Thursday, October 27, 2005

What can the television audience teach us about media bias?

I received an email this morning from KSTP television viewer Archie Anderson about a news story which reported a grain elevator explosion in Vernon Center, MN.

The story begins with Archie confronting KSTP's Mike Binkley

Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 12:47:37 EDT

Subject: non smoking grain elevator explosion Mike Binkley:

You are predictable and biased, you have been watching too many anti smoking brainwashing commercials shown on your station. Instead of asking the spokesperson from the grain elevator association if, their electrical service was inspected recently, or if an "uncovered light bulb" had been broken, or if any of the employees had come to work under the influence you asked the KSTP predictable instead, is there "no smoking there?" hoping to make it another false KSTP statement that everything is caused by tobacco.

Archie's follow-up email apparently after the conclusion of the explosion investigation:

....your attempt at being the messenger and the message at the same time by an ad hominen attack on smokers suggesting that smoking may have been responsible for the grain elevator explosion in Vernon Center in your interview with elevator representatives. In my letter to you, sent while the cause of the explosion was still "unknown" I suggested that an uncovered light bulb may have caused the explosion and you should question the elevator experts with realistic questions other than the typical KSTP "smoking related suggestive questioning". I was right and you were wrong and unprofessional, it was a light bulb that caused the explosion and NOT SMOKERS as you wished. We smokers do accept apology's even from .....authorities like you and the folks in the newsroom at KSTP (Keeping Smokers Targeted Politically)

Of course what Archie may not realize is that RWJF & the Nicoderm people pay big money for media influence in favor of the anti-smoking agenda, as proven here:

Look, I quit smoking nearly 20 years ago, and it was a good thing that I did. I further think it is always good when a smoker decides to quit smoking voluntarily. But today's smoking bans, financed by the pharmaceutical nicotine companies which profit from passage of those bans, are coercive, collusive, and frankly bordering on racketeering in my opinion. Especially when air quality test results prove secondhand smoke concentrations are 152 times safer than OSHA guidelines.

Also visit our sponsors at bottom of webpage
  • Why a Non-Smoker Fights the Pro-Smoking Ban Lies
  • Is RWJF, a 501(c)3, violating IRS rules by funding pro-smoking ban lobbyists?
  • RWJF funds and promotes universal healthcare policies which are the basis for and primary objective of Obamacare
  • Boycott these special interests (J & J) who destroyed the hospitality industry & jobs
  • Is the smoking ban movement fueled by pharmaceutical nicotine interests?
  • Now that smoking bans have been implemented, what can be done?
  • How do smoking ban lobbyists profit from smoking bans?
  • Pharmaceutical interests project the alternative nicotine marketplace to be $4.6 billion +
  • WHO report secondhand smoke doesn't cause cancer
  • Do smoker's cost society more money than non-smoker's? NO
  • Do smoker's cost society more money than non-smoker's? Part 2
  • Why does UCSF researcher Stanton Glantz support smoking bans?
  • OSHA standards prove SHS is not a health hazard
  • Tired of the nanny-state, big, socialized, corrupt, government legislation coming out of our state and federal capitols these days? Vote Republican in November 2010 & 2012

    Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11


    "Though we may not be able to protect your business property rights, we certainly support your Second Amendment Rights"

    Shop for Aircleaners

    Combustion Engine Emissions Eliminator (CE3)