Should Chris Matthews be suspended like that ABC producer was?

[Poiuyt]

The ABC producer got suspended because of a private email he had sent that was negative towards Bush. Now Matthews and Tom Delay gleefully talk about how everyone hates Hillary and that there is nothing worse than a woman know-it-all. And just why does Matthews owe Delay twice??

Steve Capus, Pres.
NBC News 212-664-3228
[e-mail]

Rick Kaplan, Pres. MSNBC
Tel. [phone]
Fax [phone]
[e-mail]

Bill Wolff, VP Program.
201-583-5008
[e-mail]

Jeremy Gaines, VP Comm.
Tel. [phone]
Fax [phone]
[e-mail]

NBC ombudsman David McCormick
[e-mail]

MSNBC ombudsman Dan Fisher
[e-mail]

[Dr Fate]

1. Which Democrats with media access are raising a stink about it on TV?

Dean was on Matthews today- did he raise the issue at all?

While we are thinking of an answer/excuse, I'd like DUers to imagine Republicans with media access being silent on TV if this were say, Dan Rather showing bias.

I think we all know the answer- no one, especially Democrats with media access, will hold Chris accountable.

Chris will continue on as usual.

The Democrats with media access who are too frightened to challenge him will also continue on as usual.

[senseandsensibility]

4. Bingo

Our side is so whipped. I, for one, am done doing e-mail campaigns about issues such as this that should be covered by elected Dems or the leadership. They should be informing viewers about this. They have the bullypulpit.

[Dr Fate]

8. The excuse makers will claim that DEMs have no bullypulpit...

Yet I saw Dean, on Chris Matthews, with a microphone and everything.

A perfect opportunity to call him on it to his face- yet Dean refused to even utter a sentence about it.

Compare this to how Republicans with media access responded to Dan Rather.

My prediction is that all other Democrats who can get on TV will also pretend it never happened.

[goclark]

23. Dean was awesome today IMO

As much as I wanted him to cut Tweety a new one, Tweety is small change compared to the punches that Dean delivered!

Tweety was crawling on the mat and begging for a drink after that whipping.

My 80 + Mom was in the kitchen cheering Dean on, it was great to watch her response to silly Tweety.

[delete_bush]

17. I agree, if you're talking about emails to the news

organs. Our email targets should be the Dems who lack the courage to take on the RW pundits. Maybe if we supported them speaking out they would go for it.

The worst that could happen is they won't be invited back, which is better than showing up with nothing of substance to say. Besides, due to faulty DNA, wingnuts have a perpetual need to fight. If we leave them alone they'll start going after each other.

[Dr Fate]

19. If they are banned from a show, they could SAY SO on other shows

...or on Air America,the Daily show, a competitor's show, or in an Op-Ed.

The fear of being banned from a show is no excuse- and if true, could be held up and used as further proof of bias.

Besides,which show would ban a Hillary Clinton or a Howard Dean? I dont see that happening.

[radio4progressives]

21. exactly - it's not as if the Dems have no access to their own constituents

:banghead:

[tgnyc]

2. what's this about the ABC producer?

[Poiuyt]

5. Here

ABC Suspends Producer Over Bush-Bashing E-Mail

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, April 1, 2006; C01

ABC News suspended the executive producer of the weekend edition of "Good Morning America" yesterday over a pair of leaked e-mails in which he used inflammatory language to slam President Bush and Madeleine Albright.

John Green, whose unpaid suspension will last one month, apologized to the White House in a call to communications director Nicolle Wallace, while two ABC executives called the former secretary of state to apologize.

snip-

In one of the e-mails, written during the first presidential debate in 2004 and leaked to the Drudge Report, Green wrote to a colleague on his BlackBerry: "Are you watching this? Bush makes me sick. If he uses the 'mixed messages' line one more time, I'm going to puke."

more-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/31/AR2006033101725_pf.html

[rocktivity]

3. Good point

If a media employees can be punished for hating a politician too much, shouldn't they be punished for LOVING one too much? It speaks directly to journalistic credibility, after all. Chris made it abundantly clear that he had no interest in being fair and balanced. That's a problem!

