During Giuliani interview, Hannity again failed to disclose reported appearance at Giuliani fundraiser
SUMMARY: As he had during a previous interview with Rudy Giuliani on Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, Sean Hannity failed to disclose that he has reportedly helped raise money for Giuliani's presidential campaign.
On the December 17 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, co-host Sean Hannity interviewed former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R), but did not disclose during the 13-minute interview that he has reportedly helped raise money for Giuliani's presidential campaign. On August 19, the New York Daily News reported that Hannity "introduced the Republican front-runner at a closed-door, $250-per-head fund-raiser Aug. 9 in Cincinnati, campaign officials acknowledge." Bill Shine, Fox's senior vice president of programming, was quoted in the article saying, "Sean is not a journalist -- Sean is a conservative commentator."
As Media Matters for America documented, Hannity also failed to disclose his reported involvement with the Giuliani campaign in an October 16 interview with Giuliani and his wife, Judith.
From the August 19 Daily News article:
It's no secret that Sean Hannity, the conservative Fox News commentator, has helped to raise Rudy Giuliani's profile -- but now he's helped the former mayor raise money, too.
In a little noticed event this month, Hannity -- co-host of Fox News' "Hannity & Colmes" and host of a popular WABC radio show -- introduced the Republican front-runner at a closed-door, $250-per-head fund-raiser Aug. 9 in Cincinnati, campaign officials acknowledge.
In so doing, some believe that Hannity -- while clearly a commentator paid to express his opinions -- crossed the line from punditry into financial rainmaking for a presidential candidate whose bottom line is now better for it.
"Fox's in-kind contribution to Republican politicians in the form of softball coverage is one thing," said Steve Rendall, senior analyst at Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, a left-leaning media watchdog group. "But this is the first time they have crossed this line into fund-raising."
More independent observers said Hannity's appearance underscored the blurring lines between news and advocacy and could be interpreted as a kind of endorsement.
"It signals within that brand of conservatism that they ought to vote for the guy," said Kathleen Hall Jamieson at the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg School for Communications.
Hannity declined to comment, but his bosses at Fox News Channel and WABC, flagship station for his national radio show, defended their marquee star by arguing that he's not a journalist and shouldn't be judged as one.
"Sean is not a journalist -- Sean is a conservative commentator," said Bill Shine, Fox's senior vice president of programming. "Sean doesn't hide, and never has hidden, his beliefs from anyone."
[...]
Hannity's leanings for Giuliani have been well-documented. The Hotline, a political journal, has noted that through July 15, Giuliani had enjoyed 115 minutes of free face time on Fox -- more than half of that on "Hannity & Colmes." His airtime on Fox was 25% higher than any other Republican candidate, data show.
The Aug. 9 fund-raiser where Hannity worked the crowd for Giuliani, held at Jeff Ruby's Steakhouse in downtown Cincinnati, was closed to the press. No known recording of his comments exist.
But some who were there -- including Hannity's boss at WABC, Phil Boyce -- said Hannity was typically effusive.
"He talked about Rudy's leadership after 9/11, about how Rudy had turned the city around and taken people off the welfare rolls," said Boyce "There wasn't anything he said that I haven't heard him say on the radio."
"Sean is not a journalist --
I agree with that statement. On the other hand, hasn't MMFA just beat this horsey to death? Are you guys at MMFA going to repeat this topic every single time Hannity talks to Giuliani?
As they say in court- "asked and answered, move on!"
Looks to me like MMFA is raising an issue that Hannity won't address. Pretty much the exact opposite of "asked and answered".
It doesn't need to be "answered".......anyone with even a passing interest in politics knows Hannity's virulent partisanship towards all thing Republican, it is hardly some little secret.
Whether he campaigned for Rudy, or does his laundry every week, shines no more light on his coziness with Rudy in the slightest.
actually no. because a lot of republicans insist that faux is actually "fair and balanced". so every instance where you can show the opposite is worthy of mention.
Once again you're confusing reporters reporting straight news, with pundits commenting. They are not in the same league, nor are they held to the same standards. Hannity doesn't come on his show and tell you his opinions are fair and balanced, he may tell you he is right, but that is not the same thing - that is again, his opinion. You can't put up Fox's opinionators as proof of anything, either way.
i'm not confusing anything. that would be faux viewers. what about guys like o'reilly. he's made plenty of statements about how non partisan he is. he even claimed he was a registered independent until franken produced his voter registration with republican checked.
O'Reilly can make all the claims he wants. so what? He is not a reporter, he is an analyst/commentator/pundit/whatever - the name of his show is The O'Reilly Factor, its his show. You don't see the CBS Evening News called "The Katie Couric Show"? People who listen to O'Reilly and Hannity and Alan Colmes know they are being given their opinions, and if they don't know it or are under some other illusion, well, they are wrong.
uh, you have heard of the no spin zone? isn't that trying to claim something you are not? it's certainly spin to declare yourself as independent when you are a registered republican. and here is his registration.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200510030001
There is no point in arguing this with you if you can't distinguish between straight news reporting and opinionated commentary, this is pretty simple. You keep taking what they say, which is their opinion, and try to shoot holes in it as misreporting straight news - sorry, it is apples and oranges.
O'Reilly can call himself the most independent guy in history, the point is when he is interviewing anyone, or doing any story on his show, he is offering his opinions.
Alternately, when Katie Couric is interviewing anyone, or doing any story on her program, she is NOT, or at least not supposed to be, giving her opinion. She is reporting. O'Reilly is analyzing and commenting. To compare the two is invalid.
no, i can distinquish. it's a lot of others who watch faux who can't.
here's the pew poll from a few years ago that showed faux viewers don't know what they're talking about. the least informed viewers.
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/16/daily-show-fox-knowledge/
this is what i meant to link to.
http://65.109.167.118/pipa/pdf/oct03/IraqMedia_Oct03_rpt.pdf
Tommy - we're not in court here! MMFA is calling these guys out on their bull$#!+, that's all! Stop going on about who's required to be "fair and balanced" and whether it's just journalsists or commentators (or advirtisments, as you tried to argue in a past thread). The point here is that FOX NEWS AND ALL OF THEIR HACK'S ARE FULL OF $#!+! And not indicating one's personal bias, especially one involving financial ties, when you are on the station that has crammed "fair and balanced" down our throats for years now IS BULL$#!+! And sure - we know he's a republican, but Judi is not the only republican running! So why can't he just come out and admit that he's pullin' for the guy? (Working for him, actually.) What is so difficult about that? (Aside from the fact that it basically eliminates any claim he has of objectivity, and thus credability. But does Sean Insanity really have any claim to either of those anyway?)
Tommy you miss the point. One of the main graphics Flox uses is their trademark "Fair and Balanced." They do this as a brand for their station, which is meant to suggest all of their programs are "Fair and Balanced," which we all now know is a lie. They attempt to impart this philosophy on Hannity and Colmes show through the overall branding...hell they even try and sell the concept further by "balancing" the show with Colmes.
They also try and brand all of their shows as news with the other trademark "We report you decide." The phrasing itself deliberately tries to mislead the viewer that this is a "News" channel that "REPORTS" the news...and sdoes so in a "Fair and Balanced" way.
So under both of these guises, the fact Hannity is a commentator is not relevant to the argument since the station itself tries to fool the viewer into believing otherwise. To not address this disparity between so-called fair and balnced reporting by Hannity that we decide on is further evidence of the station and sloant-heads lying and dishonesty. The real problem is that many people only get their "NEWS" from this no-real-news station and believe what they are getting is the truth (Flox admitted and won a court case saying they don't have to tell the truth) and that it is reported in a fair and balanced way...which it is not.
you are correct on that court case. it was in orlando, i believe. a reporter on a fox station was fired because she refused to read something that she felt to be untrue. when she sued, fox claimed we don't have to tell the truth, we're in the entertainment business.
It doesnt matter he should still conform to basic journalistic ethics if he is going to give an interview. He was INTERVIEWING Guiliani. He should have made the disclosure
It doesn't need to be "answered".......anyone with even a passing interest in politics knows Hannity's virulent partisanship towards all thing Republican, it is hardly some little secret.
Partisanship is one thing, Tommy - actively helping a candidate raise money and them having him on your show for an interview where you cast him in the best light possible is a conflict of interest that should be noted at the very least.
And Sean Hannity should be fired from Faux News for putting them in legal jeopardy.
Lame appology. This kind of SPECIFIC connection SHOULD be disclosed if he is going to interview someone he has helped with a fundraiser. We all know he is ga ga GOP but he SPECIFICALLY helped raise money for Guiliani
Are you guys at MMFA going to repeat this topic every single time Hannity talks to Giuliani?
Yes, MMFA should repeat this topic every time Hannity interviews Rudy - unless or until Sean Hannity states ON THE AIR that he has helped raise money for Giuliani.
YOU arent the judge Bubba and it isnt up to YOU to tell anybody when to move on or what to cover. Why dont you get your own website and dont forget to tell us the URL so we can drop by and tell YOU how to run it. Hannity didnt just MENTION Guiliani he INTERVIEWED HIM. Basic journalistic ethics would demand he disclose exactly that kind of connection WHEN HE INTERVIEWS SOMEONE.
I suggest MMFA take out ads in every major newspaper if they think this is so darn important. Or should I say if they think anything Hannity says or does even matters.
The folks that watch Sean are beyond help. Who else really cares?
hannity has both a television show and radio show, reaching millions. pointing out his partisanship is totally justified and worthy of attention.
Fine, but if all you've got is pointing out admitted rightwing commentators are partisan, that is pretty lame.
again many people do not make the distinction. they don't consider him partisan: just one of those good ol "common sense" faux commentators.
Well, they are wrong - are you going to make an argument based on what misconception some people may or may not have?
yes. because you and jeter are insisting this is not worthy of attention, but it shows that hannity is not the unbiased observer a lot of his listeners believe him to be. fairly simple.
You keep saying what his listeners believe him to be, how in fact do you know what his listeners believe anyway? They may know exactly what he is and totally agree with his opinions, that is far more logical than your unfounded supposition unsupported by any facts.
Also, there are some people who think Elvis is alive, so what? It's not the case, that is the point.
i have actually talked to people who think that everything they hear on faux is true. they think the whole network is fair and balanced. they don't distinquish.
First of all - Yankees suck.
Now, on to your points:
I suggest MMFA take out ads in every major newspaper if they think this is so darn important.
Not a bad idea... or better yet they could start a website and put the info on the 'net so that everyone can... oh... wait...
The folks that watch Sean are beyond help. Who else really cares?
If you don't care then why the criticism of MMFA? No. I call "Bull$#!+." Your trying to say this guy should get a pass because he's insignificant. Sadly, he's not. He's one of the most well known conservative blowhards, sorry, commentators on the air. So you are wrong, he must be called on his bull$#!+, each and every time!
It's time for the Federal Election Commission to investigate Fox News AND Sean Hannity for possible violations of federal election laws.
Actually, I’ve always thought this to be the best chance for a Fox News machine demise in general. They have survived thus far by hiring the finest lawyers and finding all the loopholes to help determine how far they can push their agenda. It’s been the backbone of Republican strategy for years. Of course, sooner or later, someone gets caught in a lie, crosses the line of legality, or just shoots themselves in the foot. Give it time, especially once Democrats are back in control of the Administration and the heat is turned on.
Hannity, another sucess story from the Support your Local Idiot Program. You too can rake in the big bucks, address the nation sans objectivity. If you know that neocon thought is always superior, we may find you sponsership loans for our next training session at rates that would make a cedit card company blush.
You owe it to the country, your nieghboors, society, your tinfoil hat, and all those friendly voices in your head.
Call for hydrocephalic enhancement today. You too can have a big head tomorrow!
Olbermann refused to tell his audience he raises money for the Daily Kos, journalists have to disclose everything, political commentators do not. Did Al Franken tell every single one of his political donations when he had guests on that he helped financially? Puhlease.
Minor difference Sue, Kos is not running for President.
Did Al Franken tell every single one of his political donations when he had guests on that he helped financially?
I used to listen to Al Franken's show all the time back when I lived in Colorado,and yes, Al DID mention it if he had contributed to a guest's campaign or organization.
That's that major difference, Sue - Al Franken and Air America are honest - Sean Hannity and Faux News are not.
Al Franken did not always disclose who he gave money to. Stop the lies.
OK. Show us an example of someone Al Franken had on his show who Franken activly raise money for that he dis not disclose that fact. I'll bet you can't, except to refer to the wacko "Franken lies" sites put together by people who are stupid enought to think that World Nut Ddaily is a legitimate news source amd that Ann Coulter is a great intellectual.
Cough up the evidence or YOU stop lying the few times I watched Frankens show he DID make such disclosures.
You are correct, Wzwriter. Franken is open about who or what he supports, unlike Sean.
Sean is supporting Rudy Giuliani for president, and will continue to support him at future fundraisers.
Sean is a commentator and not a journalist, therefore, should not be interviewing any presidential candidates. I place the blame on Fox News producers for allowing this to happen. The producers pamper Sean like a pet.
There should be a federal investigation on News Corporation, Fox News Channel and Sean. I have no doubt you will find something.
there is no problem with him interviewing candidates. he just owes it to the public to say he is working with a candidate. the right wing screams because james carville isn't proclaiming his support for hillary every other sentence, but carville has been totally upfront about it.
The posts you share used to make me laugh.
But these days, they just make me sad. You are so lost.
MY GOD is there ANY topic you wont drag Olbermann into? At any rate if he interviewed Markos he should have disclosed he raises money for them. DID he interview Markos?
Sean may admit it right after MMFA acknowledges that Hillary helped create them, and places a disclaimer in every Hillary post. That sounds about fair.
I'm sure you have proof of that accusation. I'll wait.
We are certainly better prepared and more focused on, you know, taking our arguments, and making them effective, and disseminating them widely, and really putting together a network, uh, in the blogosphere, in a lot of the new progressive infrastructure, institutions that I helped to start and support like Media Matters and Center for American Progress. Hillary Clinton Yearly/Kos Chicago, Il 10/01/07
So helping to start and support progressive internet websites 'like" media matters means she actually started media matters? Your comprehension skills need work.
If his comprehension skills were better, he'd be a liberal.....
In other words she did like Soros. She raised money for the LIBERAL INFRASTUCTURE. That is umbrella organizations like CAP that made MMFA possible this does NOT constitute a connection. When she writes MMFA a big CHECK get back to us.
Actually, if you knew anything about MMFA you would know that the REPUBLICANS and their smear machine helped create MMFA. David Brock used to be one of them and finally saw the light.
Try getting a clue...they're free.
Nope, I couldn't possibly be a liberal...not unless I had an overwhelming concern for those helpless terrorists or the sudden urge to hug a tree. Plus, I'd have to give up the reasoning skills I have and go with emotion. Nope, can't do it, but I think to make myself feel better, I'll fire up a big Monte Cristo, get in my gas guzzling SUV, and run over some baby ducks. That should do it.
And while you're at it, send some kids off to a war you would never fight, praise Jesus at every chance you have, but neglect the poor and least among us, tell us why Hollywood values are evil and elect former actors like Reagen, Arnie, and Fred, keep bashing the drug-addicted and listen to Limbaugh, harp on family values and vote for the adulterer of the moment (McCain, Rudy, Newt etc.) or listen to man who won't even accept his own sister because she is gay (Newt), call for lower spending while supporting the party that rang up the biggest debt in U.S. history, claim that experience matters when Obama is brought up, but not Bush, clamor for smaller government when voting for the party that enlarged the government bigger than ever, and then, Dave, you will be a Republican ;).
Wow friedbergboy1422 – I’ve never heard it summed up all in one sentence like that. Bullseye!
Thanks, PJ. Feel free to use it.
Nope, I couldn't possibly be a liberal...not unless I had an overwhelming concern for those helpless terrorists or the sudden urge to hug a tree. Plus, I'd have to give up the reasoning skills I have and go with emotion. Nope, can't do it, but I think to make myself feel better, I'll fire up a big Monte Cristo, get in my gas guzzling SUV, and run over some baby ducks. That should do it.
Like I said - no comprehension skills, or critical thought patterns, either. Jsut mindless right-wing blather.....
With all of the Faux new, right wing talking points...falsely projecting that all liberals arebaby duck loving (?) tree huggers who have more concern for terrorists than our own country.
The only thing he proved is that he is quite ignorant.
Are you kidding me the liberals here FLUSH more logic in the morning than you will ever show. That is just another hivemind stupidity. What you would have to give up is your ZEAL to get as many Americans killed as possible and your hatred of minorities and the poor. For US to become conservatives WE would have to have that lobotomy that came naturally to you at birth.
Dave,
"(I)nstitutions that I helped to start and support like Media Matters and Center for American Progress."
So in the RW dictionary, support = create?
Regardless of your views on Sean Hannity, has he violated any election laws or compromised his contract with Fox News or WABC by being at a fundraiser for any political candidate?
Like many criminals, we'll never know just what laws he's broken until his arrest.
Oh to dream. MSNBC would have that on a 24 hour loop.
Not that I know of but there is no QUESTION he violated basic journalistic ethics by going to a fundraiser for Guiliani then not disclosing it WHEN HE INTERVIEWED HIM. Had one of my writers done such a thing on my high school newspaper I would have fired them