Ann COMPTON Says SHE Decides What/Who Gets Covered

This was on Howard KURTZ yesterday, the Howard with the wife who is a Repuke lobbyist or operative. Besides his own efforts in that department.

*******QUOTE*******

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0407/25/rs.00.html

KURTZ: ...So is it up to pundits and journalists to decide when these things are over who did well and who did not?

COMPTON: Absolutely. We wouldn't leave that to the politicians, would we? Come on.

KURTZ: You admit it.

COMPTON: Of course we do. And we decide what's news, what's going to be covered in that one hour of compact headlines, how much of Ron Reagan makes it on the air, how much of Teddy Kennedy. But the networks, of course they decide. ....

...Bill Clinton.

We used to laugh covering the White House that he would never leave. And that seems to be -- but it's again, it's up to the media about how much you actually see that in that one hour chunk we get tonight. ....


********UNQUOTE*******

"We tell the people what they need to know,
not what they want to know."
- Frank Sesno, CNN


"Our job is to give people not what they want,
but what we decide they ought to have."
- Richard Salent, CBS


"We are here to serve advertisers. That is our raison d'etre."
- C.E.O. of Westinghouse (CBS)


"News is what someone wants to suppress,
everything else is advertising."
- Rubin Frank, NBC

Amerika.

Dead and buried.

God, I want to live in a Free Country with a Free Press again

(I now wonder, did I ever live in such a place?)

That we shouldn't have a free media? That politicians should get to control what is and isn't seen?

Why should one person get to make the decisions of just what is news and how much time is alloted for what people. I agree the politicians shouldn't get that authority although that is what is hap[pening now. Rove is pretty much the deciding factor on what gets aired concerning the pResident and Kerry.

Oh, I donno, something like WE should decide our own opinions about our politicians, as opposed to pundits and "journalists" filtering, gatekeeping, and shaping what they are supposedly reporting?

Or, something like, we always knew that Faux is FAR from "fair and balanced" (and I know COMPTON works for ABC), but here you have a supposedly mainstream "journalist" not only admitting, but bragging about shaping the news, the kind of coverage, and extent of coverage.

Or, something like, Ms COMPTON and most of her media whore ilk are NOT COMPETENT to make these judgments for US.

None of these things are NOT known to most anybody here. But I thought it was worth while to provide documentation of one of the media whores going on record about it.

then you have to be prepared to be deluged with political news. Not one hour a day - try 20. You'll have to cover what Congress says, what the President says, all his regime, your state politicians, foreign politicians, all news related to politics (which is most of it) - or take it from a party source, and trust them to tell you the relevant truth. I doubt anyone wants to do the latter, except maybe the members of Free Republic.

That's why the media have their name - they sit between the sources of news and the public. Yes, hopefully they won't 'shape' the news too. That makes varying your news channels important. But to pretend you can do without a filter in a busy world is wishful thinking.

EITHER the media filters/gatekeeps OR little ol'us will have to trudge out there and see EVERYTHING, in all its mass, for ourselves.

The point is not that there are people out there who are RELAYING information to us, but that they *are* SHAPING and slanting it. While there is a slant in EVERY communication, it's rare to have a mainstream "journalist" admitting it.

What Ms COMPTON said, again, was "we decide what's news, what's going to be covered in that one hour of compact headlines, how much of Ron Reagan makes it on the air, how much of Teddy Kennedy."

In other words, the Spice Girls decided to make Campaign 2000 to be about GORE's wardrobe, his "lying", and his multiple identities. We knew that. A large segment of voters do NOT know it, and the "reporters" don't admit it that often.

Whether she actually walks her talk is another thing.

The Iraq invasion made the mainstream media's lapdog reality painfully clear. Journalists don't decide what gets covered- or more importantly, what does NOT get covered.

These claims of professionalism and legitimacy from corporate news outlets are almost funny now.

anymore...it's propaganda.