Topic category: Corruption of American News Media
FOX News Revealing Their Bias
FOX News contributor Gillian Turner grades major candidates on how they would deal with radical Islam.
Monday morning, March 28, FOX News contributor Gillian Turner graded the five surviving presidential candidates on how they would handle the rise of radical Islam.
Ms. Turner's grading of candidates' positions on dealing with militant Islamic radicals:
So just who is Gillian Turner? And what are her qualifications to objectively grade candidates on foreign policy?
FOX News describes Ms. Turner as "a Senior Associate with Jones Group International (JGI), a global strategy firm, where she works directly with former National Security Adviser Jim Jones."
Jones is a retired Marine Corps General.
He is also a registered Democrat.
Turner's bio page at FOX News further reveals "Ms. Turner has worked at the U.S. Department of State in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor; the U.S. House of Representatives in the Office of the Minority Leader; and the Albright Group, LLC. She was also a Sharp Fellow at Columbia University in New York City." See anything that isn't Left-leaning liberal in any of these connections? State Department, the Albright Group, Columbia University.
The Albright Group merged with Stonebridge International in 2009 to form Albright Stonebridge Group. The Albright Group was founded by Madeline Albright, former Secretary of State under Bill Clinton. Another strong Democrat connection for Turner.
Given her strong Democratic Party connections, is it reasonable to expect Turner, whose current job involves working "directly" with the founding head (a Democrat) of the company who employs her, would be objective and free of any bias when grading leading candidates for president on their approach to dealing with the rise of radical Islam?
Is it likely that Turner would provide an unbiased evaluation of Hillary Clinton, the leading Democrat candidate?
Is it likely that Turner would provide a completely honest and unbiased evaluation of Republican candidates?
Might Turner be inclined to grade lower those candidates who present the greatest threat to Hillary?
Might Turner be inclined to grade highest both Hillary and those candidates who present the least threat to Hillary?
By failing to reveal Ms. Turner's "qualifications" to objectively grade presidential candidates on their approach to the rising threat of radical Islam, FOX News betrays its viewers trust that it is objective and unbiased.
Perhaps "fair and balanced" has lost its meaning at FOX News.
At any rate, the slogan "Fair and Balanced" is overrated.
How does one "balance" honesty? By giving equal time to dishonesty?
How does one "balance" full disclosure? By failing to reveal key information about FOX News' contributors?
Why was Turner not asked to explain how Hillary's disgraceful performance throughout the entire Benghazi fiasco supports a high grade on how she would handle radical Islamic terrorism?
Why was Turner not asked why her grade failed to reflect Hillary's routine breaches of highly sensitive national security information that aids radical Islamic terrorists?
FOX News would do much better to be "Honest and Complete". That includes full disclosure and unbiased presentation of facts.
Ms. Turner should be presented as a spokesperson for Democratic Party political talking points. For example, claims Trump is bad, Bernie is disengaged, Kasich is strong, Cruz is pragmatic. Such claims suggest that Democrats view Kasich and Cruz as the weakest against Hillary and they take seriously the threat from Donald Trump and are annoyed at the continuing success of Bernie Sanders, successes that witness the weakness of candidate Hillary.
We can thank Bernie Sanders for demonstrating that Hillary is NOT invincible. And Hillary's weaknesses will be exploited with far greater effect by either Trump or Cruz, one of whom will be the Republican nominee.
FOX News should bear in mind that viewers can find biased political rubbish at all of FOX News' competitors in network and cable news.
FOX News would do well to clean up its act or a new star will rise where truth and objectivity are honored over fair and balanced.
People are fed up with dishonesty and propaganda being passed off as "news".
Bob Webster
WEBCommentary (Editor, Publisher)
Biography - Bob Webster
Author of "Looking Out the Window", an evidence-based examination of the "climate change" issue, Bob Webster, is a 12th-generation descendent of both the Darte family (Connecticut, 1630s) and the Webster family (Massachusetts, 1630s). He is a descendant of Daniel Webster's father, Revolutionary War patriot Ebenezer Webster, who served with General Washington. Bob has always had a strong interest in early American history, our Constitution, U.S. politics, and law. Politically he is a constitutional republican with objectivist and libertarian roots. He has faith in the ultimate triumph of truth and reason over deception and emotion. He is a strong believer in our Constitution as written and views the abandonment of constitutional restraint by the regressive Progressive movement as a great danger to our Republic. His favorite novel is Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand and believes it should be required reading for all high school students so they can appreciate the cost of tolerating the growth of unconstitutional crushingly powerful central government. He strongly believes, as our Constitution enshrines, that the interests of the individual should be held superior to the interests of the state.
A lifelong interest in meteorology and climatology spurred his strong interest in science. Bob earned his degree in Mathematics at Virginia Tech, graduating in 1964.