Why Is PBS Using Frank Luntz To Evaluate Democratic Candidates

[EV_Ares]

Today Media Matters for America released the following statement in response to a release issued this morning by Neal Kendall, executive producer of PBS’ Tavis Smiley, regarding concerns over the announced involvement of Republican pollster Frank Luntz in PBS’ upcoming forum for Democratic presidential candidates:

David Brock, President and CEO of Media Matters:

“While Media Matters for America is pleased with PBS’ announcement this morning that discredited Republican pollster Frank Luntz will not appear on its Thursday-night programming, PBS has yet to address the fundamental problem with its choice of Luntz to participate in analysis of the PBS forum.

“Luntz’s Republican ties, his history of being criticized by his peers for misrepresenting polling data, and his past personal and professional affiliation with GOP presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani make him an inappropriate choice to provide the sole voice of expert analysis on Mr. Smiley’s program in the wake of a Democratic presidential primary forum. The fact that PBS has not acknowledged Luntz’s partisan affiliation — either in its original press release or in today’s statement — makes PBS’ use of him in this way all the more troubling.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/06/29/ask-pbs-why-theyre-using-frank-luntz-to-evaluate-democratic-candidates/

[Ron Green]

1. Their sponsors (Wal*Mart, ADM and Chevron) told them to.

[Gabi Hayes]

2. Luntz himself NAILED Smiley on his Walmart connection, in an

interview between them several months ago

there's a transcript of it, in which Luntz deconstructs Smiley's body language, expression, etc., demonstrating his considerable skills as a "demographer". priceless

no wonder he gets his focus groups to say just what he wants them to say

[MagickMuffin]

4. Transcript here:

http://www.pbs.org/kcet/tavissmiley/archive/200702/20070207_luntz.html

And here's the part about Wally-Mart:

Luntz: And there are arguments, there are very good economic arguments, and I'm a language guy, I'm not an academic. So I'm not gonna engage you in the debate over the minimum wage. But I do know that the American people don't accept how people, how CEOs can make the money they can make at the same time that they're laying off workers, not treating their customers as pleasantly as they should be, and not even responding to shareholders.

At the same time, they're making 20 or 30 or $50 million dollars, and people – and Wal-Mart’s the best example of this – people aren’t making more than a few dollars above minimum wage, and they can’t get healthcare benefits, they get no job security, and they don't even know which hours they're gonna work. Wal-Mart is an example of where corporate America’s gone too far.

We need freedom, we need the free market system, which, by the way, communicates better than Capitalism. Capitalism says there are winners and losers. The free market system says that everyone at least has an opportunity to succeed. But Wal-Mart is an example of Capitalism. And to help their customers, they’ve hurt their employees. And I don't think that’s right.

Tavis: Wal-Mart, my full disclosure, is a sponsor of this program. No, no, no…

Luntz: Now you tell me.

Tavis: No, no, no, (laugh) you…

Luntz: You guys can’t see this, but there are guns that are coming out…

Tavis: No, no, no, no, no.

Luntz: …from the crew people over here.

Tavis: You gotta always stand on your truth, and speak truth to power. That’s not what this program’s all about. I only raise that because – not defending Wal-Mart, because I know what they would say. I've heard it and read it, you know as well as I do. What Wal-Mart would say is that, “We are giving people an opportunity to work. When we come into these depressed communities, there are no jobs. We help to give people an opportunity to,” you know the spiel.

Luntz: And more power to you for doing it. That’s a great thing that they do. I believe that Wal-Mart gives people the chance to buy goods and services that they need at affordable prices. But they have such a high profit, surely they could afford healthcare for their workers.

Tavis: We’ll move off the Wal-Mart thing. Let’s go from Wal-Mart to…

Luntz: I just caused you an awful lot of trouble, didn’t I?

Tavis: No, not at all. No problem at all. You think that’s the first time I've heard a criticism of Wal-Mart (laugh)? That’s not the first time.

Luntz: No, but you did unbutton your jacket. And as someone who’s…

Tavis: No, my jacket was already unbuttoned.

Luntz: As an observer, when you start to shift in your chair, you know that you’ve done – when you said to me, "surge," you saw me go off my chair. When I said, "Wal-Mart," I could see your eyes going (laugh), "Oh my God, why did I have him on the show?"

Tavis: Not at all, not at all. I was surging by moving in my seat 'cause I'm anxious to get to, before these two minutes run out, these names I wanna throw at you. George Bush. Apparently, he and Rove had it right for a long time. What went wrong? Was it just the language, or was it public policy?

[Gabi Hayes]

7. yep, thanks, and is this a misprint, or a Freudian slip? HAAAAAAAA

Tavis: You gotta always stand on your truth, and speak truth to power. That’s not what this program’s all about.

[MagickMuffin]

12. I noticed that also

Did he mean just on that program or ALL his programs?!?!?:shrug:

Tavis, you got some 'splain to do....

[Captain Hilts]

3. Because PBS is now run by right-wing zealots like Tomlinson. nt

[xchrom]

5. why? -- because in more ways than you and i can see --

the ''game'' is rigged.

every year since reagan there are a whole bunch of social conservatives, economic conservatives, free marketeers, etc working towards mutually agreed goals.

[Gabi Hayes]

6. why? because the right wing+corporate media WANT her to win.

Luntz's focus group will show that 27 or 30 of the 33 people in his group thought Hillary won the debate.

isn't that convenient?

they KNOW that somebody like Hillary, who polls show that over FIFTY PERCENT will NEVER, EVER vote for her, can NOT win

they know that, just as they see that Obama and Edwards are both doing very well head to head against all of their "top" candidates

how stupid do they think we are

Frank LUNTZ, of all people?

the most cynical hack since Josef Goebbels?

[Gold Metal Flake]

8. Gwen Ifill Does Not Want You To Ask About That.

See here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1210885

[Gabi Hayes]

9. either does Tavis, who lied his ass off about it. Ifill doesn't like MM because

they caught her letting the competitive enterprise institute's anti-Gore commercial run on the Newshour without mentioning that it was produced by a conservative entity



PBS' Ifill failed to identify Competitive Enterprise Institute as conservative, energy industry-funded


Summary: In a segment on Al Gore's global warming campaign, PBS' Gwen Ifill noted that "critics have called Gore 'alarmist,' " before airing a clip of an ad produced by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), which she identified only as a "Washington think tank." But Ifill did not mention that CEI is a conservative institution largely funded by the energy industry, which has a financial stake in opposing policies that seek to combat climate change.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200605250007

[Gold Metal Flake]

11. You've been posting a lot this evening.

I like it! :toast:

[Adsos Letter]

10. Why...?

...probably for the same reason they are getting ready to run a revisionist and distorted program on US Church/State separation.

http://religionclause.blogspot.com/2007/06/pbs-church-state-documentary-questioned.html