[Rhodes22-list] Political- media bias in reporting exposed... a failure to think things thru

Michael D. Weisner mweisner at ebsmed.com
Fri Jun 27 09:32:54 EDT 2008 

Herb,

Thank you.  I plan to frame this message.

Mike
s/v Shanghaid'd Summer ('81)
       Nissequogue River, NY

From: "Herb Parsons" <hparsons at parsonsys.com>Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 
4:00 AM
> You're right, I missed that point.
>
> Michael D. Weisner wrote:
>> Herb,
>>
>> I believe that you missed the point.  The problem is with Ed's
>> characterization of XOM, not necessarily with the management.  I would
>> rather have the dividends that Ed indicated were being paid out, but I am
>> not unhappy with the decisions of management.
>>
>> Oh yes, I do vote just as every shareholder may.  If I knew how to run 
>> XOM,
>> I doubt that I would be sailing a Rhodes 22.
>>
>> Mike
>> s/v Shanghaid'd Summer ('81)
>>        Nissequogue River, NY
>>
>> From: "Herb Parsons" <hparsons at parsonsys.com>Sent: Thursday, June 26, 
>> 2008
>> 10:26 PM
>>
>>> Mike,
>>>
>>> When that happens, you shareholders are supposed to get together and
>>> VOTE, and make changes. Who do you really WANT to be deciding how the
>>> company is run?
>>>
>>> Michael D. Weisner wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ed,
>>>>
>>>> Without commenting directly on the politics of your post, I wish to set
>>>> the
>>>> record straight as far as the dividend situation with Exxon Mobil
>>>> Corporation.  As an XOM stockholder I find the following to be wholly
>>>> untrue:
>>>>
>>>>     > Now understand what those obscene profits are used for.  Yes, 
>>>> they
>>>> pay
>>>> the
>>>>     > head fellow an obscene salary.  But then they pay all employees
>>>> wages.
>>>> And
>>>>     > they pay something called dividends.  What are those dividends?
>>>> They
>>>> are
>>>>     > payments to the shareholders of Exxon Mobile.
>>>>
>>>> I bought XOM shares in October 2005 for $55/shr with a quarterly 
>>>> dividend
>>>> of
>>>> $0.29.  The price of gas was about $2.50/gal
>>>> (http://www.longislandgasprices.com/retail_price_chart.aspx) here on 
>>>> LI.
>>>> Today, XOM trades for $87/shr (158% of '05) and pays a dividend of 
>>>> $0.40
>>>> (138% of '05)  (it was $0.32 until '07 when it rose to $0.35 and only
>>>> last
>>>> month did it reach $0.40) while the price of gas is $4.399 (176% of 
>>>> '05)!
>>>> The 1Q08 profits were up 17% over '07, $10.9B
>>>> (http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_9121523).  While the stock 
>>>> price
>>>> has
>>>> done well, the huge profits have NOT been distributed to the
>>>> shareholders.
>>>> Where's my cut?
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>> s/v Shanghai'd Summer ('81)
>>>> Nissequogue River, NY
>>>>
>>>> From: "Tootle" <ekroposki at charter.net>Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 7:53
>>>> AM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The author of Brad's Power Line Blog said, "I think it's fair to say
>>>>> that
>>>>> the
>>>>> mainstream media's interest in Iraq has always been driven largely by
>>>>> the
>>>>> opportunity to spin events there in a way that advances a political
>>>>> agenda.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is important to understand what that unstated political agenda is.
>>>>> In
>>>>> my
>>>>> own words I summarize it as the destruction of America.  And those on
>>>>> still
>>>>> on this forum say I am overstating or exaggerating the truth.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let us understand what Obama has said about oil companies.  He has 
>>>>> said
>>>>> several times that an obscene or windfall profits tax is in order.  So
>>>>> what
>>>>> is the result of such a tax?
>>>>>
>>>>> Before you begin to assert that there are a real obscene profits made 
>>>>> by
>>>>> oil
>>>>> companies, that is for example Exxon Mobile, compare their profits 
>>>>> with
>>>>> other businesses.  Let us compare their profits with say, Microsoft. 
>>>>> As
>>>>> I
>>>>> read the numbers, Exxon Mobil is about one third ( 1/3rd ) as much.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now understand what those obscene profits are used for.  Yes, they pay
>>>>> the
>>>>> head fellow an obscene salary.  But then they pay all employees wages.
>>>>> And
>>>>> they pay something called dividends.  What are those dividends?  They
>>>>> are
>>>>> payments to the shareholders of Exxon Mobile.
>>>>>
>>>>> What are shareholders?  Those are holders of pieces of paper who say
>>>>> that
>>>>> they are owners, stakeholders in that obscene company.  And who are
>>>>> those
>>>>> noxious owners of shares of Exxon Mobile?
>>>>> Well, some are people, individuals, and members of this forum.  Others
>>>>> are
>>>>> mutual funds, retirement funds and other companies.
>>>>>
>>>>> And who are these salubrious mutual funds and retirement funds?  Well
>>>>> both
>>>>> are groups of individuals, people like on this forum who have gotten
>>>>> together and put their earnings from working into a collective fund 
>>>>> that
>>>>> purchases equities (aka stocks) for building a supply of money that 
>>>>> can
>>>>> be
>>>>> used later to pay for retirement.
>>>>>
>>>>> Simply put the obscene earnings that Obama wants nationalized are
>>>>> savings
>>>>> by
>>>>> working people like most on this list.
>>>>>
>>>>> And what will be the result of such action by Obama and his cohorts? 
>>>>> It
>>>>> will be the weakening of companies so penalized.  It could even 
>>>>> destroy
>>>>> those companies.  What would destruction of those companies mean?
>>>>>
>>>>> It would wipe out parts of mutual funds and retirement accounts.  All
>>>>> that
>>>>> those people (you people) have worked for and saved for wiped out!
>>>>>
>>>>> And are there others who own stock in these companies?  Yes, foreign
>>>>> investors own stock in American companies.  And they do so because 
>>>>> those
>>>>> companies have been shown to be stable and secure investments of
>>>>> capital.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you harm American companies or as Maxine Waters wants to do,
>>>>> nationalize
>>>>> them, what effect will that have on foreign investments?  The value of
>>>>> “ALL”
>>>>> American companies will become suspect and foreign investors will go
>>>>> elsewhere.  This would result in the value destruction of “ALL” mutual
>>>>> funds
>>>>> and failure of retirement accounts to pay retirees.
>>>>>
>>>>> And why do socialist want to do this?  The failure of the American
>>>>> economic
>>>>> system would make you all  wards of the state.  This result would give
>>>>> the
>>>>> state power over all.  This religion would make them Gods on earth.
>>>>>
>>>>> My analylsis shows that Obama and his socialist friends and fellow
>>>>> travelers
>>>>> are despots, false gods or simply agents of Satan trying to enslave 
>>>>> you
>>>>> all.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ed K
>>>>> Greenville, SC, USA
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Brad Haslett-2 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Say it ain't so!  Brad
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (from PowerLine)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> War Coverage Fades Away
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The New York
>>>>>> Times<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/23/business/media/23logan.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin>confirms
>>>>>> what we've all observed: as violence in Iraq recedes, our news
>>>>>> outlets take less interest in events there:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> According to data compiled by Andrew Tyndall, a television consultant
>>>>>> who
>>>>>> monitors the three network evening newscasts, coverage of Iraq has 
>>>>>> been
>>>>>> "massively scaled back this year." Almost halfway into 2008, the 
>>>>>> three
>>>>>> newscasts have shown 181 weekday minutes of Iraq coverage, compared
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> 1,157 minutes for all of 2007. The "CBS Evening News" has devoted the
>>>>>> fewest
>>>>>> minutes to Iraq, 51, versus 55 minutes on ABC's "World News" and 74
>>>>>> minutes
>>>>>> on "NBC Nightly News." (The average evening newscast is 22 minutes
>>>>>> long.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> CBS News no longer stations a single full-time correspondent in Iraq,
>>>>>> where
>>>>>> some 150,000 United States troops are deployed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suppose it's understandable, in a way, that coverage would be
>>>>>> "massively
>>>>>> scaled back" when there is less violence to report on. One wonders,
>>>>>> though,
>>>>>> whether the change may be due in part to the fact that network
>>>>>> executives
>>>>>> are more excited about publicizing apparent failure in Iraq than
>>>>>> success
>>>>>> there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The journalists who complained to the Times about their employers' 
>>>>>> lack
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> interest in Iraq and Afghanistan also noted that interest has flagged
>>>>>> among
>>>>>> the American public:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On "The Daily Show," Ms. Logan echoed the comments of other 
>>>>>> journalists
>>>>>> when
>>>>>> she said that many Americans seem uninterested in the wars now. Mr.
>>>>>> McCarthy
>>>>>> said that when he is in the United States, bringing up Baghdad at a
>>>>>> dinner
>>>>>> party "is like a conversation killer."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm afraid that's also true. The conclusion of the Times piece is
>>>>>> revealing,
>>>>>> too:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Journalists at all three American television networks with evening
>>>>>> newscasts
>>>>>> expressed worries that their news organizations would withdraw from 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> Iraqi capital after the November presidential election. They spoke 
>>>>>> only
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> the condition of anonymity in order to avoid offending their 
>>>>>> employers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's interesting that the journalists themselves link their 
>>>>>> employers'
>>>>>> interest in Iraq to the election. I think it's fair to say that the
>>>>>> mainstream media's interest in Iraq has always been driven largely by
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> opportunity to spin events there in a way that advances a political
>>>>>> agenda.
>>>>>> Remember al Qaqaa
>>>>>> <http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2004/10/008280.php>?
>>>>>> That story dominated the news for a week before the 2004 Presidential
>>>>>> election. It was a story of great importance, however, only as long 
>>>>>> as
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> could be used to help John Kerry's Presidential campaign. Once the
>>>>>> election
>>>>>> was over, al Qaqaa was never heard of again. With hindsight, that
>>>>>> episode
>>>>>> might be taken as a paradigm of far too much of the mainstream 
>>>>>> media's
>>>>>> coverage of the war.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:06 AM, Herb Parsons 
>>>>>> <hparsons at parsonsys.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wasn't there talk on here along the lines of most of the troops are
>>>>>>> supporting Obama? I know, I know, check the archives. I would, but
>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>> just not important to me...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tootle wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Recently I received an email about media bias.  I tried to check it
>>>>>>>> out
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> snopes.  They have finally replied:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.snopes.com:80/politics/war/raddatz.asp
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And when these things are done without any way to check things out,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> well
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> that is usually the way it is done by the Liberal Northeast Media
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> types...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ed K
>>>>>>>> Greenville, SC, USA
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go 
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go 
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Political---media-bias-in-reporting-exposed...-tp18071979p18089396.html
>>>>> Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to 
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>> __________________________________________________
>>
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to 
> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
>

More information about the Rhodes22-list mailing list