• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • Podcast
  • Full Measure
  • Blog
  • Donate
  • "Slanted" Preorder here

Sharyl Attkisson

Untouchable Subjects. Fearless, Nonpartisan Reporting.

  • US
  • World
  • Business
  • Health
    • Vaccine, Medical links
  • Special Investigations
    • Attkisson v. DOJ
    • Benghazi
    • "Collusion v. Trump" TL
    • Fake News
    • Fast and Furious
    • Media Mistakes on Trump
    • Obama Surveillance TL
    • Obamacare

Sharyl Attkisson

Full Measure After Hours

A new podcast coming in September! Click the link below to hear what it's all about!

Announcing the new "Full Measure with Sharyl Attkisson" podcast! We start Season 5 of our weekly Sunday TV program on Sept. 8. 

Our new podcast will provide behind the scenes information and interviews on topics that powerful interests often don't want discussed.

EP 001 | Full Measure After Hour… 

Check us out online at fullmeasure.news and click "about" for a list of TV stations and times.

Go to SharylAttkisson.com and click "Full Measure" to find out how to watch on demand on our STIRR app, or online anytime!

Fight government overreach and double-standard justice by supporting the Attkisson Fourth Amendment Litigation Fund for Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI for the government computer intrusions. Click here.

White House proposes billion dollar foreign aid cut

President Trump addressing a crowd at the White House.

The White House has proposed a budget cut for foreign aid of about $4 billion, says Roll Call. This large amount of money is reportedly part of unspent funds that may have already been appropriated.

Roll Call says Democrats in Congress are arguing that cutting these funds will cause further tension between the White House and Democrat-led Committees in the House of Representative, particularly with Congressional committees specifically assigned to handle funding and oversight.

Such action would be precedent-setting and a direct affront to the separation of powers principle upon which our nation was built... As leaders of the Congressional Committees with oversight responsibility for U.S. foreign policy and the appropriate resourcing and execution of development and diplomacy programs, we would be compelled to use all the tools at our disposal to respond appropriately, should such action be taken.

House Foreign Affairs and Senate Foreign Relations Committees to White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney and acting OMB Director Russell Vought.

The White House has reportedly said it will exempt certain programs from the budget cut, including some global health programs and programs dedicated to women's economic development.

You can read more about the budget cut here: $4 billion budget cut.

Visit our home page and vote in our poll on whether you think it's a good idea to cut unspent foreign aid. Look for the black box in the right sidebar or scroll down on mobile site.

Fight government overreach and double-standard justice by supporting the Attkisson Fourth Amendment Litigation Fund for Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI for the government computer intrusions. Click here.

"Hands up, don't shoot" never happened, according to the Obama Justice Dept.

"Hands up, don't shoot!" started a national movement. Problem is, it never actually happened, according to the Obama Justice Department.

Newly-released Fast and Furious documents (...still keeping government secrets)

Fast and Furious docs still REDACTED after all these years

Today, I received several pages of documents related to the Fast and Furious scandal where the Obama Administration secretly facilitated the delivery of assault rifles and other weapons to Mexican drug cartels.

Attkisson's Fast and Furious story links

I requested the documents under the Freedom of Information Act (FOI) back in 2013. This response took almost six years, even though-- under FOI law-- it was due in 30 days.

Obviously, the way the federal government complies with FOI law (or, more accurately, fails to comply), it becomes impossible for journalists to receive publicly-owned documents to use in relevant news stories.

The pages returned to me today are not enlightening. Some of them are emails from Fall of 2010 referring to a planned meeting in Mexico that included officials from the U.S. Department of Justice, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

The bulk of the editorial content in the emails is blacked out. The reason given for many of the redactions is the so-called (b)(5) exemption. It says the government can withhold "inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters which would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency."

The 2010 meeting in Mexico would have occurred as Fast and Furious and other "gunwalking" operations secretly conducted by the federal government were reaching a peak. In December of that year, Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was murdered by illegal immigrant cartel members in Arizona who had obtained guns from the U.S. government's Fast and Furious operation.

Federal officials initially denied and attempted to cover up the government's role in the weapons transfers. A sitting ATF agent, John Dodson, blew the whistle on the secret operation in a story with me for CBS News in early 2011.

Attorney General Eric Holder testified to Congress that he didn't know about the controversial program when it was underway. However, documents ultimately showed that he had received regular briefings on Fast and Furious. When those documents were made public, Holder said he hadn't read the briefings.

Although the White House denied knowledge of the cross-border gun operation, emails showed that several White House officials had discussed it. When reporters and Congress pursued more information, President Obama declared executive privilege to keep additional Fast and Furious documents from being released.

It's hard to imagine what could be considered so secret all these years after the operation was exposed. The FOI documents are copied below so that you can review them for yourself.

Support Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI

Fight improper government surveillance. Support Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI over the government computer intrusions of Attkisson's work while she was a CBS News investigative correspondent. Visit the Attkisson Fourth Amendment Litigation Fund. Click here.

Unscientific poll: 2020 nominees

About an equal percentage of you believe the 2020 Democratic nominee is already running as believe he/she has not yet announced.

That’s according to the latest unscientific poll at SharylAttkisson.com.

Forty-three percent (43%) said the nominee is already in the running. Forty-six percent (46%) think the nominee has not announced yet. You can see the full poll results below.

Meantime, be sure and vote in our newest poll on the home page sidebar (or scroll down on mobile site).

The eventual (D) nominee for President in 2020:

43%: Is already running

46%: Has not yet announced

11%: I'm not sure

Fight improper government surveillance. Support Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI over the government computer intrusions of Attkisson's work while she was a CBS News investigative correspondent. Visit the Attkisson Fourth Amendment Litigation Fund. Click here.

Good journalism is a process

My ideas about what constitutes good journalism have changed a lot over the years. I've tried to do a lot of self-examination and fine-tuning.

One flaw I discovered in my own reporting was the tendency to boil down complex issues into superlatives. Best, worst. Most, least. Good, bad. This is partly due to the format of having to tell a coherent story in a very short time period: sometimes as little as 40 seconds on the evening news. Rarely more than two minutes.

It's also the nature of the beast. We go to cover a flood and want to bring home the most incredible pictures and stories (superlatives). But our story may lack the context that most of the city isn't suffering from the flood. We cover violence in Iraq. But our story may lack the context that much of the country has grown more peaceful.

Although necessity still dictates some degree of this, I now try to provide some broader context to stories beyond the superlatives. I am also mindful that there is a lot of grey in many stories. The grey areas may be difficult to explain concisely, but sometimes they are the most interesting and important parts of a story.

I've also modified my interview style over the years: more listening. Most of my reporting is non-political, but whether I'm interviewing political figures, watchdogs, whistleblowers, or someone accused of wrongdoing, I try to ask the necessary questions while letting the interviewee make his best points. It's not about me. I ask myself: how can I get the most interesting and insightful information from this person I'm interviewing?

Many years ago I also changed how I look for people to interview on various sides of an issue. Was I subconsciously finding a reasonable person on one side of an issue, but finding a more radical, unlikeable person to represent the side I didn't agree with personally? Now, I try to find the best representatives of a given position to make their best case for it.

And when someone won't give me an interview or statement of their position, instead of giving up, I go out of my way to find another person who might represent it, or I look for a place where a representative may have spoken in the past and I can pull from that explanation so that at least it has representation in my story. I remember a story consultant at CBS News telling me years ago that our audience finds our news stories much more credible when they hear the rational explanation for "the other side," even when the other side doesn't want to provide it themselves. I think that was great advice.

Support Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI

This technique of truly wanting to hear "the other side" or gather more information has led to far more interesting stories than I otherwise might have found. I often learn something new that changes what I thought.

But the biggest and most important strategy I started using many years ago was devising and implementing an intellectual exercise: suspend my own preconceived notions and personal beliefs as much as possible on a story so that nobody can guess where I stand. (Or if they do guess, they are just as likely to be wrong, because I am not necessarily representing my own views, I am covering an interesting fact-based story.)

Too often, we journalists seek to prove our own point or convince the public to agree with our personal feelings, rather than seek facts. By really listening to what can be discovered by talking to people in the field, I have found more amazing and interesting stories. Sometimes they include angles I knew nothing about or could not have imagined, but for listening to somebody in the field. Don't make the mistake of thinking any particular story necessarily reflects what I personally think on a given topic. I have given a great deal of air time to smart people with whom I may not agree, personally.

An outgrowth of this is that I often find something to agree with--or something reasonable-- in most everybody I interview, even on topics with which I may personally differ. I now approach most stories with the idea that most of the people I'm interviewing have common goals: they want what's best for their families, their country and themselves. They just differ on the best ways to get that.

Season Five of my Sunday TV news program Full Measure beings September 8. Time has really flown! And I plan to continue my commitment to report on underreported stories and angles.

All times are Sunday unless noted. Please check local listings, as times may change without notice.

This means not just repeating what you've already seen on the news all week. It means reporting on topics that are newsy, but different than the narratives that the powers-that-be are pushing. Sometimes that ruffles feathers. It can even create powerful enemies.

That comes with the territory!

I have a small but terrific team of journalists working with me. They, too, are committed to bringing you original, interesting stories. David Bernknopf was my colleague at CNN years ago and now produces my cover stories with me. He's brilliant. So is Daniel Steinberger, who I worked with years ago at CBS News. He went on to ABC before joining me at Full Measure. The amazing Mark Orchard, another producer, brings his experience from BBC and Al Jazeera and puts his incredible touch on stories. Andrea Nejman is my line producer and is so talented, she's been field producing some terrific stories as well. Editor Tony Szulc brings his CBS News 48 Hours background and skillset to Full Measure to help make it look top notch every week. I couldn't ask for two better photographers: Bryan Barr and Lee Jenkins. The view they provide from the field, is outstanding on a daily basis. If you could see the work that both of these men do, day in and day out; with smarts, patience and kindness; it would boggle your mind. On top of everything else, they are both skilled editors. Sarah Attkisson is our incredible associate producer. She's a whiz at some of our technical needs, research and social media, among other things.

I'm lucky to have terrific contributors on the program including James Rosen, Scott Thuman, Lisa Fletcher, Joce Sterman and Jonathan Elias. They bring smart, in depth reporting to Full Measure week after week.

Sinclair's talented head of news, Scott Livingston, allows executive producer Batt Humphreys and I to do all of this with a freedom not typically afforded a national news program. That's what helps make the program as unique as it is.

What's in store for Season 5? I have been off shooting original stories in Northern Ireland, Ireland, Denmark, Sweden, England, Puerto Rico, Greece and Arizona. There is much going on in the world that impacts all of us but is not being widely reported.

Bryan Barr (left) with me and two Arizona law enforcement officers

I hope you'll check us out! Click here to find out all the ways you can watch Full Measure on TV, online or on demand--live or replays. In fact, you can watch right now at www.fullmeasure.news.

Fight government overreach and double-standard justice by supporting the Attkisson Fourth Amendment Litigation Fund for Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI for the government computer intrusions. Click here.

Face recognition technology: innovative or invasive?

A demonstration of facial recognition software, by Beatrice Murch.

A noticeable backlash against facial recognition software has "reached a tipping point," says NewScientist.

A number of people feel as if they're sacrificing privacy for convenience - "people are excited about the innovation and convenience of technology, but are becoming increasingly mindful about how intrusive it is," says Mariann Hardey of Durham University, U.K. to NewScientist.

U.S. politician Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) has voiced her concerns about facial recognition software to NewScientist. She worries that letting facial recognition technology run wild will result in an "authoritarian surveillance state."

In our right to privacy, this is about our right to our entire body.

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) to NewScientist

Large companies like Amazon are also starting to suffer as well, says NewScientist. Shareholders are shying away from Amazon's Rekognition software, which is used by governments across the world. According to NewScientist, some of these former investors believe the Rekognition software is infringing on civil liberties.

You can read more about the problems with facial recognition software here: Backlash against facial recognition tech.

Thank you to the thousands who are supporting the landmark case of Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI for the government computer intrusions.

Media madness: a new poll

Today's cover story on Full Measure looked at our exclusive poll on trust in the national news media. Read the transcript below and click on the link to read the rest and watch the video!

http://fullmeasure.news/news/cover-story/media-madness

Today, we begin with a new Full Measure poll on the national news media. As you might expect: the results aren’t very good. For the media. Whether it’s coverage of the Russia investigation or the Covington High School kids, news consumers on all sides of the political spectrum report declining trust — in us. We turn to two experts to analyze the current Media Madness.

Sharyl: One need only sample lowlights from a single month to get a sense of the problem.

In January, a Seattle Fox affiliate aired a doctored video of President Trump.

President Trump: Some have suggested a barrier is immoral.

Buzzfeed: The comparison which shows Trump with an altered face and a looped licking of his lips

The same month, Special Counsel Robert Mueller refuted a BuzzFeed bombshell that falsely claimed Trump directed his ex-lawyer to lie to Congress.

And a January article about Melania Trump in the Telegraph was followed by seven corrections an apologyand an undisclosed payment to Mrs. Trump. One-sided narratives presented virtually unchallenged. National news quoting anonymous sources that turn out to be wrong.

The headline contains the most devastating part: President Trump directed his attorney to lie to congress.

The same month, Special Counsel Robert Mueller refuted a Buzzfeed bombshell that falsely claimed Trump directed his ex-lawyer to lie to Congress.

The Washington Post took us “Inside theBattle Over Trump’s Immigration Order”— only to later admit the article misreported Trump’s actions, a reported meeting had not actually occurred, and a conference call hadn’t happened as described.

FBI Director James Comey debunked a New York Times article about supposed contacts between Trump campaign staff “senior Russian intelligence officials.”

And NBC News reported that Russian President Putin said he had compromising information about Trump. Actually, Putin said the opposite. It’s been a bad few years for media credibility.

A new Full Measure poll conducted for Full Measure by Scott Rasmussen finds: 42% of Americans believe national political news coverage is inaccurate and unreliable. Fewer— 38%—believe it’s accurate and reliable. And 52% say it’s worse compared to five years ago.

National political reporters also get poor scores. Only 26% of those polled say reporters carefully report the facts. 57% say reporters use news stories to promote their own ideological agenda.

Pollster Scott Rasmussen:

Rasmussen: We asked about national political reporters are, are they credible, are they reliable? And you know, a little more than one out of three people say yes. When we ask about Wikipedia, we get the exact same answer. So what's happening is we have a world where people look at journalists like they look at Wikipedia. “Gee, that's an interesting fact. I better check it myself.”

Sharyl: And what does that tell you?

Rasmussen: The media has a huge credibility problem and it's always had the problem. Oh, we talk about it differently today. Now we talk about it as a political bias. I think the issues have always been there. I mean, people were complaining about the bias of Walter Cronkite back in the 1960s.

Sharyl: People forget about that.

Walter Cronkite: For it seems now more certain then ever that the bloody experience in Vietnam is to end in a stalemate.

Support Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI

Sharyl: It is often argued that Donald Trump created this media environment where everybody hates the media. And then others say he simply understood that environment, and capitalized on it. Which is it you see?

Rasmussen: Oh, people have hated the media for a very long time

Trump: Fake news folks, fake news. Typical New York Times fake stories.

Rasmussen: Donald Trump capitalized on it. He understood it, but he's not the first to do so. The first President Bush when he was campaigning, he actually got kind of aggressive with, I think it was Dan Rather, during an interview because a lot of Republicans weren't sure he had the fire to, to be president.

President Bush 1: It's not fair to judge my whole career by a re-hash on Iran. How would you like it if I judge your career by those seven minutes when you walked off the set in New York? Would you like that?

Rasmussen: So he capitalized on that. But all you're doing is tapping into a sentiment that's already there and Donald Trump is playing them but beautifully

Rasmussen says his polling found a good recent example of how many today have come to regard— or disregard— the national media. The Covington High School pro-life students’ confrontation with a Native American activist at a Washington DC protest.

Rasmussen: When the story broke, of the students from Covington high school, we went out and polled right away when the story first broke and ask people what they thought. And as you would expect, liberals and conservatives had different views of whether the high school students acted inappropriately or somebody else did.

Sharyl: So to summarize, liberals probably thought the high school students who were pro-life behaved inappropriately and aggressively.

Rasmussen: Yes.

Sharyl: And Conservatives thought the Native American was the one who is inappropriate.

Rasmussen: Yes. And by the way, conservatives also thought the media was inappropriate.

ABC news: A group of teenagers, some Catholic high school students, seen wearing Make America Great Again hats, appearing to face off with Nathan Phillips – a 65 year old Native American.

Rasmussen: And then we had a week's full of coverage. And as you recall, there was a lot more coverage that came out, uh, about the incident. A lot more videos and a lot more information. And a week later, nobody's opinion changed.

Sharyl: I’m surprised by that because some reporters and in media even apologized that they had been too hard on the children at first or the high school students without knowing the full story.

Whoopi Goldberg: So many people admitted they made snap judgements before all these other facts came in. (Continued...)

Read more and watch the story by clicking the link below:

http://fullmeasure.news/news/cover-story/media-madness

Fight government overreach and double-standard justice by supporting the Attkisson Fourth Amendment Litigation Fund for Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI for the government computer intrusions. Click here.

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Coming Soon

Subscribe

Get the Latest Stories Straight to Your Inbox

Follow Sharyl Attkisson

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Recent Comments

  • Mickey Pullen on Hydroxychloroquine: Politicizing Medicine (PODCAST)
  • Mike Marinak on Hydroxychloroquine: Politicizing Medicine (PODCAST)
  • Debunking “The Hotchkiss Republicans Report” - The Hotchkiss Record on "Collusion against Trump" timeline

Subscribe

Get the Latest Stories Straight to Your Inbox

Footer

Pages

  • Home
  • About
  • Podcast
  • Support
  • Contact

2ndary Pages

  • Full Measure Stations
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Subscribe to SharylAttkisson.com

SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS

  • Attkisson v. DOJ/FBI
  • Benghazi
  • Fake News
  • Fast & Furious
  • Obamacare

Ad

Ad