I know this isnt about EMS.  Well it sorta is but in an indirect way.  This is about politics.  A touchy subject I know but Im interested to see what you guys think.  Im really interested to hear from some of you guys in other countries if this happens there.

I just saw on the news that the parent company of fox news (whose motto is "fair and balanced")  gave a million dollars to the republican party and only about 100,000 to a few democrats.  Is this normal?!  Arent journalists supposed to just report the facts and remain neutral?  Seems like a HUGE conflict of interest and further evidence that TV journalism has gone off a cliff.  Does this frustrate anyone else? 

Article here
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/18/dga-calls-for-fox-n...

(Posted this under "off duty EMS board"  Not sure this is the kind of thing thats supposed to be posted on here so Ill delete it if the powers that be so desire)

Views: 52

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

You''d hope that journalists would be objective, but that went out of vogue with Walter Cronkite and Tom Brokaw. Now, they are just shills for the political views of their owners - liberal left for NBC, CBS, ABC, and CNN - a bit to the right for FOX etc

One of my great disappointments is why there are so few EMS political action committees trying to influence legislation. The AAA has AMBU-PAC, but I don't know of any others. Oh yeah, that's right! To have a useful PAC, you need money - and EMTs and paramedics won't contribute to the cause. So, no political influence.
I'd say a little more then a "bit to the right" for Fox. ;-) That's why I read my news from many different sites. It's the only way to get a balanced and complete idea of what is occurring.

And Skip, to bring it back to the standard circular argument (hehehe), is it possible there is no money because we let anybody and their grandmother join? I'm not trying to blast anyone, or bring up any age old wars... but the type of people who make up some of the service seems to be a starting issue. And I could go on from there and think of another dozen reasons.
In the UK we really have 2 forms of news...SkyNews which is part of Rupert Murdoch and Fox and is leaned heavily towards his interests and the BBC (British Broadcasting Corp) who is paid for by a TV licence fee the most ridiculous thing in the world (£146.50) to watch TV not just BBC any channel must represent the opinions of the government of the day.

It is against campaign regulations for broadcasters to donate to party funds and must represent a balanced view in election coverage but its obvious to see which journalists pick their favourites in the style of their reporting.

Interestingly there is now going to be a parliament group on EMS now and is an example of why the british are no good with acronyms. it is the APPGEAS. (All Party Parliamentary Group on Emergency Ambulance Services) should be good for some lobbying one hopes...
Oh yes.....

John Gaines said:
I'd say a little more then a "bit to the right" for Fox. ;-) That's why I read my news from many different sites. It's the only way to get a balanced and complete idea of what is occurring.

And Skip, to bring it back to the standard circular argument (hehehe), is it possible there is no money because we let anybody and their grandmother join? I'm not trying to blast anyone, or bring up any age old wars... but the type of people who make up some of the service seems to be a starting issue. And I could go on from there and think of another dozen reasons.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Follow JEMS

Share This Page Now
Add Friends

JEMS Connect is the social and professional network for emergency medical services, EMS, paramedics, EMT, rescue squad, BLS, ALS and more.

© 2014   Created by JEMS Web Chief.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service