From an August 24 ColorofChange.org press release:
Facing increased pressure from ColorOfChange.org members, 16 new companies have pledged not to run additional ads on Fox News Channel's Glenn Beck Program. Thirty-six companies have now committed not to support Beck's show since ColorOfChange.org launched its campaign three weeks ago.
The defections come as ColorOfChange.org members mobilized last week against corporations who still refused to pull their ads from Glenn Beck by placing thousands of phone calls to company executives. By the end of the week, three of these companies - Clorox, Lowe's and Sprint - had pledged not to run additional ads; Red Lobster and Vonage have not yet responded.
The new companies distancing themselves from Beck include Airware Inc. (makers of Brez anti-snoring aids), Ancestry.com, AT&T, Blaine Labs Inc., Campbell Soup Company, Clorox, Ditech, The Elations Company, Experian (creator of FreeCreditReport.com), Farmers Insurance Group, Johnson & Johnson (makers of Tylenol), Lowe's, NutriSystem, Sprint, The UPS Store and Verizon Wireless. They join twenty other companies who previously pledged not to run additional ads on Glenn Beck. The moves come after the Fox News Channel host called President Obama a "racist" who "has a deep-seated hatred for white people" during an appearance on Fox & Friends.
From Jim Towey's November 8, 2008, Wall Street Journal op-ed:
Mother Teresa was asked at the end of her life whether she was discouraged because after decades of caring for the dying and destitute in Calcutta little seemed to have changed. She replied, "No. God doesn't call me to be successful. God calls me to be faithful."
History will decide whether George W. Bush was a successful President. But he was faithful. He had a charge to keep and he kept it.
From The Fox Nation, accessed on August 24:
Fox Nation links to a WorldNetDaily article which claims that Hannity "would make a formidable candidate, with the likability of Reagan, good looks and strong convictions." From the article:
Talk-show host Sean Hannity, a vocal opponent of Barack Obama's policies, said today he would not rule out a bid for the presidency in 2012.
Egged on by radio colleague Bill Cunningham, Hannity said he would consider entering the front lines of the political fray if God directs him.
"I've never made a decision in my life without - whatever destiny God has you've got to fulfill it," he said. "I'm not sure that's my destiny."
Hannity would make a formidable candidate, with the likability of Reagan, good looks and strong convictions. He's also a polished communicator and knows the issues inside out.
And he can debate.
The fringe pub just posted a name-calling screed about Obama and 9/11. After reading it a couple times I still have no idea what the Spectator is talking about, other than according to the Spectator's anonymous sources, Obama plans to completely desecrate the memory of 9/11.
Or something like that.
But this passage I got:
Color of Change is the extremist racial grievance group that isn't happy that TV's Glenn Beck did several news packages on Van Jones, the self-described "communist" and "rowdy black nationalist" who became the president's green jobs czar after jumping on the environmentalist bandwagon. The White House may be behind a push to destroy Beck by convincing advertisers to stop buying time on his show.
Read that again. According to AS's Matthew Vadum, Color of Change is leading a advertising boycott Glenn Beck because his show aired some nasty reports about a Color of Change ally, Van Jones.
Talk about living in a parallel universe. The boycott, of course, came in response to Beck's hateful smear that Obama is a "racist" who suffers from a "deep seated hatred of white people." That's why nearly three dozen companies have recently walked away from Beck's show.
But in Spectator's la-la land, Beck never called the President of the United States a racist. The episode simply does not exist.
MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell:
Meanwhile, the president is on vacation. He is on a 25 acre estate in Martha's Vineyard. We understand a $35,000 rental for the week. His personal expense, his family's expense. Communications for the President, as always, and security, provided by the taxpayer. No one begrudges him the vacation.
Really? Then why do you keep talking about the expense?
Writing about the sweeping, and still-growing, advertising boycott of Glenn Beck's show, Howard Kurtz stresses that while companies are fleeing Beck, they're not leaving Fox News. No advertisers have completely yanked their ads from Fox.
Writes Kurtz [emphasis added]:
Beck's charge was so incendiary -- and bizarre, considering that Obama's mother was white -- that even some conservatives winced. But boycotts rarely succeed in forcing anyone off the air, and indeed, Fox hasn't forfeited a dime. A Fox spokeswoman pointed to the network's statement: "The advertisers referenced have all moved their spots from Beck to other day parts on the network, so there has been no revenue lost."
But that does not appear to be the case. From the Associated Press:
"This is a good illustration of that conundrum," said Rich Hallabran, spokesman for UPS Stores, which he said has temporarily halted buying ads on Fox News Channel as a whole.
FYI, Kurtz reported that "about 20 companies" had pulled their ads from Beck's program. The AP pegs the number at nearly three dozen.
From then-White House Office of Faith-Based & Community Initiatives director Jim Towey's November 26, 2003, "Ask the White House" online chat:
Colby, from Centralia MO writes:
Do you feel that Pagan faith based groups should be given the same considerations as any other group that seeks aid?
I haven't run into a pagan faith-based group yet, much less a pagan group that cares for the poor! Once you make it clear to any applicant that public money must go to public purposes and can't be used to promote ideology, the fringe groups lose interest. Helping the poor is tough work and only those with loving hearts seem drawn to it.
Buried in the middle of Robin Givhan's remarkably defensive screed against Michelle Obama's "jarring" and "common" decision to wear shorts on a recent outing at the Grand Canyon is this throwaway line:
Obama's thigh-skimming shorts speak to body confidence and athleticism rather than fashion, sex appeal or coquettishness.
It's a shame Givhan chose not to elaborate on that. If we stipulate to Givhan's contention that what the First Lady wears matters, we might well come to the conclusion that Michelle Obama's "body confidence" is something to be applauded, particularly in a society that has long done everything possible to undermine the confidence women have in their bodies. We might well conclude that a First Lady who demonstrates to millions of American women that you don't have to be a size zero to be comfortable and confident is doing something remarkably positive and important.
But instead of exploring that possibility, Givhan sniffs that Michelle Obama's outfit was insufficiently "polished" and "aesthetically respectful." And that's a shame. Givhan had an opportunity to say something important, if only she had seen it.
Earlier this month, I noted that Washington Post/CNN media critic Howard Kurtz has repeatedly failed to disclose his financial relationship with CNN when writing about the cable channel, even after assuring Post Ombudsman Andrew Alexander that one such failure was an "oversight" that "won't be repeated."
Well, look what appears at the bottom of Kurtz' column today, in which he mentions CNN:
Howard Kurtz is a CNN contributor and hosts its media program "Reliable Sources" hour, which is part of "State of the Union."
Good to see Kurtz disclosing the tie again, but it's woefully inadequate. Kurtz has the biggest conflict-of-interest going, and it isn't a theoretical one: it has clearly affected his coverage of CNN and Lou Dobbs this summer. Someone at the Post owes it to readers to address this comment publicly.
Kurtz is doing an online discussion at this very moment if you'd like to ask him about it.
From the Fox Nation on August 24: