Hosting segment from Hazleton, Pa., Dobbs did not acknowledge fundraising for the embattled town
SUMMARY: During his Lou Dobbs Tonight "special report" on the efforts of the city of Hazleton, Pennsylvania, to combat illegal immigration, Lou Dobbs praised a controversial anti-immigrant ordinance passed by the city, but he did not mention that, during the segment, he was promoting, on the show's CNN website, a website soliciting money for Hazleton's legal fund.
On the May 2 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight, host Lou Dobbs reported from Hazleton, Pennsylvania, for a "special report" called "Broken Borders," which he said, "examine[d] [Hazleton's] efforts to deal with the harsh realities of illegal immigration." On June 13, 2006, Hazleton passed the "Illegal Immigration Relief Act," drafted by the city's mayor, Lou Barletta, a controversial ordinance that sought to suspend the permits of local businesses and others for employing "unlawful workers" and landlords for renting to "illegal aliens." The measure, which was slated to go into effect in September 2006, was suspended in October of that year, after several groups, including the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), challenged the legislation. At no point during what Dobbs called "a very special hour" did he mention that, on the Lou Dobbs Tonight website, he had been promoting a solicitation for donations to Hazleton's legal defense fund.
From the special "Broken Borders" broadcast on the May 2 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight:
DOBBS: The national media, if I may say, appears hell-bent on obfuscating the issue, frequently equating legal immigration with illegal immigration. But the facts are clear. There are as many as 20 million people in this country illegally.
And the Bush administration and the Democratic leadership on Capitol Hill seem determined to impose a massive illegal alien amnesty on American citizens, with little or no regard for the consequences.
Communities such as Hazleton are now taking action on their own, precisely because the federal government has failed to secure our borders or to enforce our immigration laws.
Later, Dobbs interviewed Barletta, who talked about the ordinance's impact:
BARLETTA: It was amazing, Lou. Immediately after we passed the ordinance, we witnessed many people leaving in the middle of the night, actually packing up their belongings and leaving.
So, you know, we would -- it would be fair to assume that those that left so quickly were illegal aliens who were just fleeing to another city.
Dobbs praised Barletta's efforts, stating, "Hazleton, the community, is leading the battle against illegal immigration, stepping in where the federal government has simply failed to perform its duty."
Yet, Dobbs neglected to mention that, during the segment, he
was promoting solicitations to the town's legal fund. On his show's
website, Dobbs posted a link to Small Town Defenders, a site
hosted by Barletta
that solicits money for the city's legal fight against MALDEF and the
ACLU.
At the top of Barletta's site, he implores visitors to donate: "We need your help! Your contribution will help us win this fight!"
The Associated Press reported that, as of May 5, Hazleton has raised $266,000 in private donations.
According to a separate AP report published May 4, after receiving a letter from the National Institute for Latino Policy, CNN chief executive Jim Walton removed the link to Small Town Defenders.
During its May 6 profile of Dobbs, CBS' 60 Minutes did not mention that Dobbs had been promoting solicitations for Hazleton's legal fund. At the end of its segment, however, CBS acknowledged that Dobbs had taken on a new role: "While [correspondent Lesley] Stahl was talking to Dobbs, unbeknownst to 60 Minutes, he was talking to CBS News and has now joined The Early Show as a weekly commentator."
God knows when fighting the ACLU, even a town needs tons of money........good for Hazelton. I hope they get $$$ galore.
And good for them for taking a strong stand against those that employ and rent to illegal aliens.
Tommy,
We all know how you feel about this issue and I’ve posted many times my views on it as well, but what do you think about Dobbs promotion of this agenda? I don't watch Dobbs much although there are issues that I agree with him about from time to time, but his show has become a one trick pony and a platform to advance his personal views on immigration issues. Now there are many that shares Dobbs’ views but feel that Dobbs does not present all sides of this issue. Lou rarely has someone on representing a diverging point of view from his own unless it is someone with an extreme view like those advocating open borders as policy. I like Lou but he isn’t a neutral or unbiased source of information for immigration issues? By the way didn’t he used to have a business show, what happened?Lou Dobbs is very consistent on this issue and how he feels about the sovereignty of our borders. He is passionate, unapologetic and determined to bring this issue front and center - for he feels it is being avoided by both parties to the detrimint of our country.
I agree with him and applaud his efforts on this issue.
Tommy,
Lou Dobbs is biased on this issue and he will never allow oter points of views to be aired and I do have a problem with that.
What would be another point of view to argue in favor of illegal immigration?
Tommy, There are those that want emphasis toward preventing anymore illegal migration but grant amnesty to those here. There are those who believe if we enforce and strengthen the laws we currently have and secure the borders that the undocumented workers will return to their countries on their own volition and it will reduce further illegal entry. And judging buy some of the people that post here there are those who want a special unit to hunt down and deport illegal’s as long as they do it with out raising their taxes of course. Just because the opinion doesn't jibe with yours and Lou's doesn't mean it isn't valid. I hate when you dismiss other people's opinions as silly or irrelevant because they don’t agree with you. Good night Mr. Smarty Pant's I'm going home now.
Lynn
I do not see an issue with Lou Dobbs being an advocate on this issue, it is similar to O'Reilly and his issues and Olbermann and his issues. I enjoyed the 60 minutes piece on Dobbs and while I disagree with him I enjoyed him calling Bush a disaster.
Hey Doris
They deleted the post I was responding to you. I certainly wasn't cursing at you. One of my faults, I can be a bit of a potty mouth sometimes.
" I like Lou but he isn’t a neutral or unbiased source of information for immigration issues? "
Since when is he supposed to be neutral/unbiased??? He hosts an opinion show. He is not a network news reporter. He has his own views that he brings to the table just like O'Reilly, Cavuto, Gibson, Olbermann, Matthews, etc...
Per Lou Dobbs own words he considers himself a journalist.
""Absolutely," Dobbs says. "I may be an advocacy journalist, but I'm a journalist."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/03/60minutes/main2758082.shtml?source=mostpop_story
Can someone please investigate into Tommy being paid to blog off topic comments on this websites to distract away from the actual issue?
The sad part is that you don't even acknowledge or make attempts to discuss the issue.
Not that your opinion matters to me, but please explain to me how my initial post is off topic?
As for getting paid, well, let's just say it's not enough.
How about the fact that this MMFA post is about whether Lou Dobbs is a fair journalist or just an advocate for one position, and you try to turn it into a debate about illegal immigration with your very first post?
You used to have a lot of offer these discussions, but you've really dropped off lately. It seems every post of yours is either asking why an article is on MMFA, or you try to ignore the actual issue MMFA is pointing out, and instead take the argument in your own direction (i.e. turning this entry criticizing Dobbs into an immigration debate).
It's not as annoying when you simply want to debate off-topic. It's more annoying when you play MMFA mission statement policeman post after post.
That's disingenuous of you, Tommy; you obviously care about MHK's opinion or you wouldn't have asked your question. As for your opening comment being off topic, it was. You immediately cast your net to trawl for an immigration argument when the subject of the MMFA's piece was "journalist" Lou Dobbs praising Hazelton's "controversial anti-immigrant ordinance" without disclosing to viewers his personal bias, advocacy and involvement in the City's legal battle to enforce the ordinance.
I always like to note when Tommy has no opportunity to refute what someone has says, he simply refuses to comment any more.
Two people explained very well how he went off topic, and he was wrong. He asked how he had done that, they explained it to him, and he then is totally silent. Never an acknowledgement.
If he replies to this comment it will either be
1. I didn't see their comments, (so I didn't acknowledge the strength of their arguments and the total lack of credibility in my argument after they blew holes in it, and I never will respond to it, even though I am now aware of it)
2. I don't want to fight over this with (name any poster) (and so I will still not acknowledge they were right and I was untruthful and I did go off topic and did not stay on topic!)
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Tommy - it's an honest question as you seem to spend a large portion of your day disrupting this site with off topic posts like this one. It's not like its an isolated case either, you do so on a regular basis.
One has to wonder why a person that is constantly complaining about a number of issues relating to MMFA, would then turn around and spend the majority of his day reading and posting comments.
Are you being paid?
You did a hellacious job avoiding the point of this article.
The point is not that Hazleton can and maybe should raise money.
The issue is that if Dobbs is going to help that fundraising effort, he needs to make that clear, repeatedly.
What a dweeb you are that you either can't or won't understand the difference.
The head of CNN thought that it was inappropriate for him to even have that link on his webpage.
"According to a separate AP [link to www.columbian.com] color="#0052a3">report published May 4, after receiving a letter from the National Institute for Latino Policy, CNN chief executive Jim Walton removed the link to Small Town Defenders."
Media Matters isn't saying that it's inappropriate for Dobbs to have that link, but his big boss did think so. Media Matters is saying that if he was going to be in a position of advocacy for their fund-raising, he has an obligation to mention that, and he did not ever mention it.
What about that, Tommy? That's the issue here.
First off, my initial post was very much on topic, just not the one you wanted raised, tough. It went to the ACLU, which is mentioned as lawyering up against this town - and it went to the issue of illegal immigration, which is the actual topic itself.
As for what Media Matters is objecting too, tough. I could care less what they feel is Dobbs' obligation - he is a commnentator on an opinion broadcast, and has every right to advocate his position however he feels appropriate. His opinions are very well known and if he is giving out information to help this town fight expensive lawyers on his website, disclosing that on his broadcast is his business......don't contribute if you don't want too.
MMFA and I disagree on this.........as for you and your friends who are so concerned about my posts and their distractions, then you are obliged to ignore them, feel free.
Ghrino,I have conversed with reasonable posters here about my feelings on this issue, and the regulars here know I am not an open border idiot as you so rudely and ignorantly stated. I lean toward stronger enforcement and augmentation of policies that would eliminagte the hiring of illegal immigrants and consequently I think they would go home and it would stop future migration here. I also wish that the immigrants would demand change in their own country, the policies toward the poor in those countries is abysmal and they are Oligarchies. I feel that governments are obligated to create an economy that would prevent the mass migration of their own people to other countries because said people are living in crushing poverty. I understand there is almost a 40% poverty rate in Mexico. The Mexican government is scavenging off of these poor people that come to the US because they can't find sustainable employment at home and the US government. Oh yeah and I see you haven't changed a bit. You're still one of the biggest ass holes to post on this board. To reiterate my feelings about Lou Dobbs, I feel that he still feel his show does not provide a neutral platform to debate all aspects of the immigration issue. In addition, after this response to your post I will never respond to you again because you are an ignorant fool and not worth the typing time.
Thanks MMFA for letting me know about Dobb's website and that he's soliciting money for Hazleton's legal fund.
I'll gladly contribute.
Why does MMFA refer to the ordinance as anti-immigrant? MIS-INFORMATION there guys!
It's the"Illegal Immigration Relief Act" Last time I checked ILLEGAL means NOT LEGAL. Not controversial at all. In fact I applaud this town & it's Mayor....it should be the blueprint this nation uses!
Jeter,
I believe MMFA highlighted this as an example of Lou's bias on immigration issues. I know that many Americans agree with Dobbs' stance, my stance of course is much more nuanced than Lou's and I'm torn about how to handle the undocumented folks that are already here, and I don't necessarily disagree with what this town is doing. That said, Lou is completely biased on this issue and he isn't a good source to access if you want an impartial assessment of immigration issues. I hope that people who are concerned about this issue don't limit themselves to Lou's show. Damn these guys are so lucky. Can you imagine having 5 hours a week to promote you pet causes and to talk about anything you want to and get paid handsomely for it? I'm jealous.Lynn,
I believe Dobbs is correct on this issue. That's not being biased. There is a Right & Wrong here...no gray area. As Tommy mentioned [above]...what is the other point of view to argue in favor of ILLEGAL immigration?
It's become clear that the Federal government is going to continue to drag it's feet on this important issue. So perhaps it's up to the Cities, Towns, and States to deal with it as they feel best.
If MMFA and other websites, Left or Right can ask for donations for themselves or causes they believe in, then Dobbs is within his rights to do so also.
Jeter,
I didn't say Dobb's wasn't within his right. I actually acknowledged that these guys use their shows to promote agendas near and dear to their hearts. I wish I had a show to do the same. BUT using a news show to advance a personal agenda shows a bias. Also in my opinion There are indeed gray areas and multiple approaches to managing the immigration issue in my opinion. But you'll never here my opinion represented on Lou's show because if you don't share his opinion exactly Lou doesn't want to hear it because he believes as you do that he's right and anyone who disagrees with on any aspect of his views on this topic is wrong. I disagree, debate those approaches to managing illegal immigration openly and honestly and we voters will back the candidate that vows to implement immigration policy that we think is best. Well I'm tired and hungry and I'm going home now. Have a good night!
Baloney that there's no gray area.
Baloney. There are multiple things that can be done, and many of them are not at cross purposes, and so there are a myriad of choices in how to deal with the issue of illegal immigration and dealing with those already here.
There is a ton of gray in these issues.
I don't care how right the man thinks that he is, it is not ok to distort the truth in order to get people to pay attention to your pet causes.
One of the issues he tackles relentlessly is illegal immigration. And on that, his critics say, his advocacy can get in the way of the facts. Following a report on illegal immigrants carrying diseases into the U.S., one of the correspondents on his show, Christine Romans, told Dobbs that there have been 7,000 cases of leprosy in the U.S. in the past three years. 60 Minutes checked that and found a report issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, saying that 7,000 is the number of leprosy cases over the last 30 years, not the past three. The report also says that nobody knows how many of those cases involve illegal immigrants. "We went to try and check that number, 7,000. We can’t…," Stahl says. "Well, I can tell you this. If we reported it, it’s a fact," Dobbs replies. "You can’t tell me that. You did report it," Stahl says. "I just did," Dobbs says. "How can you guarantee that to me?" Stahl asks. Says Dobbs, "Because I'm the managing editor. And that’s the way we do business. We don’t make up numbers, Lesley." "That’s a strange attitude for a reporter to have, 'I don't need anymore facts. I know what the truth is,'" says Mark Potok, who monitors hate groups for the Southern Poverty Law Center. Potok charges that Dobbs is a fear monger. "The impression you get, pretty strongly I think, day after day, is that sort of all 11 million illegal aliens are bringing leprosy, they’re bringing crime, they’re bringing all these terrible things to the United States," he explains.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/03/60minutes/main2758082.shtml?source=mostpop_story
Thanks MMFA for letting me know about Dobb's website and that he's soliciting money for Hazleton's legal fund.
