angeroonie john stewart slightly on the left and stephen colbert sarcastically on the right balance each other out and provide the most fair and balanced news hour:)

Here's the video of Obama talking to ACORN:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmn4ptXu2...

The editor sent me an email response to my earlier question. He said they did cover the march in the Sunday paper (fair enough--I knew the online Gazette doesn't have the same coverage as the paper version). And he said the ACORN story is covered extensively in today's paper. Better late than never. Still, for only a couple hours, they had an article posted online and then took it down. I don't get that. I think the ACORN story is important because they were going to be involved with the 2010 census, they've received $53 million in federal money over the past nine years, and they were eligible for $8 billion more in stimulus money. Now, ACORN's funding has been cut and they will no longer be assisting with the next census. That is due solely to two college kids that knew ACORN was a shady operation, and did their own investigative reporting. So, it's a big deal. Also, there's video of Obama talking to ACORN telling them that he's going to work with them to set his agenda. He is surrounded by many people of low character. That's not good. Some say politics as usual (which is sad), but when you get proof, you gotta clean house.

pete,
I don't believe they are President Obama's buddies. I work for a company and know there are some people doing wrong, it is almost a guarantee but that doesn't mean they are my "buddies" because we both work for or even support the same company.
.
I want to know about Acorn and have all involved in this crime put in jail.
.
anger
Unfortunately I like the shock jock news so I watch mainly Fox and MSNBC. I would guess with those two outlets being so bias that CNN would be smart to come in down the middle. The problem is, CNN won't win the ratings war being "Fair and Balanced" because those on the right want their opinion reinforced "Fox News" as do those on the left "MSNBC."
.
On election night and after the debates I watched CNN and was impressed with how fair the coverage was. No Hannity or Olberman breaking things down. They had experts from both sides but at least those experts would listen to (Hannity doesn't) and not mock (Olberman cannot) the other side.
.
That is my take, at least on Cable News coverage.

Question for all: Which outlet, in your opinion, is the most objective and accurate in reporting the news? I know they are all guilty of spin and sensationalism, but if you had to choose, who would you say is the most unbiased?

Did every body see that? THE WASHINGTON POST.

I gave up believing anything that any of the news outlets were saying completely the day I heard THE WASHINGTON POST was selling influence.It should have been a LARGE turning point in time for the press of the world to show that they were watching our backs. We heard very little about it from any of them. It would be very sad if not so tragic. Tragic not only because their competitors didn't flush them, tragic because NOW no one seems to be paying attention.

The problem I find is they are all lying and have slants.
.
Covering the 9/12 rally should happen but how do you cover it? Do you show the patriotism rallying against Obamacare? OR Do you show the people comparing Obama to Hitler, the Devil and posters saying "Burry Obamacare with Kennedy."
.
The Jimmy Carter comment...The right will demonstrate how "not about race" the debate is while Keith Olberman on Tuesday went through multiple quotes showing how racist the debate has become.
.
How about Fox & Friends asking Glen Beck the number of protestors for basically his rally. What did he say, close to 2 mil as citing by a university…when asked what university he couldn’t remember and they let it go.
.
Citing Fox is fine but be careful because they do their own spin on any news story…as does MSNBC, Rush, Hannity, and most commentators on any “news” network.
.
Last question, why is Acorn such a big story? Why is it worth covering? Obama had a connection but doesn’t any longer. Some gov’t $ went to them but it went a lot of other places.
.
I will say this, the networks are ignoring the Acorn story the same way Fox ignored the no bid contract story. More than likely, both should be covered but bias…from BOTH SIDES, got in the way.

Thanks, kiowamohican. I didn't know those details about ACORN. However, I do know that every new law passed gives the oligarchy one more reason to ROTF laughing at us. I just wonder how the so-called "journalists" manage to fall asleep at night. Maybe DiGriz has the right idea.

Fool-ont-the-hill:
You'd be shocked at what you probably don't know. Corruption in government is FAR bigger then most ever will imagine, or accept.
.
The Acorn thing is hardly even a "recent" scandal. Most have know for years that they are a criminal enterprise. It's really not that big of a story to anyone who has followed them. Organized crime has been tied into labor unions, and the politicians, for decades. Acorn is much like Paul Castellano's empire was in it's hay day. Everyone knew it was a huge criminal enterprise, but good luck ever doing anything. He owned all the politicians, from legislator to judges.
It's just one huge shell game, and if anyone has ever been involved in it, you'd probably be stunned at 1st, but eventually just come to see that it's very much the ACCEPTED and NOT the exception.
.
Castellano, and is ilk, were eventually hit hard by the RICO statutes. ACORN, will of course, never be charged under any RICO statute. As the new way of organized crime is to pose as an agency for helping the poor, and disadvantaged. It serves as a great cover for rampant organized crime. While the poor never do get helped, the people in the organization bilk millions of $$$'s, the public is to dumb to figure out what's going on, the politicians are tied into the criminal enterprise (and most of the time actually help fund it), and the reporters actually buy into the silly notion that the organization is helping the poor. It's really a great racket.

The Acorn exposé is important news but the bigger exposé is how two students on a shoestring budget exposed the truly pathetic state of investigative journalism by national news organizations. This begs the question: what else don't we know?

Hey, Sarah, are you the person I had the chunky v. creamy peanut butter debate? (I was looking up old posts.)

Eeewww, yeah, I found a YouTube of it. That's pretty bad. O'Reilly gets on my nerves sometimes. Especially lately. Just because I can't figure him out. I still watch him though.

Who's Shawn Hornbeck?

Wow, thanks. You are all right in my book for that alone, Sarah.

It's not in the Gazette. I had been checking CNN.com and ABC.com and didn't see anything. The ACORN story has been alive for a week. Today I see others are finally covering it, maybe some did yesterday. It's underplayed. Most people don't watch the news everyday or read more than one newspaper.

Jacmarien: Before you get a chance to reply, I wanted to apologize for my comment sounding rude. I didn't mean it to be, especially after realizing that you usually write comments that don't attack others. Again, I apologize. P.S. But darnit, I still wish O'Reilly would do the right thing and apologize to Shawn Hornbeck.

Jacmarien: How come your comments always seem to contain items heard on Fox News about 10 minutes before your posting times? If you'd occasionally turn to another channel, you would find that many of these stories have been covered by other networks and by major newspapers.

The Gazette is one of many traditional news sources that chose to avoid these two stories. ABC News' Charlie Gibson, just two days ago, claimed he had never heard of the ACORN story. So congratulations, you are more thorough and better informed than a network news anchor. Most people are not.

The Gazettes focus is LOCAL news.

Believe it or not there are other news sources besides the gazette. If you don't like what they report or don't report go somewhere else. I read multiple news sources everyday from both sides of the aisle. I somehow even managed to read the articles on acorn and the march in washington. I can read the drudgereport to get the right perspective and I can read the huffington post to get the left. You knew about acorn and the protests so you obviously were able to get your news from a different source as well. Instead of complaining at every little thing that the gazette does wrong (in your opinion) move on.

Justin Timberlake Rules (really?): You like information being withheld? The news shows everytime Cindy Sheehan and her six friends show up to protest (except not now that Obama is president for some reason, hmmmm). When at the very minimum 75,000 people--and in reality more like a million people--show up to rally in DC and the "traditional" press ignores it, we should all be angry. When corruption is exposed in an organization that receives millions of dollars of taxpayer money and the "traditional" news buries it, we should all be angry. Don't you want the information so you can write it off as garbage yourself, or do you want the "traditional" news to decide that for you? Regardless of what your views are, I think everyone should be offended when news is buried. Report it and debunk it if you don't agree with it, but for God's sake, report it.

jacmarien - I called and talked to the editor and asked them why they weren't posting stories on these important events. They told me they were doing it just to p!ss you off. I think it's working. Have a good night:)

Here's the link to the Gazette's ACORN article. Gazette, why is there no longer a link on the front page?

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/U...

Gazette ... what in the world are you doing!?! You had the ACORN story up, and now it's gone?

Don't blame the Gazette completly. They get there info from Press Releases from the major news organizations. They in turn didn't report anything, therefore no press release, no local coverage.

GAZETTE! Wake up! I, too, am wondering why you are ignoring these major news stories. Pls explain!

I understand and agree with the anger over the Acorn incident. But I'm still waiting for Bill O'Reilly to apologize to Shawn Hornbeck for remarks made on the air in 2007. (Sigh!)

Its about time the Gazette reported on the Acorn corruption scandal. We have been wondering what happened to the unbiased journalism that used to be a trade mark of the gazette.
For more on ACORN
http://biggovernment.com/category/acorn/...

This American doesn't, and I am better off for it!

The ACORN story has been unveiling on FOX now for almost a week!

I stand corrected. Just a half hour ago, the Gazette posted a story about the ACORN scandal. Unless there is an error with your search engine, this appears to be the first ACORN story since April of this year. This scandal has been out all week. What took you so long?

Why has the Gazette not reported on the 9/12 March on DC? Why has the Gazette not reported on the ACORN scandal? I left a phone message yesterday and sent an email to the Editor today, but haven't heard back yet. These are two major news stories that have been virtually, if not completely, ignored by "traditional news." No wonder people are finding other ways to get information. It is so blaringly obvious that there is bias in the news industry, I haven't even heard any argument about it lately. Pretty hard to make a case against it. Shameful.