When I heard that sound clip of the AP reporter bringing grams McCain some jimmy covered donuts I thought-where's the journallistic code of ethics.
I don't trust the corporate media like I used to. I get my news from BCC America, AFP-agency France Press, and some talkers.

i did not know about this specific situation you cite but the AP has become decidely right wing in it's unbiased reporting and I have even noticed how it seemingly went overboard on the Obama pastor problem but only reports positive news on the McSames.......

Associated Press .... Non-profit cooperative

The AP is a cooperative owned by its contributing newspapers, radio and television
stations in the United States, which both contribute stories to the AP
and use material written by its staffers. Many newspapers and broadcasters
outside the United States are AP subscribers, paying a fee to use AP material
without being contributive members of the cooperative.

As of 2005, the AP's news is published and republished by more than 1,700 newspapers,
in addition to more than 5,000 television and radio broadcasters. The
cooperative's photograph library consists of more than 10 million images. It
operates 243 news bureaus and serves 121 countries, with a diverse international
staff drawing from all over the world.
……..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associated_Press……..


Christopher Newton
The Associated Press fired Washington, D.C. bureau reporter Christopher Newton in
September 2002, accusing him of fabricating at least 40 people and organizations
since 2000. Some of the nonexistent agencies quoted in his stories included
"Education Alliance," the "Institute for Crime and Punishment in Chicago," "Voice for the
Disabled," and "People for Civil Rights."
..........
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associated_Pr...s..........Damn


Newton if he did either, but his gambit is maybe only as half as dishonorable
for what passes for proper journalism. Every day, thousands of reporters pad
their stories to fit the stock news formula. Like casting agents, they phone
around looking for the precise quotation their story needs to appear "balanced."
They lead their witnesses with language such as, "So would you say ...?" or
asking the question five different ways until they get the right quotation to
fit their predetermined thesis and complete the formula.
..............
http://www.slate.com/id/2073304/

I assume you meant the BBC America. Did you know that the BBC claims to be the World's largest corporate broadcast company in the world?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/purpose/what.shtml

Apparently, AFP is the oldest incorporated news outlet ............. from 1835.

http://www.answers.com/topic/agence-france...sse?cat=biz-fin

From the website listed above ..................

Agence France-Presse

Company Perspectives:

Agence France-Presse is the world's leading news and photo agency. We are fast, we are balanced; above all we are accurate.

Key Dates:

1835: The agency's precursor, Agence Havas, is founded
1852: Agence Havas launches an advertising division.
1857: The agency's advertising activities are merged
1941: The agency's news division is spun off as Office
1944: The FIO is disbanded and reforms as Agence France-Presse
1957: Independent status is granted AFP in a 1957 legislative act
1985: Decentralization of operations begins.
1991: AFP enters a joint venture, called AFX
1997: AFP launches Internet financial new service
1999: Companynews Internet news service is initiated.
2000: AFP purchases 100 percent controlling interest of AFX.

Incorporated: 1835 as Agence Havas
NAIC: 51411 News Syndicates

Agence France-Presse (AFP) is the world's oldest news agency and one of the world's top three, behind the United Kingdom's Reuters and The Associated Press of the United States. Unlike its publicly traded rivals, AFP remains largely controlled by the French government, along with a number of its top media clients. In this capacity, AFP's operations are restricted by a series of requirements first legislated in 1957, such as precluding opening the company's shares to private investors and a requirement that AFP present a balanced budget for each year. These two restrictions, in particular, have limited AFP's ability to raise the capital needed to invest in new products and outlets, including the Internet, and to compete head-to-head with its wealthier rivals. Nonetheless, AFP maintains an unsurpassed reputation for the integrity and independence of its reporting.

End of website quote.

I can remember an early 1980s appearance on the McNeil/Lehrer News Hour of Mister S. Robert Lichter and Ms. Helen Thomas about the then recently released study by Lichter and Stanley Rothman that illustrated media bias. Ms. Thomas looked to be on the verge of taking off on Mister Lichter and was just waiting for the chance to unload on him when Ms. Judy Woodruff (McNeil/Lehrer Moderator) asked Mister Lichter if he felt that Associated Press news releases were "biased". Mister Lichter replied that after careful study of AP news releases, he came to the conclusion that they could be used as a cure for insomnia.

Ms. Woodruff then looked over to Ms. Thomas (they were seated side by side in the studio) and said "Why, Helen. I don't know if you've just been insulted or not". All Ms. Thomas could do was to laugh at the Complement/Insult.

AP articles are dry to the point of being boring.

A box of doughnuts does not a conspiracy make.

Best Regards,

Back in April, during a large Associated Press meeting - a journalism-related convention of sorts for AP reporters, clients and other journalists, the assembled masses were addressed by then-candidates, and then faced a Q/A session.

After McCain's speech, and before the Q/A began, one of the two reporters that regularly travels with McCain on his campaign bus (AP reporters also travel with Obama) said and did the following:

AP: As you mentioned, Ron, myself, a couple of AP reporters. we spend quite a bit of time with on the back of the “Straight Talk Express” asking you questions and what we’ve decided to do today is invite everyone else along on the ride. We even brought you your favorite treats.

(She presents him with a box of Dunkin Donuts)

McCain: Oh my God…hehehe..Let’s see if we got the right kind. (He opens the box) Oh yes, with sprinkles.

AP: Sprinkles…

McCain: Hmmm. This is our latest health Program..

AP: A little coffee with a little cream and a little sugar. I think we’re set for the hard questions.



From there the reporter went on to ask about McCain's position on the controversial "shield law," a hot topic of interest to journalists.

HERE'S A STORY ON THE EPISODE from C&L, which includes video.

It was, I think, a pretty appalling little display, and certainly inappropriate. It SHOULD be noted, however, that this was at an industry event, and a Q/A for journalists about the candidate's positions on issues related to journalism - not a press conference intended to solicit information from candidates for conveyance to the public. CNN apparently covered part of it live, cutting away as the Q/A's began.

Making this episode look even worse was what happened with Obama later that same day. After he gave HIS speech, there was no box of donuts. The reporters were friendly enough, but they didn't reference all the good times they'd had.

When it came one editor's turn to ask a question, it was about shifting troops to Afghanistan to pursue Bin Laden. And in his question, the editor referred to "Obama Bin Laden."

Obama politely corrected him, and the editor was - mortified is really the only word that fits. He was deeply embarrassed and apologized. The C-Span coverage I saw showed the guy holding his head in his hands and miming beating it on the table. The CNN view, however, doesn't show the guy at all after sits down. Anyway, Obama brushed it off, made a joke about it having happened before, and went on to answer the question.

When the two clips were shown back to back, it looked absolutely awful. Hey, even Randi Rhodes accidentally called him Osama, but when the accusation is slanted coverage, an honest and embarrassing mistake is billed as proof.

Here's the only video I could find of this episode, again from C&L.

The McCain reporter perfectly personified the danger of spending so much time with a candidate - any candidate of any party for any office - that they become pals, and the reporter loses the ability to stand-back and look at a situation from the outsider's perspective. They don't go to town writing about a flubbed answer, because they've spent so much time with the candidate they know what he or she "meant." They make allowances without realizing it.

Some have maintained the solution to this is to routinely rotate reporters in and out of campaigns - have them going back and forth between different opposing camps. The problem with THAT approach, however, is that the "new" reporter doesn't know it when the candidate has flip flopped, because he don't know that the guy he's covering today said something quite different on the same issue two weeks earlier.

The short-term reporter doesn't know when the candidate seems to be much more exhausted than previously, or when there's a new energy not seen before. When they see someone rushing into the candidate's hotel room with a sheaf of papers and a worried expression, if they haven't been around they may not know if that guy running in is the campaign's pollster, or if he's the advance man in charge of finding the Dunkin' Donuts in the next town. A new reporter doesn't know if the crowds this week are smaller and lackluster compared to last week, or larger and more vocal.

So, the real "solution" is assigning GOOD reporters who CAN maintain that distance, the sort of reporter who CAN make a joke and have a casual, friendly conversation about nothing important in the morning, and then write a piece tearing that candidate a new asshole for flip-flopping six hours later.

There are brilliant staff reporters at the AP, and dogs. Same goes for the editors. I can't provide any definitive studies, but I suspect the ration of clods to superstars at the AP is pretty close to that of the average hospital, power plant, court house, or where ever you work. Lots of stories that run under the AP banner are also actually first run in client/subscriber newspapers, and the AP "picks them up" and puts them on the AP wire. Again, sometimes dogs, sometimes geniuses.

Yes, I know a lot of folks hereabouts are convinced the AP is a tool of the right. There are also many howling complaints from the other side that the AP is obviously a classic example of the "left wing media." A complaint I heard just this morning was that the AP for three days running kept the story about Republicans protecting the oil companies from losing their tax breaks, and from a windfall profits tax at the top of their "political news" wire sent to every virtually Internet subscriber, from Yahoo, through AOL and Google News, for some examples. They were even more irritated that the story was ALSO kept front and center in the "Top Stories" category, AND in the "US NEWS" Category. The Republicans helping out the oil companies was turning up on everyone's computer screen for DAYS, except under the category of sports.

The complaint was that the AP was "clearly" trying to smear Republicans by beating Americans over the head with a black and white implication on a vote they say was actually filled with lots of important and relevant nuance.

In my experience, both sides are absolutely convinced the other's complaints are focused on inconsequential, rare examples, while THEY are truly the victims of an irrefutable daily barrage of slanted news and headlines. Both sides essentially cross their arms and say, "I don't care what minor exceptions you might see, I know what I KNOW."

And both sides have examples of stupidity to point at - like the giggling ditz with her box of donuts, or the oft-repeated negative headline - that they say proves their point.

Iraq war deception and complicity of Media monopolies that pandered to the Administration for access.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/05/28/d...own-complicity/

Lincoln Group paid propaganda [in European papers to create the coverstory - everybody
thought Iraq had WMD], paid propaganda for "No child left behind", administration plant in the Whitehouse press pool, Pentagon "old generals propaganda" ....

Phil Donahue was booted off MSNBC before the Invasion of Iraq - ....................... fake ratings excuse - [advertising-based/motivated - crap !] .... they booted him, based on content.


I've heard a lot of red herrings from the Administration - all proven fear oriented, distractions and lies ... [illegal wiretapping - before 9/11; rendition torture and prisons
.... etc] - most proven false within 6 months to a year, but not accurately
"retracted" with balanced equal time

.................................................................


The best Administration "shaped propaganda" .... Valerie Plame's real status
... specifically defined by Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald as he announced the charges. But the volume of false characterizations spun her to be nothing but a "deck jockey"; to cover for treason - Outing a REAL covered agent.

................................................................

As before when a relevant issue came up .... you seem to convieniently ignored the amount of
intentional distraction and bombardment of Bullshit .... the real problem.


The number if false stories that dominate over the facts - predominately through the most popular media outlets, via AP.


And McCain's false claims on Obama's policies not accurately covered.
http://forums.therandirhodesshow.com/index...amp;#entry26866



Qualitative ..... vs quantitative ....
http://forums.therandirhodesshow.com/index...ost&p=26979
http://forums.therandirhodesshow.com/index...ost&p=28622
http://forums.therandirhodesshow.com/index...ost&p=28651
http://forums.therandirhodesshow.com/index...ost&p=30011

One can refuse to play the insider game. Mister Ralph Nader is a great example of this. He will kick anybody's arse end if he sees fit. He takes not one thin dime from anyone. He purportedly owns just two suits and either walks or uses public transport whenever practicable. Corporate gurus have arranged for various "Sparrows" to meet up with him over the years to get info or to involve him in a sex scandal. All these attempts have failed, insofar as the public knows.

One can be the quintessential outsider. But its a hard road to travel. You'll have few if any allies because the very fact you have an ally means that there is someone you may have to cut some slack. Principles (and the hard adherence to them) prevents this. Many people (who are less than perfect) are understandably hesitant to grant access to someone who could turn on them at any time.

Where is Mister Nader today? He HAS his principles intact. He also had roughly 12 people at an outdoor news conference a couple months in his latest bid for the Presidency. Did you even know that he was running for President this year? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23319781/

A box of donuts is a small tension breaker, nothing more. May as well ban the annual Gridiron event in Washington ............ http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb52...03/ai_n25232251

Ultimate adherence to principles at all costs is what leads to violent revolutions .......... not working relationships.

Take your pick.

Best Regards,

Beyond bias, my issue with them has been that many of their reports have been alternately incomplete or downright wrong.

I've actually written to the Associated Press at least 5 times in the last six months because the quality of their stories have been so shabby, that I was worried about the fact that multiple news organizations would then taken their feed from the AP, and the stupidity would become a matter of "common wisdom" due to shear repetition of the mistake, or shall we say, "suspicious omission" of critical information.

And what also cracks me up is that I've watched them literally change a single story online THREE TIMES within a matter of 6 hours, based upon those letters, and yet no mention is made of the fact that they did have to correct themselves. It was creepily Orwellian - as if the past never existed.

It's also not standard news practice: typically when a news organization makes a correction, they print it seperately below the article and call it such, or they print a retraction outlining what was originally said and how it was wrong, then apologize for the error. Yet this is not what I've seen the AP do. They just rewrite the story and play it off like the error never happened.

Maybe this is just sloppiness online, but since so many other news organizations no longer have remote bureaus and are dependent upon the AP feed, it's kinda important they get it right.