Senator Boxer

112 Hart Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20510

202.224.0454 (fax)

Dear Senator Boxer,

Your appearance on the Senate Commerce Committee during the Dixie Chicks controversy in 2003 is fresh on my mind, and leads me to inquire why the committee isn’t investigating a similar campaign of sabotage by broadcast and other media corporations against Senators Clinton and McCain in this election.  If you’ve followed the coverage, then you know a well-orchestrated, incendiary narrative towards both Sen. Clinton's candidacy and that of Gov. Sarah Palin has been underfoot for some time. Meanwhile, virtually all of our mainstream press outlets have covered up the extent of Senator Obama's links to political corruption in Chicago, the former terrorist William Ayers, and at least two war profiteers involved in the Iraq War. This includes Iraq's former minister of electricity - a fugitive wanted by Interpol! Such connections represent legitimate homeland security concerns that for any other candidate would invite serious scrutiny and possible disqualification.

Wouldn't you agree that the violation of anti-trust laws and F.C.C. rules appears to be far worse than in the previous case you heard testimony on? That's why I believe you have an obligation to defend and preserve the integrity of the electoral process now before irreparable harm is done to our democracy.

If news media outlets are in fact collaborating with each other and the campaign of Sen. Obama, Congress should demand that the Department of Justice and F.C.C. enact stiff penalties and initiate criminal prosecutions and other deterrents as needed.

I would like to suggest potential witnesses and offer some specific questions that might be included as part of an inquiry into the wrongdoing:

 

·      Asking the presidents of ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN and FOX to respond to questions like these:

 

1.  Why did so many of you black out the results of the January 29^th Florida Democratic primary on January 30^th?  Since you were covering that election before the vote, did you enter into some sort of agreement with each other, and with news services like Yahoo, or with the Democratic National Committee not to report that nearly two million voters - a state record - showed up to the polls?  If Obama had not lost by 17 points, would you have reported the results?

 

2.  Why did your newscasters and so-called election analysts repeatedly mislead viewers about the Florida dispute by asserting “the state party violated the rules by moving up the date of the primary?” You’ve been corrected by your sources interviewed on your programs, and by Sen. Clinton's numerous public statements about the Republican controlled state legislature and Republican governor setting the primary date over the objections of the party. So why did you persist in reporting erroneous information between March and June?

 

3.  For NBC, why do you employ a “political director” (Chuck Todd), whose job during the primaries appeared to be coordinating and engaging personally in attacks on Clinton’s candidacy, both on your own network and others like CSPAN? What exactly is his job description? Why does your affiliate CNBC sell a product called the Hillary Nutcracker but no such similar product for other candidates?  Why did Tim Russert announce that Barack Obama had won the Democratic nomination after the Indiana/North Carolina primaries, before the Florida and Michigan delegate situation had been resolved?

4.  For CNN, has your advertising relationship with coal, gas and oil producers this year been predicated on favorable and round-the-clock coverage of Obama, regardless of a drop in ratings? Have you had any discussions with U.S. State Dept. or Bush Administration officials regarding the provision of a Voice of America-type coverage of Obama overseas?

Why did you persist in running a single clip from an Obama speech over and over in the lead up to the Pennsylvania primary, when your own factcheck expert had debunked its claim?  Obama’s statement that unlike Clinton, he takes no special interest contributions was untrue, yet you only pointed that out to viewers in one weekday morning interview with the expert. 

Why does your biographical sketch of Obama - still running as of the July 4th holiday - make no mention of Tony Rezko, the scandal with Rev. Wright and Louis Farrakan, Saddam Hussein bagman Nadhmi Auchi (who loaned the money for Obama's home purchase) and Rezko's best friend Aiham Alsammarae, Iraq's former minister of electricity (who is wanted by Interpol)? You harp on Obama's landslide victory in the 2004 senate race without mentioning that his G.O.P. opponent Jack Ryan was forced to drop out of the race. Why did you omit this key development in the campaign?

The biography segments you aired on the Clintons and McCains went into detail on every possible scandal, real or fabricated by their enemies, while Obama's sketch plays like an infomercial. Why the disparity of treatment? And why do you claim that Obama "passed" ethics and non-proliferation bills in the U.S. Senate when in his own ad spots he only takes credit for state laws he allegedly passed?

 

5.  For all the networks - How did you arrive at the decision to devote three days of headline coverage to Sen. Clinton’s remark about RFK’s assassination, when she had made the same statement to Time magazine on March 3^rd without any reaction?  In the latter incident, the only source cited by any network on the first day of coverage was a vaguely worded press release from the Obama campaign saying "Sen. Clinton's statement before the Argus Leader editorial board was unfortunate and has no place in this campaign."  How did you make the leap to Clinton suggesting Obama might be assassinated, when the journalists actually interviewing her that day drew no such conclusion?  Wasn’t it simply a reporter for the New York Post who concocted that claim?  Are sources now optional in reporting on presidential campaigns?

 

6.  For CNN and FOX, why were so many of Sen. Obama’s speeches during March and April given live coverage and broadcast from beginning to end, whereas only clips of a few speeches by Sen. clinton and Sen. McCain were ever broadcast at all?  Why have you frequently focused Sen. Clinton' statements on the campaign trail only when she talks about Obama, whereas his remarks about the economy, the war, his squeaky clean credentials etc. are more typically featured? (This would certainly explain why public opinion polls always suggested that Sen. Clinton was the one being negative.)  Also, why did your panels of experts in January, February and March generally include only experts with negative appraisals of Clinton?

7. For PBS, why do your anchors so persistently gush over Obama as some kind of Starbucks version of Gandhi? In her interview with Sen. Clinton, why did Judy Woodruff keep prodding her to say wonderful things about Obama, rather than talk about her own candidacy? Why did you present two election analysts, Shields and Brooks, as representing competing viewpoints on the political spectrum, when both of them were persistent Clinton bashers? Why is Gwen Ifill allowed to cover the election at all when she is a close friend of Condoleeza Rice and hostile towards the Clintons?

 ·   Asking the publishers of Time and Newsweek magazines:

 

1.  Why have you featured Sen. Obama on your covers eleven times in the past year?  Has anyone else in the history of either publication received this level of publicity?

 

2.  Why did your representatives who appear on television - Mark Halperin, Eleanor Clift and Joe Klein - invariably promote the candidacy of Obama and deride Hillary Clinton? What is the basis for their unwavering position on these candidates, and have they been assigned to promote a specific line of argument pre-determined by management? Was Mr. Klein ever reprimanded for declaring on CNN that Clinton would only leave the race if an I.E.D. were exploded under her limousine?

 

·    Asking Washington Post reporter Marie Cocco for her analysis of the disparity in how the media has treated race and gender throughout the campaign.

 

-------------------------------------

 

Sen. Boxer, wouldn't you agree that if the campaigns of sitting U.S. senators like Clinton and McCain can be subjected to such concerted and collaborative opposition without consequence, then our democracy is no longer functioning? If nothing is done to correct these wrongs immediately, it seems to me no amount of hearings afterward will repair the damage by the time the dust has cleared and yet another presidential election has been stolen from the American people.

Please take the time to look into what’s going on.

Sincerely,

 

www.thecityedition.com