Tag Archives: abc

Bachelor Pad was the Hottest Show on Television for 25 of its 120 Minutes

If you caught last night’s episode of ABC’ s Bachelor Pad , the closest thing I’ve seen to parent-safe smut, you witnessed a revival of makeout parties that we’ve needed since MTV Spring Break gyrated into obscurity. Fifteen guys and girls donned blindfolds and judged each other’s makeout prowess for our viewing pleasure. It was sexier than the Miss Universe pageant. It’s not my fault.

Read more from the original source:
Bachelor Pad was the Hottest Show on Television for 25 of its 120 Minutes

Filmmaker James Cameron Backs Out of Global Warming Debate HE Organized

Multi-millionaire filmmaker James Cameron on Sunday backed out of a global warming debate that he asked for and organized. For those that haven’t been following the recent goings on concerning Nobel Laureate Al Gore’s favorite money-making myth, an environmental summit was held this weekend in Aspen, Colorado, called AREDAY , which is short for American Renewable Energy Day. Ahead of this conference, Cameron challenged three noted global warming skeptics to a public debate where he was going to personally “call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out with those boneheads.” One of the invited skeptics, Ann McElhinney of NotEvilJustWrong.com , wrote about Cameron’s surprise cancellation Sunday: His representatives contacted myself and two other well known skeptics, Marc Morano of the Climate Depot website and Andrew Breitbart, the new media entrepreneur. Mr. Cameron was attending the AREDAY environmental conference in Aspen Colorado 19-22 August. He wanted the conference to end with a debate on climate change. Cameron would be flanked with two scientists. It would be 90 minutes long. It would be streamed live on the internet. They hoped the debate would attract a lot of media coverage. “We are delighted to have Fox News, Newsmax, The Washington Times and anyone else you’d like. The more the better,” one of James Cameron’s organizers said in an email. The AREDAY program listed the debate as taking place 5:30 PM Sunday (page 8): McElhinney continued: But then as the debate approached James Cameron’s side started changing the rules. They wanted to change their team. We agreed. They wanted to change the format to less of a debate-to “a roundtable”. We agreed. Then they wanted to ban our cameras from the debate. We could have access to their footage. We agreed. Bizarrely, for a brief while, the worlds [sic] most successful film maker suggested that no cameras should be allowed-that sound only should be recorded. We agreed [sic] Then finally James Cameron, who so publicly announced that he “wanted to call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out,” decided to ban the media from the shoot out. He even wanted to ban the public. The debate/roundtable would only be open to those who attended the conference. No media would be allowed and there would be no streaming on the internet.  No one would be allowed to record it in any way. We all agreed to that. And then, yesterday, just one day before the debate, his representatives sent an email that Mr. “shoot it out ” Cameron no longer wanted to take part. The debate was cancelled.  Morano wrote Monday: Cameron backed out of the debate at the last minute after environmentalists “came out of the woodwork” to warn him not to engage in a debate with skeptics because it was not in his best interest. According to AREDAY organizers, activist Joseph Romm of Climate Progress urged Cameron not to go ahead with the debate as well. Romm making this suggestion is certainly no surprise, for last April he got trounced in a debate with Morano. Dismayed by his defeat, Romm barred any articles by Morano to be linked to at Climate Progress and attacked me for writing about the encounter.  Bad sportsmanship must be a common trait amongst climate alarmists, for after cancelling his AREDAY debate, Cameron still had harsh words for skeptics he refused to face: “I think they’re swine,” the renowned filmmaker told an audience member Sunday on the final day of the American Renewable Energy Day summit in Aspen. It was during a series of talks Sunday about the strong effect the right-wing punditry – Cameron named the regulars: Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh, who are known for their sharp attacks on environmentalists – has on Americans. With campaigns like the production of his blockbuster hit “Avatar,” Cameron said people are starting to realize the gravity of the problem. “I think we did move the needle a little bit,” he said. Moved the needle, Mr. Cameron? By organizing a debate and then chickening out? It’s a good thing the characters in his films have more guts than he does or they certainly wouldn’t be worth the price of admission. 

See the article here:
Filmmaker James Cameron Backs Out of Global Warming Debate HE Organized

ABC Hides Identity of Liberal Activists Advocating for More Government Intervention in Business

Good Morning America’s Bianna Golodryga on Sunday featured a liberal activist arguing for more government intervention in the form of paid time off laws and “affordable” child care. The ABC host never identified Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner’s ideology or the fact that she’s a  Huffington Post contributor. Instead, Golodryga fretted about “bias” against women who have children. The Rowe-Finkbeiner interview and the preceding segment lamented the fact that women who have children often don’t end up making as much as men and also females who don’t have kids. Neither segment even hinted that there could be two sides to the story. Instead, Rowe-Finkbeiner was allowed to lobby, “We know that passing family-friendly policies and programs like paid family leave, like affordable child care, like access to paid sick days, like access to flexible work options, those things actually help lower the gap between women and men.” Rowe-Finkbeiner’s blogs on the Huffington Post have advocated for a number of left-wing causes, including attacking Arizona for its tough immigration law. The segment also featured a woman by the name of Kiki Peppard. Golodryga explained: “Kiki Peppard spent a decade as a successful bookkeeper before taking leave to spend more time with her kids. But, when she went to reenter the work force after a divorce, she found herself on the outside looking in.” An ABC graphic blandly identified that Kiki “had a hard time finding work.” However, according to MomsRising.org , where Rowe-Finkbeiner is the executive director, Peppard has ties to the organization dating back to 2006. Golodryga also skipped this fact. Instead, she wondered, ” So, we heard Kiki’s story. How common and widespread are stories like hers? ” Rowe-Finkbeiner played dumb: “You know, I hear from women like Kiki everyday. Kiki is definitely not alone.” ABC on Sunday went way beyond being one-sided. Not identifying either of these women, their agendas and their connections is incredibly misleading. A transcript of the August 22 segment, which aired at 8:40 am EDT, follows: BIANNA GOLODRYGA: In America’s Jobs this morning, we’re going to look at the pay gap. The disparity between what men and women make has been shrinking over the years. And while it’s still not exactly equal, it is getting better, except for one particular group of women. They’re some of the most accomplished women in the world. Supreme Court justices. A former secretary of state. Even the head of Homeland Security. But, despite their widely varying political differences, they all have one thing in common: These woman don’t have children. And experts say, that fact may contribute directly to their success. According to the University of Chicago, men and women right out of school had nearly identical incomes and hours worked. But, 15 Years later, the men made 75 percent more than the women in the group. The only exception to the room? A small group of women who never had children. Their pay equaled the men. KIKI PEPPARD: There is such a double standard. GOLODRYGA: Kiki Peppard spent a decade as a successful bookkeeper before taking leave to spend more time with her kids. But, when she went to reenter the work force after a divorce, she found herself on the outside looking in. PEPPARD: The very first question asked me was, “Are you married?” And the second question was, “Do you have any children? This went on for the first 18 job interviews. On my19th job interview, they did not ask me about my marital status. They did not ask if I had children and hired me. GOLODRYGA: It’s long been assumed women make less than men because they have more career disruptions. But the unequal pay disparity also pits moms against non-moms. Women with kids are 44 percent less likely to be hired than women without. And they’re paid $11,000 less. And in this economy, that bias can be devastating to many families just trying to get by. And joining me now from Seattle to talk more about this is Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner, the co-founder and executive director of MomRising.org. Good morning. Thanks for joining us, Kristin. KRISTIN ROWE-FINKBEINER (executive director, Momsrising.org): Good morning. GOLODRYGA: So, we heard Kiki’s story. How common and widespread are stories like hers? ROWE-FINKBEINER: You know, I hear from women like Kiki everyday. Kiki is definitely not alone. One of the thing is that this problem is bigger than most people realized. In fact, the maternal wall standing in the way of the glass ceiling. And here’s what it looks like: Women without children make 90 cents to a man’s dollar. Women with children make only 73 cents to a man’s dollar. So, this is a big discrepancy. And we have a big issue with pay discrimination against mothers. GOLODRYGA: So, when we hear statistics like that, what can be done to level out the playing field in the workforce? ROWE-FINKBEINER: Well, we have a big issue to address. And that’s that we have a 1950s work policy structure but we have a modern labor force. We’re now more than 50 percent of the labor force are women for the first time in history. But, that doesn’t mean we’ve reached full equality as we just heard in the segment. Because, right now, women and mothers are struggling. Moms are working full time and can’t put food on the table. In fact, one in four children in our nation are experiencing food scarcity in their households because of economic limitations, according to the USDA. So, the solutions are there. We have solutions. We know that passing family-friendly policies and programs like paid family leave, like affordable child care, like access to paid sick days, like access to flexible work options , those things actually help lower the gap between women and men. And they raise all boats. Because, it’s not just moms who need the policies, but everybody needs those policies in order to excel in their life, in the workplace and with their families. GOLODRYGA: But, now of all times, with the economy being so bumpy, with jobs being even more difficult to find, what should moms who are planning on taking time off do to avoid falling behind? ROWE-FINKBEINER: Well, professional women who decide to take time out of the labor force need to do four things. One, and most importantly, they really need to keep up with their professional contacts. Maintain those contacts so they have smooth sailing when they move back into the labor force. Two, they need to make sure that their professional accreditations are up to date while their out of the labor force. Three, this is really important. They need to find a mentor. Somebody who has navigated this interesting seas before and can help them navigate through. And fourth, one thing that’s very important is to find volunteer positions that you can put on the resume while you’re out of the labor force to show that you were productive while you were staying home with kids. Not that staying home with kids isn’t an important job in and of itself. Because it is. One of the things, though that is critically important to understand is that because we have a 1950s work policy structure in our nation still, we haven’t updated our policies like most other countries have, that most women can’t stay out of the labor force. So, we have a huge problem where we, you know, don’t have paid family leave, like 177 other countries do. And because of that, we see the implications on kids with a quarter of families with young children living in poverty. So, it’s important to recognize that not that many people can stay out of the labor force. GOLODRYGA: That is true, indeed. Especially in these times.

More:
ABC Hides Identity of Liberal Activists Advocating for More Government Intervention in Business

NewsBusters 5th Anniversary: A Look Back at Some of Our Top Posts of Outrageous Media Outbursts

As part of the 5th anniversary celebration of NewsBusters we have started a weekly Five for Five feature to list the blog’s top twenty five posts. Last time, we looked at the top five posts on journalistic Obamagasms. On Friday we concluded with the top five posts of outrageous media outbursts. We have picked out a couple posts from each of the five categories and asked the authors to reflect back on writing them up. In this series of short videos, they share their thoughts on how they caught the particular media moment and describe the impact their post had. We finish our video look back by reflecting on two of top posts of outrageous media outbursts: “Rosie O’Donnell Spouts 9/11 Conspiracies: ‘First Time in History Fire Has Ever Melted Steel'” by Justin McCarthy (reflection by Rich Noyes) and “Maher Buys Into Claim Sarah Palin’s Baby Son Really Her Grandson” by Brent Baker. Check out the last video of NewsBusters’ Tim Graham and Kyle Drennen remembering some of the top posts on journalistic Obamagasms.

Here is the original post:
NewsBusters 5th Anniversary: A Look Back at Some of Our Top Posts of Outrageous Media Outbursts

Robert Reich Falsely Accuses Newt Gingrich Of Saying ‘Muslims Are Like Nazis’

Robert Reich on Sunday falsely accused former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich of saying Muslims are like Nazis. As NewsBusters reported last Monday, Gingrich was quoted by the New York Times as saying that building a mosque at Ground Zero “would be like putting a Nazi sign next to the Holocaust Museum.” Gingrich elaborated on “Fox & Friends” that very morning: Nazis don’t have the right to put up a sign next to the Holocaust Museum in Washington. We would never accept the Japanese putting up a site next to Pearl Harbor. There’s no reason for us to accept a mosque next to the World Trade Center. Unfortunately during the Roundtable segment of ABC’s “This Week,” Reich claimed without challenge that Gingrich said, “Muslims are like Nazis” (video follows with transcript and commentary, file photo):  ROBERT REICH: But the upsurge in kind of Islamophobia, George, cannot be explained by anything, it seems to me, other than a kind of intolerance that is fed by — I don’t want to say this, don’t want to believe it — but it seems to me the same kind of intolerance that is feeding the anti-immigrant fever in the United States. It comes from a deep-seated fear and anxiety in Americans right now that is rooted, in turn, in the economy. I mean, people are ready to believe Newt Gingrich when he says that the Muslims are like Nazis. That’s outrageous. Actually, what’s outrageous, Bob, is that you would make such a false accusation on national television and nobody would call you out on it. Gingrich did not say that Muslims are like Nazis. He said that allowing a mosque at the site where thousands of innocent Americans were senselessly murdered by radical Islamists would be like allowing the Nazis to put a sign next to the Holocaust Museum. That you would not only misinterpret this as a comparison of all Muslims to Nazis but also say it on national television is the height of intellectual dishonesty, and you should be ashamed of yourself. 

Read this article:
Robert Reich Falsely Accuses Newt Gingrich Of Saying ‘Muslims Are Like Nazis’

Oksana Hires Former Prosecutor, ABC News Correspondent

Filed under: Oksana Grigorieva , Mel Gibson , Mary Fulginiti , Celebrity Justice TMZ has learned

Ex-Dem Aide Stephanopoulos and Ex-Dem Congressman Discuss Impact NY Mosque Will Have on Democrats

Rather than focus on the rightness of building a mosque near Ground Zero, or investigating the potential funding of the construction, Good Morning America’s George Stephanopoulos on Tuesday spent an entire interview with Harold Ford Jr. focusing on how it could damage the Democratic Party. Stephanopoulos began the segment by asserting, “They really hope this goes away at the White House. ” Talking to the former Democratic Congressman, the GMA co-host highlighted Barack Obama’s comments on the issue and speculated, “But, is this something that’s going to linger through November or go away with- once everyone’s back from Labor Day break?” Stephanopoulos zeroed in on the political ramifications, wondering, “And, Harold, I know you think that the President did the right thing on this issue, has the right position. But did he do it in the right way?” Highlighting the mosque and other potential problems for the Democrats, Stephanopoulos closed by quizzing, “Put the campaign hat back on. How do you run as a Democrat in this environment?” To recap, Stephanopoulos, a former Democratic operative, interviewed a former Democratic Congressman about the impact this issue could have on the Democratic Party. A transcript of the August 17 segment, which aired at 7:07am EDT, follows: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: They really hope this goes away at the White House . Thank you, John. For more on this, we’re joined by former Congressman Harold Ford, now chairman of the Democratic Leadership Council and the author of a new book, More Davids Than Goliaths: A Political Education. Excellent title. Thanks for joining us this morning. HAROLD FORD JR.: Thanks for having me. STEPHANOPOULOS: And, Harold, I know you think that the President did the right thing on this issue, has the right position. But did he do it in the right way? FORD: He probably could have spoke more artfully the first day and more clearly. STEPHANOPOULOS: How so? FORD: I think that- Well, if he believed that there’s a right to build, but perhaps it should not build in that location, he probably should have just said that. I think the follow-up has created some confusion. And probably will create some consternation in political circles within the party. Harry Reid announcing his opposition to building the cultural center- it’s interesting. The terms of the debate has been defined by the other side- It’s not a mosque, but a cultural center that’s going to be built- has now said that he’s opposed to building it there. What looks like could happen, George, is a consensus could build around maybe building it a few blocks away- moving the construction of the cultural center or the locating of the locating of the center, a few blocks from where they have planned it now. It might be- STEPHANOPOULOS: You know, there was a rumor yesterday, that that came up. That the leaders of the Senate were thinking about that. It was first reported in Israeli press, but they came out and said no way. Would that take the issue off the table for Democrats now? FORD: Well, it might. If you take Reid at the core of what he’s saying. He saying, “I support it, but just not there.” So, you might be able to find some agreement around it. I think Mayor Bloomberg will obviously play a lead role in brokering this. He’s been such a staunch- and I think had the right position on this. Not only for New York, and for the country. If you can’t build this in Manhattan and New York City, if we can’t foster a center, build a center that fosters conversation about tolerance and understanding, here, where else can you do it? What better place to do it? But, it may be that the politics have gotten so intense, that you may have to consider moving this, just a few blocks away. Perhaps you can find Democrat, Republican, liberal support for this. STEPHANOPOULOS: How big a deal do you think this issue is? I mean, obviously, you saw the President’s opponents pounce hard over the weekend, which is part of the reason he seemed to backtrack on Saturday. You see Reid breaking away from it. But, is this something that’s going to linger through November or go away with- once everyone’s back from Labor Day break? FORD: Well, jobs and the economy are foremost in people’s minds. This is, in lot of ways, a distraction. Not that it’s not an important issue. But it’s a distraction in that regard. But, as you and I know in politics, these kind of distractions can define campaigns in the last eight weeks. New York City, we are approaching the anniversary of 9/11. Obviously, from what I hear, Newt Gingrich and others plan to speak that day at the sight, where the cultural center is planned to be built or plan to be located. It certainly will- Politics will certainly be around this until election day. I think Reid’s comments yesterday opened the door for all Senate candidates to be asked about this- STEPHANOPOULOS: And break with the President most likely. FORD: Exactly. Reid has given his colleagues and those running for office covert in saying that we sport the right to build. But this may not be the place to build. STEPHANOPOULOS: Put your old campaign hat back on. You ran for Senate back 2006 and write about it in More Davids Than Goliaths. This is a tough, tough environment for Democrats right now. You’ve got this job situation, high unemployment. You’ve got ethics problems. You’ve got the former chairman of the Ways and Means committee, Charlie Rangel, Maxine Waters facing trial in the House. Now you’ve got this issue. Put the campaign hat back on. How do you run as a Democrat in this environment? FORD: I think Democrats, when they return in the fall, and I talk about this in the book, when I ran for leader in 2002, about how the message has got to lead. I think the tax cuts should be extended. Make the middle-class ones permanent. Phase in the top level. I think, two, I think you- STEPHANOPOULOS: So, break with the President on that? FORD: Well, the President’s given some wiggle room there. He has indicated that he’d like to make these middle-class rates permanent. But, I do- I have some different opinions about some of the other rates, particularly the business rates.  I don’t think you out to add more uncertainty to the marketplace now, particularly for any size business. Two, take some of the unused stimulus and apply it to deficit reduction, to apply projects, infrastructure projects that are read to be moved on. And, finally, I think you have got to come out with some of the deficit reductions of that commission right away. If raising the retirement age is on the table, if there’s consensus with Simpson Bowles, you got to be willing to do that for people under 45, including myself STEPHANOPOULOS: So, get spending- Okay, Harold Ford. Thanks very much.

More here:
Ex-Dem Aide Stephanopoulos and Ex-Dem Congressman Discuss Impact NY Mosque Will Have on Democrats

Hollywood Ink: No Ding-Dong For Hugh Jackman

Also today in Hollywood Ink: Hangover screenwriters go back to the drunken well (twice)… Robert De Niro may go back to Italy… A Sundance darling walks out on its distributor… and more.

Continue reading here:
Hollywood Ink: No Ding-Dong For Hugh Jackman

TV Bites: The Office Goes to China

Also in this morning’s TV Bites: Are We There Yet? will be around for a long time… an Entourage star heads to 90210 … ABC won’t yank the football away from Charlie Brown… and more ahead.

Link:
TV Bites: The Office Goes to China

Hype-brids: Networks Tout Green Vehicles, But Americans Buy Four Times as Many SUVs

If news outlets were fueled by bias, then ABC, CBS, and NBC would be Hummers. Over the past two years, the media have declared Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs) “dying” while celebrating the popularity of hybrid cars. Americans disagree. Data from Edmunds.com showed SUV market share has grown or remained stable whereas hybrid market share has declined. In July 2010 alone, SUVs outsold hybrids 4 to one. When gas prices were high in summer 2008, the media eagerly reported the demise of the SUV and wrote its epitaph, as CBS News’s Hattie Kauffman eloquently did on May 26, 2008: “Here lies the mighty sport utility vehicle, once a symbol of status and power, now collecting dust.” From July 2009 to July 2010, total SUV sales increased by 38.9 percent whereas hybrid sales have decreased by 32.7 percent. Large SUV sales alone have increased by nearly 40 percent. Yet back in 2008, the three networks all paid their respects to the “dying” SUV, with ABC’s Chris Cuomo jumping on the hybrid bandwagon before the SUVs body was even cold: “Everybody’s trying to sell their SUV, want to get into one of these new jobs, you know, the smart car, the hybrid, the high-mileage type vehicles, all these alternative cars.” The “everybody” Cuomo mentioned must only have included the hybrid owners and not the SUV owners. Despite the overwhelming numbers, since June 2008, the Business & Media Institute discovered the networks’ covered hybrid cars three to one over SUVs. Specifically, there were more stories about the Toyota Prius (37) than on the top 5 best-selling SUVs combined (24). Still, back in 2008 network reporters such as ABC News’s David Muir predicted a green upheaval as he erroneously reported on the SUVs demise. “American carmakers are looking for a revolution, too. The gas guzzlers so popular yesterday are no longer popular today,” Muir said on July 20, 2008. The only “guzzlers” are the media members who continually drink the liberal Kool Aid. In May 2008, the first month of high gas prices, hybrid models had 2.52 percent market share. The hybrid model market share in May 2010, two years into the “revolution:” 2.52 percent. Those numbers didn’t stop CBS’s Anthony Mason from ushering in the “electric era” on the April 1, 2010 CBS “Evening News:” “Well, it’s a real challenge, but Katie, we are at the dawn of the electric era,” Mason declared. That “dawn” may not be rising as fast as Mason hoped. According to the Market Data Center , the best selling vehicle in the month of July was the Ford F150, a pickup truck. Fortunately, for Kauffman, Muir, and Mason, as their network ratings crumble , there are plenty of “gas guzzling” SUVs around to carry their remains. Volt and Prius: A Media Love Story Despite pedestrian sales numbers and recalls, reporters at the big three networks continue channeling their inner Billy Mays, turning their segments into infomercials for eco-friendly cars. The media’s favorite green cars have been the new Chevy Volt and the Toyota Prius. The networks aired nearly twice as many Volt stories (42) as they aired on the top five selling SUVs combined (24). Further proof of network favoritism: Ford F150’s have outsold the Prius nearly three to one, yet the networks have covered the Prius over the F150 three to one (37 to 12). The Prius has established itself as an environmental symbol thanks to the media hyping its popularity with the liberal Hollywood elite, as CBS reporter Ben Tracy did on Feb. 11, 2010. Tracy interviewed actors Penelope Cruz and Orlando Bloom and concluded Hollywood star power “helped make the Prius a household name.” Being outsold three to one by a “gas guzzler” is an awfully big amount for a “household name.” The Chevy Volt, a plug-in electric car expected to hit the market in November, has also been popular with the media. Both NBC “Today” host Matt Lauer and CBS’s Mason took test rides in the Volt, with Lauer being the first non-GM person to actually drive it. Additionally, all three networks hyped the Volt in their coverage of the 2009 and 2010 Detroit International Auto Shows, nearly two years before the Volt was even expected to hit the market. Recently, some in the media were outraged when GM announced the Volt would be priced at $41,000. Of course, when challenged about the price in a July 29 press conference, Ron Bloom, Obama’s senior advisor to the Treasury Secretary for automobiles, distanced the government from GM. “We do not tell GM what to charge for cars,” Bloom said. “Most kinds of new technology are expensive.” Unlike batteries, which require positive and negative charges to work, the government only operates on positive charges, such as the positives touted by Obama in his July 30 visit to Michigan, but dismisses negative charges. The Obama Administration found plenty of positive charge in the network news reports, as all three networks praised Obama’s July 30 visit to GM where he test rode the Volt. ABC’s Karen Travers called it a “victory lap” and NBC’s Savannah Guthrie echoed Obama’s remarks that the “American auto industry [is] resurrected from the dead.” Since summer 2008, only ABC and NBC interviewed analysts skeptical of the green car business model. NBC’s Phil LeBeau interviewed Standard and Poor Equity analyst Efraim Levy on May 6, 2009, where Levy noted smaller, green cars would result in smaller profits but larger losses. “Smaller cars have smaller price tags. So, therefore, you have less room to make the profits, and if a car’s not successful, the losses are even more painful,” Levy said. Case in point: the 1997 GM EV1, which was named one of Time magazine’s ‘ Worst Cars of All Time. ‘ The EV1, GM’s first attempt at an electric car, flopped due to disappointing battery power and a lack of demand . The EV1 retailed at $34,000, cost GM $80,000 per vehicle, and ultimately GM lost $2 billion on the EV1 program. The $2 billion is more than the $1.3 billion second quarter profit GM recently reported. Instead of the SUV, the GM EV1 is now the vehicle “collecting dust.” Cart Before the Horse On April 1, 2010, the big three network news broadcasts fooled their viewers with reports on fuel emission standards. ABC, CBS, and NBC evening news shows each aired stories about the new fuel emissions standards, which had been based on the 2007 Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) rules and championed by the Obama Administration. According to the new standards, by model year 2016 all cars and light trucks must average 35.5 miles per gallon. ABC and CBS sandwiched their reports between stories on – you guessed it – Toyota and the Volt, whereas NBC’s Lee Cowan devoted a full two minute report on the new standards. He actually noted the cost of lowering emissions will trickle down to the consumer: “But reaching that new efficiency level does come with a price, an estimated $52 million for car manufacturers to be paid by the consumer. About $1,000 per car may be added on to the sticker price,” Cowan reported. But Cowan still encouraged viewers to buy a green car, saying it will save them money in the long run: “Now, Brian, although these new cars will cost a little bit more, the government says that will be more than offset by your savings in fuel, they’re saying about $3,000 over the course of that new environmentally-friendly vehicle.” Cowan’s report was misleading. A 2006 study by Kiplinger’s Personal Finance Magazine discovered that of the top seven hybrids, only the Prius will save you money over five years compared to a non-hybrid vehicle. According to the study, three out of the seven hybrids will cost you over $3,000 more, the amount the government claims you’ll save. Myron Ebell, director of energy and global warming policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a free market think tank, told BMI he thinks the new fuel emission standards will lead to more dire consequences than just hitting consumers’ pockets. “I think automakers will go bankrupt again,” Ebell said. “In order to meet the new standards, big cars will become expensive and they’re going to have to sell a lot of small cars. Detroit automakers have never figured out how to make a profit on small cars.” Ebell added that the 2007 CAFE standards “foreshadowed” the auto bailouts and that the bailouts have turned Chrysler and GM into “creatures of the Obama Administration.’ “The automakers are in worse shape than had they gone into bankruptcy,” Ebell said. “Bankruptcy would have broken the worst part of the union contract and they [GM and Chrysler] wouldn’t have to answer to the government.” Only ABC News interviewed anyone challenging the government’s boat-without-a-paddle auto policy and its relation to energy standards. On Jan. 11, 2009, ABC’s Bianna Golodryga interviewed Jean Jennings, editor-in-chief of Automobile magazine: “The government is on the wrong track because they are dictating fuel economy without an energy policy,” Jennings said. “And yet, they are forcing the car companies to spend billions of dollars in development costs for a technology that might be way ahead of what people want.” Yet the networks didn’t challenge the Obama Administration’s fuel emission demands for the auto industry. Ironically, for three networks that won’t cover SUVs, they’ve become SUVs for Obama’s auto plan: Steadily Urging Victory. End of the Road In “Home Improvement,” Tim “The Tool Man” Taylor often shouted “more power!” For the media, it’s worth shouting “less bias.” With SUVs alive and well, the network news shows remain committed to promoting green cars and cheerleading the Obama Administration’s auto policies. According to Michael LaFaive, director of the Morley Fiscal Policy Initiative at The Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a free market think tank, Obama’s auto praises are played out in the media like a “Rooseveltian victory lap.” “There’s no ribbon cutting ceremony for tax cuts like there is for opening a new battery factory,” LaFaive said. “The government has nothing to sell this as a way to stimulate demand.” Despite the unfavorable media coverage, SUVs are still in demand and rather than collecting dust, they’re making hybrids eat their dust. Methodology The Business & Media Institute examined news stories from ABC, CBS, and NBC from June 1, 2008, through July 15, 2010. June 1, 2008, was selected because it was after Memorial Day and in the thick of the high summer 2008 gas prices. BMI also examined the three evening news stories from Friday, July 30, 2010, the day Obama visited the Volt assembly plant in Michigan. Final numbers included 69 stories on hybrid vehicles and 19 on SUVs. Based on the June sales from AOL Autos, the top five best selling SUVs are the Chevy Traverse, Chevy Equinox, Toyota RAV4, Ford Escape, and Honda CR-V. Only stories longer than 100 words were counted. Recall stories were excluded because they focused on consumer safety as opposed to the actual cars. Data was provided courtesy of Edmunds.com, HybridCars.com, The Wall Street Journal Market Data Center and AOL Autos. Like this article? Then sign up for our newsletter, The Balance Sheet .

Read the original post:
Hype-brids: Networks Tout Green Vehicles, But Americans Buy Four Times as Many SUVs