MINDBLOWINGLY HUGE Conflict of Interest: Luntz and Giuliani

[TheIndependent]

Guys, people really need to know about this. This is CONFIRMED bias. Last night's focus group is now, without a doubt, proof that Fox and Luntz were pushing Giuliani the entire time through the guise of impartiality:

Tell me about your work for Rudy Giuliani.

Rudy Giuliani hired me because I was recommended by his political consultant and because I love baseball. I hate to admit this, but I brought my baseball card collection to show him, because I'd heard he was a fanatic Yankee fan, and I figured this would be a way that we could bond. We ended up talking for 22 minutes. My whole interview with Rudy Giuliani in 1993 lasted for 22 minutes, and at least 19 of the 22 minutes was focused on baseball. So I don't know if he got it right or wrong; all I know is that this was a guy who understood the value of words and understood the value of language, but even more than that, it's the power of personality. You know, you have asked me what matters in research and how do you apply different components. What matters most in politics is personality. It's not issues; it's not image. It's who you are and what you represent. And this guy, from the very beginning of his administration, even if people disagreed with what he was doing, they trusted him to do it, and even if they didn't like him, they respected him.

My job as a pollster is to understand what really matters. Those levers of importance -- sometimes they're called levers; sometimes they're called triggers. What causes people to buy a product? What causes someone to pull a lever and get them to vote? I need to know the specifics of that. And in politics, more often than not, it's about the personality and the character of the individual rather than where they stand, and that's exactly the opposite of what your viewers will think.

Did you help him?

Part of the task is using language and using speeches and using photo ops and using the power of campaign to convey a specific message. And my job in '93 and '97 was to explain to the campaign what the public wanted and to help explain to the public that that's exactly what he was offering. A pollster, a marketer, someone who is the explainer of public opinion, has the ability to inform somebody like Rudy Giuliani [of] what really matters to the public, and so that makes Rudy Giuliani an even better candidate.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/persuaders/interviews/luntz.html

[TechnoGuyRob]

.......




......




HE DISCOVERED GIULIANI'S SOUL BY TALKING ABOUT BASEBALL!?

[LibertyEagle]

That article is from 2004. I wonder who besides FOX, he is employed by now.

Hhhmm... but how can that be true? In that article, they are talking about the change from global warming to climate change. That happened very recently.

[TheIndependent]

That article is from 2004. I wonder who besides FOX, he is employed by now.

And my job in '93 and '97 was to explain to the campaign what the public wanted and to help explain to the public that that's exactly what he was offering.

Take a bet.

[Korey Kaczynski]

.......




......




HE DISCOVERED GIULIANI'S SOUL BY TALKING ABOUT BASEBALL!?

Well, these people are essentially a clique of anti-intellectual, pro-Israel "jocks," so I'm not surprised.

[Zydeco]

Luntz's reputation is so low I never thought it could go lower...and yet it does.

[Mark]

That article is from 2004. I wonder who besides FOX, he is employed by now.


Fox OWES RP ( and others they don't 'pimp' )

EQUAL AIR TIME..

we should sue.. think of the publicity..


.

[kylejack]

They do not owe Ron air time. Speech is free in this country.

[james1844]

Can we verify this and get it into the mainstream press?

[TheIndependent]

MORE:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200706270001
http://mediamatters.org/items/200706260002
http://disinter.wordpress.com/2007/08/02/giuliani-in-cahoots-with-fox-news-chief/

[werdd]

to bad the cowboys rons team kicked both the giants and buffalos ass this year. ;)

[TheIndependent]

Can we verify this and get it into the mainstream press?

Blog/Digg/Reddit/Local Media (TV, Newspapers)/Online Media, stat.

[Zarxrax]

Wow, someone put this on digg, now!

[bbachtung]

Hmm . . . A reputable news company (not one whose founder -- Rupert Murdoch -- is a contributor to both Hillary and Rudy) would have disclosed this information many times during the broadcast (if such an organization would even utilize such a biased person's "expertise"). We've all seen news organizations disclose information in order to avoid the appearance of impropriety; for all the shit that CBS got over Dan Rather, you'd think that CBS would want to go into it with Fox news over this.

[TheIndependent]

Bump.

[Daveforliberty]

Somebody should send this to Olbermann.

[JaylieWoW]

This just in... LewRockwell Shattering the Web One Pundit at a Time! (http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/016355.html)

Any Penn & Teller fans around? I KNEW I'd seen this Luntz character around before. I wonder how many of those people in the "focus" group would be pissed off at being made a muppet by Luntz & his selective poll questions. Hmmm... maybe need to get this video a few views on You Tube....

[TheIndependent]

Bump!

[dmspilot00]

I posted this already in this thread (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=27556), but I'll say it again here in light of this new information on Frank Luntz.

Right after the debate, Luntz asked his focus group if they thought Rudy Giuliani won the debate. Only three hands went up.

Twenty minutes later (after 'discrediting' the text poll), Luntz said, "I didn't really ask the right question earlier...how many of you think that Rudy Giuliani is the best Republican to defeat Hillary Clinton?" Nearly every single hand went up!

Of course what he meant was that since only three people thought Rudy won, and that was the wrong answer, he had to change the question. I just wouldn't have expected him to actually say so on air! Talk about Freudian slip.

[OptionsTrader]

Penn and Teller for Ron paul...

[Tim724]

It has seemed to me that Fox, as a whole, has been promoting Giuliani.

Hannity is a big promoter of Giuliani. His whole schtick now is being an apologist for Giuliani's weak conservative record. He's got some mantra he keeps repeating like if you agree with someone 80%, they're not your enemy.

Fox definately tried to slime Romney in the previous debate where they had that guy in the diner rub his nose in his mis-statement about his sons serving their country by helping his campaign instead of going to Iraq.

They're kindof luke warm to McCain.

[TheIndependent]

I posted this already in this thread (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=27556), but I'll say it again here in light of this new information on Frank Luntz.

Right after the debate, Luntz asked his focus group if they thought Rudy Giuliani won the debate. Only three hands went up.

Twenty minutes later (after 'discrediting' the text poll), Luntz said, "I didn't really ask the right question earlier...how many of you think that Rudy Giuliani is the best Republican to defeat Hillary Clinton?" Nearly every single hand went up!

Of course what he meant was that since only three people thought Rudy won, and that was the wrong answer, he had to change the question. I just wouldn't have expected him to actually say so on air! Talk about Freudian slip.

You'll also notice that he then framed it afterward as if Guiliani was by far their choice of candidate, even though unbeknownst to those not paying attention at home it was out of context. Classic Luntz manipulation.

[dmspilot00]

It has seemed to me that Fox, as a whole, has been promoting Giuliani.

Of course. Rupert Murdoch has "selected" Rudy Giuliani to be our next president.

[Kregener]

And George Soros has "selected" Hillary.

Battle of the Titans - Freedom is doomed!

Saturday at 8...7 Central, on NWO television...

[tsopranos]

You'll also notice that he then framed it afterward as if Guiliani was by far their choice of candidate, even though unbeknownst to those not paying attention at home it was out of context. Classic Luntz manipulation.

Penn and Teller Defend Ron Paul vs. Luntz and Fox News
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=If9EWDB_zK4

[Shink]

I posted this already in this thread (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=27556), but I'll say it again here in light of this new information on Frank Luntz.

Right after the debate, Luntz asked his focus group if they thought Rudy Giuliani won the debate. Only three hands went up.

Twenty minutes later (after 'discrediting' the text poll), Luntz said, "I didn't really ask the right question earlier...how many of you think that Rudy Giuliani is the best Republican to defeat Hillary Clinton?" Nearly every single hand went up!

Of course what he meant was that since only three people thought Rudy won, and that was the wrong answer, he had to change the question. I just wouldn't have expected him to actually say so on air! Talk about Freudian slip.

Great catch! Especially after going to http://lewrockwell.com/blog and watching Penn & Teller on Luntz...FUCK YOU, FRANK.

[bbachtung]

Of course, Rupert Murdoch (owner of the parent company of Fox News) hosted a fundraiser for Hillary's 2006 reelection to the U.S. Senate (Source: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/61faabde-deb8-11da-acee-0000779e2340.html) . . . so, he's got his two choices for POTUS. If Giuliani and Clinton are the nominees, then Murdoch is guaranteed a friendly president.