Public television’s attempts to placate David Koch.

A Word from Our Sponsor
Public television’s attempts to placate David Koch.
by Jane Mayer May 27, 2013
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2013/05/27/130527fa_fact_mayer?curren...

Part1

Part2

No votes yet

I just knew that he wasn't donating to something he complained about just to be charitable. And another ploy they use is to make a grant to a prestigious university but insist on picking the area where the grant will be used, picking the person running the program and requiring final approval before any results are published.

This is what happens when education loses public funding and they are forced to make a deal with the devil because of budget cuts. Their latest target is N.P.R.

Going to enjoy wolfman trying to talk about himself in the third person with the new moniker.

When you read the entire article you find out that Koch did not try to stop the airing of the show or to get time for a rebuttal. From what I read he simply resigned from the board. I would think that the public tv station would be thankful for that since he is such a dirty successful businessman who only makes his money by keeping down the middle class. But see the public tv stations like having the big names of business on their boards so they can tap them for funds and throw the names around when fund raising.
Is there any proof Koch has stopped donating? None that I saw in the story. If he does perhaps a liberal millionaire will step forward and pick up the slack.

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

The fat woman in the first video claims that all David Koch has to do it "tap his wallet". She offers no proof that he did that, threatened to stop donating, or offered advice on programming. He stepped down from a board position, which of course is unpaid. This fat ass can't get her film shown anywhere except tax payer funded stations and is pissed that someone there made a decision not to air it. If there is any proof otherwise that is not innuendo I'd like to see it.

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

Is anyone really fooled when a militant left-wing-ding posts under the name "MrIndependent"? There's nothing independent about Liberal thought.

Liberals love a huge government and then get all flustered when said huge government runs totally out of their control. Well, DUH. Huge governments are automatically out of your control. They only serve themselves.

Instead of being so worried about what moniker the poster is using, why not take the time to actually read the post?

Because NMFR it's the same thing that Mike Coon does. He changes his name so he can attack people and hope we won't realize it's him and be able to respond with his own misdeeds/words.

That is why he does it. Not because he's tired of being called wolfman but because he's made numerous attacks, posted other's personal information, and made claims that were easily proven false and we continue to call him out on it.

If he were just wanting to change his name, I'd have no problem with it. However he engages in a trick known as sock-puppeting. He creates false names and responds to himself to say "Yeah! You tell them wolfman!" to make it look like more people agree with his line of reasoning.

Where he fails is just like this original post. He doesn't change his style. Most people generally don't change their style or they use the same words repeatedly. That is how we are able to spot it. I'm sure if I changed my screen name most would figure out it's me within a few posts.

MikeyA

On to the thread....

Who cares. The Koch Bros will be able to brainwash the whole country in a few months after they buy the LA times. And in the end... isn't that the goal? LOL

MikeyA

Speaking of brainwashed, I give you the purported purveyors of tolerance and open-mindedness.

The crown jewel comes right around the 0:54 mark. I've taken the liberty of including the transcript (h/t Hot Air).

Protestor: We’re at a point in our history where we need to be a little more open-minded. Um, a little bit more liberal on views all across the board.

Interviewer: [The] Kochs self-describe as libertarian, and they fund a lot of groups that are against the drug war. The LA Times came out against Prop 19, which would have legalized marijuana in LA, and they’ve pushed anti-dispensary measures. Are you worried that in some sense they would push the LA Times to the left on those kind of issues?

Protestor: Um, I believe that regardless of their views, it’s not what the general populace needs.

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

Says the guy whose only retort is to post a video made by another.

No original thoughts here people, move along.

MikeyA

An absolutely brilliant post Clemson. Just like radio and television, people have other choices they just refuse to make them. There are any number of papers in L.A. but they don't want to read them, they want their L.A. Times. They don't even realize it's owned by a conglomerate already, the fools.

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

Facts on Media in America: Did You Know?
http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=4923173
Quote from article:
FACT: The Telecommunications Act of 1996 lifted ownership limits for radio stations, leading to incredible consolidation of radio station ownership. One company alone, Clear Channel Inc., owns 850 radio stations across the country. Before the change, a company could not own more than 40 stations nationwide.

Several large stations owned by Clear Channel briefly banned the music of the Dixie Chicks because of their critical comments about then-President George W. Bush. Stations owned by Infinity have also banned certain musicians based on their political views.

