NBC Nightly News features children turned away from NIH, ignores Dem funding opposition
After Republicans in the House of Representatives passed a funding bill for the National Institutes of Health, NBC Nightly News has run two feature stories about children and other patients who could not enroll in a cancer clinical trial at NIH because of the “shutdown.”
In neither story was the Republican funding bill or Democratic rejection of funding mentioned.
The most recent feature story was last night.
Those of you who read this blog, or pay even cursory attention to the news, know that House Republicans passed the NIH funding bill, over the objections of 170 Democrats who voted against it.
Harry Reid then refused to agree to a consent motion in the Senate to approve the funding. Dana Bash at CNN even questioned Reid about it at a press conference, wondering why he won’t just agree to the House funding bill since it might help a child.
All of this took place against an Obama veto threat.
Anyone who pays even a little attention knows that it is Democrats, and Democrats alone who have blocked funding for NIH child clinical trials.
Yet in the entire segment on NBC tonight, not a word was mentioned about why there is no funding. All that is mentioned is a generic and presumably bi-partisan failure to reach an agreement. Here’s the full video (full transcript here):
Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
This is not the first time NBC Nightly News has ignored that Democrats are opposed to the funding bill, and unable to put political differences aside even for children with cancer and rare diseases.
On Thursday, October 3, NBC Nightly news ran another segment that ignored Democrats’ opposition:
Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
This is your mainstream media bias at work. It’s not just what they do report, it’s what they ignore.
And what they ignore is that Democrats killed funding for the children featured in the NBC Nightly News segments. Even a single sentence in these reports would have put it in context.
Please note, we are not talking about MSNBC.
We are talking about NBC Nightly News, the flagship news program at NBC.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Just think how different America would look if we had a working press.
Amen, Rags. If we had had a working press this man would not have even been nominated for the presidency. The press elected him and they have kept him propped up ever since. They cannot, will not, or are too ignorant to see the mistake they made.
I remember when journalism was considered an honorable profession. But today, Responsible Journalism is an oxymoron, like jumbo shrimp or plastic silverware.
Yes and one can put getting a “college education” in that category.
Today, ‘higher education’, is the state kiddies are in, to get that “college education”.
The house should redo the bill, except this time call it the MSNBC emergency NIH Funding Act.
See if they ignore it then.
Doesn’t. Fit. Their. Agenda.
Well, NBC would have ignored the fact that the Republicans killed the funding, if that had been the case.
Two things have raised my hope – Breitbars’s new site called Truth Reviolt “TR” and, if I understood correctly the announcement here that LI will start sending out crews of young journalist to document public behavior of the people in Washington DC who think they are the elite of this country.
I *love* the on-the-ground work that Team LI has done already. It’d be great to see some more of it!
It’s an obvious ploy. They want to fund the government piecemeal without addressing the underlying conflict. In addition, Republicans have been trying to cut at least 10% of NIH funding.
Funding NIH is an obvious ploy – but Democrats and their media allies trying to exploit the denial of participation in a clinical trial (caused by the Democrats themselves) is just fine.
The more you comment, the more you reveal yourself as a craven statist bootlicker. Keep it up.
And they want the ability to shutdown everybody’s health care the next time they create a “crisis”!
(I’d call it blackmail, but they would probably claim that term is racist.)
Question: How much did NBC make in that one evening of media pogrom against Republicans?
Answer: More than enough to fund the clinical trial of the girl they featured.
Every Republican who appears on an MSM program should be saying:
“Of course, it’s the Democrats who are refusing to pass any one of the several CRs the House has sent to the Senate. If the Democrats are so sure a CR that includes funding for the ACA would pass the House, why don’t they just pass one of the CRs already presented – ending the shutdown today – and introduce a bill that funds the ACA as a separate issue, that could pass tomorrow?”
I understand the failure of the press in this and the desire to play it by both sides. But look at what they are saying was denied the children. They can not participate in a “clinical trial”. That means that one half of the children are receiving a know chemotherapy regimen while the other half is receiving an experimental drug. In the trial process, this drug would have only suggested improvement of a tumor in mice or similar mammal. The purpose of the trial at this level would be see observe adverse reactions that you can not tell in mice and to see if humans have the same tumor resolution. In other words, the children are not being denied medical treatment, it only means that the experimental drug is not being used and evaluated. So, it is a non story no matter what.
That is why I call Obama “the shoe shine boy”. It is not meant to be racist, it is because he acts like a New Orleans shoe shine boy. There, when you are standing in line for a restaurant, a shoe shine boy will approach and as if you want your shoe shined for a dollar. Sure you say, the boy shine one shoe then gets up to leave, you ask about the other shoe, he says that one will cost $25.
[…] Legal Insurrection: NBC Nightly News features children turned away from NIH, ignores Dem funding opposition: […]
Apologies for the repost and the length of this repost, but this seems a good time to take another look at the ethics of professional journalists. See if you can find any violations (snicker /sarcasm – it’s ALL violations):
SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS CODE OF ETHICS
SEEK TRUTH AND REPORT IT
Journalists should be honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.
— Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible.
— Diligently seek out subjects of news stories to give them the opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing.
— Identify sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources’ reliability.
— Always question sources’ motives before promising anonymity. Clarify conditions attached to any promise made in exchange for information. Keep promises.
— Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.
— Never distort the content of news photos or video. Image enhancement for technical clarity is always permissible. Label montages and photo illustrations.
— Avoid misleading re-enactments or staged news events. If re-enactment is necessary to tell a story, label it.
— Avoid undercover or other surreptitious methods of gathering information except when traditional open methods will not yield information vital to the public. Use of such methods should be explained as part of the story
— Never plagiarize.
— Tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience boldly, even when it is unpopular to do so.
— Examine their own cultural values and avoid imposing those values on others.
— Avoid stereotyping by race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, geography, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance or social status.
— Support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.
— Give voice to the voiceless; official and unofficial sources of information can be equally valid.
— Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.
— Distinguish news from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two.
— Recognize a special obligation to ensure that the public’s business is conducted in the open and that government records are open to inspection.
Ethical journalists treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect.
— Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.
— Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
— Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.
— Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone’s privacy.
— Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.
— Be cautious about identifying juvenile suspects or victims of sex crimes.
— Be judicious about naming criminal suspects before the formal filing of charges.
— Balance a criminal suspect’s fair trial rights with the public’s right to be informed.
Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public’s right to know.
—Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.
— Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.
— Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and shun secondary employment, political involvement, public office and service in community organizations if they compromise journalistic integrity.
— Disclose unavoidable conflicts.
— Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable.
— Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence news coverage.
— Be wary of sources offering information for favors or money; avoid bidding for news.
Journalists are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other.
— Clarify and explain news coverage and invite dialogue with the public over journalistic conduct.
— Encourage the public to voice grievances against the news media.
— Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
— Expose unethical practices of journalists and the news media.
— Abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.
One is hard-pressed to find an ethic the media doesn’t violate on a daily basis.