I realize that I am being repetitive here, as I have talked about this subject before, but it bears repeating as it tests the pulse of the television-watching public: the fact that Fox News Channel is #1 throughout any given week, according to polls.

So to hammer home the point, a Public Policy Polling nationwide survey of 1,151 registered voters on January 18-19 discovered that 49 percent of Americans trusted FNC, which is 10 percentage points higher than its leading competitor.

37% said that they didn’t trust Fox, which is not surprisingly, the lowest level of distrust of any of the networks.

In reference to partisanship, there was a split among those who trusted FNC: 74% of Republicans trust Fox while only 30% of Demcrats stated they trusted the network.

Meanwhile, CNN was the second-most-trusted network, garnering the trust of 39% of those polled while 41% said they didn’t trust CNN. All three of the major networks were trusted by les sthna 40 percent of those polled, with NBC ranking the highest at 35%; 44 percent said they didn’t trust NBC, which was combined with its sister network BSNBC MSNBC.

Additionally, 32 percent said that they trusted CBS while 31 percent said they trusted ABC; both CBS and ABC were mistrusted by 46% of those polled. According to PPP President Dean Debnam:

“A generation ago you would have expected Americans to place their trust in the most neutral and unbiased conveyors of news.

“But the media landscape has really changed, and now they’re turning more toward the outlets that tell them what they want to hear.”

So there you have it, folks. The numbers do not lie. The poll illustrates what is probably old news: the American viewing public is not as stupid as the progressives (liberals) make them out to be. Not to mention that despite what the Democrats claim, this country is by and large center to just right-of-center in their thinking.

And that will be validated when the mid-term elections take place in November of this year.

Just when we’re settling into our Thanksgiving routine, I just thought I would give you fair warning that OBC ABC, in their quest to favor curry with the Obama Administration, is going to flood our television screens as the network will present to the masses, “Christmas at the White House”, hosted by Oprah Winfrey. The program is scheduled  to air on December 13 at 10 PM Eastern.

Just more exposure for a President that, in my opinion, spends too much time on TV. I suppose that’s a result of his plummeting ratings; however, it seems to me that if your popularity’s sinking, being on TV is the last thing that you want to do. But what do I know? I’m just a mere blogger spouting my two cents. In any case, I plan on watching something that evening that is only 500% better than anything that ABC cobbles together – and that would be TVLand.

I know, I know. Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin has been getting the business from just about every source – politicians, regular citizens, bloggers, you name it. But lately, Palin has inadvertantly been receving some help from a very unlikely source. Pause–pause–pause: the mainstream media!

Let’s set the scene, according to Kyle Drennen from Newsbusters: 

Thursday’s CBS Morning Show revealed some new attacks on Palin (ben there, done that) by none other than the father of Bristol Palin’s child, Levi Johnston (Again, old news there). Now according to Morning Show co-host Maggie Rodriguez:

“And shocking allegations that could shatter former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin’s conservative family image. If she chooses to believe what Levi Johnston is saying.”

In the report that followed this teaser, correspondent Kelly Wallace claimed that Johnston “took off the gloves” and “debunks the popular image of Palin as hockey mom and moose hunter, telling…that ‘she doesn’t hunt, doesn’t read, doesn’t work hard, doesn’t spend time with her family, but instead spends all night alone in her bedroom.’”

Wallace added:

“As for Sarah and Todd’s marriage, Johnston says they constantly threatened each other with divorce. ‘Once the cameras would leave, they didn’t talk to each other. I’ve never seen them sleep in the same bedroom.’”

After the report, Rodriguez mentioned:

“And when we talked last April, he made similar claims to me and Sarah Palin said he’s lying, he just wants publicity, he just wants his little moment in the spotlight…my guess would be she would probably say something along those lines.”

Co-host (and bleeding heart liberal of the nth degree) Harry Smith asked Rodriguez that since she’s met and interviewed him, does he seem credible. she simply said, “How can I possibly answer that?”

Now here is where it gets interesting. The other liberal television outlets actually came to Palin’s rescue. On NBC’s TODAY show, correspondent Norah O’Donnell covered the story; however, she raised the possibility of Johnston milking the Palin angle by saying:

“Levi Johnston is pretty much trashing Palin publicly, saying she complained about her workload as governor, didn’t cook for her kids and tried to keep Bristol’s pregnancy secret. But is he telling the truth or is this just another ploy for publicity?”

