Get Bill Sammon…

Someone at FNC has it in for its DC Bureau Chief Bill Sammon. I can see one embarrassing leaked email coming out as a random thing not necessarily indicative of anything. But two; both of which wind up in Media Matters’ hands? That tells me someone wants to make Sammon look bad. Of course Media Matters does but it can’t do it on its own. It needs an insider with a grudge.

The latest leak is chronicled by Politico’s Keach Hagey…

Fox News Washington managing editor Bill Sammon sent an e-mail to staff last December offering guidance on how to handle the climate debate, three weeks after the Climategate scandal broke and in the midst of the Copenhagen climate summit.

“Given the controversy over the veracity of climate change data,” Sammon wrote, “we should refrain from asserting that the planet has warmed (or cooled) in any given period without IMMEDIATELY pointing out that such theories are based upon data that critics have called into question. It is not our place as journalists to assert such notions as facts, especially as this debate intensifies.”

Update: One thing all these emails have in common, besides the “get Bill Sammon” angle is that they’re old; from last year. This suggests the possibility that this could be an ex-FNC employee who archived emails before they left and is now using them for revenge.

Advertisements

67 Responses to “Get Bill Sammon…”

  1. Once again, I don’t see anything embarrassing about Sammon’s statement. It’s perfectly objective.

  2. The email on it’s own is pretty innocuous but when taken with other leaked emails and the Ailes and Murdoch interviews there is enough evidence to prove the obvious fact that FNC talent both primetime and dayside are given Republican talking points by their masters on a regular basis.

    This is not really debatable anymore but it is getting harder and harder for Fox apologists and FNC supposed straight talent, like Baier or Hemmer, to find excuses for the obviously biased coverage.

    But it doesn’t really matter to Murdoch, Ailes and all as the reason FNC exists is to be the propaganda arm of the Republican Party and not a real news organization. 😉

  3. Grandpa Dave Says:

    I see. If it doesn’t conform to the liberal/progressive ideology then it must be a “Republican Party talking point”. 😉

  4. bushleaguer Says:

    I don’t see anything wrong with this. The public/government option thing, on the other hand, was about using a Republican talking point.

    Someone definitely has it out for Sammon.

  5. “If it doesn’t conform to the liberal/progressive ideology then it must be a “Republican Party talking point”.”

    It’s a Republican Party talking point when Frank Luntz focus groups it and tells FNC brass that this is how to frame a subject so as to put it in the best light for the Republican Party.

    It ‘s unlikely that would conform to ‘liberal/progressive ideology’ but if it helped the Republicans then that could be a RPTP used as well on FNC. 😉

  6. lonestar77 Says:

    Every other news network promotes “global warming” as fact and mocks anyone who dares to disagree. Yet, it’s a “controversy” when Sammon instructs his people to point out that there is controversy surrounding the science? uh, ok.

  7. The CC science is consistant, evolving, but consistant. The politics, especially the energy industry funded sources seem to be the only real controversy.
    Like everything else, we postpone the cost of dealing with this and pass the disaster/debt to our children/grandchildren. I can only imagine what they will think of their parents/grandparents.

  8. LS: I couldn’t have said it better myself. It is the current CW that climate change is fact and every day new evidence is put forth to prove that fact.
    There is only controversy among the fringe groups that always exist to challenge CW; be it truthers, birthers, creationists, flat earthers or climate change deniers. Most of these deniers are conservitive Republicans so promoting climate change controversy on FNC plays to that hardcore Republican base most of whom still believe men and dinosaurs walked the earth at the same time.

  9. BTW: You wouldn’t have to instruct your ‘straight news’ talent on how to refer to climate change if they didn’t automatically want to use the correct perspective on the subject. You only need to instruct them only when you want them to say things that they ordinarily wouldn’t think to say.

    FNC is the only network who promotes this fringe POV on the climate change and does so solely to please their conservitive Republican masters.

  10. There is no evidence to conclusively prove Climate Change as fact. There is evidence to suggest that climate change could be going on however. But it’s scientifically impossible to use short term data to prove a long term hypothesis. This is a nuance that’s frequently lost in the whole climate change argument which usually takes a “the earth is warming up so it’s climate change”/”there’s no proof of climate change is being caused by man therefore it’s not happening” polar opposite discussion.

