NewsMax is offering Her Way free with a one-year subscription
Right-wing news website NewsMax is offering potential subscribers a copy of Her Way: The Hopes and Ambitions of Hillary Rodham Clinton (Little, Brown & Co., June 2007), by Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta Jr. in addition to the "Deck of Hillary" -- a combination the website claims is "worth $38" -- for free with a one-year subscription or renewal to its magazine. NewsMax describes the "Deck of Hillary" -- a set of playing cards -- as "the perfect antidote to the liberal media's Hillary love fest."
Her Way joins a list of books being promoted by NewsMax that includes works by authors such as R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr., Tom DeLay, Mark Steyn, Bill O'Reilly, Dr. Laura Schlessinger, Ann Coulter, Jerome R. Corsi, Brian Kilmeade, Ed Klein (author of The Truth About Hillary: What She Knew, When She Knew It, and How Far She'll Go to Become President), and Christopher Ruddy.
Media Matters has noted numerous problems with Gerth and Van Natta's book in recent weeks, of which Media Matters obtained an advance copy.
So? It's a marketing tool they obviously feel is in their best interest financially......it's their absolute right, it's nobody else's business.
Don't subsribe then, geez....
I agree with you Tommy. My question to MMFA is Sooooooooooo what? I guess it is a slow newsday for MMFA.
MAY I SUGGEST ... that NewsMax is unabashedly rightwing, whose every action is not just partisan, but venomous and radical in their opposition to all things to the left; Democrats, Liberals, Progressives are horrible and evil to NewsMax and its supporters.
On the other hand, this book by Gerth is being promoted as an "objective" and "factual" view of Hillary Clinton, presented by reporters of great integrity.
Such a book would not be endorsed by NewsMax. NewsMax is interested only in political hit pieces, fueled by hatred of Democrat "subjects". NewsMax gives its seal of approval ONLY to blatant rightwing propaganda, filled with lies and smears and innuendo and uncorroborated rumors. NewsMax's endorsement of this book is prima facie evidence that it is NOT what it is advertised to be.
This book is a HIT PIECE, and that is confirmed by its endorsement by a rightwing HIT PIECE loving website/organization.
THAT is the importance of this story: It shows that the way this book is being promoted is a pack of lies, and that this Gerth book is just another rightwing smear bit MASQUERADING as "objective journalism." As if we didn't already know.
Tex,
Despite your typical whining, I still say, So? If you don't like Newsmax, or this book, don't read them or buy the book - hit piece or not. It's simple.
It has nothing to do with us buying the book.
It has to do with why Media Matters posted this, you numbskull.
They posted it because it calls the credibility of the book and the author further into question by the association with NewsMax. It's another example of how this book lacks the requisite adherence to the truth and rejection of third-hand gossip, and instead relies on many rightwing talking points. If it was honest, NewsMax wouldn't have anything to do with it!
Sue,
What Newsmax does in the marketing of their product is nobody's business, least of all this webiste's or yours. Stop whining about a private enterprise's business decision, that is ridiculous.......even for you.
Your favorite numbskull....
Tommy, NewsMax's subscription offers are as much our business as what MMfA puts on this site are yours. What's the big deal?
Val,
If you think it's important, or even appropriate, for this website to start criticizing private company's business decisions, which is exactly what this is - well, then we disagree.
Where is this decision criticized in the post? It is merely noted.
As far as my original post goes, why is it more or less justifiable for posters to criticize NewsMax's choices than for you or other posters to criticize MMfA's choices?
MMFA specifically has a comment section soliciting compliments, gripes and the like. Newsmax is a private company offering a promotion within their company.....you can criticize it all you want; it just seems a little ridiculous for this website to stick their nose in a private company's business decisions when there is no relevance to anything regarding their own mission statement, except the fact that MMFA hates this book.
But there is relevance.
This book is being touted as a factual recitation of reality.
In fact, it's so much not a factual book that NewsMax is touting it as a free gift.
That's the relevance.
I understand that you try to denigrate Media Matters and their relevance all the time by asking "why is this here", but your repeating that tired and inaccurate talking point over and over again has yet to make it a relevant complaint.
I could give a flying F*ck what NewsMax promotes as a free giveaway.
I never said that I did care.
This is another example of your favorite faux debunking - the strawman argument!
The issue is what this demonstrates about the credibility of the book itself. I explained this above. Are you such a numbskull that you cannot understand this?
TOMMY:
You obviously have problems with THIS site, yet you return time and again.
Now you suggest that if I don't like NewsMax, or this book, that AVOIDING them is the proper response. I should not comment about a site with which I disagree, or what its association with a recently publishied political book might be.
Yet here YOU are, on MMFA, criticizing away at its every decision.
Is this a typical rightwing case of "Do as I SAY, not as I DO?" Or are you simply oblivious to the irony of your words versus your actions, the hypocricy, the double standard?
[FYI, as a PHILOSOPHY, I woudn't recommend an American merely avoid and refrain from commenting on anything with which they disagree. They should know what they're talking about, read all written production of the opposition, watch every talking head show they can. AVOIDANCE only produces ignorance. So your advice is not only hypocritical, it is an attempt to dumb down your political opposition, I guess so that Rightwing Propaganda can stand unchallenged, the better to influence hapless impressionable potential GOP voters. Well, NO SALE, lad. Your advice to remain silent is rejected ... out of hand. Sad for you, really.]
Tex,
First you scold me for coming here and commenting critically on items posted here - and then you turn right around a few lines later and give me your PHILOSOPHY about not recommending avoiding or refraining on things one disagrees with.
Now Tex, I realize your ad nauseum rightwing bashing talking points normally get in the way of your consistency and common sense, but this is really beyond the pale and wildly contradictory, even for you.
But hey, it's Friday and there ain't enough laughs around me today, so thanks for contributing.
TOMMY:
Thanks for the confirmation. OBLIVIOUS it is. LOL
What is MMFA then? The flip side of the same coin?
I don't mind you echoing what I said, and doing so in an early post, but I made the same point yesterday.
This purportedly honest reporter with this factual story is having his book hawked by NewsMax. If I were him, I'd object to NewsMax doing this, except that it's probably going to help the ultimate sales of the book. Any reasonable person knows that being associated with NewsMax damages their credibility.
Sue,
Even though responding to you risks damaging my credibility, I do it anyway.....get over it.
NOT THAT GEORGE:
You should buy this book, and read it as it is advertised: An objective look at the truth and reality about Hillary Clinton, produced by ethical, professional, and objective reporters who are respected for the quality of their reportage.
Then, go watch FOX NEWS, where you can be assured that the news shown you is "fair and balanced".
How can you trust in these things? Because radical rightwing hawks like NewsMax and Roger Ailes TELL you that you don't have to worry about any BIAS in the book or the cable NEWS channel.
In other words, be a damn fool.
Tex,
Your latest drumbeat of seeking out fair and balanced news is hysterical.....reading your daily display of shrill, left wing, straight out of the DNC playbook, diatribe of tiresome talking points is hardly exemplary of anyone who yearns for anything fair, or anything balanced.......you're not fooling me, Ole Buddy.
TOMMY:
Congratulations! You have identified someone who CLAIMS to be a partisan, biased, unapologetic INDIVIDUAL who is a citizen, writes of his political opinion on websites, and has NO position in "the media". No radio show, no column, no hourlong talking head spot on the networks or cable.
I am a Liberal, and have never strayed from or hidden that fact. I do NOT claim to be personally "fair and balanced" as FOX does, or "objective" as Gerth does. I DO claim to be TRUTHFUL, as Hannity and Limbaugh do, but in contrast, I really AM truthful ... because I deal in facts.
So you've really hit paydirt this time, pal. To combat and rebut all the examples of FALSE ADVERTISING by the rightwing media, lying claims of no bias and objectivity, you manage to point out a BLATANT PARTISAN who is NOT in the media.
Brilliant, man. Breathtaking. I'm in awe.
Gee Tex, I would venture to guess your truthfulness may be compromised when you admit you are neither fair, nor balanced, nor objective.
But you keep reaching for the stars, you're almost there........
TOMMY:
It's an interesting theory that you think a partisan cannot also be truthful. It's great for THIS partisan, because I know you'll be looking for that instance of me NOT being truthful, and will let everyone on this site know when you find it. I've only been posting a couple or three YEARS now.
Until that time, consider that EVERYONE has a point of view, but not everyone is honest. That you suggest that anyone who has an opinion cannot then be honest ... well, that's about the strangest charge I've seen yet from a rightwinger.
What a killer point, Tex. Wish I'd said it myself.
It's another example of one of the fatal flaws of rightwingers. They assume that the flaws that they suffer from must be universal. They cannot evaluate stuff fairly because their biases overwhelm their sense of fair play, so they incorrectly assume that liberals cannot evaluate stuff fairly either!
They are so partisan that they cannot accurately assess the facts to come to reasonable conclusions, so they assume that liberals cannot do that either, when nothing could be further from the truth.
It's an interesting bit of news I probably would never have learned about otherwise.
I am neither surprised not outraged, but I think it's nice that MMfA staff pay attention to this stuff so I don't have to...
Pay attention to it for what reason? Is a private enterprise suppose to run things by you or anyone else for that matter before it decides on a promotion?
How silly this thread is, unbelievable.
I just think it's funny that it's already free.
Order your's before midnight and we'll throw in the ronco ginzu potato peeler! That's a $38 dollar value, free! Order now...
And the playing cards, who can resist that little morsel around the poker table. "C'mon boys, land on Hillary, slap down Bill". "Ok, altogether now, everybody grind your cigar on their heads!"
What entertainment!
Agree on this one... non-issue. I could care less what prizes people get with their Newsmaxx subscription.
Tommy
I am LOL. Love the idea. In fact I going to subscribe now for the cards because, I play a lot of poker and it can get pretty boring when all you are dealt are 7 and 2 for starting cards in Texas Hold’em. This would greatly help in passing the time between hands. Also going to send Newsmax an e-mail telling them what a great thing they are doing.
Bill would be disappointed if you didn't play strip poker with those cards.
Why can't I be interested in whatever I find interesting? You do the same.
We are just trying to show you the errors of yours ways. Heck, you might even become a better person if you listen to us all enough.
i don't think most of us are only capable of using half our brains.
Down to just the insults now? I was just answering the question.
i gave your "answer" the respect and time it deserved.
more then it deserved in fact
It is off topic for MMFA to post this. Attack the book makes sense and is a good thing but, so what someone is pushing the book for subscriptions. The LA Times and the NYT are allowed to push there lies all the time. I think MMFA needs to get away from the censorship angle and work on pointing out the lies.
How can a MMfA post itself be "off topic?" It is the topic!
If you get MMfA banned from MMfA, what will happen? Will the universe fold back in on itself?
MMFA should not post the this topic. Off mission statement for them.
and your kicking your feet and bawling like a baby and holding your breath till you turn blue only shows how childish and whiney you are. :)
The book is garbage, but I agree. I do not see the issue with them doing this. They are playing to their audience.
Doris, Doris, Doris.
Losing faith in you. This is outrageous that newsmax is trying to spread these lies. I want you to send an e-mail to newsmax right now expressing your outrage. That is what MMFA would like you to do.
gee tommy boy maybe because they will later use those 'sales' figures to claim it was a 'best-seller' when in fact it went into the bargain bin so fast it is being given away days after it was released. now THAT is a ROTFLMAO at YOU, again.
This thread has nothing to do with Newsmax or Her Way other than the fact that Brock wished he had the circulation or popularity of either. Fortunately, he doesn't.
This item is here because any reader who spends time searching for "the liberal media's Hillary love fest" will discover that there is no liberal media.
Another marketing tool for NewsMax - if enough of their readers believe the media is decidedly liberal, they get more attention......it's all business.
yes we all know what a fan you are of lies
What liberal media love fest over Hillary? From what I've seen, they've reserved their 'love fest' for McCain, Romney, and Thompson.
Funny, I had a completely different take on this item. I thought it was pointing out the tactic of giving away these crappy books in order to inflate sales figures.
As I've recently been bombarded (by a good old friend) with emails from Human Events, I know that they're trying to unload these propaganda piles with subscriptions.I get an offer for a free conservative book every day.
Very interesting site! Here's a little gem I came across there:
The Politically Incorrect Guide to ScienceThe Politically Incorrect Guide to Science busts myths, reveals hidden agendas, and lets you in on some of the little-known secrets about what's really going on in science.
Bet your teacher never told you:
Why fears of nuclear power aren't science, but unscientific scaremongering
Why species are increasing, not disappearing
Why global warming (and other temperature changes) are not caused by humans (remember the Ice Age?)
Why embryonic stem cell research is snake oil medicine (which is why it needs government subsidies)
Why Darwinism is crumbling
Why the story line of the brave scientist Galileo versus an ignorant Church is wrong
And another one:
The Professors reveals the frightening truth about some of the worst academics in the country and what they are "teaching" our students today. Bestselling author David Horowitz exposes how radical liberal professors are being promoted far beyond their academic achievement, teaching subjects outside their expertise to promote their own political agendas, and abandoning any pretense of academic discipline.
Meet a few of The Professors:
A law professor who spent ten years on the FBI's "Ten Most Wanted List"
A black studies department chairman who is a convicted torturer and inventor of Kwanzaa
An education professor who teaches that rap music is an effective tool for teaching English literacy
An early childhood education professor who bombed the Pentagon and is proud of it
An English professor who regards the fall of Communism as a "moral catastrophe"
Chessguy, when my buddy put me on that mailing list, my first impulse was to click on "unsubscribe". Then I realized I was getting a whole bunch of comedy for free! The insightful writing of Coulter and gingrich are amazing.
You forgot to say the next President of the Uniteds States Obama also.
Can you rewrite and repost this so it makes sense ?
Ashenshard
You forgot to list Obama the next President of the United States.
Duncan, you forgot to mention that Obama is magical.
What is newsmax?
I enjoyed knowing about NewsMax's marketing ploy to boost subscribtiond. Getting the free book reminds one of the saying "there's no free lunch" or "it's to good to be true".
We all know if you think you are getting something for nothing it usually turns out to be not to your favor. Look at what giving out this stuff does. It dumbs down the brain as if Americans need anymore dumbing down than it already gets from right wing talkers such as O'Rielly, Limbaugh, Savage, Coulter,
Now if NewsMax gave out a $38 dollar gift certificate to a book of your choice from a bookseller near you such as Borders or Barnes and Nobles then I would say Media Matters lacks a topic.
The reason this is an issue is because this book is purportedly not a partisan attack book.
The fact that News Max is promoting this book and offering it for free debunks that non-biased message.
Thank you NTG....somebody here FINALLY got the point of this article.
The reason Media Matters is posting this story is not to silence free speech (BTW, the first amendment only prevents the *federal government* from quashing free speech) or tell organizations what literature they can disseminate. They are pointing out that the Right Wing is engaged full-tilt in a smear campaign against Clinton, to the point that they are giving away several books to do so. I can only assume that they must be scared to death of her becoming President. This alone makes me more inclined to support her. Although John Kerry is a good, intelligent man, I think Hillary Clinton is tougher and politically more savvy and probably can withstand the onslaught.
Another reason why this is worth highlighting is that it has become part of the standard procedure to pump up the sales figures on these kinds of books since the birth of the RWNM. Right Wing organizations buy piles of the attack book of the moment, bundle them with their own publications and sell the whole thing at a steep discount. Then they go on use these spuriously inflated sales figures as some sort of "proof" of the truth and accuracy of their publications.
MOON:
This rightwing ploy of artificially inflating sales figures for garbage books by rightwing writers was noted years ago. The New York Times began putting an asterisk (*) next to books whose sales were substantially higher in number due to BULK BUYS by partisan political organizations.
Immediately, Rightwing superstar author Ann Couter's "best seller" status would have an asterisk beside that stat, which says, "NOT REALLY THAT POPULAR, only as a bulk partisan political PR tool - bought to be GIVEN AWAY FREE."
Nathan Hale said, "I only regret that I have but one ass to risk for my country." (paraphrasing)
Ann Coulter says, "I RESENT that my book has an asterisk!" It's OK when mom buys ALL your Girl Scout Cookies, but to be a bestseller, your sales must be to a WIDE audience. You were exposed as a manufactured hack. Sorry.