:headbang:
rocknation

[NYCGirl]

6. But Matthews is not a journalist. He's a pundit. There is a difference. NT

[rocktivity]

10. Even pundits have to demonstrate respect for truth and even-handedness.

Otherwise, they're just--well, extremist fanatics!

:headbang:
rocknation

[NYCGirl]

12. I don't agree. Pundits are there to interview and give views. I have no

problem with McLauglin or even someone like William F. Buckley.

[rocktivity]

14. The difference between pundits and extremist fanatics

is the difference between William F. Buckley and Ann Coulter. Chris has officially crossed that line!

:rofl:
rocknation

[MiniMe]

30. Like Hannity demonstrates respect for truth? n/t

[pacalo]

11. If you want to talk semantics...

this is the definition of "pundit": (Hindu, a learned man of Dravidian orig.) (1) a Brahmanic scholar (2) a learned person (3) an authority or critic

So I guess you're right, semantically speaking: he's an authority on Republican talking points & what pleases them & he's a critic of those who don't go along.

But, according to wikipedia, Matthews worked as a print journalist for 15 years, spending 13 years as Washington Bureau Chief for The San Francisco Examiner (1987–2000), and two years as a nationally syndicated columnist for The San Francisco Chronicle.

Whatever, he's lost his credibility as a "voice of record". His word is not of the record, but of one viewpoint, which happens to be twisted heavily to the right.

[fooj]

15. You're right. However, he passes himself off as a journalist.

Peace.

[WFF]

24. I don't consider Matthews a pundit. I consider him a moderator and an

interviewer. The pundits are his guests. At least that's the way I llook at it. Maybe I'm wrong.

[NYCGirl]

27. That's an even better description. NT

[pacalo]

7. YES. I had the same thought when I watched the video.

If a producer can be suspended for a private, off-the-record e-mail comment, Chris Matthews deserves much harsher consequences. He's lost his credibility as a journalist, which means "voice of record" in my book.

[AX10]

16. I agree. Matthews did it on air.

He should be fired immediatly.

[VOX]

22. Technically, he wasn't "on-air." The feed was on, but not broadcasted.

Nobody actually viewed the exchange until Harry Shearer posted the feed capture on HuffPo.

However, IMO, Matthews should be canned anyway!!! :grr:

[pacalo]

29. And how did this video manage to get out publically, I wonder?

The fact that it wasn't meant for public viewing means nothing. At least, that's what we learned by the ABC producer's experience.

[vanboggie]

9. I wrote them all to advise them he should be fired

I also reminded them that Fox's ratings are going down as KO's are going up.

[fooj]

13. Here's a thought...

Hey Tweety...why not try sticking to the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics for a change. Here's a link for a little refresher course...

http://www.spj.org/ethics_code.asp


Preamble
Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist's credibility. Members of the Society share a dedication to ethical behavior and adopt this code to declare the Society's principles and standards of practice.



Here's their mission statement...


The Society of Professional Journalists is dedicated to the perpetuation of a free press as the cornerstone of our nation and our liberty.

To ensure that the concept of self-government outlined by the U.S. Constitution remains a reality into future centuries, the American people must be well informed in order to make decisions regarding their lives, and their local and national communities.

It is the role of journalists to provide this information in an accurate, comprehensive, timely and understandable manner.


It is the mission of the Society of Professional Journalists:

To promote this flow of information.
To maintain constant vigilance in protection of the First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech and of the press.
To stimulate high standards and ethical behavior in the practice of journalism.
To foster excellence among journalists.
To inspire successive generations of talented individuals to become dedicated journalists.
To encourage diversity in journalism.
To be the pre-eminent, broad-based membership organization for journalists.
To encourage a climate in which journalism can be practiced freely.
******************************************************************

Why not write the ethically-challenged treasonous rat bastard and express your disdain personally...

[e-mail]

Peace.

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

18. tweety wants to be scotty's replacement

[radio4progressives]

20. This is Extremely Important Reference Material -

We need to have this contact (along with all other major media sources) archived in a spot at DU that is easily accessed in the lobby so that everyone can find them for all media activism ..

just a simple folder "Media Contact Info" ... ;)

[eppur_se_muova]

25. That would only disrupt a carefully established double standard...

which took years to get firmly in place.

[stevedeshazer]

26. Two words:

Dan Rather.

[Gabi Hayes]

28. ,