She further added:

“Levi is also challenging Palin’s image as an outdoorsman….But in this media photo-op this year, Palin is seen picking fish, like salmon, off set-nets in Bristol Bay, something she’s done for more than 20 years.”

Even Good Morning America got into the act. Correspondent Bill Weir had his doubts, as well by reporting:

“His story contradicts virtually everything America knows about the former governor and it is counter to the praises he once sang to Larry King.”

He also added this:

“As for Johnston’s efforts to cash in, the self-described ‘country guy’ who didn’t want to put himself in front of thousands of people on the campaign, recently walked the red carpet at the teen choice awards. And during the Vanity Fair photo shoot, admitted that he would be willing to pose for Playgirl.”

Finally. Sarah FINALLY catches a break. And from the MSM, no less. They actually did what they’re paid to do: report the news. Now whether this means that the MSM will finally leave Palin alone is highly doubtful, but it is about damn time that the MSM did some truthful reporting. As a matter of fact, they should make it a daily habit.

By the way, if you want to view the entire transcript from the Morning Show that was aired Thursday (today), please click here.

As much as I deplore the vast majority of programming on the mainstream networks, I have to give them credit for protesting what has been low ratings.  Even though ABC, NBC and CBS have shown President Obama’s news conferences, it is common knowledge that the ratings have slipped.

Let me ask you this question.  Let’s say that you’re the head of programming for one of the three aforemtioned television networks – put your political affiliation aside for this question – and the White House requests that you set aside a block of time for a Presidential news conference.

Assuming that you’re a businessperson, then you know that when the White House asks for primetime coverage of a news conference, you have a dilemma facing you.  Do you, out of civic duty or guilt, cave in to the pressure from the Obama administration?  Or do you, as guardian of the business that you run, opt to have your regular programming on the night of the proposed news conference?

Perhaps some insight is in order here. 

First, let’s deal with the protocol.  Instead of contacting ABC, Rahm Emanuel twisted the arm of Bob Iger, the head of Disney.  Meanwhile, Emanuel calls Jeffrey Immelt, the head of General Electric instead of NBC.  CBS is bypassed in favor of Les Moonves, the head of the company, which was spun off of Viacom.  So you see, the Obama administration applied its old-school, Chicago-style tactics in dealing with those three networks.  On the other hand, Fox had the balls to stand up to the Obama administration and say NO.

To illustrate the bumrush that Obama and Co. to the networks, one of the suits at CBS, Paul Friedman put it this way:

“It’s an enormous financial cost when the president replaces one of those prime-time hours. The news divisions also have mixed feelings about whether they are being used.”

And as one would expect between discussions between Emanuel and the networks, the White House dictated the time that the new conferences would take place.  Early on, the aforementioned networks – all of them in bed with Obama, by the way – thought that the Obama news conferences would be a ratings bonanza.  Early on, they were.  not so much now. 

And there’s the matter of the financial impact when networks preempt their regular programming to televise an Obama news conference.

All three networks have thrown away as much as $40 million in lost revenue in order to show these events so far.  The ratings?  They have dropped with each recurring news conference.  So you can say safely that these news pressers have been a financial drain on all three networks. 

I have an idea of how ABC, NBC and CBS should proceed in the future when approached by the Obama henchman, requesting primetime for another news conference.  Exercise some independence and do what Nancy Reagan suggested decades ago – JUST SAY NO.  If Fox can do it, then so can you.  Besides, even if you wanted to show Obama press conferences, even you guys know that you can expect more of the same when they air.  Nothing new or earth-shattering to talk about. 

Bottom line – and that includes your financial bottom line – is that limiting the press conferences will automatically improve your financial books.  And that’s something that you can safely take to the bank.

I know, I know.  you’re thinking, “What’s so significant about June 24?”  Believe it or not, folks, it actually is significant; significant because it involves the mainstream media.

The night of Wednesday, June 24 is significant in that the media – namely ABC – and the government are a tag team.  As a matter of fact, the network has turned over its programming to the Obama administration so they can attempt to brainwash the viewing public and push their “socialized medicine” government-run health care program.  One thing is for certain here: there will be ethical questions raised about this development.

What’s in store?  OBC ABC News anchor Charlie Gibson will do World News Tonight from the Blue Room of the White House.  The network also plans to do a primetime special named, “Prescription for America” – which will originate from the East Room.  There’s a twist to this development: there will be no opposing points of view allowed during this particular programming.

Late Monday night, a letter was sent to the head of ABC News, complaining of this format; the letter states:

Dear Mr. Westin:

As the national debate on health care reform intensifies, I am deeply concerned and disappointed with ABC’s astonishing decision to exclude opposing voices on this critical issue on June 24, 2009. Next Wednesday, ABC News will air a primetime health care reform “town hall” at the White House with President Barack Obama. In addition, according to an ABC News report, GOOD MORNING AMERICA, WORLD NEWS, NIGHTLINE and ABC’s web news “will all feature special programming on the president’s health care agenda.” This does not include the promotion, over the next 9 days, the president’s health care agenda will receive on ABC News programming.

Today, the Republican National Committee requested an opportunity to add our Party’s views to those of the President’s to ensure that all sides of the health care reform debate are presented. Our request was rejected. I believe that the President should have the ability to speak directly to the America people. However, I find it outrageous that ABC would prohibit our Party’s opposing thoughts and ideas from this national debate, which affects millions of ABC viewers.

In the absence of opposition, I am concerned this event will become a glorified infomercial to promote the Democrat agenda. If that is the case, this primetime infomercial should be paid for out of the DNC coffers. President Obama does not hold a monopoly on health care reform ideas or on free airtime. The President has stated time and time again that he wants a bipartisan debate. Therefore, the Republican Party should be included in this primetime event, or the DNC should pay for your airtime.

Respectfully,
Ken McKay
Republican National Committee
Chief of Staff

As expected, ABC News did respond to the RNC complaint; their Senior Vice President, Kerry Smith said on Tuesday (today) that it contained “false premises”, adding:

“ABCNEWS prides itself on covering all sides of important issues and asking direct questions of all newsmakers — of all political persuasions — even when others have taken a more partisan approach and even in the face of criticism from extremes on both ends of the political spectrum. ABCNEWS is looking for the most thoughtful and diverse voices on this issue.

“ABCNEWS alone will select those who will be in the audience asking questions of the president. Like any programs we broadcast, ABC News will have complete editorial control. To suggest otherwise is quite unfair to both our journalists and our audience.”

Like I said earlier, folks, this raises ethical questions here.  And an investigation by the FCC is warranted here.  I have never, ever heard of where one party got network airtime without the opposition getting rebuttal time during the same airtime.

But it does appear that the Obama administration and ABC obviously have this love affair going on.  This development is not only wrong, but unethical, as well.  Should more developments arise, The Republican Temple will being them to you.  This is disturbing stuff here, folks.

I don’t want to simply say that the liberal press had anything to do with President-elect Barack Obama getting elected, but consider this: according to the Center for Media and Public Affairs, Obama has received the most positive election coverage in 20 years of studies of this subject; specifically, Obama received 68% positive coverage from the four major television networks (ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox) according to the report, which was released on Friday.

On the flip side, Republican presidential challenger John McCain received only 33% positive coverage from the networks; the percentages were based on 1,197 stories broadcast from August 23 to November 4 on “ABC World News Tonight“, ”NBC Nightly News“, “CBS Evening News” and “Fox Special Report“.  To no one’s surprise, NBC led the Obama lovefest with 73% positive coverage while Fox was the sole network to tangle with Obama with only 37% positive coverage – slightly less than the 41% positive coverage they provided, hence the “fair and balanced” moniker.

Fox even dared to do what the left-leaning networks wouldn’t dream of doing: taking Obama to the woodshed for his announcements with the “Office of the President-Elect” placard in front of him.  Someone needs to tell Obama that no such thing exists and to read the U.S. Constitution.  And guess what?  The Center is not alone in the liberal lovefest with Obama.  Pew Research Center did a poll amongst voters and they (70% of them anyways), like the vast majority of us Republicans, agree that the networks wanted Obama to win the election while Harvard University did some analysis in early November revealed that 77% of Americans said that the press is politically biased while only 5% deemed the press conservative.

Again, I don’t want to say that the media is biased, but let’s face it – numbers do not lie.  And you know that the lefty press isn’t going to let up as to be honest, they’re just an extension of the Obama administration.  And yes, that includes the bastion of liberalism PBS.  That’s why 2010 is such a pivotal year; there will be lots of coverage of the races at that time – and it will be liberal in flavor – which is why I am calling out to all of you to boycott the Big 4 networks (ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS) and get your political coverage at Fox – specifically Fox News Network.  If you have DIRECTV, that should be channel 360 on your program grid.