  11. Grandpa Dave Says:

    Of course Climate Change is happening. And it has been for millennia. It’s only relatively recently that we’ve been able to measure it accurately worldwide. As Spud said, that’s way to short a period to prove anything, one way or the other.

  12. icn2, Excellent use of the English language to make your point, though, tens of thousands of years of data does provide some interesting coorelations.
    The CC theory is based upon an incredible amount of research from a huge number of scientists coming to the same conclusion. The quantitive issue being the degree of change, the impact and the degree of cause by different factors. The principal that we have a serious problem is not at issue, except for politics, and we all know that politics knows no reason.

  13. There’s no way to prove to everyone’s satisfaction that anything is fact. But at some point the evidence is strong enough to make it the CW of the time.

    There are still millions of people that ‘believe’ that the world is only 7000 (?) years old based on religious beliefs; but science proves this to be wrong. It’s OK to promote this religious theory on ‘religious’ networks but not on cable news which is suppose to deal in scientific evidence on subjects that are not in dispute scientifically.

    Climate change (man made or not) is not in dispute scientifically except for those with a political (Republican/conservatives) and/or financial (coal/oil supplier supporters) reason to deny it’s happening. It’s the current scientific CW.

  14. There is not one thing in that memo that makes Sammon look bad. To me, it shows exactly what a managing editor should be doing…. making sure his staff presents the FACTS and letting the audience know the FACTS.

    This is obviously an angry lib staffer or ex-staffer out for revenge. Won’t get any with this drivel.

  15. This is obviously an angry lib staffer or ex-staffer out for revenge.

    Or someone really pissed about all the crap he was forced to say. I nominate Magor Garrett.

  16. Wrong answer. Even if Major (note sp) were upset (and there’s no actual evidence that he was, or is), he is too classy to archive years of emails and use them against someone. I would look to an ex-staffer who has a propensity for holding grudges and has a reason to be upset with Sammon, and therefore save years of emails for future use.

  17. Garrett gave up a plum White House gig to get away from FNC, then pointedly showed up on MSNBC almost immediately. He’s pissed.

  18. Evidence-free speculation can be fun, but isn’t very enlightening. I think he may have appeared on FBN before MS anyhow.

  19. Brian Wilson?

  20. “Garrett gave up a plum White House gig to get away from FNC,”

    Plum if you don’t mind being on the road constantly with no set schedule of when & where you’ll be. He said he wanted to get out of tv and back to print journalism. There is absolutely no reason not to believe him. Other than, I hate Fox so Major does too.

  21. Something good can be man-made as well:

  22. ^^ If you click on the ‘YouTube’ logo, it’ll take you to the clip.

  23. like the emails reveal anything new. come on bring something more damning to the table. we already know that fox sends out pro gop talking points.

  24. fanofgrendel Says:

    Anybody seen Brian Wilson lately?

  25. tinafromtampa Says:

    Stick to the facts, that is the message that Bill Sammon is telling FNCers. I don’t know why MM thinks that is a big deal…no “get” here or with the other email. I note that Mediaite is trying to make a big deal out of this email, like the other one, but will just get shot down again, just like last time.

    No story here.

  26. How about Shep as the email leaker. He’s the only free spirit left at FNC.

  27. “No story here.”

    ^Move on, move on; nothing to see here. 🙂

  28. lonestar77 Says:

    Get back to me when you have something other than, “Bill Sammons instructed his people to make sure and provide the caveat that there is controversy surrounding global warming alarmism”. I know many of you only want to hear that global warming will cause the planet to flood in 2 years and 15 days unless we stop driving trucks and start wiping our butts with pine needles. But, for the rest of us, we’d like to hear journalists do something other than call the other side flat-earthers. The majority of the MSM took Algore’s statement that “thu duhhhbaate is oooovver” as fact. Well, like his ridiculous movie, it’s not fact and excuse me if I think there’s a little more that causes the planet to heat & cool other than cow flatulence and using the incorrect light bulb. Global warming alarmism is a cult. The left desperately needs something to believe in & they’ve found it.

  29. Heatwaves are getting hotter, cold storms are getting colder, ice caps are melting and snow levels are rising. Only an idiot would pretend this is all ‘natural’, and that the Industrial Revolution hasn’t had a major impact on it. Climate change deniers are just another faction of the right wing that doesn’t want to hear about a problem because it might cost them something.

  30. lonestar77 Says:

    Well, it’s a no lose situation for you, Joe. If it gets hotter, it’s global warming. If it gets colder, it’s global warming. If snow melts, GW. If snow falls, GW. If your steak is over cooked, GW. Undercooked, GW.

    You mention I have something to lose? What about your side, Joe? You have a lot to gain. What dems love most. Regulations, less freedom, increased taxes & control.

    To the left, virtually every answer to every problem is global warming. It’s absurd. How do you know it’s getting hotter and/or colder? Compared to when? Compared to 250 years ago when they measured how hot or cold it was by going outside and saying “it’s pretty effin’ cold today.

  31. Just keep burying your head, LS. 50 years from now when it won’t matter to us, somebody else is going to have to deal with it because it’s already too late. There isn’t enough environmental regulation the US and Europe can do to counteract India and especially China’s rapid and unregulated growth. Paradise was paved over long ago.

  32. lonestar77 Says:

    Color me extremely worried. I’m just glad the left has found religion.

  33. Of course you’re not worried; the only effect it’s had on you so far is to threaten your belief in a completely-free-market, no-regulation, “I’ve got mine and screw you” world. Worrying involves a conscience. Pesky things..

  34. lonestar77 Says:

    I’m not worried because I don’t think it’s a real threat. If it were a real threat, the alarmists would be sane about it. The fact that they’re not, tells me that they have other motives. They’re the PETA of climate/environmentalism, etc. It’s pretty hard to take people serious when they’re such whackjobs. I honestly don’t think I’ve heard a problem in the world that hasn’t been explained by “global warming”. I’m never going to buy a prius or any other golf cart with doors on it. I don’t think that I have any effect on the mating habits of a polar bear.

    Those wingnuts want to regulate what we drive, what we eat, what temp our thermostat is set at. Yet, they have absolutely no problem with Obama flying all over the country in AF1 to give stump speeches for congressional candidates. They have no problem with him flying all over the world to take care of business that could be done using a teleconference. They have no problem flying around in private jets themselves…especially all of the hollywood yahoos who see GW as their flavor of the month. BUT, they want me to change my meager habits. Yeah, go bleep yourselves, jack-holes (not you, Joe).

  35. ”No conscience” vs ”Not you, Joe”. Nice comparison, that.

  36. lonestar77 Says:

    Oh, and FWIW, my skepticism has nothing to do with my belief in “a completely-free-market, no-regulation, “I’ve got mine and screw you” world.”

    I just don’t buy it. Maybe this little analogy will help you: I don’t believe in asking someone to give me something for free that I could purchase myself. But, that’s not why I don’t believe in Santa Claus.

  37. Yeah, I’M the one acknowledging the obvious fact that this planet is in deep shyte while you guys ignore it, but HE wins because be didn’t include me with ‘the jackholes’. Suit yourselves, I’ve had it.

  38. — a completely-free-market, no-regulation, “I’ve got mine and screw you” world.” —

    That’s the all-purpose answer. It has no basis in fact or reason, but there it is.

  39. lonestar77 Says:

    ^ yeah, I didn’t quite understand what that had to do with me not believing that I have zero impact on the temperature of the planet.

  40. lonestar77 Says:

    ^bad sentence but I think you get the point.

  41. I don’t know too many people around here who ‘have theirs‘. I personally lost ‘mine’ a few years back.

  42. Actually LS has a small point. Climate change is unlikely to affect how he or most of us posting here live our lives in any major way . We’ll all be long gone before it really has any major detrimental influence on our day to day existence.

    On the other hand our grandchildren will have to deal with it every day and will not look back at our ‘it’s all a leftest plot to control my life’ excuses with the same ‘I’ve got mine – screw you’ attitude expressed now by the right.

  43. LS is exactly right. The left has gambled on this, but it isn’t much of a risk. Any change or slight abnormality in the weather gets chalked up to GW.

    But the real brilliance of this strategy is that there is no loss for it. If science in 50 years shows that GW wasn’t real, what’s the left going to say? “Oops, we cleaned up the planet… darn.” It’s a win-win! And the businesses who get put out of business, or the people who can’t make ends meet, oh well… who’s going to remember them anyway?

