The Associated Press vs. The Democratic Party

11:06 am EST June 1st, 2006 | Politics | 3 Comments

I’m curious. Is it that the AP is somehow benefitting from the Republican majority, or is it that the AP has decided to just become blatantly biased in this election year? How else to explain their continuing campaign to attack Democratic leader Harry Reid with b.s.?

Related Posts

  • No Related Post
«
»

3 Responses to “The Associated Press vs. The Democratic Party”

  1. JWG says:
    June 1, 2006 at 4:06 pm

    Let me see if I have this straight:
    1) Reid didn’t really get “tickets,” he just received free access…although the other Senators still managed to pay for their non-ticketed access. So the AP is incorrect because they used the word “ticket.” The horror of it all!
    2) Reid originally claimed that the other Senators were required to pay for their access because they were out-of-state, but he was mistaken. Reid now correctly states that all Senators can get free access, but AmericaBlog thinks that because Reid’s misstatement was actually more restrictive Reid should not be criticized, ignoring the fact that Reid originally implied that the other Senators were not really appearing more ethical than he when they really were.
    Poor boo-boo kitty Reid. Would you really accept these explanations if we were talking about a Republican? No way.

  2. Josh Yelon says:
    June 1, 2006 at 4:06 pm

    There are several new forms of media that are competing with or threatening to compete with the established media giants: blogs, low-power FM, internet radio, and internet TV. If any of these take off, it will hurt the bottom line of established media giants.

    So the media giants are lobbying to kill the biggest of these threats. The net neutrality legislation is clearly aimed at killing internet TV. As for low-power FM, that’s being blocked by the FCC.

    Of course, the Democratic party has a big incentive not to cooperate with big media. We’re already in an adversarial relationship with them. We’re already seeking out ways to bypass them – ie, Air America, Current TV, etc. Plus, the recent changes in the fundraising structure of our party have made us less receptive to lobbyists in general.

    Furthermore, the Republicans have already shown themselves to be willing to cooperate with the media giants — after all, it was their FCC that killed low-power FM. Of course, Democrats could reverse that decision on a moment’s notice.

    So yes, there’s a lot of money at stake here.

  3. BD says:
    June 1, 2006 at 6:06 pm

    You mostly have it straight, although you should note that “managed to pay” is a strange phrasing since none of the Senators were legally allowed to pay for free access. McCain’s money ended up going to charity, since the government body could not accept it.

    This is a non-story; the only reason it’s in the news now is because John Solomon tried to tell us a man was biting a dog instead of a dog biting a man.