I wonder if Bill O'Reilly will claim that this is hate? Good job both MMFA and Kos, exposing how deep the HMOs and Insurance companies are in the pockets of the main stream media will only help America in the future obtain health insurance for all and impove our health care.

Maybe this is part of the reason Billdo has had such a boner for The Daily Kos lately.

This tends to discredit Billdo's claims that NBC is a hotbed of liberalism.

Shouldn't "journalists" be in quotes?

Personally I would put several question marks after the word.

I wonder if they all attended the same Republican "journalism school" as Jeff Gannon?

You can practice your spanish at the same time and spell it ¿journalist?

Well, there you go. I actually heard Sean Hannity speak in favor of "advocacy journalism" on one of his shows. That is the new "journalistic" paradigm that the troglodytes have been carefully building over the past fifteen years. "Advocacy journalism" translated from Troglodish to English is "propaganda".

That would be similar to "advetorial". My wife writes an article about the real estate developement she is PR'ing for, sends it off to magazines, along with a huge check for some full color, full page ads, and miracle of miracles the story she wrote appears with the byline "staff reporter". Who cares when it's just a real estate developer trying to move some condos and vacant lots? But, when it rears its ugly head in this setting, where shameless corporations are trying to influence legislation and regulations that directly effect them, it is cowardly and unethical. This is bribing "journalists" plain and simple.

Interesting how that brain-dead Nazi Hannity has no problem with journalists crossing the line, but bitches and moans about every case of "judicial activism" he sees (where a judge does not rule according to his narrow-minded agenda...)

This is MMFA (and DKOS) at its finest.  Journalists used to believe in objectivity, but now it is about networking and $, period.  If people were truly given the truth of how the medical insurance industry is run and the reach of its lobbyists and money, we would demand change unequivocally.  Instead, we are fed a stream of misinformation and spin (The term "socialilzed medicine", for example, I mean, that's straight from McCarthy).  It's sickening because people, CHILDREN, for crying out loud, are dying as a direct result of the current system.  And by the thousands.  And they are dying needlessly, of treatable disease.  How can we, as a people, allow it to continue and allow the lying about it to continue?

Journalism has never been about objectivity. What in the world gave you that idea. All media are owned or run by someone with an agenda. It's always been that way.

Thank you for finally admitting the right wing journalism / media agenda. 

THE RICK:

While it's true that almost everybody has "a bias" of some sort, Journalists are required (by self imposition and also by EDITORS) to set aside their bias and report the FACTS.

Similarly, juries and judges are human beings, and so must have bias of many fashions, but when doing their JOBS in judging impartially, they are required to set aside their bias and consider ONLY the facts presented, in order to arrive at a verdict.

Alas, it is said that "The THIEF thinks EVERYONE steals," and so it follows that Leatherhelmet would excuse the current strongly rightwing-biased media by saying that "everybody does it".

In truth, everyone DIDN'T do it, journalists used to strive hard for objectivity ... but that was unacceptable to those who longed for rightwing advocasy. And it's also true that if such bias is obvious (FOX NEWS), then it is a violation of journalistic ethics, and falls headlong into PROPAGANDA. Which is OK by Leather, as long as it's RIGHTWING Propaganda, bought and paid for.

Who said "The TRUTH has a Liberal bias."? That person was right on. 

That would be Stephen Colbert.

"Journalism has never been about objectivity. What in the world gave you that idea. All media are owned or run by someone with an agenda. It's always been that way."

Anyone that has any knowledge of the history of journalism wouldn't say any of this. With just about every post of yours, you come across as knowing less and less.

With just about every post of yours, you come across as knowing less and less.

You've noticed that, too???

Nice work by MM and kos. I will look forward to some follow-up as well as a thorough explanation from PBS & NBC.

A good read is an oldie:  "Confessions of a Medical Heretic" by the late Robert Mendellsohn, M.D. 

Basically, the "health care Industry"'s goal is not health, it's dependency.  The medical experts on the networks all angle their reports to that end.  I'd love to see Andrew Weil become a medical expert for one of these networks.

The two NBC correspondents I'm not that surprised by, but I'm very disappointed that a regular on the NewsHour is tangled up in this.  I have long regarded the NewsHour as the last, best thing we have left resembling real television journalism.

The key word there is "resembling"

I watch "The Newshour" not because it is good but because it is not as bad as the others.  There is a possibility that they will respond to emails protesting this evidence of bias.

However it must be said that the interviewers on "The Newshour" rarely ask the really tough questions or pursue obvious falsehood with the vigor a real journalist like MSNBC's David Schuster would - and they subscribe to the "false balance" canard of giving equal weight to the liar and spin doctor whenever they have a progressive anywhere near their set - one example being the Vote Vets guy vs the wingnut talk show b**ch.

But don't you know it's much more important and newsworthy that a sports copy editor in East Podunk gave $25 to Howard Dean or a newspaper ad salesman in Smalltown gave $50 to John Kerry? Now that's your conflict of interest, right? Will this story of journalists taking tens of thousands of dollars to shill for corporate interests get anywhere near the screaming "COPY EDITORS AND CLERKS ARE GIVING $ TO LIBRULS AND DEMOCRATS!!!" story that had the wingnuts' panties in a twist a few weeks back? Somehow, I doubt it, though this is at least as if not many times more egregious and not at all uncommon.

This is just one example of how the "free market" doesn't cure everything. You would think that non-objective "journalists" would be rejected by the "free market", yet they seem to thrive in the current environment. I'm not calling for a return to the Fairness Doctrine, but, I have a question for the "Free Market" worshippers among us...How do we fix this? Is truth no longer valued by the "values" voters?

Nerzog, this is by far, the best example of the breakdown that occurs when a public good is handled by private industry.  Can you imagine what would happen to the fire department or police or the military (oh wait, that's already been privatized) if they were run for profit?

Less affluent neightborhoods would receive a lower standard of care than wealthy residents and there would be right-wingers saying, why can't rich people be allowed to choose what kind of fire service they want if they can pay for it?

While I generally support capitalism, an unregulated "Free Market", extrapolated out to its logical conclusion, would lead to something resembling feudalism...and I think we've already tried that.

Corporate propaganda obviously pays better. The Free Market rules against truth, again!

Maybe Jim Mik should change his name to Vinnie.

Nancy Snyderman was suspended without pay for a week once after she recorded a radio commercial for Tylenol. Then she left ABC a weeks after that to go to Johnson & Johnson—the company that makes Tylenol.

The only really surprising thing about this for me was that Dr. Sanjay Gupta wasn't on the list.

Some people will never learn. All of those internet tubes have a long memory.

These used to be full-time jobs!  Not for celebrity journalists like Nancy. They are on several boards (each at least a day a month); and then they write and deliver talks, travel and attend pre-meeting "speakers dinners" where they get to rub shoulders with the nice folks from industry. 

No wonder it seems like one story in UPI or AP gets circulated to all the major newspapers faster than you can say "bandwagon."  They have to fill space and air without doing any new work.

Even more than the obvious conflicts of interest these medical "journalists" have, the thrust of most medical coverage is to promote dependency, as I posted earlier. 

It's a culture of fear...Everyone is urged to get checked for every possible disorder so "see your doctor" if you suspect you have a myriad of ailments; and even if you don't, if you are a little down due to a normal reaction to something, you'll likely wind up with a prescription for something.  Zoloft, prozac, ritalin for kids, you name it.

When people are not divorced from reality and not afraid of their own bodies, they usually know when something is amiss and needs a doctor's attention.