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

Here's what I know about media in America-
1- if you don't like what you hear, change the station, or write the Program Director
2- if you don't like what you see change the station, or write the Program Director
3- if you don't like what you read, buy a different paper or write the Editor
4- if these steps don't satisfy you listen, watch, or read other sources on the internet
5- if these don't placate you, start your own blog, online radio station, or steaming video site
Complain about ownership all you want. What drives any business whether it's radio, tv, newspaper is the bottom line. Stop listening and advertisers will stop buying, advertisers stop buying stations and papers take notice and change. Perfect example is Air America. Another good one is classical music and jazz. You won't find a classical station that isn't PBS funded and most cities don't have a big enough audience to support 24/7 jazz either.
Why do liberals insist on wanting to change all of us instead of just changing their own listening, watching, and reading habits?

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

Maybe if we ate more sanwiches we would understand what you're saying.

Doubtful. I'm not sure no matter what you try you have that capacity. But you and ignorant Wolfman could try the Michael Douglas cure.

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

Well the Entertainer seems to think all of us can afford the latest gadget to find our connection to our preferred medium. When media concentration only allows us to consume one side then we have a problem. The man behind the curtain controls Oz and the Munchkins know no difference. The slippery, the well dressed, the vain, the lucky spermed feel only they are entitled to the riches of the entitled.

Yesterday I attended a public event and ran into one of these so-called made men who's public persona is well crafted and only for media consumption. This individual had raped a woman in Michigan and was able to keep his name from media scrutiny in all but one small newspaper. The only reason he didn't serve hard time was, I believe, his business connections in high places . So for the rest of us we live with the reality that those who have the money have control and are above the law.

Fred may think that news is controlled by ratings and viewer choice but the real truth is news delivery should have no ratings factor to influence reality. We all have a right to unbiased news.

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

Says the guy who wants media that reports against his political side silenced.

MikeyA

Billionaire Adelson spent over $150 Million on the 2012 election. With Citizens United we allowed a few robber baron billionaires (from both parties) control of our elections. Fred will naturally defend this system of corruption because he makes a living off the status quo. How many interviews has he given to Americans for Prosperity, the Heritage Foundation and other 501c thinktanks that have bought commercial time on WSPD? The I'll scratch your back syndrome is alive and well in corporate media.

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

I refer to my earlier post about how to control your own media. Mr Independent, or ignorant Wolfman as I like to call him, obviously has a computer or he wouldn't be able to post. Using that computer he can search out unbiased news 24/7, start a website of his own unbiased news etc etc. Instead he chooses to search for ways to change the market place instead of allowing supply-demand to do it. In the 30+ years I've worked in Toledo I believe I can count on one hand the number of times I've had someone from AFP or Heritage on air with me. Of course I do get my daily talking points from Bain Capital. Last week they included interviews on Sylvania's Art Fair, the Vietnam Appreciation event this week, domestic violence, and the box office success of Fast and Furious 6.

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

9/20 Fred talks with James Sherk of The Heritage Foundation about how public unions destroy the government and our economy.

Read more: http://www.wspd.com/cc-common/podcast/single_page.html?more_page=1&podca...

Made up problem promoted with Koch money.

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

Sirius Radio? I thought your UAW retirement package has allowed you to retire in style?

Ignorant Wolfman you are too funny. I love this part of your post "Made up problem"- there is nothing more made up than a man complaining that he doesn't like what he hears on the radio when all he really has to do is turn it off, change the station, or find an internet source for the pablum he wants someone to spoon feed him. Made up problem, indeed.

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

9/20 Fred talks with James Sherk of The Heritage Foundation about how public unions destroy the government and our economy.

Read more: http://www.wspd.com/cc-common/podcast/single_page.html?more_page=1&podca...

Right Wing Watch
The Heritage Foundation
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/heritage-foundation
Quote from website:
The best-known and most influential right-wing think tank, the Heritage Foundation owes much of its success to savvy marketing and PR and the generous donations of right-wing benefactors, foundations and wealthy corporations. The foundation boasts about its influence on Capitol Hill yet insists that it does not "lobby."
Then this:
According to Media Transparency, the Heritage Foundation received $61,944,537 in foundation grants from organizations such as: the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, the Scaife Foundations, the John M. Olin Foundation, Inc., Castle Rock Foundation, JM Foundation, Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation, the Richard and Helen DeVos Foundation, and the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation.

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

Comment viewing options

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