I'll gladly contribute also
To the faithful who trust that humans cannot pollute and destroy our living environment, who trust that Jesus will smile on us if we pray...where are you?
Do you not have faith that He will smile upon and make mighty the nation that opens it's doors and hearts to his most precious creation?
As long as those precious creations obey the immigration laws and stand in line like other law-abiding immigration applicants, then by all means, He and us, will smile fondly on each and every one of them.
Right, because man's law trumps God's law.
Before you start; yes, I was making a disingenuous argument.
I fully believe in the rule of law, I also believe human rights and human dignity supercedes any law that places a person in harms way. I agree with cracking down on employers but kicking a person out on the streets in this manner is utterly immoral. Do we really want a population of desperate, homeless people trapsing around our country?
Regardless of what your stance is on this issue, it would be good of Dobbs to disclose he has been endorsing this cause and putting his reputation and money behind it. I think that is all MMFA is asking for.
Perhaps I missed it, but where does it say that Dobbs has put his own money behind this?
Tommy, I mistyped, I meant to say he should acknowledge his role in the fund-raising effort. Thanks for keeping me on my toes.
Note that once you clarified your comments, and Tommy couldn't then jump on a misstatement, he ignored your comment.
The topic of this posting by Media Matters is that Dobbs should announce his involvement in the fund-raising, and he failed to do so.
So Tommy, what about that issue? After all, that's what this posting is about! Shouldn't someone like Dobbs who is an advocate for a cause be obligated to announce their advocacy?
There was an issue with a concern troll who infiltrated an opposing candidate's blogging comments. The issue was that he wasn't honest about his partisanship.
There have been multiple issues over the years. Right now the Republicans are trying to make hay from the issue that Speaker Pelosi's husband might benefit from the legislation proposed. The new rule for 'earmarks' is that legislators have to announce their sponsorship of those earmarks and also verify that they have no personal gain from that earmark. We demanded that rule so that we could have that transparency. Why shouldn't we hold journalists to a similar standard? He can hold the opinions he has, and he can help their fund-raising, but he should announce that personal involvement with the fund-raising!
What's funny is that he has only been consistent on this issue for Mexican migration, especially in that he is totally opposed to amnesty. I remember in one segment about Cuban immigrants, sandwiched between two segments on illegal Mexican immigrants of course, he said any Cuban that is able to make it to our shores should be immediately granted citizenship.
Lou Dobbs's wife is Mexican-American.
So what...?
Or are you, Jeter2, covertly condoning The C-Thomas/C-Rice "I got mine & I'll make sure you don't" School of Politically-Ersatz Jurisprudence?
Are you overtly accusing Clarence and Condoleeza of managing funds that do not exist? Libel.
Not at all...it doesn't take much to understand, both had closed [read: slammed] the doors of opportunity, for others, behind them. Your disingenuous comment goes far...but not as far as denying minorities an honest opportunity...as they did.
I don't really think this is a huge issue. Dobbs is an "advocacy" journalist, he dislikes Bush, so he's not a conservative misinformer, and since his original story on Hazleton was obviously pro-Hazleton, I don't see how inserting the fact that he was promoting the legal fund for Hazleton changes anything....if he was somehow gaining money from that fund, maybe there would be a problem.
And it's on his web site, sheesh. Not like he was trying to avoid the topic.
Now Now, One can certainly dislike Bush and still be a huge conservative misinformer. Michael Savage I understand dislikes the Bushies and he is a huge psychopathic conservative misinformer nut case. I don't even know that Dobbs is conservative although he may be, but whether he’s conservative, liberal or moderate he certainly has a biased view on immigration issues and will only entertain views that he agrees with or he will allow views that are so out of the mainstream that it makes his stance look good. As for Bush, some seem to take the approach that enemy of my enemy must be my friend. I think any reasonable person left or right of the political spectrum knows that the Bush administration has been a monumental disaster. That said I like Lou Dobbs but I believe he's let's say consumed with promoting his solution to the immigration problem and as I said that's his right but he's no unbiased source for information on the issue. That’s the point that MMFA is making with this thread.