Accuracy in Media

As if we needed any further evidence that the liberal media are in the tank for Hillary Clinton, a new analysis by the Center for Public Integrity reveals that political contributions by journalists to the Democratic nominee outstrip those made to Donald Trump by a margin of more than 27 to 1

Of the $396,000 the Center for Public Integrity tracked, $382,000, or 96 percent, went to Clinton.

Among those giving to Clinton were former ABC “World News Tonight” anchor Carole Simpson, at $2,800, longtime television talk show host Larry King, at $2,700, and New Yorker television critic Emily Nussbaum, who said during the Republican National Convention that Donald Trump was running an “ugly and xenophobic campaign,” while conveniently forgetting to disclose that she gave Clinton $250 in April.

The analysis only identified one Trump donor—out of about 50. It was Les Waldron, an Emmy Award-winning assignment editor for the San Diego CBS affiliate KFMB, who gave the Donald $28 in July.

Many major news organizations prohibit journalists from making political contributions, but that isn’t universal in the industry. That means that some journalists—usually those at small news organizations—can, while those at larger ones can’t.

With the public’s trust in the media at an all-time low, this analysis—as unsurprising as it may be—will only reinforce the perception that the media have no intention of covering the presidential campaign fairly and honestly.





Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.

Comments

  • Tbear

    The system is clearly rigged as evident by what the mainstream media did to get Obama elected twice; and now they are doing the same for Hillary.

    Journalism is dead in America. Thankfully there a many creditable Internet news sources and the truth eventually leaks out – thanks to the likes of Wikileaks. And now The National Enquirer (which in my opinion is more trustworthy than the NYT) published this today:

    http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/hillary-clinton-lesbian-sex-claims-vince-foster-fixer/
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a6a1d9ee09967ed430a86ddbe9898d10a2e422cee36791dab92a710bfe0ce72d.jpg

  • IronChefSandwiches

    Your OWN ARTICLE puts the lie to your nonsense charges. Small, local affiliates can contribute. There are thousands of them. This study looked at 50. What were their methods? How did they pick the people? You’re a hack, Irvine. A lunatic, idiot hack.

  • Alan Krusinger

    Methinks you protest too much. The question is not are they allowed to contribute, but why are they so biased and does this show in their “reporting”.

  • IronChefSandwiches

    That’s two questions. lol First, they are “so biased” because they’re educated. Study after study have shown that the higher the education level, the higher the affinity for liberals ideas. The answer to the second question is a very obvious “no”. The greatest trick the right has played in the last few decades is convincing the rubes that the media is liberal. It’s so bad that if they report that Trump is a raving scumbag, it’s “liberal”. Facts have a liberal bias. The media doesn’t.

  • IronChefSandwiches

    And so, Thor, you’ve fallen this far. Your inability to accept reality has now become complete. I’m looking forward to accepting your apology on the 9th of November.

  • Chance Boudreaux

    Liberalism is a mental disorder. Wanting others to take care of you and rule every aspect of your life is infantile. It is also the safe, weak, easy choice for those that rather stew in their dirty diaper rather than create their own destiny.

  • Chance Boudreaux

    Go back to the Daily kooks, adults are trying to save the Republic here.

  • Chance Boudreaux

    Does Hillary Parkinson’s Clinton got you hot with her grandma panties and mini-seizures?

  • Ang
  • IronChefSandwiches

    LOL Like they’d waste money paying someone to troll AIM, a site no one reads. Also, since you didn’t disagree with what I wrote, I’ll take you’re conceding my point. Thanks!

  • IronChefSandwiches

    You’re following me around, responding with drivel while ignoring the points I’ve made. You’re a moron and a rube.

  • Alan Krusinger

    You apparantly missed the CNN moderated debate where Trump was repeatedly interrupted by the liberal “unbiased ” moderator.

  • IronChefSandwiches

    Oh dear God, you people and your ability to live in a fantasy world… If you’d watched the debate without being a right wing moron, you would have seen Trump being the one who interrupted over and over and over. Unreal.

  • Chance Boudreaux

    Keep telling yourself as you wet the bed tonight.

  • Jack Parsons

    NBC Universal, News Corporation, Turner Broadcasting and Thomson Reuters are among more than a dozen media organizations that have made charitable contributions to the Clinton Foundation in recent years, the foundation’s records show.

    The donations, which range from the low-thousands to the millions, provide a picture of the media industry’s ties to the Clinton Foundation at a time when one of its most notable personalities, George Stephanopoulos, is under scrutiny for not disclosing his own $75,000 contribution when reporting on the foundation.

    The list also includes mass media groups like Comcast, Time Warner and Viacom, as well a few notable individuals, including Carlos Slim, the Mexican telecom magnate and largest shareholder of The New York Times Company, and James Murdoch, the chief operating officer of 21st Century Fox. Both Slim and Murdoch have given between $1 million to $5 million, respectively.