  44. Didn’t this story start out with Al Gore stating global WARMING was going to make the oceans rise, etc, etc. Then, when there were problems found in some of the research (and the NY Times would not print the emails because they were “stolen” – hypocritical maybe?) from the guy in London who was the keeper of the information (he threw away some of the past data – why would you do that?) then we changed the language to “climate change” rather than “global warming”. We have had climate change for eons – you know the “ice age” (not the movie). So climate change has gone on forever – now its a debate of why the change is happening now. There is strong disagreement about this and I wager in any of our lifetimes there will be no final agreement on this issue. Take the actions that you feel you must, but don’t make every one else drink you glass of kool-aid.

  45. I will start taking the Global Warming alarmists seriously when I see THEM, voluntarily, changing and scaling back their own lifestyles, and doing the things they want the government to require everyone to do.

    They don’t need to wait for the government to mandate any of those things. They’re perfectly free to modify their own lives and reduce their own carbon footprints to their heart’s content, but we don’t see any of them doing it. Could that be because they don’t really believe it themselves? I’ll believe them, when I see some real evidence that they believe what they’re telling the rest of us.

  46. lonestar77 Says:

    “have theirs”. I wish. I got two kids under 5. $$$$ isn’t exactly growing on trees around here.

  47. The country should spend billions of dollars that we don’t have, and enact yet even more regulations to choke-off what few business we have left, on something that the unconverted consider a fairy tale. 10% unemployment will then be a fond memory, which the left will no doubt continue to blame on greedy businessmen.

  48. It doesn’t have to be a blanket run on environmental regulation, but it would be nice if the right would at least act like adults about it and have a legitimate conversation. They take the easy way out: “I found a guy who says climate change is BS, so screw it..it’s not real and I’m not going to talk about it.” Greg Gutfeld – of all people – said we should ignore the screeching on both sides, and have that conversation. Which won’t matter anyway. India and China.

  49. lonestar77 Says:

    Have a conversation with who? After every thunderstorm there’s some lefty yahoo blaming it on global warming. It’s tiresome. I wasn’t speaking in hyperbole when I said that I’m pretty sure I’ve heard every problem in the world linked to global warming at one point or another. It’s crazy. If there’s a drought…global warming. If it floods…global warming. It makes my head hurt.

  50. After every major weather-related cataclysm, there’s some righty yahoo blaming it on cows. The earth is changing. It’s our fault.

  51. “After every thunderstorm there’s some lefty yahoo blaming it on global warming.”

    Actually LS that comment is BS. The only people that use local weather conditions as a proof/non proof of climate change are people like you who have no real scientific evidence or knowledge to base a real argument on. Those who believe CC is happing tend to quote scientific studies. But then getting your evidence from Glen Beck is so much easier.

  52. How do you know it’s getting hotter and/or colder? Compared to when? Compared to 250 years ago when they measured how hot or cold it was by going outside and saying “it’s pretty effin’ cold today.

    Lonestar should probably do a little research on the difference between WEATHER and CLIMATE. The possible existence of global warming relies on a warmer CLIMATE. Yet, there is Lonestar, an unfortunately clueless conservative, wondering why the WEATHER isn’t colder than 250 years earlier. CLIMATE, Lonestar, CLIMATE. Follow along with the terminology, please.

    And when I call you clueless, Lonestar, I don’t mean that in a derogatory manner (however, it probably looks that way). You’re clueless, IMO, because it seems like you don’t know what global warming is.

  53. Another pointless subject beaten to death.

  54. Actually, I should probably clarify: I’m not sure if LS was referencing climate or weather, but you look pretty clueless when you’re wondering about cold weather when the study is about the climate.

  55. Seeing as how cold weather has so little to do with climate.

  56. lonestar77 Says:

    Thanks, Bill Nye. Nothing has been proven either way & there are plenty of scientists on both sides of the issue.

    At this point, I’d be happy to pay a one time fee to the left so they can buy some carbon credits & feel better about themselves. As long as I don’t have to hear about global warming/climate change ever again.

  57. “there are plenty of scientists on both sides of the issue”

    Actually there not; that’s just an FNC talking point. There are a few paid by the coal and oil industry to muddy the issue; much like the tobacco industry used to hire scientists to prove that cigarettes were healthy.

    Most of the rest are guys like Art Robinson, the ‘scientist’ who ran against Peter Defazio in November and whose science expertise is, shall we say, suspect.

