Much is known already in this 2016 season of a presidential election about how journalists are in Hillary Clinton’s pocket.
What’s equally important, but probably less known, is that she’s in their pocketbook.
The Center for Public Integrity on Monday reported that journalists so far in this election season have given 27 times as much money to Hillary Clinton as to Donald Trump.
For example, Carole Simpson, a former ABC “World News Tonight” anchor, has given Clinton $2,800.
And New York Times television critic Emily Nussbauam, who spent the Republican National Convention, “pen-pricking presidential nominee Donald Trump as a misogynist shyster,” gave $250 to Clinton.
In a commentary at the Washington Examiner, Paul Bedard wrote, “The CPI report revealed that Clinton was given nearly $400,000 by journalists, while Trump got only about $14,000.”
“Some 430 in the media business donated to Clinton compared to 50 to Trump,” he wrote. “Journalist[s] from the ESPN, Vogue, Elle, the New Republic, Facebook, and many others coughed up cash for Clinton in record form. Even the Pulitzer Prize winning media critic for the New Yorker wrote a check for the Democrat.”
Related articles (story continues below):
In the current issue of Whistleblower magazine, titled “HILLARY’S ULTIMATE WEAPON: America’s biased and abusive news media finally abandon all pretense of fairness,” WND’s David Kupelian writes:
Only one thing could be more bizarre, in the United States of America, than electing Hillary Rodham Clinton as president – a sick old woman who lies constantly, values nothing but her own power and wealth, has accomplished nothing of value, advocates disastrous policies, and has spent a lifetime wallowing in criminality and corruption – and pulling all those around her down into the same muck.
That one thing even more bizarre would be the current specter of virtually the entire establishment news media, who traditionally have feigned impartiality and fairness, now falling over one another in a frenzied public campaign to put the Clintons back in the White House.
That the journalists already are in Clinton’s pocket is not new.
The New York Post said a trove of emails released by WikiLeaks showed “the Hillary Clinton campaign coordinated with media outlets to promote positive stories about the Democratic presidential hopeful and give her maximum positive coverage.”
The report said, “Clinton’s campaign coordinated with the New York Times, which gave it approval on quotes for a long profile on the candidate. Times reporter Mark Leibovich emailed campaign communications director Jennifer Palmieri on July 7, 2015, seeking approval on the Clinton quotes.”
It also explained that a Boston Globe editorial writer “worked with the Clinton campaign to give her a ‘big presence’ in coverage during the candidate’s swing through the area amid the Democratic primary. Marjorie Pritchard, the Globe’s op-ed editor, emailed campaign chair John Podesta to tell him, ‘It would be good to get it in on Tuesday, when she is in New Hampshire. That would give her a big presence on Tuesday.'”
The report said, “The emails also show the Clinton Foundation flagged requests from ‘FOB’ (friends of Bill Clinton) or ‘WJC VIPs’ (William Jefferson Clinton VIPs) to the State Department to offer assistance in the ¬aftermath of Haiti’s 2010 earthquake.”
The Public Integrity report said, “At ESPN, baseball news editor Claire Smith has made numerous small-dollar contributions to Clinton’s campaign that add up to almost $600. Smith, who in a tweet last week described Trump as a ‘would-be dictator & sexual predator,’ did not return requests for comment, and ESPN spokesman Ben Cafardo declined to comment.
“But ESPN’s political advocacy policy states that employees such as Smith ‘must avoid being publicly identified with various sides of political issues’ and that the sports network ‘discourages public participation in matters of political advocacy or controversy among editorial employees.'”
The report explained, “Each news professional offers his or her own unique take on a basic question: Why risk credibility – even one’s livelihood – to help pad a presidential candidate’s campaign account?”
It explained Simpson responded by stating she is a “former” journalist and now is “free to do many things I was prohibited from doing as a working journalist.”
“I have been waiting for the day our country would have a woman president,” Simpson told the center’s researchers. “When Hillary decided to run, I was delighted because I couldn’t think of a more qualified woman to seek the high office.”
The study said major news organizations routinely limit to what their journalists can contribute, to make sure that such contributions don’t “compromise journalists’ impartiality or seed the perception that jouranlists are biased toward certain politicians or political parties.”
For example, the report states, the New York Times’ ethics handbook states, “Any political giving by a Times staff member would carry a great risk of feeding a false impression that the paper is taking sides.”
The warning for AP reporters?
“Under no circumstances should they donate money to political organizations or political campaigns.”
The Public Integrity report continued noting that among Clinton’s supporters are Damien Brouilland, the Washington Post’s director of finance and compatroller, former New Republican Publisher Chris Hughes, Vogue editor Anna Wintour, Vanity Fair features editor Jane Sarking and more.
Continued the report, “So how do Trump campaign officials feel about journalists and media executives giving money to Clinton?
“‘Considering that we’re witnessing the single biggest coordinated media attack in political history, it should come as no surprise’” Trump spokesman Jason Miller told the Center for Public Integrity. ‘If the [Federal Election Commission] viewed their biased hit pieces against Mr. Trump as in-kind contributions, they would have exceeded their maximum allowable gift limits a long time ago.'”
Trump himself tweeted about it:
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 17, 2016
Kupelian wrote, “The blizzard of WikiLeaks revelations of collusion between the ‘mainstream media’ and the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign – working hand-in-hand behind the scenes to destroy Donald Trump and return the Clintons to the White House – are highly disturbing, but not at all surprising. Here’s why.
“Rush Limbaugh’s frequent characterization of the establishment press as ‘an extension of the Democratic Party’ is neither a metaphor nor an exaggeration. It is literally true. As the Media Research Center has long documented, not only is there a virtual ‘revolving door’ between Democratic Party administrations and the ‘mainstream media’ – but to a great extent, the two institutions are made up of the same people!”
He continued, “Many Americans have suspected this, especially when seeing high-profile examples like George Stephanopoulos, the fiercely loyal Clinton partisan who served as White House communications director and senior policy for adviser for Bill Clinton, but who later magically morphed into a top ‘mainstream’ journalist as chief anchor and chief political correspondent for ABC News, co-anchor of ‘Good Morning America,’ host of ABC’s ‘Sunday Morning This Week’ and regular substitute anchor for ‘ABC World News Tonight.’ One of the thousands of just-leaked Clinton campaign emails strongly suggests Hillary’s campaign colluded with Stephanopoulos before his interview with ‘Clinton Cash’ author Peter Schweizer last year (an interview for which Stephanopoulos was later criticized for not disclosing he’d personally donated $75,000 to the Clinton Foundation).”
Kupelian described that as just the “tip of the iceberg” and cited many instances of the open door between the Democrats and the media.