Was The Telegraph dishonest?

This is a continuation of The Telegraph a Work in Progress.

It is apparent to reasonable people when the President and Publisher of a news publication feels he has to inform the readers that what he is writing is “verifiable facts”,  (Apr. 12, 2009 - Editorial by George McCanless President and Publisher – The Macon Telegraph) the people can assume he knows the publication has a problem.

When we look back at The Telegraph’s so-called news coverage, editorials, opinions and endorsements we feel that we can reasonable form the opinion that they are seriously missing honesty and integrity. It is indisputable that if an individual wants to know what is going on they have to look elsewhere. We know the reader is not going to get the facts and what they need to make informed decisions from The Telegraph.

People are clear on the fact that deception by omission is the same as dishonesty. Most also feel that deceit, dishonesty and slander is the same no matter what page it is located on or what the “Editorial page staffs” call it.  (See “staffs” your “To endorse candidates or not”)

Your “editorial page staffs” has already informed the reader as to their position on the First Amendment. We are told that “The constitution does not address, directly or by implication, how to ‘report the news,’ with or without bias.” Most certainly a reasonable person will infer that this applies to the “editorial page staffs” as well as the news staff. (See editor’s note, The Telegraph – Friday, May 15, 2009)

During the last administration they had plenty of space to label Condoleezza Rice and others in that administration, liars, etc. 

Also noted are other things, which if taken individually might not mean anything, however when taken together, they began to form a pattern.

We ask, if The Telegraph can not cover such things as the following just how are they going to endorse candidates with a meaningful endorsement? But then perhaps they do not consider the following to be a need to know.

A few examples of what has been completely ignored are:

·        “Obama’s relationship with the group ACORN” (Association of Community Organizations for Reform)

·        ACORN is under investigation in several states for criminal activity

·        Obama served as the lead attorney for ACORN.

·        According to Federal election records the Obama campaign paid ACORN subsidiary, Citizens Services Inc. $832,598, of which $80,000 went directly to ACORN.

·        “The FBI and Department of Justice opened an investigation. (into ACORN) However, the Obama Justice Department, while noting that ACORN had engaged in ‘questionable hiring and training practices,’ closed down the investigation in March 2009, claiming ACORN broke no laws” (from Tom Fitton Judicial Watch)

·        Obama’s relationship with 1960’s radical William Ayers. Ayers hosted a coffee in 1995 for the purpose of introducing Obama to some local political players.

·        Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC) documents shows that Ayers and Obama chaired two CAC operating bodies from 1995 to 2000.

·        Nancy Pelosi of California and how the CIA lied to her

·        Obama’s Chicago style politics “They bring a Knife, I’ll Bring a gun.”

·        Sen. Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut and his ethics problems

·        Fast and Furious – This is the gun running program of this administration. At the present the House is holding hearings about this.

·        The death of two federal agents and the fact that weapons from the above is linked to the death scene.

Or maybe The Telegraph thought reports on some of the above might lead to connections with articles pertaining to Obama’s health care.  Such as your “Health-care insurers’ profits up 56 percent in ‘09”. 

Most Reasonable people could have serious doubts about this article when they discovered it was a product of “Health Care for America Now”. When the facts are pointed out that this organization included the Unions, ACORN and others in bed with Obama, they just might conclude the article was nothing more than a shill for the Obama administration.

The response of people  will be interesting  when they get all the facts surrounding your “Health-care insurers’ profits up 56 percent in ‘09” (Tribune Washington Bureau) when the people know the full story about “Health Care for America Now”. We think that the reader should be aware that a number one source of information is AP (Associated Press). We are sure the reader will be interested in the fact that in a recent AP article titled , “’Health Insurers’ Profits Not So Fat” they pointed out: “Health insurance profit margins typically run about 6 percent, give or take a point or two. That's anemic compared with other forms of insurance and a broad array of industries, even some beleaguered ones.”

The AP went on to point out that Health-care insurers’ “Profits barely exceeded 2 percent of revenues in the latest annual measure.”

This is a gigantic difference from your “profits up 56 percent in ‘09”. We think The Telegraph’s deception is evident.

When a letter pointed out a list of things most people considered important which The Telegraph has not covered, the reader was informed on 12/17/09 that: “The Telegraph is carrying less national and international news because it has had to reduce its number of pages this year. Naturally, we try to focus on events and issues in Middle Georgia with the space we have now.”  There were similar comments to another letter.  (Editors note 12/28/2009)

Then it was business as usual. It is amazing; the staff of The Telegraph seems to have an excuse for everything.

Have a nice day.