Bozell Column: NBC's Massive Al Gore Donation

Photo of Brent Bozell.

Bill Dedman, a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter for MSNBC, recently filed a report on the MSNBC website that won’t win him any Pulitzers. He investigated political donations made by journalists, and found a resounding liberal tilt: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes, and only 16 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties.

Does this prove cause and effect, a subsequent tilt in the liberal media’s coverage of the news? No, but to believe there is no causation at play here is ludicrous: if a survey of journalists found that 86 percent were donors to the National Right to Life Committee, would anyone dispute labeling the media "pro-life"?

The talk radio lines were ablaze with commentary. Predictably the news media reacted with near silence. Fox News, of course, was on it. MSNBC television lightly covered the result on TV – but refused to discuss the media bias angle. Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post filed a good story, as did a few other "mainstream" newspapers, but that was it.

And small wonder. The journalists who tried to respond often looked even worse. The funniest was Randy Cohen of the New York Times Magazine. The Grey Lady expressly forbids its employees from making political contributions. Cohen writes a column called "The Ethicist." This ethicist has made multiple contributions to the radical MoveOn.org group, but when challenged told MSNBC he thought his donations to MoveOn.org were "nonpartisan."

Apparently that wasn’t ludicrous enough. Cohen added the argument that no community service work or donation should be characterized as non-ideological, and suggested that if a journalist can join the Catholic Church (anti-abortion) or donate to the Boy Scouts (anti-gay Scoutmasters), that is the same as donating to MoveOn.org. Did I mention that this fellow writes a column called "The Ethicist" for The New York Times?

But here’s the ultimate irony: You could add together all the contributions to liberals uncovered in this MSNBC report and still they pale in size compared to the donation about to be made to the political left by MSNBC’s parent, NBC Universal.

On July 7, Dedman’s employers at NBC Universal are launching a massive extravaganza, 75 hours devoted to coverage of Al Gore’s Live Earth "climate crisis" concerts on all seven continents (including some British scientists jamming in Antarctica, presumably going for that ever-elusive Penguin Vote). 

In addition to devoting the entirety of NBC’s Saturday prime-time hours to this Gorestock, hosted by Ann Curry of NBC News, there will be seven hours on CNBC, 18 hours on Bravo, 22 hours on both the Sundance Channel and the Universal HD channel, and three hours combined on Telemundo and Telemundo 2. On top of that, NBC’s press release added that "MSNBC will broadcast special coverage of this global concert event throughout the day with live reports from the concerts in New York and London."

It’s an enormous in-kind campaign contribution. Can you imagine how many millions of dollars this 75 hours of air time would cost a billionaire politico like Ross Perot if he tried to buy it? But NBC is just giving it away to Al Gore, even as liberals press him to run for president in 2008. "NBC Universal is proud to be the exclusive U.S. broadcaster of this historic television event," said Jeff Gaspin, the president of NBC Universal’s cable and digital content. This concert’s "historic" status is certainly multiplied up by all the hours and hours of free publicity.

Have NBC executives convinced themselves, a la Randy Cohen, that Al Gore’s concerts are really "nonpartisan"? If so, they’re not reading the press accounts. In Rolling Stone, Live Earth organizer Kevin Wall is saying the concert will press their demands: "no more f—ing excuses...No more coal-fired energy plants can be built. Three percent a year reduction in carbon emissions in all industrialized nations...We have to mobilize an army, and that’s what we’re about to start doing."

These nostalgic corporate "global citizens" at NBC are not in the news gathering business. Rather, they are looking to make the news by creating the next Woodstock, and the leftist utopia always looming around the corner in their minds. It is impossible to defend as non-ideological an agenda that mobilizes "an army" for Al Gore to put a big government-enforced dent in our energy use. Impossible, that is, unless you’re "The Ethicist" for The New York Times.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Was NBC staff dressed in Chin

Was NBC staff dressed in Chinese Buddhist robes when they agreed to this?

And small wonder. The journal

And small wonder. The journalists who tried to respond often looked even worse. The funniest was Randy Cohen of the New York Times Magazine. The Grey Lady expressly forbids its employees from making political contributions. Cohen writes a column called "The Ethicist." This ethicist has made multiple contributions to the radical MoveOn.org group, but when challenged told MSNBC he thought his donations to MoveOn.org were "nonpartisan."

The bold I inserted sums it up for the me when it comes to the looney left...and their non-believable looney-toon answers they try to spin by us...constantly.

The msm and their polls are below the polls of Congress....

Now that is really bad...but your excellent blog is the perfect explanation of why.

Busy little leftist bee's as they continue along with their continual enemy within work.

Agenda agenda...agenda....

And if talk radio discusses t

And if talk radio discusses this, and the motives, and gets behind the scenes and reports the truth, these same looney-toons will want to shut them down -- "too much time on the airwaves for conservatives -- not fair, boo-hoo".

when Brent Bozell  says &quo

when Brent Bozell  says "if a survey of journalists found that 86 percent were" is proving that statistics do lie since there are over 100,000 staffers in newsrooms.   So what percentage is 125 sports statisticians, a film critics, food and fashion writers  of 100,000?

You're being disingenuous - a

You're being disingenuous - at best. I don't believe the implication was that these were cherry picked results. And it certainly wasn't that these were the only 127 or whatever ideologically biased reporters.

Without knowing the complete methodology of the poll in question it's difficult to draw meaningful conclusions. But I'd be willing to bet that if a truly representative sample was used, it tracks pretty closely with reality. Afterall, that's what this site deals with every day, isn't it!

 

There is no "Sensible gun control". There is freedom, or there is not, period!

I -Burn - according to Bill D

I -Burn - according to Bill Dedman, who's story these numbers come from:

The final list represents a tiny percentage of the working journalists in the nation. Daily newspapers alone employ about 60,000 full-time journalists. Approximately 30,000 work in television news jobs and 10,000 in radio news

And since he picked 200 of largest newspapers and magazines out of 1600, yes, it was cherry picking -  since large media is in larger cites (i.e, New York).  And the smaller media is in outlying conservative locations.

In addition, his label as "journalits" is a misnomer - sports stats, food critic, film reviewer... geeze!!