NBC news president sh#@ canned

Via Stacy McCain

The New York Times spins it this way:

The longest-serving president of any of the three network news divisions, Steve Capus of NBC News, stepped down from his position on Friday, six months after Comcast restructured its news units in a way that diminished his authority.

Exactly how voluntary was this “stepping down”? John Nolte points to the scandal-plagued tenure of Capus at NBC News:

  1. During last year’s presidential election, Andrea Mitchell wascaught manufacturing a Romney gaffe where none existed.
  2. During last year’s GOP primary, Ed Schultz edited video of Texas Governor Rick Perry to make him look racist.
  3. In April of last year, the “Today Show” was caught editing audio of a 9-1-1 call to make George Zimmerman look racist.
  4. In August of 2009, Contessa Brewer sliced and diced a photograph so it wouldn’t look like a black man attended a Tea Party carrying a firearm.
  5. Just this week, NBC News maliciously edited video of a town council meeting to make it look as though Second Amendment civil rights activists heckled a parent who lost his son in Newtown.

The news is only important if it means NBC is going to actually restore journalistic standards to its news coverage, which, IMO, wold mean firing Andrea Mitchell, Contessa Brewer, Ed Schultz, and anyone else who committed these acts of journalistic malpractice. Otherwise, it is absolutely meaningless.

 

What is the difference between Ed Schultz and a pile of monkey dung?

The monkey dung likely has some legitimate purpose! Via Breitbart TV

Understand this. Ed Schultz has no idea what actually happened that night. Zimmerman might have been within his rights, we shall see when all the evidence is seen. Zimmerman has not “walked free”. He might face charges still, and yes Ed we might come to find that Zimmerman was to blame, if so, put him in jail. But, what if Martin was to blame, we have an eye-witness that supports Zimmerman’s version of the events. Why do you continue to ignore that Ed? Oh, of course, it does not fit your narrative!

Further, Ed points out that there have been 65 “deaths” since the laws’ passage. And what about those “deaths” Ed? What were the circumstances Ed? Why did you just throw out the “65 deaths” line? Could it be that those deaths were legitimate cases of self-defense? Why is telling the whole story so tough Ed? And while we are talking truth Ed, try this on for size. The fact is you could not give a damn less about that dead kid! You care about one thing Ed. Exploiting his death for all it is worth.

Now THAT is a fine idea!

Abolish the FCC? Why YES! Please do!

The FCC is an outmoded appendage of the past.  Time to shut it down.  As a bonus, we would save $325 million per year in the process

he same organization that forced all consumers to buy Ma Bell-made telephones for decades, the same FCC that enforced speech codes via radio “fairness doctrines,” the same FCC that took two decades after its invention to OK cellular technology for the marketplace and acted similarly sluggishly with cable and satellite innovation has no business online. (Harsanyi)
Jack Shafer sees the FCC’s latest “Net Neutrality” power grab as a “solution” looking for a problem:

The FCC’s sense of urgency may befuddle you. After all, the many-colored, hydra-headed, and infernally useful beast that is the U.S. Internet came into being without government demands and decrees. Without commandments from the FCC or anybody else, American broadband companies invested tens of billions of dollars to create an Internet infrastructure for their customers.

I could not agree more, lots more at the link.