• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Media Matters breaking the law in its 'war' on Fox News?

ReverendHellh0und

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,903
Reaction score
20,983
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Is Media Matters breaking the law in its 'war' on Fox News?Media Matters, the George Soros-backed legion of liberal agit-prop shock troops based in the nation's capital, has declared war on Fox News, and in the process quite possibly stepped across the line of legality.

David Brock, MM's founder, was quoted Saturday by Politico promising that his organization is mounting "guerrila warfare and sabotage" against Fox News, which he said "is not a news organization. It is the de facto leader of the GOP, and it is long past time that it is treated as such by the media, elected officials and the public.”

To that end, Brock told Politico that MM will “focus on [News Corp. CEO Rupert] Murdoch and trying to disrupt his commercial interests ..." Murdoch is the founder of Fox News and a media titan with newspaper, broadcast, Internet and other media countries around the world.

There is nothing in the Politico article to suggest that Brock, who was paid just under $300,000 in 2009, according to the group's most recently available tax return, plans to ask the IRS to change his organization's tax status as a 501(C)(3) tax-exempt educational foundation.

Being a C3 puts MM in the non-profit, non-commercial sector, and it also bars the organzation from participating in partisan political activity. This new, more aggressive stance, however, appears to run directly counter to the government's requirements for maintaining a C3 tax status.

Since Brock classifies Fox News as the "leader" of the Republican Party, by his own description he is involving his organization in a partisan battle. High-priced K Street lawyers can probably find a federal judge or a sympathetic IRS bureaucrat willing to either look the other way or accept some sort of MM rationale such as that it is merely providing educational information about a partisan group.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: Is Media Matters breaking the law in its 'war' on Fox News? | Mark Tapscott | Beltway Confidential | Washington Examiner
Click to expand...



I say yes, as a 501c3 it should not be engaged in political warfare. We all know this soros backed non-profit is really nothing more than a left wing attack machine, bent on out of context snipping of anything it disagrees with.

It's war on fox, is not only abhorrent, but illegal.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I say yes, as a 501c3 it should not be engaged in political warfare. We all know this soros backed non-profit is really nothing more than a left wing attack machine, bent on out of context snipping of anything it disagrees with.

It's war on fox, is not only abhorrent, but illegal.
Click to expand...

Wow, can you imagine all of the media outfits and think tanks that would be decertified if the government really enforced this? Anything from the heritage foundation to move on would suddenly have to pay taxes.
 
megaprogman said:
Wow, can you imagine all of the media outfits and think tanks that would be decertified if the government really enforced this? Anything from the heritage foundation to move on would suddenly have to pay taxes.
Click to expand...


Budget crisis solved... :thumbs:



Does heritage activaly wage war against a news organization? I don't know... :shrug:



Move on is another media matters soros front group.
 
Last edited:
I'd be in favor of it. Free speech doesn't include freedom from paying taxes like everyone else. Naturally, media matters if hardly the only partisan organization and the same standard should be applied to any other 503c's of the same vein.
 
rathi said:
I'd be in favor of it. Free speech doesn't include freedom from paying taxes like everyone else. Naturally, media matters if hardly the only partisan organization and the same standard should be applied to any other 503c's of the same vein.
Click to expand...



Agreed...........
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I say yes, as a 501c3 it should not be engaged in political warfare. We all know this soros backed non-profit is really nothing more than a left wing attack machine, bent on out of context snipping of anything it disagrees with.

It's war on fox, is not only abhorrent, but illegal.
Click to expand...

Is Fox News breaking the law by calling itself a news station? I think so.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I say yes, as a 501c3 it should not be engaged in political warfare. We all know this soros backed non-profit is really nothing more than a left wing attack machine, bent on out of context snipping of anything it disagrees with.

It's war on fox, is not only abhorrent, but illegal.
Click to expand...

Ok so let me get this straight. MM is going after Fox News claiming they are a defeacto arm of the GOP. MM is also trying to achieve tax exempt status under 501c3 which would effectively ban MM from engaging in political activity. Per the first sentence in your initial post: "I say yes, as a 501c3 it should not be engaged in political warfare. We...". Should I assumed that you DO believe that FOX News is in fact a political organization then?
 
Fox news like any other news outlet has it's time for news and time for it's commentators which those segments can be political, satire or whatever, it's the opinion part of the show and not necessarily the opinion of Fox or whomever is the media outlet maybe. To openly declare war on a law abiding citizen news outlet, company or whatever should be taken seriously. By what means does MM intend to declare war, will it be by legal or illegal means or both. Attempting to stifle free speech because one doesn't like what they are hearing should themselves be shut down.
 
People are so caught up in this they don't see the failure of logic:
Since Brock classifies Fox News as the "leader" of the Republican Party, by his own description he is involving his organization in a partisan battle. High-priced K Street lawyers can probably find a federal judge or a sympathetic IRS bureaucrat willing to either look the other way or accept some sort of MM rationale such as that it is merely providing educational information about a partisan group.
Click to expand...

It's only Brock classing Fox as the leader of the GOP, as it says, it's his own description, not a legal one, it's not breaking the law, unless Fox is the leader of the GOP.
 
deltabtry said:
Fox news like any other news outlet has it's time for news and time for it's commentators which those segments can be political, satire or whatever, it's the opinion part of the show and not necessarily the opinion of Fox or whomever is the media outlet maybe. To openly declare war on a law abiding citizen news outlet, company or whatever should be taken seriously. By what means does MM intend to declare war, will it be by legal or illegal means or both. Attempting to stifle free speech because one doesn't like what they are hearing should themselves be shut down.
Click to expand...

It is impossible for a private organization to stifle the free speech of another unless they do something like make illegal threats. Everything else is just the market doing what it does.
 
deltabtry said:
Fox news like any other news outlet has it's time for news and time for it's commentators which those segments can be political, satire or whatever, it's the opinion part of the show and not necessarily the opinion of Fox or whomever is the media outlet maybe. To openly declare war on a law abiding citizen news outlet, company or whatever should be taken seriously. By what means does MM intend to declare war, will it be by legal or illegal means or both. Attempting to stifle free speech because one doesn't like what they are hearing should themselves be shut down.
Click to expand...

Ok.... I cannot disagree that any business should be discouraged from inhibiting another business's right to do business (or for that manner the Owner, Director,CEO, etc...). But, this "declaration of war" is simply rhetoric unless you honestly believe that MM is trying to storm Murdoch's house with guns blazing (and lets face it no one believes that). So, that being said, it's not like the the United States isn't rapt with examples of businesses actively and aggressively attacking one another. So I really dont see what the big deal is unless what you really object to is a organised entity accurately and distinctly defining what it's intentions are (definitely more of a rare situation). So, my initial question stands... Either, Fox News and/or Rupert Murdock ARE NOT political entities and thus are merely players in our economy and any other competing interest has a right to challenge their market share, OR THEY ARE political entities and and MM should be denied the tax exempt status they desire. Where is the controversy?. I don't really see how this issue can be seen any other way.

As an adjunct, I know where I stand, I do actually believe that the majority of the republican base get its information from Fox News and personally take umbrage with the institution and how it presents information (even in it news programming). Just so you know where I am coming from. That being said, and to address your arguments....

1. The majority of Fox News programming is opinion as opposed to news. No problem there for me, I am ok with that. Just curious as to why it's not called "Fox Opinion Channel" then. Because after all, if someone fed you a sandwich which was 2/3 **** and 1/3 beef... Would you consider that a "**** Sandwich" or a "Hamburger"? As per Fox News Channel's own reps... ~2/3 of programming is opinion based (avg. 15 hrs. opinion vs. 9 hrs. news).

2. The "To openly declare war on a law abiding citizen..." comment was covered above.

3. (I am assuming you are talking about figurative "war" as per 2 above)"By what means does MM intend to declare war, will it be by legal or illegal means or both." Really? Well, one of the things that I love about this country is that no one has the right to presume my actions are illegal until they have proof to the contrary. It sounds like you would rather presume guilt.

4. "Attempting to stifle free speech because one doesn't like what they are hearing should themselves be shut down." Um ok, can you please explain to me how this is applies to MM? No where did I see a comment from MM that says anything about preventing fox news from actually operating or distributing thier message. Simply that they wanted to provide a context for people to interpret that message, i.e. a political context.

Besides are you really trying to convince me that in relation to Fox News, MM is the "Goliath" as opposed to the "David" in this situation? Come on, why would Fox News ever be afraid of a war with MM?

