Media Matters donors Revealed

[Oddball]

Coors Foundation...
Union Carbide...
The FM Kirby Foundation...
Kaiser Chemical...
Mobil...
Texaco...
Lawrence Fertig...
Getty Oil...
Horizon Oil....

No wonder they were so tough on Fox for reporting that global warming might be manmade.

Yes, heaven forbid people actually fighting against being put out of business by a bunch of hoaxers.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

No, dimwit, the POINT is that Media Matters purports to not BE a "left-wing cause". What is it about the concept of lying that just bounces off the liberal mind instead of sinking in and being understood?

Media Matters has been running around, holding itself out as some sort of objective group just concerned about making sure news coverage is truthful and accurate. The fact that no one believed their bullshit doesn't mean you get to just shrug and pretend they were open and honest about being a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party.

MediaMatters has never claimed to be "objective".

In fact, their mission statement says:


They've never claimed to not be partisan.

as a 501c(3), they are supposed to stay out of politics. they don't.

Political activity

Section 501(c)(3) organizations are subject to limits or absolute prohibitions on engaging in political activities and risk loss of status as tax exempt status if violated.[26]

If they wish to remain politically active, fine. They should lose their tax exempt status. I'm fine with that.

I'm very familiar with the laws regarding 501c3s - it's what I do for a living.

 

[Luissa]

No, dimwit, the POINT is that Media Matters purports to not BE a "left-wing cause". What is it about the concept of lying that just bounces off the liberal mind instead of sinking in and being understood?

Media Matters has been running around, holding itself out as some sort of objective group just concerned about making sure news coverage is truthful and accurate. The fact that no one believed their bullshit doesn't mean you get to just shrug and pretend they were open and honest about being a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party.

MediaMatters has never claimed to be "objective".

In fact, their mission statement says:


They've never claimed to not be partisan.

as a 501c(3), they are supposed to stay out of politics. they don't.

Political activity

Section 501(c)(3) organizations are subject to limits or absolute prohibitions on engaging in political activities and risk loss of status as tax exempt status if violated.[26]

If they wish to remain politically active, fine. They should lose their tax exempt status. I'm fine with that.

They can stay tax exempt because they are "educating".

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Here's the law:

The Restriction of Political Campaign Intervention by Section 501(c)(3) Tax-Exempt Organizations

 

[Luissa]

Just think of Media Matters as the 700 club of the left wing.
Have you ever watched that show? And it files under the same tax exempt status.
Charity Review of Christian Broadcasting Network / 700 Club

 

[Oddball]

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

Pretty clear that MM is defacto propaganda arm of the DNC and in violation of the IRC.

 

[8537]

they dont think anyone should be allowed to support left leaning causes.

They try to keep left leaning ideas from being discussed

Right, but the Koch brothers are demons because they fund libertarian causes?

The Koch brother don't fund libertarian causes. They fund rightwing reactionaries and corporatists.

 

[8537]

Any proof anyone is "funding" the Tea Partiers??

Look up Koch brothers and the tea party, it isn't that hard. And there is plenty of proof. If you are too stupid to do so I will provide proof, but I have posted it a few times and if right wingers are too stupid to figure out on their own who the Koch brothers fund well that is their problem.
Oh! And look into who thrown Tea Party fundraisers, and who sits on the boards of these groups that throw the parties.

Fuck of Luissa.

You might want to look into who funds Barry and the left. Unless your to stupid that is.

^Precious.

One should be careful when choosing to question another person's intelligence.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

Pretty clear that MM is defacto propaganda arm of the DNC and in violation of the IRC.

How is that "clear"?

What contact does MediaMatters have with the DNC?

If you're so certain, take them to court.

 

[Luissa]

Any proof anyone is "funding" the Tea Partiers??

Look up Koch brothers and the tea party, it isn't that hard. And there is plenty of proof. If you are too stupid to do so I will provide proof, but I have posted it a few times and if right wingers are too stupid to figure out on their own who the Koch brothers fund well that is their problem.
Oh! And look into who thrown Tea Party fundraisers, and who sits on the boards of these groups that throw the parties.

Fuck of Luissa.

You might want to look into who funds Barry and the left. Unless your to stupid that is.

I don't have to, plenty of right wingers have provided that info. Of course I was smart enough to remember.
and what is Fuck of Luissa? Do I have my own brand of Fuck now?

 

[8537]

The point is the same sort of groups fund right wing causes.

No, dimwit, the POINT is that Media Matters purports to not BE a "left-wing cause". What is it about the concept of lying that just bounces off the liberal mind instead of sinking in and being understood?

Media Matters has been running around, holding itself out as some sort of objective group just concerned about making sure news coverage is truthful and accurate. The fact that no one believed their bullshit doesn't mean you get to just shrug and pretend they were open and honest about being a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party.

MediaMatters has never claimed to be "objective".

In fact, their mission statement says:

Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.

They've never claimed to not be partisan.

AIM, on the other hand, DOES claim to be nonpartisan.

 

[Conservative]

MediaMatters has never claimed to be "objective".

In fact, their mission statement says:


They've never claimed to not be partisan.

as a 501c(3), they are supposed to stay out of politics. they don't.

Political activity

Section 501(c)(3) organizations are subject to limits or absolute prohibitions on engaging in political activities and risk loss of status as tax exempt status if violated.[26]

If they wish to remain politically active, fine. They should lose their tax exempt status. I'm fine with that.

They can stay tax exempt because they are "educating".

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner.

On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.

The Internal Revenue Service provides resources to exempt organizations and the public to help them understand the prohibition. As part of its examination program, the IRS also monitors whether organizations are complying with the prohibition.

they should lose their 501c(3) status right there.

 

[8537]

Coors Foundation...
Union Carbide...
The FM Kirby Foundation...
Kaiser Chemical...
Mobil...
Texaco...
Lawrence Fertig...
Getty Oil...
Horizon Oil....

No wonder they were so tough on Fox for reporting that global warming might be manmade.

Yes, heaven forbid people actually fighting against being put out of business by a bunch of hoaxers.

Well yes, heaven forbid people actually fight against being fed a pack of lies every day by a bunch of Fox "news" programs.

 

[Oddball]

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

Pretty clear that MM is defacto propaganda arm of the DNC and in violation of the IRC.

How is that "clear"?

What contact does MediaMatters have with the DNC?

If you're so certain, take them to court.

That'll probably happen as soon as we get shed of an AG whose blatant corruption is making John Mitchell look like an piker.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

as a 501c(3), they are supposed to stay out of politics. they don't.


If they wish to remain politically active, fine. They should lose their tax exempt status. I'm fine with that.

They can stay tax exempt because they are "educating".

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner.

On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.

The Internal Revenue Service provides resources to exempt organizations and the public to help them understand the prohibition. As part of its examination program, the IRS also monitors whether organizations are complying with the prohibition.

they should lose their 501c(3) status right there.

That's not what that law refers to - that refers to campaigns. Not "politics" in general.

MediaMatters doesn't do "Voter Education". They do media commentary.

There are no laws that restrict the political opinions and biases of non-profit organizations.

 

[Conservative]

They can stay tax exempt because they are "educating".

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner.

On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.

The Internal Revenue Service provides resources to exempt organizations and the public to help them understand the prohibition. As part of its examination program, the IRS also monitors whether organizations are complying with the prohibition.

they should lose their 501c(3) status right there.

That's not what that law refers to - that refers to campaigns. Not "politics" in general.

MediaMatters doesn't do "Voter Education". They do media commentary.

There are no laws that restrict the political opinions and biases of non-profit organizations.

really? Well, I just posted the entire law, from YOUR link, and I don't see any such distinction made. Perhaps I'm missing it. Could you highlight it for me please?

 

[8537]

Pretty clear that MM is defacto propaganda arm of the DNC and in violation of the IRC.

How is that "clear"?

What contact does MediaMatters have with the DNC?

If you're so certain, take them to court.

That'll probably happen as soon as we get shed of an AG whose blatant corruption is making John Mitchell look like an piker.

What the fuck does the AG have to do with it? No one's proposing to bring suit against the government. The AG would play no role in such a case.

My gawd you blabber a lot.

 

[Luissa]

Marcus Owens, former head of the IRS non-profit division, said only an IRS audit would reveal if MMfA had indeed used its tax free revenues not for educational purposes, but mostly for political activities, which would result in loss of tax free status. Owens also stated that some political activity by a non-profit is legal under the tax code.[69]
In regards to the War on Fox, Politico reported:[70]
"Owens emphasized that there is nothing in the IRS rules that prohibits tax-exempt educational nonprofits from attacking specific companies or from zeroing in on one company — as long as there is no private benefit to that company’s competitor — so Media Matters’s increasing focus on Fox News over the past few years does not trigger a violation."

Media Matters for America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I find this part interesting

Alleging that MMfA's War on Fox - as well as its partisan activities - was not primarily educational as MMfA had insisted, but was instead "unlawful conduct", former Fox consultant and George H.W. Bush's White House counsel C. Boyden Gray sent a letter to the IRS asking that MMfA's tax-exempt status be revoked.[65]
Prior to Gray's IRS petition Politico reported that FoxNews had run "more than 30 segments calling for the nonprofit group to be stripped of its tax-exempt status".[64] In another report Politico said Fox News and Fox Business campaigns held that "the non-profit’s status as an educator is violated by partisan attacks. That sentiment was first laid out by a piece written by Gray for the Washington Times in June."[66] In an interview with Fox News Gray seemed to change his view of MMfA's conduct; he said “It’s not unlawful. It’s just not charitable."[67]
MMfA vice-president Ari Rabin-Havt said “C. Boyden Gray is Koch-affiliated, former Fox News contributor whose flights of fancy have already been discredited by actual experts in tax law.”[67] Gray denied having been on Fox's payroll while he was a Fox consultant in 2005, though at that time Fox had said Gray was a contributor, adding: "We pay contributors for strong opinions".[66][68]

 

[bripat9643]

Right, but the Koch brothers are demons because they fund libertarian causes?

The Koch brother don't fund libertarian causes. They fund rightwing reactionaries and corporatists.

You're an imbecile.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

they should lose their 501c(3) status right there.

That's not what that law refers to - that refers to campaigns. Not "politics" in general.

MediaMatters doesn't do "Voter Education". They do media commentary.

There are no laws that restrict the political opinions and biases of non-profit organizations.

really? Well, I just posted the entire law, from YOUR link, and I don't see any such distinction made. Perhaps I'm missing it. Could you highlight it for me please?

The law refers to restrictions on involvement with political campaigns. It's in the title of the page.

As I said before, I know this law because I work for a political 501c3, in a political context.

I know what "Voter Education" refers to in the context of the law because that's what I do for a living.

It doesn't restrict an organization from having a bias, or political opinions. The only restrictions are placed on activities relating directly to political campaigns.