NORTON META TAG

Showing posts with label goldline international. Show all posts
Showing posts with label goldline international. Show all posts

12 February 2011

FOX NEWS INSIDER: “Stuff Is Just Made Up from MEDIA MATTERS & ”Standing Up To Glenn Beck from MOJO 10 & 11FEB11

I resent the management and owners of fox "news" and "media" corp for their Orwellian manipulation of their viewers. Their inability, their unwillingness to tell the truth disgusting. They are a perfect example of a propaganda machine that can lead to a country being ruled by a dictator, with the electorate being so brainwashed they willing elect those to power that publicly rail against the threats to society and national security while secretly working to do away with the very civil and human rights and liberties they are sworn to protect until we are left with a Republic that is such in name only. hitler's propaganda machine accomplished this, and if we are not careful the tea-baggers and right wing extreemist of the gop will accomplish it too. From Media Matters and MOJO.......
February 10, 2011 7:20 am ET - by Eric Boehlert
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201102100007
Asked what most viewers and observers of Fox News would be surprised to learn about the controversial cable channel, a former insider from the world of Rupert Murdoch was quick with a response: “I don’t think people would believe it’s as concocted as it is; that stuff is just made up.”
Indeed, a former Fox News employee who recently agreed to talk with Media Matters confirmed what critics have been saying for years about Murdoch’s cable channel. Namely, that Fox News is run as a purely partisan operation, virtually every news story is actively spun by the staff, its primary goal is to prop up Republicans and knock down Democrats, and that staffers at Fox News routinely operate without the slightest regard for fairness or fact checking.
“It is their M.O. to undermine the administration and to undermine Democrats,” says the source. “They’re a propaganda outfit but they call themselves news.”
And that’s the word from inside Fox News.
Note the story here isn’t that Fox News leans right. Everyone knows the channel pushes a conservative-friendly version of the news. Everyone who’s been paying attention has known that since the channel’s inception more than a decade ago. The real story, and the real danger posed by the cable outlet, is that over time Fox News stopped simply leaning to the right and instead became an open and active political player, sort of one-part character assassin and one-part propagandist, depending on which party was in power. And that the operation thrives on fabrications and falsehoods.
“They say one thing and do another. They insist on maintaining this charade, this façade, that they’re balanced or that they’re not right-wing extreme propagandist,” says the source. But it’s all a well-orchestrated lie, according this former insider. It’s a lie that permeates the entire Fox News culture and one that staffers and producers have to learn quickly in order to survive professionally.
“You have to work there for a while to understand the nods and the winks,” says the source. “And God help you if you don’t because sooner or later you’re going to get burned.”
The source explains:
“Like any news channel there’s lot of room for non-news content. The content that wasn’t ‘news,’ they didn’t care what we did with as long as it was amusing or quirky or entertaining;  as along as it brought in eyeballs.  But anything—anything--that was a news story you had to understand what the spin should be on it. If it was a big enough story it was explained to you in the morning [editorial] meeting. If it wasn’t explained, it was up to you to know the conservative take on it. There’s a conservative take on every story no matter what it is. So you either get told what it is or you better intuitively know what it is.”
What if Fox News staffers aren’t instinctively conservative or don’t have an intuitive feeling for what the spin on a story should be? “My internal compass was to think like an intolerant meathead,” the source explains. “You could never error on the side of not being intolerant enough.”
The source recalls how Fox News changed over time:
“When I first got there back in the day, and I don’t know how they indoctrinate people now, but back in the day when they were “training” you, as it were, they would say, ‘Here’s how we’re different.’ They’d say if there is an execution of a condemned man at midnight and there are all the live truck outside the prison and all the lives shots.  CNN would go, ‘Yes, tonight John Jackson, 25 of Mississippi, is going to die by lethal injection for the murder of two girls.’ MSNBC  would say the same thing.
“We would come out and say, ‘Tonight, John Jackson who kidnapped an innocent two year old, raped her, sawed her head off and threw it in the school yard, is going to get the punishment that a jury of his peers thought he should get.’ And they say that’s the way we do it here. And you’re going , alright, it’s a bit of an extreme example but it’s something to think about. It’s not unreasonable.
"When you first get in they tell you we’re a bit of a counterpart to the screaming left wing lib media. So automatically you have to buy into the idea that the other media is howling left-wing. Don’t even start arguing that or you won’t even last your first day.
For the first few years it was let’s take the conservative take on things. And then after a few years it evolved into, well it’s not just the conservative take on things, we’re going to take the Republican take on things which is not necessarily in lock step with the conservative point of view.
“And then two, three, five years into that it was, we’re taking the Bush line on things, which was different than the GOP. We were a Stalin-esque mouthpiece.  It was just what Bush says goes on our channel. And by that point it was just totally dangerous.  Hopefully most people understand how dangerous it is for a media outfit to be a straight, unfiltered mouthpiece for an unchecked president.”
It’s worth noting that Fox News employees, either current or former, rarely speak to the press, even anonymously. And it’s even rarer for Fox News sources to bad mouth Murdoch’s channel. That’s partly because of strict non-disclosure agreements that most exiting employees sign and which forbid them from discussing their former employer. But  it also stems from a pervasive us-vs.-them attitude that permeates Fox News. It’s a siege mentality that network boss Roger Ailes encourages, and one that colors the coverage his team produces.
“It was a kick ass mentality too,” says the former Fox News insider. “It was relentless and it never went away. If one controversy faded, goddamn it they would find another one. They were in search of these points of friction real or imagined. And most of them were imagined or fabricated. You always have to seem to be under siege. You always have to seem like your values are under attack. The brain trust just knew instinctively which stories to do, like the War on Christmas.”
According to the insider, Ailes is obsessed with presenting a unified Fox News front to the outside world; an obsession that may explain Ailes’ refusal to publically criticize or even critique his own team regardless of how outlandish their on-air behavior.  “There may be internal squabbles. But what [Ailes] continually preaches is never piss outside the tent,” says the source.  “When he gets really crazy is when stuff leaks out the door. He goes mental on that. He can’t stand that. He says in a dynamic enterprise like a network newsroom there’s going to be in fighting and ego, but he says keep it in the house.”
It’s clear that Fox News has become a misleading, partisan outlet. But here’s what the source stresses: Fox News is designed to mislead its viewers and designed to engage in a purely political enterprise.
In 2010, all sorts of evidence tumbled out to confirm that fact, like the recently leaked emails from inside Fox News, in which a top editor instructed his newsroom staffers (not just the opinion show hosts) to slant the news when reporting on key stories such as climate change and health care reform.
Meanwhile, Media Matters revealed that during the 2009-2010 election cycle, dozens of  Fox News personalities endorsed, raised money, or campaigned for Republican candidates or organizations in more than 600 instances. And in terms of free TV airtime that Fox News handed over to GOP hopefuls, Media Matters calculated the channel essentially donated $55 million worth of airtime to Republican presidential hopefuls last year who also collect Fox News paychecks.
And of course, that’s when Murdoch wasn’t writing $1 million checks in the hopes of electing more Republican politicians.
So, Fox News as a legitimate news outlet? The source laughs at the suggestion, and thinks much of the public, along with the Beltway press corps, has been duped by Murdoch’s marketing campaign over the years. “People assume you need a license to call yourself a news channel. You don’t. So because they call themselves Fox News, people probably give them a pass on a lot of things,” says the source.
The source continues: “I don’t think people understand that it’s an organization that’s built and functions by intimidation and bullying, and its goal is to prop up and support Republicans and the GOP and to knock down Democrats. People tend think that stuff that’s on TV is real, especially under the guise of news. You’d think that people would wise up, but they don’t.”
As for the press, the former Fox News employee gives reporters and pundits low grades for refusing, over the years, to call out Fox News for being the propaganda outlet that it so clearly is. The source suggests there are a variety of reasons for the newsroom timidity.
“They don’t have enough staff or enough balls or don’t have enough money or don’t have enough interest to spend the time it takes to expose Fox News. Or it’s not worth the trouble. If you take on Fox, they’ll kick you in the ass,” says the source. “I’m sure most [journalists]  know that. It’s not worth being  Swift Boated for your effort,” a reference to  how Fox News traditionally attacks journalists who write, or are perceived to have written, anything negative things about the channel.
The former insider admits to being perplexed in late 2009 when the Obama White House called out Murdoch’s operation as not being a legitimate new source, only to have major Beltway media players rush to the aid of Fox News and admonish the White House for daring to criticize the cable channel.
“That blew me away,” says the source, who stresses the White House’s critique of Fox News “happens to be true.”
Copyright © 2010 Media Matters for America. All rights reserved.

Standing Up To Glenn Beck


Glenn Beck is, for a liberal like me, far more entertaining to watch than, say, Sean Hannity or Bill O'Reilly. The latter are garden variety blowhards and their subject matter is predictable. But Beck? He's crazy! He thinks the Muslim Brotherhood is going to take over the entire Mediterranean! Fabian socialists are a fifth column working to subvert everything that makes America great! (But slowly. Sneakily.) The Tides Foundation is on a mission to "warp your children's brains"! And Obama the secret Marxist is behind it all! It all fits together!
This is actually sort of entertaining in small doses. But in bigger doses, not so much. Conor Friedersdorf:
As I've said before, lots of Glenn Beck listeners aren't in on the joke. Unlike Roger Ailes, Jonah Goldberg, and every staffer at the Heritage Foundation happy hour, they don't realize that the Fox News Channel puts this man on the air fully understanding that large parts of his program are uninformed nonsense mixed with brazen bullshit.
....Conjure in your mind a retired grandfather. He served in World War II, voted twice for Ronald Reagan, and supports the Tea Party. Awhile back, he started watching Glenn Beck....
Actually, we don't have to conjure this. Richmond Ramsey has done it for us. I've mentioned before that lots of Fox viewers have the channel on all day long, basically as background noise, and Ramsey says he's noticed this too. His piece is called "Fox Geezer Syndrome":
Over the past couple of years, I’ve been keeping track of a trend among friends around my age (late thirties to mid-forties). Eight of us (so far) share something in common besides our conservatism: a deep frustration over how our parents have become impossible to take on the subject of politics. Without fail, it turns out that our folks have all been sitting at home watching Fox News Channel all day — especially Glenn Beck’s program.
....I asked my father privately why Mom, who as far as I know never before had a political thought, was so worked up about Obama all the time. "She's been like that ever since she started watching Glenn Beck," Dad said.
....Then I flew out for a visit, and observed that their television was on all day long, even if no one was watching it. What channel was playing? Fox. Spending a few days in the company of the channel—especially Glenn Beck—it all became clear to me. If Fox was the window through which I saw the wider world, for hours every day, I'd be perpetually pissed off too.
....Back home, I mentioned to a friend over beers how much Fox my mom and dad watched, and how angry they now were about politics. “Yours too?!” he said. “I’ve noticed the same thing with mine. They weren’t always like this, but since they retired, they’ve gotten into Fox, and you can’t even talk to them anymore without hearing them read the riot act about Obama.”
And that's from a conservative. It's all entertaining enough until you come face to face with the consequences. Sure, Beck's audience is relatively small: a few million, probably no more than one or two percent of the adult population of the country. But that's misleading. These are the shock troops, the true believers, the ones who have turned our politics so toxic. And worse, they're being deliberately conned by Roger Ailes and his pals, who know perfectly well that this stuff is nonsense. And it's all in the service of selling yet another con, getting the geezers to invest their money in endless gold scams.
I know this is whistling into the wind, but it's long past time for the adults in the Republican Party to speak up about this. Glenn Beck is the Father Coughlin and the Robert Welch of his generation rolled into one, and his brand of noxious conspiracy theorizing isn't something to be tolerated just because it produces a few useful idiots. It's time for this to end.
Front page image: Al Grillo/Zumapress.com

08 July 2010

Law & Order: Mortgage Victims Unit (Starring Fred Thompson) 6JUL10 from MOTHER JONES

We all have a responsibility to make sure the elderly and infirm we know do not fall prey to companies like AAG American Advisors Group.

— Greg Nash/WDCPIX.COM. Slider image via
For six years, former presidential hopeful Fred Thompson played Arthur Branch, the gruff, straight-shooting district attorney in the television series Law and Order. Thompson's character had an unflinching commitment to the letter of the law. The same can't be said for a firm that Thompson has been pitching for lately in TV ads: a mortgage company that's landed in hot water in a half-dozen states for allegedly preying on elderly Americans and, in some cases, violating state law.
This spring, Thompson, a jowly ex-GOP senator from Tennessee, signed on to serve as the national spokesman for American Advisors Group (AAG). In an ad for the company, Thompson stands in front of a charming white house with an American flag flying out front and sings the praises of a lesser-known mortgage product called a reverse mortgage: "Join hundreds of thousands of other Americans who have used a reverse mortgage as a safe, effective financial tool," he implores viewers.
Thompson's new employer, however, has a troubled track record. Regulators in Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Virginia, and Washington State have cracked down on the firm for deceptive marketing and consumer fraud. In February, for instance, the Illinois attorney general, Lisa Madigan, sued AAG and its president for direct-mail solicitations that Madigan described as "extremely misleading." That same month, the state of Massachusetts temporarily banned the company from doing business in the state.
A questionable company enlisting a popular public figure like Thompson to peddle its wares is nothing new. As Mother Jones recently reported, a company called Goldline International uses TV and radio host Glenn Beck to lure unwitting customers into dubious gold-buying deals. (AAG has also advertised on Beck's Fox TV show.) Last month, JD Hayworth, a former Republican congressman who's angling for Arizona senator John McCain's seat, suffered a major embarrassment when an old infomercial resurfaced showing the conservative plugging $1,000 seminars on how to tap "free" government money.
In AAG's case, putting a celebrity face on its mortgage products is at the core of the company’s marketing strategy. Before hiring Thompson, the company used the late veteran actor Peter Graves as its spokesman. And in August 2009, AAG president and CEO Reza Jahangiri explained that a large part of the company's national marketing campaign would revolve around a "celebrity spokesperson" who "adds that credibility and gets borrowers a little more comfortable with the company."
Reverse Mortgages: The New Subprime?
In AAG's line of work, you need all the credibility you can get. The company peddles reverse mortgages, a variety of loan available to homeowners 62 or older, letting them tap the equity in their houses. Here's how they work: In a typical mortgage, the lender advances the loan's principal amount up front to finance the borrower's purchase of a home, and then the borrower repays the lender in monthly installments. In a reverse mortgage, a lender like AAG pays a homeowner—either in monthly payments, a lump sum, or a line of credit—the amount of equity in the home. Then, as fees and interest accumulate over time on the loan, the borrower's balance increases. That sum must be paid off when the borrower moves out, sells the home, or dies, at which point whoever inherits the house must pay off the loan.
More than 90 percent of reverse mortgages are federally insured. Conceived in the early 1980s, they were envisioned as a way for the elderly to pull money out of their homes to pay for medical costs or supplement diminished incomes. In recent years, as the aging boomer generation swells the ranks of elderly Americans, the market for reverse mortgages has skyrocketed. The total principal committed in federally backed reverse mortgages increased seventeen-fold between 2001 and 2008, from $1 billion to $17 billion. Heavyweight banks like Wells Fargo and Bank of America, as well as lesser-known lenders like Financial Freedom, are all major players in the industry. And, like subprime mortgages, reverse mortgages have been securitized and traded, a practice that began for this lesser known industry in 1999.
Source: National Consumer 
Law Center, Department of Housing and Urban DevelopmentSource: National Consumer Law Center, Department of Housing and Urban DevelopmentAs the reverse mortgage industry grows, so, too, do the cases of fraud and predatory practices. In fact, the reverse mortgage industry today looks a lot like the subprime mortgage industry five or six years ago. According to a report by the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC), senior citizens are often pushed into reverse mortgages they don't want or need by overzealous brokers, some of whom worked as subprime mortgage brokers before that market imploded. The Senate Special Committee on Aging has held two hearings, in December 2007 and June 2009, on the risks of reverse mortgages. At a June 2009 banking conference, John Dugan, the Comptroller of the Currency, warned (PDF), "While reverse mortgages can provide real benefits, they also have some of the same characteristics as the riskiest types of subprime mortgages—and that should set off alarm bells."
Lenders target seniors by advertising on TV, via the Internet, and through direct mail; in some cases, they disingenuously describe reverse mortgages as "free money," and ply seniors with images of shopping sprees and dream vacations. In AAG's case, the company's marketing materials are at the heart of its run-ins with state regulators.
In September 2008, regulators with Massachusetts' Division of Banks ordered AAG to stop sending "false or misleading" direct mailers to consumers, which strongly resembled official government mailings. The company agreed. Seven months later, though, state regulators again caught AAG using misleading mailers that suggested the company's reverse mortgages were related to the Obama administration's economic stimulus plan—which wasn't true. Massachusetts regulators also said that the fine print on AAG's offer was printed in a smaller font and a lighter color so that it was especially hard to read. In February 2010, the state banished AAG from doing business in Massachusetts for nearly two years.
AAG has had similar run-ins with regulators in Washington, Illinois, Virginia, Florida, and Maryland. Washington regulators found that AAG sent the deceptive mailers to approximately 72,000 state residents, violating state law. In Virginia, AAG settled with the state and paid a $7,500 as a result of its deceptive marketing materials, though the company admitted no wrongdoing. And in Wisconsin, the state's banking division cited AAG for failing to fully disclose its conflicts with Massachusetts and Washington regulators while applying for a mortgage banking license, for which the company paid Wisconsin $2,000.
AAG says its deceptive mailers were the work of a third-party marketing company and not the company directly. Since running into trouble with state regulators, the company "realized the need to be in control of our marketing and the need to be very conservative in our approach," CEO Jahangiri told ReverseMortgageDaily.com. The company has also pursued settlements and other compromises with state regulators in response to issues arising from its mailers, state regulatory records show. Jahangiri didn't respond to questions submitted in writing by Mother Jones for this story.
Fred's Spotty Spokesman Record
AAG announced Thompson's new role as pitchman this spring, amidst the crackdown by state regulators. (Thompson, through the public speaking agency that represents him, did not respond to a request for comment.) Now, his face is plastered all over AAG's website and marketing materials. His signature even adorns the company's front page. "Find out how much cash you may qualify for," Thompson says in his AAG ad. "Call AAG today."
This isn't the first time Thompson has lent his name to a questionable company. He is among conservative luminaries like Glenn Beck, conservative radio host Laura Ingraham, and former presidential candidate Mike Huckabee who've worked as paid spokespeople for Goldline, the gold company that's been accused of scamming its customers.
In 2007, Thompson, then mulling his presidential run, appeared in radio ads for a fraud prevention company named LifeLock. That company's owner, the Los Angeles Times reported, had previously been accused by the Federal Trade Commission of deceptive advertising and stealing money from customers' bank accounts. (The owner, Robert Maynard Jr., settled both accusations without admitting wrongdoing, but was banned by the FTC from selling "credit-improvement services.") A Thompson spokesman said at the time that Thompson hadn't researched the company beforehand, and that the voice-over was part of Thompson's contract as an ABC Radio commentator. "You can't expect the individual on-air personality to do research on every company," the spokesman, Mark Corallo, said.
*****
Read the State of Illinois Attorney General’s complaint against AAG: