• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

CBS employees discuss fabricating stories?

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/10/31/phone-recording-sets-off-firestorm-in-alaska/

"Employees at a CBS affiliate in Anchorage left an accidental voicemail for an aide to GOP Senate candidate Joe Miller in which they discussed and laughed about the possibility of reporting on the appearance of sex offenders at a Miller rally. And they chatted about responding with a Twitter alert to “any sort of chaos whatsoever” including the candidate being “punched.”

“The perception that this garbled, out of context recording may leave is unfortunate, but to allege that our staff was discussing or planning to create or fabricate stories regarding candidate Miller is absurd,” he said. “The complete conversation was about what others might be able to do to cause disruption within the Miller campaign, not what KTVA could do.”
He added, “Have we had internal discussions about the level of professionalism we need to bring to our conversations, internally and externally? Of course we have, this is a lesson to learn from.”




Here's the audio:


http://joemiller.us/audio/KTVA102910VMAILRAW.wav




It's pretty garbled.

So your thread title is pretty much baseless, right?

I have a friend that works in retail, and when a sale comes out to $5, she often teases the customer saying, "That'll be five hundred dollars, please." It may be an unfunny joke, but it would be totally inaccurate to claim that my friend is trying to raise the price of a $5 item to 10,000% of the price--or even to ask whether she is considering doing so.
 
According to the reports, this was from a voice mail call, so should they not be able to provide the names of the people that left it. I mean certainly they left their names and a message before the extra stuff was recorded.

So what are suggesting? That Palin and the Miller campaign just made up the call? Well not according to various sources. For example, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...mail-likening-supporters-child-molesters.html says that KTVA General Manager Jerry Bever admitted that the recording is real. In fact, KTVA's own website has Bever's statement admitting it was real (http://www.ktva.com/ci_16482041).

And yes, KTVA should be able to provide the names of the reporters in the tape. Think they will? :rolleyes: From what I've read,the two voices are believed to be the *news* director for KTVA (Staci Feger) and assignment editor Nick McDermott. McDermott's is apparently confirmed since he reportedly texted Randy DeSota (Miller's campaign spokesperson) this: "Damn iPhone … I left you a long message. I thought I hung up. Sorry."

Now of course Bever then claims his reporters weren't talking about something as biased as what the actual conversation seems to suggest. No, he claims they were talking about "what others might be able to do to cause disruption within the Miller campaign". But I'm skeptical. Here's what the Miller campaign says the audio reads (and Bever didn't contest this and it's sounds right to me):

FEMALE REPORTER: That’s up to you because you're the expert, but that’s what I would do....I’d wait until you see who showed up because that indicates we already know something...

[Laughter]

[INAUDIBLE]

FEMALE REPORTER: Child molesters...

MALE REPORTER: Oh yeah ... can you repeat Joe Miller’s ... uh ... list of people, campaign workers, which one's the molester?

[INAUDIBLE]

FEMALE VOICE: We know that out of all the people that will show up tonight, at least one of them will be a registered sex offender.

[Laughter]

MALE REPORTER: You have to find that one person...

[INAUDIBLE]

FEMALE REPORTER: And the one thing we can do is ... we won’t know ... we won’t know but if there is any sort of chaos whatsoever we can put out a twitter/facebook alert: saying what the... ‘Hey Joe Miller punched at rally.’

FEMALE REPORTER: Kinda like Rand Paul.... I like that.

[Laughter]

FEMALE REPORTER: That’s a good one.

What's said on the tape just doesn't fit what Jerry Bever claims was going on at that meeting. In fact, why would they even be discussing that topic in the first place and laughing about it? I think Bever is lying to cover for yet another dirty trick by the leftist mainstream media … lying to spin away yet more bias on their part. Palin had it right.

And looking at the hundreds of comments on the KTVA website containing Bever's transparently dishonest explanation (http://www.ktva.com/ci_16482041 ) I see that hardly anyone else is buying the excuse either. But then maybe *some* JREF *skeptics* are just a bit more gullible than most people. Imagine that. ;)

By the way, you may notice that the ONLY political ad on their home page (http://www.ktva.com/ ) is for Lisa Murkowski. Bought and paid for.

Finally, KTVA is a CBS affiliate. You might have noticed the CBS logo in the upper right hand corner of their website? You might have noticed that they refer to themselves as "CBS 11". To claim they have nothing to do with CBS is just more transparent dishonesty and spin. It's pathetic and lame. And noone is being fooled any longer … which will start to become clear tomorrow.
 
Obama is not a candidate. You've got to keep up with the news a little better.

And if I had said POTUS Obama, you would then say that he was not POTUS when he played hide and seek with the media back in October, 2008. No comment on the similarities of Miller and Obama media ducking?
BTW: Are you saying that POTUS Obama won't be a candidate for re-election?
 
BAC:

Until proven otherwise, YES, I would assume Palin and Miller were lying.

However, when I posted, the last thing I had heard (which from last night on the tele) was that the station was denying it.

If they are admitting it, and the reporters did say the things they did, then all those involved in it should be fired. End of Story.

TAM:)
 
So your thread title is pretty much baseless, right?

No, my thread title was a question. Just like yours above. I'll put you down for no as far as the thread title is concerned. I cannot determine from the audio everything that was said but from what I did hear It did sound as though they were speculating on events that had not happened which is not something I would expect from any reporter or journalist. Would you?
 
applecorped, since not one post dealt with the OP topic, it would appear that no one at JREF actually wants to discuss CBS being caught making plans to fabricate an attack on Miller and laughing about it. Some bunch of *skeptics*. ;)
Right, because it's so skeptical to automatically believe everything that is good about your side or bad about the other side without compunction.

And notably absent with his kneejerk cries of "smear tactic!" is mhaze. Sooooo not surprised.
 
Last edited:
And if I had said POTUS Obama, you would then say that he was not POTUS when he played hide and seek with the media back in October, 2008. No comment on the similarities of Miller and Obama media ducking?

I suggest you look up the grammatical topic of "the sequence of tenses" then. When do you think "candidate Obama" should go south?

BTW: Are you saying that POTUS Obama won't be a candidate for re-election?
No. I'm saying exactly what I said. I'll repeat it for you: Obama is not a candidate.
 
Somebody ought to tell him. He's been campaigning since he won 2 years ago...

No, he hasn't--at least not as a candidate (he has campaigned for his proposals--though not nearly enough-- and for other candidates but not as a candidate himself).
 
No, my thread title was a question. Just like yours above.
No. Yours was a leading question which was baseless. There is not reason to suspect, based on this audio, that CBS employees were discussing fabricating stories.

Mine was a yes/no question tag on a statement. That statement was based on reading the story and listening to the audio and finding a lack of any support for the notion that CBS employees were discussing fabricating stories.
 
No. Yours was a leading question which was baseless. There is not reason to suspect, based on this audio, that CBS employees were discussing fabricating stories.

Mine was a yes/no question tag on a statement. That statement was based on reading the story and listening to the audio and finding a lack of any support for the notion that CBS employees were discussing fabricating stories.

It looks like my leading question lead you to conclude that the answer was no. Others disagree.
 
Cicero:

1. Chris matthews is a host of a political analysis and opinion show.
2. chuck todd is senior political analyst.

The quote you gave was pretty mild. I could find hundreds of quote from shannity and the fox minions that are much much more bias the other way.

TAM:)
 
Cicero:

1. Chris Matthews is a host of a political analysis and opinion show.

He is a political pundit. Who could forget this bit of political analysis that he calls an "objective assessment."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no9fpKVXxCc


2. chuck Todd is senior political analyst.

Who thinks and behaves as if he were a political pundit. He is also Chief White House Correspondent and political director for NBC News. These job descriptions are in conflict with espousing the liberal POV and biased opinions when posing as a someone who is supposed to provide news not opinion. You really should become familiar with the actual job descriptions of different American cable news on-air people. Then you would be able to compose valid assertions.

The quote you gave was pretty mild. I could find hundreds of quote from shannity and the fox minions that are much much more bias the other way.

TAM:)

Hannity is a political pundit. He is supposed to be biased. FOX News does not identify him as a reporter, journalist, or political analyst. I gave you quotes pertaining to your example of Matthews and company ridiculing on Joe Miller. You confused this with political analysis.
 
He is a political pundit. Who could forget this bit of political analysis that he calls an "objective assessment."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no9fpKVXxCc




Who thinks and behaves as if he were a political pundit. He is also Chief White House Correspondent and political director for NBC News. These job descriptions are in conflict with espousing the liberal POV and biased opinions when posing as a someone who is supposed to provide news not opinion. You really should become familiar with the actual job descriptions of different American cable news on-air people. Then you would be able to compose valid assertions.



Hannity is a political pundit. He is supposed to be biased. FOX News does not identify him as a reporter, journalist, or political analyst. I gave you quotes pertaining to your example of Matthews and company ridiculing on Joe Miller. You confused this with political analysis.

yes. I think, however, that Chris is a hybrid Political Analyst/Pundit. He is certainly much more centered then Olbermann/Maddow. I liken him to Fox's Chris Wallace.

I have not looked at the clip, but I am assuming it is Matthews "Chill up my leg" comment about Obama...an honest moment, but perhaps not his best as a professional member of the media...punditry aside.

TAM:)
 
It looks like my leading question lead you to conclude that the answer was no.

It lead me to point out that the question is baseless.

It's akin to these silly woo woo "documentaries" where the narrator breathlessly asks something like, "Do these anomalous EMF readings indicate the presence of ghosts?" or "Were the lights in the sky Clem Caddilehopper saw interstellar alien spacecraft?"

Sure the correct answer is "No!" but the questions themselves are baseless.
 
It lead me to point out that the question is baseless.

It's akin to these silly woo woo "documentaries" where the narrator breathlessly asks something like, "Do these anomalous EMF readings indicate the presence of ghosts?" or "Were the lights in the sky Clem Caddilehopper saw interstellar alien spacecraft?"

Sure the correct answer is "No!" but the questions themselves are baseless.

You mean like the CNN documentary "Tailwind?" The sci-fi story narrated by "journalist" Peter Arnett, that alleged the United States had used poison gas against women and children in Laos. The report that was later discredited.
 
The skeptical answer is maybe, but unless more definitive evidence arises it is inconclusive.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom