Slashdot Mirror
Does the GOP Pay Friendly Bloggers?
jamie writes "According to the conservative political journalism site Daily Caller: '"It's standard operating procedure" to pay bloggers for favorable coverage, says one Republican campaign operative. A GOP blogger-for-hire estimates that "at least half the bloggers that are out there" on the Republican side "are getting remuneration in some way beyond ad sales." Or in some cases, it's the ads themselves: ads at ten times the going rate are one of the ways conservative bloggers apparently get paid by the politicians they write about. In usual he-said she-said fashion, Daily Caller finds a couple of obscure liberal bloggers to mention too, but they fully disclosed payment and one of them even shut down his blog while doing consulting work, unlike Robert Stacy McCain and Dan Riehl."
And this differs from the Democrat party how exactly??
Well, for one, the Republican Party is a major national party in the US, very much like the Democratic Party. The Democrat Party, on the other hand, is an imaginary party invented by Republicans.
That's the main difference. Hope that helps.
I doubt a single one of the people self-righteously attacking the GOP right now has the integrity to attack the Democrats and the way the mainstream media covers for them.
In the last 2 years alone, there have been scandals involving the Democrats that would have crippled the GOP by the time the media was done harping on them. Take, for instance, the scandal involving the Black Panthers. Now that Obama's in power, he's not considered a whistleblower. He's considered a "disgruntled ex employee of the DoJ." The left and mainstream media have largely taken the same "no evil here, move along people" stance on that issue that the Bush Administration did over the NSA wiretapping and its whistleblowers.
The media is even being prohibited from going near even clean up sites on the beach in the Gulf under penalty of imprisonment--under a statute that BP helped create. Where's the media? Where's the outrage over a majority Democratic Congress and President shackling the press? I could go on, but I think I've made my point for those who've been paying attention these last 2 years.
So don't click it.
It leads to the "Ace of Spades" blog, wherein there is an article that deconstructs this stupid Daily Caller story and also crosslinks to Dan Reihl's blog where he also responds to the Daily Caller story.
You don't want to click it, fine. Your loss and your choice to remain in ignorance.
Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
People who earn $250,000 a year are not rich, and the current administration has already raised taxes on people who make far less than that: tobacco, tanning, and anyone who doesn't want health insurance. It's almost certain that taxes will be raised on nearly EVERYONE next year, as the W tax cuts will expire and Congress has not moved much on extending them. Even if the Republicans got out of the way as Obama wishes (I'm not sure how a minority gets IN the way), the Democrat plan does not extend the cuts for the top two brackets. This means that people making as little as $171,000 a year-- again, NOT RICH-- get a tax hike.
We'd all be a lot better off if we realized two things: one, that wealth comes from building assets, not earning wages-- thus "rich" people aren't people who just make more than you; and two, that money isn't a zero-sum game. We can ALL benefit from a capitalist, but lawful and ethical society.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Yeah its called the "Fox Republican News Network"
Where I work, our main receptionist is a 60yo republican. She doesn't make that much, and her husband has been a truck driver for years, so they can't make all that much money. Her car is at least 10 years old. For some crazy reason, she has "Joe the Plumber"-itus and seems to think she'd be better off with republican policies. Somehow the republicans have managed to convince people that increasing taxes on the rich (over $250,000/yr) and lowering everyone else's taxes is the wrong thing to do. I just don't understand it.
Republican voters believe they deserve to be punished because they sinned. They sinned by not working hard enough, which results in them not making the millions they would make if they worked hard enough.
That's rather what I was trying to point out.
As Ace says in his article:
This is some guy offering this reporter the quote he wants -- but it's not SOP, at least not that I've heard.
So the guy quoted in the article is just confirming the biases of the Daily Caller reporter, who then, rather than look for information to back up this claim, simply reports it as truth, thus confirming biases of his leftist readers.
I see this OVER and OVER AGAIN in the establishment media. They all repeat the same story without ANY of them bothering to actually do investigative journalism to find out if it's true, and an entire bloc of people get tarred with a phoney accusation of payola.
Even worse is the way so many people here just lap it up without even giving it an OUNCE of critical thought. And this is supposed to be a bastion of "Nerds" AKA: more intelligent people. Sad.
Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
for regurgitating your propaganda
do you have a point?
if so, say it, in a 2-3 sentences
or fuck off
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
What about the charges that weren't false? Were they exonerated of those?
I gave a post from one of the accused responding in a logical and intelligent manner to an accusation. the fact that it is an overtly political blog has no relevance other than the fact that it is one of the targeted by the original Daily Caller story.
Or does the accused not get a chance to speak for themselves in your little crazy world?
Frankly, I'll always take an openly partisan blog over a supposed "news" outlet that pretends to balance when they are really staffed almost completely by leftists. At least the partisan blog is up front about their biases.
Now begone you leftist troll.
Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
The left has been hiring protesters for some time, which is why you often see familiar faces at differing rallies. As has been mentioned, there are plenty of funded left-wing blogs. As usual, it's only an issue when it's right-wing.
What's funny here, if you RTFA, is that these are hardly huge blogs and certainly not really news blogs per se' and doesn't appear to be coming from the RNC. So we're talking about certain Republican campaigns. Much ado about nothing.
Liberal democrats support slavery. They support state-managed slavery. Where everything about you is known by the government, your actions are controlled by the government, and your thoughts are given to you by the government. Given a choice between corporations and government, I'll take the corporations EVERY TIME, thank you very much. But the choice between government and corporate ownership is a false one in the US. Our constitution allows us to be as free as we demand. Republicans want to give our freedoms to multinational corporations, democrats have already given much of our freedom to the government. Time for a party of the people. Jamie's bias is obvious and is meant to leave us choosing between the two evils.
it describes how republicans voted
its not an opinion
its a fact
here's a protip for you: facts actually still exist in this world. and 2,000 bluster-filled blatantly partisan blogs don't dispute the facts
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Slashdot = Left wing rag of sh!t
The pot is black. Underneath its painted on exterior the pot is black, and it is only because the pot pays lots of money to be painted that it ever appears to be white. Often the money changes hands slyly so that people can't realize that the pot is black. In fact lets show you this very black pot over here to demonstrate how black the pot really is. This is a pot that payed a lot of money to be painted white but we caught it. Oh and the kettle is also black.
Thanks slashdot for showing your political bias as always. The article was bad enough, but when it was posted on slashdot it became even more one sided. "Does the GOP pay friendly bloggers?" Yeah that's unbiased. Also, don't pose a question when you are going to tell the readers something. Be honest about your slant: "The GOP pays for friendly bloggers." Would be a much nicer headline.
So what class do you place yourself in?
You're an 'enlightened intellectual,' correct? And your track of thinking isn't a track at all. It's the complete truth. And while you would never claim to have it all figured out, you consider yourself way ahead of most others and 'if you were just in charge' things would be better.
Correct?
but I think you could make a pretty good argument that whichever party is out of power always leads that category
Could you? I'd be interested in seeing that. It seems that the Republicans were leading that category by just as much when they were in power (WMD, anyone?).
We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
Then again, by just watching Fox, you're funding terrorists.
This sounded pretty outrageous, so I looked it up, watched the video, etc.
Mr Stewart's question, meant to be comedic, sets up a false standard. Check out the list of the other holdings of this 'evil prince':
Citicorp
Citibank
AOL
Apple Inc.
MCI Inc.
Motorola
News Corporation Ltd
Four Seasons
Plaza Hotel
Savoy Hotel
Monte Carlo Grand Hotel
Euro Disney SCA
Colony Capital
That's just from the wikipedia writeup. I'm sure some actual research could yield far more recognizable names.
So, I'm led to ask this question: How much were you paid to write that on slashdot??
Just kidding, of course, but still, there it is.
i am of the people, for the people. i want the policies that are best for them
your packaged response would be: "you don't speak for me"
fine, i won't speak for the wackjob fringe
then this is where you either:
1. assert your policies. thereby speaking for the people. thereby being a complete hypocrite of committing the same crime you accuse me of
2. assert no one should speak for anyone. as if this is possible in a society. if you wish to not be a part of society, then fine: fuck off, go away, shut up, and let those who actually care about society care for society
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
"you reject OBVIOUSLY NEUTRAL NEWS SOURCES"
My ass. There are no "neutral" news sources. If a lib recommends it, then it supports liberal views. If a conservative recommends it, then it supports conservative views. If a frigging NEOcon recommends it, then it's radical as all hell. Have you forgotten that every sumbitch on the internet has an agenda? That includes you and me.
For "neutral" news about America, you'll probably do best to read the BBC. And, they aren't even really neutral.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
I didn't miss it. I'm only pointing out that when explained fully, it isn't necessarily funny any more.
A better angle would be that watching Stewart on Comedy Central would also be funding terror, via Viacom links to both AOL and Disney.
Daily Caller finds a couple of obscure liberal bloggers
Do you mean "a couple of obscure Democratic bloggers?"
Because by contrasting "Republican" and "Liberal" you make it look like you are implying that Republicans are, in any way, conservative.
This is bad for your image of credibility among thinking individuals.
RUGBYRUGBYRUGBY
It kind of does, though. I mean it's still ludicrous, but it lacks edge.
The line of reasoning is:
1) Guilanni rejected money from guy for terrorism-related reasons
2) Guy may be behind funding of mosque, implication being that it should likewise be rejected
Now compare the two punch lines...
3a) Guy also owns Fox, should be rejected /kneeslap...
or
3b) Guy owns everything.
Maybe I'm just more critical of comedy than you are, but I see the latter as far less humorous.
The fact someone believes there are neutral news sources is part of the problem. Every reporter in existence colors their 'facts' with their beliefs, rejecting or providing facts based on their personal concept of 'accuracy'. Editors help, but they can't add missing data if they don't know about it.
Blogging has been going on since paper and the printing press became fairly common. And political parties influencing it has been going on all along. If someone can't figure out that a blog is prejudiced one way or another, they have a problem. Ben Franklin used to write under a pseudonym to try and convince people that someone other than he had an opinion about something, hoping it would lend more credence to the discussion.
When one assumes neutrality of any given media, that is when they have joined the herd.
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
You were simply Fox bashing, because that's what the cool kids do. There's nothing wrong with it, but there's nothing special about it either.
Well, perhaps you're wearing the 'Team Evil' shirt, whereas I'm wearing the 'Team Stupid' one. I see it as more ironic, really.
Republicans have generally RESIGNED faced with various scandals. Democrats facing the same type of scandals do not.
Did he now? Why didn't he care enough to track his own money as well? Because he, rather like Fox, declined to tell the whole story, wherein the guy is connected to Viacom as well as to Fox.
Just let it go.
You are using an outdated page. That page even discloses that those
numbers were from 2005, see the Wikipedia page that outlines world
medians: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_household_income. This
page is from 2008 with more current data.
"50% of households in the country makes less than $45,000 per year."
From your own source (wikipedia.org) this is not true (see above link).
The median income in the US is $52,029, not $45,000 as you state with
your out of date numbers.
Even if you go by your out of date source, the interesting thing is the
graph which shows all of the different ranges of earners growing about
the same from 1967-2003. Unlike the Marxists/Liberals would like you
to believe, the rich are not getting richer and the poor are not getting
poorer. It's actually staying about the same over time.
Just don't take my opportunity to get rich just because you're too lazy to
go out there and take a chance or work hard.
are the ones hurt the most by Republican policy.
I call shenanigans. That line of bullshit might work on people who are under 30 and/or have no memory of the suck-assery of the Carter Administration. We had a "benevolent liberal" in the White House with complete Democratic control of the House and Senate. What did that get us? Double digit inflation. Skyrocketing interest rates. High unemployment. Gasoline shortages. Hostages in Iran. I could go on, but we all get the point. There's a fundamental lack of understanding about basic economics on the left.
We hear the unending cries about how "The Corporations" or "The rich" are evil. Tell me, when is the last time you were hired by someone who didn't have more money than you? You can't earn money without giving someone else a chance to earn money as well. If someone digs ditches, s/he has to buy shovels and someone has to make and sell shovels. You can sit on your ass and cry about how it's not fair that someone else is making money digging ditches while you're not making any sitting on your ass or you can get up and dig ditches for someone until you can buy your own shovel.
No one is promising that it'll be easy. No one is guaranteeing success, but it's certainly possible. I make nearly double what I made 5 years ago. How? I worked my ass of. 3 college degrees in four years. I did it, almost anyone can. IF they want to.
liberal politicians are immoral, or anti-jesus, or hate families or something.
I'll never vote for a liberal because I'm pro-life, pro-constitution, pro-America and pro-keeping my money in my own pocket. No liberal is palatable to me.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Congratulations on solving 'the problem' of income inequality. Do we have your permission to adapt your solutions to polar bears and woodland squirrels ? I ask this, because, over the last 2 decades, scientists from the Government Funded Institute for Advanced Learning Stuffs have been studying the foraging habits of polar bears and woodland squirrels, and the results are shocking.
In summary, the polar bears, and the woodland squirrels, that more actively collect food, and store it, have more food collected and stored.
The polar bears and woodland squirrels, who work at McDonalds and watch DVR'd episodes of 'Lost' the other 8 hours of the day, have less food collected and stored.
Of course, anyone can see, the catastrophic outcome that is sure to become reality if these behaviors are not altered. The DVR watching polar bears and woodland squirrels, will not have any food to share with the
other DVR watching polar bears and woodland squirrels, during the 8 hours of the day they watch 'Lost'.
In order to avoid this disaster, we request another $100 billion dollars so that we can find a way to force the active, hard working, food collecting polar bears and woodland squirrels, to give the fruits of their labor to the .... the DVR watching polar bears and woodland squirrels are at risk of losing weight, or not being able to
polar bears and woodland squirrels who watch DVR'd episodes of 'Lost'. If science and government fail to do this
watch their DVR for the 8 hours of the day which they paid for and have the god given right to use.
{vommit}
Soo the conservatives finally learned that trick from the LIBIES !!
Took them long enough !
First the Southern DemonicRATs/Military Industrial Complex stage a COO within their own party AND COUNTY by killing their own, most popular President EVER !!!!!!
Then years later after successive SD/MIC presidents who drain the greatest and wealthiest country the world has ever know of it's wealth, they kill their new won dominance by putting an ILLEGAL ALIEN into the presidency, WHAT CAN THEY DESTROY NEXT !?!?!?!