now is to be really rude," he said.

Those attempting to equate Congressman Joe Wilson’s "You lie!" outburst to the outrages of Serena Williams and Kanye West are missing the mark. He was rude, and no, he oughtn’t have done it – there. Let us understand clearly the distinction. Wilson may be rude, but Williams and West (especially) are pigs.

At the semifinals of the U.S. Open tennis tournament in New York, Serena Williams drew nearly universal condemnation for screaming profanities at a line judge who (wrongly) ruled her foot was over the line on a serve. It wasn’t just obscenities, it was threats of physical violence, with Williams suggesting she would shove a tennis ball down "your f—ing throat" to the referee. Her performance was so vile that even historic tennis bad boy John McEnroe called it beyond the pale.

Had Wilson yelled that he was going to shove something down President Obama’s blankety-blank throat, then we’d have a similarity. But why did Williams feel free to uncork a massive fit? Maybe because there are no consequences. She was assessed a $10,000 fine, less than a slap on the wrist. She won more than half a million dollars at that tournament alone.

It’s very easy to be outraged by the way our "objective" media greeted the massive September 12 rally against Big Government in Washington and across the country. They treated it as a menacing surge of white anger, meanness, and racism. But all the media bias against this rally clearly illustrates one nagging truth for media liberals: they really don’t think conservatives should be allowed to protest. It’s somehow like a copyright violation.

On Monday night’s "Countdown," MSNBC’s David Shuster found the protest united "in apparent hatred of the current president, Barack Obama." It was undemocratic, a sign of people not accepting election results, and Shuster even suggested Sen. Jim DeMint’s speech at the rally signaled he favored a "military coup." The unglued anchorman also dismissed the crowd as "white, whiter, and whitest," all attending an "intolerance festival."

Cable television is a minefield of unspeakable raunch for children, who, like it or not, freely roam the hallways of this medium at night. The Parents Television Council has issued its list of the Top 10 Worst Cable TV Shows for Kids. One hopes that someone out there is shocked.

Leading the list is Comedy Central and its vile celebrity roasts. These mean-spirited and vile knockoffs are nothing like the side-splitting, kid-because-we-love Dean Martin roasts of the Seventies.

August’s roast of Joan Rivers was the ugliest yet. Rivers came out on stage holding hands with six little kids of different nationalities and joked that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie were having a yard sale. She shoved the kids and snapped: "All right, kids, go make jewelry!" Behind the kids' backs, she flipped a middle finger and said: "I hate children."

Is President Obama getting overexposed? This we know: a firm believer in all his fawning media clips, Obama thinks there is no political problem he cannot overcome with yet another nationally televised address. Not only has he scheduled an umpteenth appearance in prime time, he now insists on addressing the nation’s schoolchildren.

Why is this controversial? What is more American than having her president addressing the young? Reagan did it. So did Bush. The problem is Obama and his administration. There is – always is – a political agenda.

The mission was not to educate, it was to indoctrinate. The public learned the Department of Education sent out guidelines to principals urging that children "write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president." Older students were urged to answer the question: "What is President Obama inspiring you to do? What is he challenging you to do?"

I was stunned to read on Life Site News that a new movie is being planned about Our Lady of Guadalupe, so-named for an appearance of the Virgin Mary near Mexico City in 1531 that’s credited with converting nine million indigenous Mexicans to Christianity. The film, still untitled, will be produced by Mpower Pictures, the company that was launched with the pro-life movie "Bella" in 2006 and founded by "The Passion of the Christ" producer Steve McEveety.

That a movie would be made about Our Lady of Guadalupe is amazing, but that wasn’t half the surprise. The movie is being written by Joe Eszterhas. Yes, the same Joe Eszterhas responsible for screenwriting filthy movies like "Basic Instinct" and most infamously, "Showgirls," a movie so pornographic even the late Jack Valenti condemned it.

What I didn’t know until now is the story of the conversion of Joe Eszterhas in 2001, powerfully captured in his 2008 memoir entitled "Crossbearer: A Memoir of Faith."