How NBC Changed ‘The Facts’ To Block Dennis Kucinich From The Nevada Debate

[babylonsister]

How NBC Changed ‘The Facts’ To Block Dennis Kucinich From The Nevada Debate
Submitted by davidswanson on Thu, 2008-01-17 16:03. Elections | Media

By Matthew Lasar, Media Channel

Nevada’s Supreme Court upheld NBC’s exclusion of presidential contender Dennis Kucinich from MSNBC’s Democrats’ debate. But the TV network’s own appeal to the court reveals that its managers changed the program’s qualification rules — a move that threw Kucinich off the program.

An NBC Emergency Petition’s “statement of facts” filed today admits that Kucinich may have qualified for the debate under the rules outlined by Democratic party consultant Jenny Backus. Those guidelines said that a candidate had to finish in at least fourth place in the New Hampshire primary or Iowa Caucus to participate in the January 15th debate.

A candidate could also qualify by being included “in the top four in one of six credible random-sample telephone national news media polls conducted since the Iowa Caucus.”

NBC’s statement acknowledges that in a Gallup Poll completed soon after the Iowa Caucus, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama received the support of 33 percent of those polled, John Edwards obtained 20%, and Kucinich won 3%. New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson picked up only 1% of those surveyed.

NBC notes that “The poll had a margin of sampling error of +/- three (3) percentage points, thereby making it unclear as to whether Mr. Kucinich or Mr. Richardson finished fourth in the subject poll.” Despite this, NBC’s statement says that on January 9th, Backus emailed the Kucinich campaign, inviting the Ohio Congressmember to join the debate. A day later, Bill Richardson quit the race.

The next day, January 10th, NBC Political Director Chuck Todd rescinded the networks’ invitation. He explained that under NBC’s “revised debate criteria, Mr. Kucinich no longer qualified thereunder.”

more...

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/30195

[Echo In Light]

1. NBC = WAR PROFITEER

This can't be stressed enough imo...

[OneBlueSky]

3. GE = nation's largest "defense" contractor . . . they also build nuclear power plants . . . n/t

[ixion]

2. ignoring (or excluding) the truth will not make it go away

and if we don't start returning to reality, we're going to be screwed beyond repair, if we're not already.

[mod mom]

4. I don't support their decision and I am no longer watching their network-even KO.

I wrote them and let them know how I felt (a danger to democracy putting their pro war profiteering ahead of opening access so all voices could be heard.)

[countryjake]

5. Have you included NBC?

I wrote them both, cable and network, many times, both before they won the appeal to exclude Cong. Kucinich, and after (yesterday's were not so nice and I imagine those were ignored). Boycotting the evening news is not an easy thing to do for me, especially since I've tried to watch all three networks for many years, and I'd already whittled that obsession down to just NBC. Now I'm left with none...since ABC and CBS are worse in their sponsorship, or at least equally complicit in how they censor and edit what the American public hears during suppertime.

[lynnertic]

6. Me neither! No NBC for me! The writer's strike makes it easy.

Wish I could boycott the Microsoft part of MSNBC too. That proves more difficult.

[DefenseLawyer]

7. At this stage in the game

isn't it on the candidate to have garnered enough support to be included? I realize that as the process started, that is somewhat of a circular argument, one doesn't get coverage without support, yet can't get support without coverage. But it's January 2008, DK has been included in previous debates and has taken part in one caucus and one primary, with nominal support in either. That may be a bad thing for DK supporters and a bad thing for democracy in general, but as to this specific event, why should someone with practically no support get equal time? Hasn't your guy had enough time to make his case by now?

[Johonny]

9. I agree

It's a tough call on this one. In general I think most people feel A) Dennis should graciously leave the race at this point B) The Democratic party has nothing to gain from further exposure of Dennis Kucinich C) continued media bashing by Kucinich will hurt any chance at another national run

On the other hand it does "feel" dirty what NBC did. Frankly due to the new "compressed" primary schedule I'm not sure the media and the candidates themselves have a good feel for when it's time to pare down.

[onenote]

8. I thought it was pretty well accepted that NBC changed the rules of the game

But that in and of itself doesn't create a legal right for DK to participate in the debate (although I think NBC had a moral obligation to honor their original invitation).

An invitation and an acceptance thereof doesn't create a binding contractual obligation. Not even under DK's "promissory estoppel" theory.

Put another way: if a network extended an invitation to a public figure to appear on a show like Meet the Press or Face the Nation and that person accepted and then decided not to appear, do you honestly think that the network could get an order compelling that person to show up?

Or put one last way: if you get an invitation to a wedding or some other event and you accept and then at the last minute you decide you're too busy, or too tired or just don't want to go, could the host sue you to force you to come show up? Could they sue you for the cost of the food/drink that they bought in reliance on your acceptance?

[NoodleyAppendage]

10. Chuck Todd. We should make this ASSCLOWN a pet project at DU.

Chuck Todd has been a thorn in Dems side since his CSPAN days. I'd like to nominate this assclown for special DU attention, letter writing, and other methods of general nuisiance at our disposal.

J

[Blue Congress]

11. We need to start protesting at the TV stations

We need to make them so miserable they quit their jobs and repent for lying to the American people.