Veteran reporter resigns from CBS over liberal bias.

POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Wednesday, July 23, 2025 20:08
VIEWED: 7318
PAGE 1 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE

AURAPTOR

Wednesday, March 12, 2014 3:54 PM

CBS News investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson has announced her resignation after being employed by the network for more than two decades.
“I have resigned from CBS,” she stated simply to her 41,000 Twitter followers on Monday.

Miss Attkisson had grown frustrated at CBS with what she saw as liberal bias, as well as “an outsized influence by the network’s corporate partners and a lack of dedication to investigative reporting,” several sources told Politico.
Miss Attkisson began negotiating with CBS News President David Rhodes as early as last April about getting out of her contract.

She described her resignation as “amicable,” Politico reported

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/10/sharyl-attkisson-resig
ns-cbs-after-months-talks/#ixzz2vjxsIW9H

JONGSSTRAW

Wednesday, March 12, 2014 9:43 PM

Good for her. CBS is actually the least biased to the Left of the major networks. ABC is mostly a liberal cesspool, while NBC mandates that its on-air propagandists fellate Obama every day.

SIGNYM

Thursday, March 13, 2014 8:13 PM

Mainstream media.... and by that I INCLUDE FOX NEWS, so please don't make this post to be something that it isn't... is not invested in telling their viewers/ listeners the truth, but in passing along a POV. Heck, if they were involved in telling the truth and focusing on important items, do you they they would run thousands of ads every day?

Just watch the media knowing that it's not there to tell you anything important, but to get you to react the way that want you to react. Like listening to somebody that has a POV and is trying to convince you, and they get to yack at your for hours every day. If you know the backers of that particular outlet, then you'll be able to figure out their intent by watching how the news changes.

BTW- I don't watch CBS much, but so far it seems to me that the broadcast company that most faithfully carries Obama's water is NPR and its public radio station affiliates.

AURAPTOR

Thursday, March 13, 2014 10:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Mainstream media.... and by that I INCLUDE FOX NEWS, so please don;t make this post to be something that it isn't... is not invested in telling their viewers/ listeners the truth, but in passing along a POV. Heck, if they were involved in telling the truth and focusing on important items, do you they they would run thousands of ads every day?

Actually, yes. ( As I understand what you meant ) Who else would pay for the studios, staff, equipment, power and salaries ? The content need not suffer just because it's a for profit organization. If anything, it should be better for it.

Quote:

Just watch the media knowing that it's not there to tell you anything important, but to get you to react the way that want you to react. Like listening to somenody that has a POV and is trying to convince you, and they et to yack at your for hours every day. If you know the backers of that particular outlet, then you'll be able to figure out their intent by watching how the news changes.

I'm not sure you're getting it. But then as NBC is owned by G.E. , which is fully in the tank for advancing the AGW agenda, that might make some sense.

Quote:

BTW- I don't watch CBS much, but so far it seems to me that the broadcast company that most faithfully carries Obama's water is NPR and its public radio station affiliates.

With out even listening to NPR, I could have guessed that they'd be most in the tank for our Collectivist OF Chief.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

AURAPTOR

Friday, March 14, 2014 7:38 PM

Nailed it.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

SIGNYM

Friday, March 14, 2014 10:05 PM

Quote:
Heck, if they were involved in telling the truth and focusing on important items, do you they they would run thousands of ads every day?-signy

Actually, yes. ( As I understand what you meant ) Who else would pay for the studios, staff, equipment, power and salaries ? The content need not suffer just because it's a for profit organization. If anything, it should be better for it.-rappy

Rappy, the advertising IS the content! That's where the stations make their money! The shows are just the pretty candy-wrapper which draws eyeballs to the advertising!

I could point out a least a half-dozen ways that the shows themselves (the part you mistakenly call "content") are fundamentally negatively affected by the commercial nature of broadcast media. But I encourage you and everyone to think how this could be, and if you have any thoughts on the topic, please feel free to bring them to the table!

AURAPTOR

Friday, March 14, 2014 11:00 PM

As I said... NBC programming , its 'Green Week ' nonsense , is a direct product push for GE and its subsidiaries. Glad we agree on something.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

AURAPTOR

Saturday, March 15, 2014 6:03 AM

The news that CBS News investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson is leaving the network does not come as any great surprise to those who have followed her career. Last year, at a time when we learned that the Obama Justice Department was spying on Fox News’ James Rosen as well as a group of reporters at the Associated Press, Attkisson reported that her computer had been hacked. But, as Dylan Byers wrote in Politico, Attkisson had an even bigger problem: most of her colleagues at CBS didn’t like the fact that she had spent the last few years reporting aggressively about the Obama administration’s various shortcomings and scandals.

Journalists at mainstream media outlets like to pretend that they play it down the middle when it comes to whoever is in power. But it was hardly a coincidence that the prevailing office culture at the network that the president trusted, in Steve Kroft’s memorable phrase, not to make him “look stupid,” would think ill of a reporter that thought it worth her time to investigate stories like Fast and Furious, Solyndra and Benghazi. If, as Byers reports today, Attkisson has come to a parting of the ways with CBS after “hard fought negotiations” that led to her departure prior to the expiration of her contract, it was due to the following factors:

Attkisson, who has been with CBS News for two decades, had grown frustrated with what she saw as the network’s liberal bias, an outsize influence by the network’s corporate partners and a lack of dedication to investigative reporting, several sources said. She increasingly felt that her work was no longer supported and that it was a struggle to get her reporting on air.

At the same time, Attkisson’s reporting on the Obama administration, which some staffers characterized as agenda-driven, had led network executives to doubt the impartiality of her reporting. She is currently at work on a book — tentatively titled “Stonewalled: One Reporter’s Fight for Truth in Obama’s Washington” — that addresses the challenges of reporting critically on the administration.

While Attkisson is just one reporter and CBS has long since ceased being a dominant force in the national media, this may be a crucial moment in the history of American journalism. It was assumed that any major news outlet would regard aggressive coverage of all administrations as a given. But that ceased to be the case when Barack Obama entered the White House. If Attkisson is being shown the door at CBS it is not because her work is not highly regarded but because she has violated the prime directive of liberal media insiders: thou shalt not report on Obama in the same way that you reported on George W. Bush or even Bill Clinton. The liberal bias that conservatives have long complained about is out of the closet.

While most journalists have been reliably liberal in their politics for decades, the culture of the profession has always valued an “agin’ the government” mentality in which all politicians are viewed with cynicism. So long as even liberal journalists regard it as their duty to ferret out stories about corruption, mismanagement and failure within the government, we can feel safe that no administration, even one that is favored by the left, will escape the scrutiny necessary to provide accountability.

But there is little doubt that this has begun to change since Obama came to office. After the media hammered both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush throughout their presidencies, Obama has had it relatively easy. Part of it is due to the special hold that this historic president has over liberals. The growing bifurcation of American society in which the country has been divided between those who read the New York Times, listen to NPR and watch mainstream networks and MSNBC and those who read the Wall Street Journal, listen to talk radio and watch Fox News, has also affected journalists who should know better. The culture at CBS and like-minded outlets is to see any aggressive reporting about the president and his policies as evidence of wrong thinking rather than part of their obli

GEEZER

Saturday, March 15, 2014 10:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Rappy, the advertising IS the content! That's where the stations make their money!

Just out of curiosity, where would you suggest they get their money?

"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

SIGNYM

Saturday, March 15, 2014 10:59 PM

The media has been relentlessly kind to Presidents in general, including GWB.

As far as Clinton is concerned, none of his major initiatives - NAFTA, DOMA, DMCA, the Kosovo war, welfare reform, repeal of Glass Steagall, the Commodities Futures Reform Act... all of which came back to bite us 6-12 years later.... were subject to the press scrutiny they deserved.

As far as Bush's biggest blunder... the Iraq war... Judith Miller of the NYT carried HIS water relentlessly, "reporting" on connections between Saddam Hussein and 9-11 (which didn't exist), yellowcake deals (which didn't happen), WMD programs (that weren't even a figment of Saddam's imagination), and "terrorist training camps" that even the CIA doubted, referencing such sketchy backgrounders as "Curveball", a notoriously unreliable source. GWB got a huge pass after 9-11, the press didn't really turn on him until after Katrina.

Obama... some of the press went off on ridiculous criticism about him being a Kenyan, a non-American, a Muslim, and radical, none of which was true. The liberal press, unfortunately, never challenged him on more substantive grounds, and let pass without comment Obama's appointment of a pro Wall Streeter (Geithner), his continued bank-bailout slush fund, the speech where Obama first spoke the words "indefinite preventive detention", and all of his other betrayals of his constituency.

So "the press" is faithful to the President, as long as the President is faithful to the banks, the military, the alphabet-soup security agencies, and the remainder of the rich and powerful.

1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE