Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Osborn F Enready · May 14, 2007, 05:15 pm

This is my letter to all national and local news agencies, and I would ask that if anyone who reads it would like to copy it and send it on their own behalf, please do so, or write one of your own and send it.

Please help take part in making election 2008 an election we can be proud of as Americans.

Quote:

Dear National and Local News Agencies,

As a news agency, do you feel obligated to bring non-biased, factual information to the public, so the public has the ability to make informed decisions regarding economic, social and political issues?

If so, why in the past and currently, does there appear to be a bias in your reporting of 2008 Presidential Canidates when your job is to INFORM, not dictate who "appears" to be most popular? Why aren't all the canidates included in each poll so that the public can truly determine which canidate is the most popular, instead of limiting the poll choices to give unfair advantage to listed choices? Would you agree to an "equal representation" policy that required you as a news network (and all news networks), to offer each political canidate meeting ballot access requirements equal time for public address, debate and questioning by the public?

I think its about time intellectual honesty play a role in reporting the news in the United States, and I am going to start a national movement to back it. Is the national media ready for truly "fair and balanced investigative journalism" without bias, spin or selective coverage?

This nation is NOT a democracy, nor merely a republic. This nation is a Constitutionally Limited, Democratic Representative Republic.

How can we have a Constitutionally Limited, Democratic Representative Republic without the Constitutional Limitations being enforced, or the representational choices being accurately and equally covered by a free-press, as a free-market requires in a nation built upon the ideals of self-government and the foundation of individual rights?

America has more than two political parties, and more than a choice between two parties. The Libertarian Party has become the third largest party in the United States almost entirely without the help of major media coverage, and the Green Party isn't far behind them.

When only 50% of American citizens eligible to vote, actually vote, that says something about how Americans feel about their lack of representation, and the lack of empowerment they feel they have to change things. Of that 50% who do vote, about 15% are swing voters, in other words "non-partisan". If 65% of the nation is not feeling adequately represented enough to vote along the major partisan lines consistently, isn't it time for the media to expose the nation to ALL of their voting choices THAT MEET BALLOT ACCESS REQUIREMENTS?

I fear as the bi-partisan polarization builds, if the media doesn't adequately inform Americans of their TRUE POLITICAL third choices, they may be inclined or compelled to turn to the next natural and historical third choice once a common belief of political usurpation is assumed by the majority of the public, which would be violent revolt, rebellion and mass protest, or random lashing out at the "political machine" as described in Orwells "1984" and so seemingly coming to fruition embodied in everything from the "War and Emergency Powers Act", "The Patriot Act", "NAFTA Superhighways", "PNAC", UN-US anti-gun campaigns directed at law abiding U.S. citizens, and so many other examples.

What role is the media going to play for 2008? A role of attempting to honestly inform and educate citizens towards voting and campaign finance reform. coupled with media referendum on equal time allotment for canidates who meet ballot access requirements for debate, campaign coverage? Or, are you going to do as you have done for years as your viewer numbers tumbled more and more as internet grass-roots media steals your stage, and rightfully so, since they provide the information you have been lacking for so long?

The campaign funding system in the United States has become a tool against the free-market, and lever to remove individual rights from all people of this nation over the last 158 years created by the bi-partisan majority, to aid the bi-partisan majority and the false choice between "the lesser of two evils" as so many regard it. As part of what claims to be a "free-press", I would think all news agencies would seek to point this out, and be part of the solution instead of part of the problem.

I thank you for your time, and hopefully reply to my sincere and honest questions in a time of Great American Need.

Sincerely,

Osborn F. Enready (All Rights Reserved)
Toledo, Ohio

These are the news agencies I have mailed so far.

news@nbc24.com.,
americasnewsroom@foxnews.com,
atlarge@foxnews.com,
beltway@foxnews.com,
bigstory-weekend@foxnews.com,
bullsandbears@foxnews.com,
cash@foxnews.com,
cavuto@foxnews.com,
news@foxtoledonews.com,
colonelscorner@foxnews.com,
comments@foxnews.com,
drmanny@foxnews.com,
elijahgip@gmail.com,
feedback@foxnews.com,
fncimag@foxnews.com,
fncspecials@foxnews.com,
fns@foxnews.com,
forbes@foxnews.com,
foxreport@foxnews.com,
friends@foxnews.com,
hannityandcolmes@foxnews.com,
heartland@foxnews.com,
hemmer@foxnews.com,
housecall@foxnews.com,
jamie@foxnews.com,
jer@foxnews.com,
myword@foxnews.com,
lineup@foxnews.com,
lisonlaw@foxnews.com,
martha@foxnews.com,
wtvg.webmaster@abc.com,
newswatch@foxnews.com,
oreilly@foxnews.com,
redeye@foxnews.com,
studiob@foxnews.com,
special@foxnews.com,
letters@theblade.com,
webmaster@wgte.pbs.org,
news@wtol.com

If anyone would like to help, please post the email addresses of your local news agencies in the United States, so they too can be mailed.

Thank you for your time, and intrest.

Milton Bradley · May 14, 2007, 05:42 pm

Word, my brother, word.

I happen to know that you composed a special copy for Fox's national news outlet.

I am behind you all the way on this.

Mozart1220 · May 14, 2007, 08:27 pm

The media does not decide who we vote for. The World Bank does. With the exception of Fox, 99% of the media outlets are into ratings, they have no "bias" either way.

However, if you are all the way to the right, I can see how everything but Fox would be "biased" to the left.

The Decider · May 14, 2007, 08:51 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Mozart1220

The media does not decide who we vote for. The World Bank does.

The World Bank? Could you explain this conspiracy further?

Milton Bradley · May 14, 2007, 08:53 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Mozart1220

The media does not decide who we vote for. The World Bank does. With the exception of Fox, 99% of the media outlets are into ratings, they have no "bias" either way.

There is still bias, but it usually occurs at the hiring level. Just like the paid pundits, they only employ the people they want speaking for the corporation.

Quote:

Quote by: Mozart1220

However, if you are all the way to the right, I can see how everything but Fox would be "biased" to the left.

I don't have to be all the way to the Left to observe a bias as obvious as Fox's. As a matter of fact, I would turn that right around on you, and contend that you would have to be biased ( to the Right ) not to notice something that obvious.

The only way I can concieve of you coming to that conclusion is if you allow them to frame the debate ( which is the popular contention ) of what is "Left", and "Right".

ZNFYRH · May 15, 2007, 08:36 am

I agree with the spirit of the letter, but not how it is written.

The words with all capital letters are a big no-no if you want to be taken seriously.

Professionally speaking, it is written more like a speech and less like a letter.

Lose the emotional emphasis and keep it clear and objective and it's golden.

brien · May 15, 2007, 10:01 am

Great effort there OS. I would merely hope these people would actually take time to read it. btw, you misspelled candidate. You dropped a "d" No big deal. This is why I hardly ever edit my own stuff for publication. I know you can spell candidate but when we read our own material, we know what we mean, so it is very difficult to pick up on these little errors.

Otherwise, great communication there. Never be discouraged to write anyone who has power. You never know who may read it.

Heather · May 15, 2007, 10:47 am

Quote:

Quote by: brien

Otherwise, great communication there. Never be discouraged to write anyone who has power. You never know who may read it.

Another thing to take into consideration when writing and voicing opinions to companies of any sort is that statistically, for everyone 1 person who contacts them about a specific concern, there are 10 more people who feel the same, however, have not taken the effort to say so. I would imagine that the public relations department for these companies are aware of this, it's all the more reason to speak up!

Osborn F Enready · May 16, 2007, 04:38 am

Thanks everyone, and brien, thanks for pointing out the error.

I wrote that in a bit of a "huff", and after re-reading it I caught some more errors after I posted it.

I am hoping to encourage more people to take similar action, and at the least, add their local news agencies by link in a post so that others can e-mail them should they feel compelled to do so.

Mozart1220 · May 23, 2007, 06:02 pm

Quote:

Quote by: The Decider

The World Bank? Could you explain this conspiracy further?

Conspiricy"? No laws are being broken, it's just that by the time the actual elections come around, only "insiders" get to play. This has been common practice for many years.

Do some research on the "trilateral commission".

Nice that you use the word "conspiricy" though, it suggests that any idea outside the mainstream is the domain of lunatics.

Conspiricies happen all the time, everywhere, everyday. If two ten year olds plot to steal some candy, it's a "conspiricy".

**Pooeypants** · May 25, 2007, 05:54 am

Actually Mozart, if you want to make an assertion, unless it is a widely accepted fact then you must support it with the relevant data. One can merely ask another member to "Do some research".

Sonart · May 25, 2007, 04:30 pm

.

This is interesting... a Libertarian trying to dictate to our constitutionally protected, privately owned, free press what and about whom they can report on and write about.

Go figure.

.

Milton Bradley · May 25, 2007, 04:49 pm

Calling for intellectaul honesty us nothing like dictating terms.

Of course, we wouldn't expect you to recognize anything as foreign as itellectual honesty. It might collaps your whole philosophy.

**Matt W** · May 25, 2007, 05:20 pm

Getting a little personal, here, gents. Move on.

DO NOT RESPOND IN THIS THREAD TO THE PRECEDING MESSAGE.
Please contact a member of the staff privately if you have any questions.

Osborn F Enready · May 25, 2007, 05:45 pm

Quote:

Sonart said:
This is interesting... a Libertarian trying to dictate to our constitutionally protected, privately owned, free press what and about whom they can report on and write about.

Could you elaborate about how you arrive that CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC, CBS, are "privately owned", and what you mean by that term?

They are privately owned, as in, NOT owned by government.

I don't think private ownership by corporation and private ownership by an individual are very comparable though in that usage as you applied.

Also, where have I "dictated"? What meaning of the word "dictate" were you using?

May 14, 2007, 08:27 pm	#3 (permalink) (top)
Mozart1220 Igneous Magma Posts: 687	The media does not decide who we vote for. The World Bank does. With the exception of Fox, 99% of the media outlets are into ratings, they have no "bias" either way. However, if you are all the way to the right, I can see how everything but Fox would be "biased" to the left. Big Jr is watching you!

May 15, 2007, 10:01 am	#7 (permalink) (top)
brien Iceberg Location: Connecticut Posts: 5,691	Great effort there OS. I would merely hope these people would actually take time to read it. btw, you misspelled candidate. You dropped a "d" No big deal. This is why I hardly ever edit my own stuff for publication. I know you can spell candidate but when we read our own material, we know what we mean, so it is very difficult to pick up on these little errors. Otherwise, great communication there. Never be discouraged to write anyone who has power. You never know who may read it. Brien the Iceberg If you tell the truth you don't have to remember anything. M.T.

May 16, 2007, 04:38 am	#9 (permalink) (top)
Osborn F Enready Principled Observer Location: Toledo, Ohio Posts: 13,873	Thanks everyone, and brien, thanks for pointing out the error. I wrote that in a bit of a "huff", and after re-reading it I caught some more errors after I posted it. I am hoping to encourage more people to take similar action, and at the least, add their local news agencies by link in a post so that others can e-mail them should they feel compelled to do so. Petition of Redress of Grievances: http://www.givemeliberty.org/default.htm Canadian Lawsuit Against Their National Banks: http://www.freewebs.com/classaction/ Osborn F. Enready

May 25, 2007, 05:54 am	#11 (permalink) (top)
Pooeypants Neo Moderator Location: England Posts: 5,549	Actually Mozart, if you want to make an assertion, unless it is a widely accepted fact then you must support it with the relevant data. One can merely ask another member to "Do some research". War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is strength Harness the power of Ingsoc, then you can capture someone killed the year before Last edited by Pooeypants; May 25, 2007 at 06:16 am.

May 25, 2007, 04:30 pm	#12 (permalink) (top)
Sonart It's simply logical Location: San Diego Posts: 4,333	. This is interesting... a Libertarian trying to dictate to our constitutionally protected, privately owned, free press what and about whom they can report on and write about. Go figure. . I don't suffer from insanity... I thoroughly enjoy it

May 14, 2007, 05:42 pm	#2 (permalink) (top)
Milton Bradley BANNED Location: Ohio Province, Rep. of Comerica Posts: 7,320	Word, my brother, word. I happen to know that you composed a special copy for Fox's national news outlet. I am behind you all the way on this.

May 15, 2007, 08:36 am	#6 (permalink) (top)
ZNFYRH Volcanic Erupter Posts: 4,375	I agree with the spirit of the letter, but not how it is written. The words with all capital letters are a big no-no if you want to be taken seriously. Professionally speaking, it is written more like a speech and less like a letter. Lose the emotional emphasis and keep it clear and objective and it's golden.

May 25, 2007, 04:49 pm	#13 (permalink) (top)
Milton Bradley BANNED Location: Ohio Province, Rep. of Comerica Posts: 7,320	Calling for intellectaul honesty us nothing like dictating terms. Of course, we wouldn't expect you to recognize anything as foreign as itellectual honesty. It might collaps your whole philosophy.