EDIT: typo's fixed and clarification
 
Last edited:
Swit said:
Ok so let me get this straight. MM is going after Fox News claiming they are a defeacto arm of the GOP. MM is also trying to achieve tax exempt status under 501c3 which would effectively ban MM from engaging in political activity. Per the first sentence in your initial post: "I say yes, as a 501c3 it should not be engaged in political warfare. We...". Should I assumed that you DO believe that FOX News is in fact a political organization then?
Click to expand...



I think FOX News is a ****ty channel on my cable box. like most of TV. :shrug:


They are not a tax exempt organization however.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I say yes, as a 501c3 it should not be engaged in political warfare. We all know this soros backed non-profit is really nothing more than a left wing attack machine, bent on out of context snipping of anything it disagrees with.

It's war on fox, is not only abhorrent, but illegal.
Click to expand...
Citizens United - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A conservative group literally produced and advertised a movie bashing hillary clinton during the presidential election and the supreme court ok'd it. I don't think media matters has anything to worry about. Anyone that thinks them criticizing fox news is illegal apparently hasn't been reading up on this case. BTW, even without this case what they did still isn't illegal.
 
Andalublue said:
How do you feel about the tax-exempt status of explicitly political think tanks like these boys...?

Cato Institute: Sponsors Program
Click to expand...


The Cato Institute is classified as a 501(c)(3) organization under U.S. Internal Revenue Code. The Institute performs no contract research and does not accept government funding. For revenue, the Institute is largely dependent on private contributions.

According to its annual report, the Cato Institute had fiscal year 2008 income of $24 million. The report notes that 77% of Cato's income that year came from individual contributions, 13% from foundations, 2% from corporations, and 8% from "program and other income" (e.g., publication sales, program fees)
Click to expand...


CATO fits under 501(c)3 status.


Media Matters does not given its lobbying efforts.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Citizens United - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A conservative group literally produced and advertised a movie bashing hillary clinton during the presidential election and the supreme court ok'd it. I don't think media matters has anything to worry about. Anyone that thinks them criticizing fox news is illegal apparently hasn't been reading up on this case. BTW, even without this case what they did still isn't illegal.
Click to expand...


Critisizing? I never stated that was my issue. The issue is:

As part of this war, it plans a campaign of “guerrilla warfare and sabotage” on Fox News, its top and mid-level executives, its big-name anchors, parent company News Corp., and papa bear Rupert Murdoch.

Media Matters is putting together "opposition research" files on Fox honchos, along with a legal team to help Fox foes sue for defamation. It also has two reporters working on a book about the network that's due out next year. Fox has no comment, but a Fordham media professor thinks the network is probably tickled. “One way of keeping your core supporters happy is to be attacked by people your core supporters don’t like.”
Click to expand...


This is not the pervue of a 501(c)3
 
how is MM's efforts to educate the public that faux news is neither fair nor balanced other than consistent with its educational focus?
 
roughdraft274 said:
Are you saying 501-c-3's can't lobby?
Click to expand...


No, I am not, what I am saying is they violated the "limited" portion of the rules, furthermore, they violate the:


501(c)(3) exemptions apply to corporations, and any community chest, fund, cooperating association or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, to foster national or international amateur sports competition, to promote the arts, or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals.[7][8]
Click to expand...

When they engage in a war as they stated on Fox as I quoted above.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
No, I am not, what I am saying is they violated the "limited" portion of the rules, furthermore, they violate the:




When they engage in a war as they stated on Fox as I quoted above.
Click to expand...

so it is clear, murdock is doing thru the media what he is unable to do thru the courts
the law is not with him


notable that those who condone the republicans affixing real targets on democrat politicians - including those who were later shot - later whine (as instructed by their received talking points) when MM targets the media arm of the GOP, exposing it as the reich wing propaganda machine that it is found to be
 
justabubba said:
so it is clear, murdock is doing thru the media what he is unable to do thru the courts
the law is not with him


notable that those who condone the republicans affixing real targets on democrat politicians - including those who were later shot - later whine (as instructed by their received talking points) when MM targets the media arm of the GOP, exposing it as the reich wing propaganda machine that it is found to be
Click to expand...



What the hell are you talking about? Seriously.. :doh
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I say yes, as a 501c3 it should not be engaged in political warfare. We all know this soros backed non-profit is really nothing more than a left wing attack machine, bent on out of context snipping of anything it disagrees with.

It's war on fox, is not only abhorrent, but illegal.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't that mean that someone would have to show that Fox actually was " the "leader" of the Republican Party" to make this work?
If that point of fact can't be established, it seems it would be hard to get this into court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom