Quote:
Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND
I was referring to this comment:
So regarding the EDWARDS case O'Reilly was being a good journalist; the 'Major Networks' sat on the story b/c the liberals want to keep a woman/minority republican down?
As far as CAIN goes, I said it above. There were DOCUMENTED settlements regarding sexual harassment. This makes it fair game. If Cain really thought those settlements would not come out during a campaign for the white house then he is a moron, as are his political aides/advisers.
So Fox news and or O'Reilly specifically mentioned nothing about the Cain story at all, because no one came out in person and it wasn't 'confirmed'?
If not, then who is sitting on stories then to further a political agenda?
|
"the 'Major Networks' sat on the story b/c the liberals want to keep a woman/minority republican down? "
I don't know what you're saying. In the Edwards case, the major networks kept it quiet as long as they could, until they were all embarassed by the National Enquirer, of all things. In the Cain situation, as soon as the first accusation was made, the networks couldn't get it out fast enough.
"There were DOCUMENTED settlements regarding sexual harassment."
Not until long after the major networks were gleefully reporting the story. For the first several days, the networks ran with a story from POLITICO, which only cited an anonymous source making a vague accusation. But since the acused was a black conservative, that was good enough for them.
I agree with you, talking about the settlement is absolutely fair, and I'll do you one better, the networks have a responsibility to report that.
Hybrid Mode
