kd 5 elite When I would have been a working journalist for the Associated Press, I didn't bring about political parties or candidates. I also didn't buy individual stocks, opting instead for mutual funds. I didn't even register like a Democrat (that is earn money voted right at that moment), and so would not get involved in party primaries. While I became eligible for do these types of things, I felt my audience deserved to know i was happy to put away my own , personal political and financial preferences inside the interest of doing the most beneficial job I really could at fairly presenting the down sides during the day. This too extended towards the small amounts I was capable of help with charities at that time. I purposely avoided giving to partisan or highly divisive causes because I desired so that you can honestly say i always was doing my best to avoid taking sides.

Times have changed. So, it appears, have standards.

ABC News host George Stephanopoulos found himself the prospective of scrutiny and criticism recently when it found light he has given $75,000 for the Clinton Foundation during the last 36 months. While the donations were technically a matter of public record, Stephanopoulos wouldn't mention these donations to viewers, even when he interviewed Peter Schweizer, the author of "Clinton Cash," last month. Schweizer's book alleges that donations on the foundation can have swayed Hillary Clinton while she served as secretary of state. In the statement to Politico, which broke the storyplot, Stephanopoulos apologized. "I should have got the additional step of personally disclosing my donations to my employer also to the viewers on air over the recent news article regarding the Foundation," he was quoted saying. (1) A similar day, ABC News issued a statement of that own, saying it will stand behind its anchor, characterizing the incident as "a reputable mistake." (1)

kobe 8 Stephanopoulos' error was not just in neglecting to disclose his contributions towards the Clinton Foundation, however. It absolutely was in not recognizing that his decision to support the causes he favors through a foundation controlled, plus some would say exploited, from the Clintons undermines his capability to fairly cover one of several nation's most prominent political families. Yet he have hedged on acknowledging this reality. Stephanopoulos has now said that he will not moderate ABC's GOP debate in February, but in addition has said he'll not recuse himself from coverage in the 2016 presidential race, despite needs him to accomplish this. Schweizer lambasted Stephanopoulos, saying the incident represented "a tremendous breach of ethical standards" (2) - especially when, as some observers noted back then, the anchor pointed out Schweizer's political background while an interview and not mention his very own.

ABC is loaded with lots of reporters it might have assigned to understand more about "Clinton Cash" also to interview its author. Stephanopoulos' support of the Clinton Foundation sends a note that he supports the Clintons; if he didn't wish to send that message, he might have made contributions towards Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, or Greenpeace, or perhaps a host of other charities doing similar work towards causes imperative that you him.

I send these sorts of messages too. I'm a Republican currently, but I still make small campaign donations to my good friend, Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont. He was my good friend before he went along to Washington, and the man will still be my mate after he leaves. So while I don't go along with a lot of his positions, i could well be loath to see his party back control of Congress, I make my small gifts as a means of proclaiming that I'm always with him. My donations send a note, to Tester and other people who cares to look, that my good friend has my support.

kobe 9 elite Stephanopoulos' contributions to the Clinton Foundation, although not huge while what he says he donates every year, sent an identical message to the Clintons, surely deliberately. Besides was he on their own team in the past, but he will get on their team down the road. He wants them to know he's rooting for the kids today. It is precisely what such contributions mean, even if it is not explicitly stated. That is certainly the location where the fault lies. Like a non-journalist, Stephanopoulos seemingly allowed send this kind of message. As a journalist, he has disqualified himself at a non-opinion reporting role about the Clintons, or on races where Clintons are running, by sending it. The belief that neither he nor ABC have acknowledged this reality shows simply how much standards have changed - I'd say fallen - since I left The Associated Press.