    There may be a few legitimate climate change experts who still aren’t fully on the side climate change is a totally man made thing but they are a very small minority.

  58. fritz3 is correct. Government agencies, by the way, if you look at the results of their studies and the actions they’re taking, are fully aware that global warming is real and is a serious threat – to national security and foreign policy. The Pentagon doesn’t treat this as a “both sides have arguments so let’s do nothing” type of problem – they are actively planning for the impact. FNC is being either led by stubbornly blindly ideological executives, or deliberately obfuscating the truth because it pays better to tell conservatives what they want to hear, I’m not sure which. Meanwhile, yes, India and China will invest in green energy and we’ll keep wasting our time..

    As far as who leaked the emails, I doubt it’s on-air talent. The emails evidently went to several internal mailing lists, and you’d have to figure that in a large media organization, each list could comprise dozens to hundreds of staff. The content speaks for itself, however.

  59. Trouble is….Sammon is right. There are more and more now coming forward and stating that they simply can not predict what is a non-linear chaotic system to any degree of certainty. And with the last 10 years of temp. data now indicating NO increase in temp and an actual decline. Seems the solar data input is more in charge.

  60. When you are the only network to send out a memo on how to refer on air to the climate change question and the council you give is a Republican Party talking point it becomes pretty obvious that you are doing it to muddy the waters.

  61. fritz3: “When you are the only network to send out a memo on how to refer on air to the climate change question and the council you give is a Republican Party talking point it becomes pretty obvious that you are doing it to muddy the waters.” How do you know that FOX is the only network to send out a memo…?’ Do you have insider information at all networks? Wow, how omniscient of you! Maybe the talking points you speak of are from a scientist that doesn’t believe in global warming, but of course, everything that FOX does is a Republican talking point, right?

    I don’t suppose you saw Bill Hemmer yesterday giving John Cornyn the third degree about his stand on earmarks, did you? Was that a Republican talking point, too, to be sure to have interviewers on FOX point out Republicans hypocrisy on earmarks? Enough so that even Chrissy “Tingle” Matthews had a blurb on the Bill Hemmer interview on his show and gave kudos to Bill Hemmer!

    Same old story, FOX does Republican talking points and they are evil but when NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, all use the NY Times (which prints the Democrats talking points) as their source of information thay are being totally fair, right?

  62. “but of course, everything that FOX does is a Republican talking point, right?”

    Pretty much. 😉

    “I don’t suppose you saw Bill Hemmer yesterday giving John Cornyn the third degree about his stand on earmarks, did you? Was that a Republican talking point, too, to be sure to have interviewers on FOX point out Republicans hypocrisy on earmarks?”

    Actually it’s more a tea party talking point. Conservative/tea party republicans are vehemently opposed too ear marks so Hemmer holding Cornyn’s feet to the fire over his hypocrisy is exactly what I would expect FNC talent to do. If he hadn’t that would be news.

  63. lonestar77 Says:

    “is exactly what I would expect FNC talent to do.”

    Wow, you’re such a genius! Well, to be accurate, like most liberals, you tell yourself you know everything, anyway.

  64. And it’s a left-wing, chain-jerking talking point to criticize everything Fox does regardless of validity. Tiresome and predictable.

  65. Fox News is a religion that does news. Fortunately, they’re pretty good at both. I reserve the right to criticize them one subject at a time, and praise them the same way.

    Btw, you’d have to care more than is healthy for you to have noticed this, but I debated the relative validity ofclimate change as a real problem here. I didn’t say a word about Sammon’s memo about how the anchors refer to it. “Government-run” was propaganda. Noting that there’s still some debate about how bad climate change is – and what’s causing it – is a reasonable approach.

  66. Not that you asked, but I was referring to someone for whom every question that Fox asks somehow..I don’t know..confirms the voices in his head. .

    — you’d have to care more than is healthy —

    Which is why we’re all here.. 🙂

  67. […] Kalpa Pharmaceuticals Kalpa Pharmaceuticals Kalpa Pharmaceuticals Kalpa Pharmaceuticals Kalpa Pharmaceuticals Kalpa Pharmaceuticals Kalpa Pharmaceuticals Kalpa Pharmaceuticals Kalpa Pharmaceuticals Kalpa […]

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: