Has C-Span Violated Their Mission?
Sent 3/25/2024
To: 14 at C-Span, 7 at DPIC and the 7 pro death penalty experts, at bottom
Please forward to Mimi Geerges
All professors, GWU, School of Media & Public Affairs
Subject: The Death Penalty: Has C-Span Violated Their Mission?
Re: Why has C-Span, rarely, if ever, heard these rebuttals before? Too obvious?
From: Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom
C-Span's Mission includes these 3, out of 5 (1).
1) C-Span's Mission - "To provide our audience with access to the live, gavel-to-gavel proceedings of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate and to other forums where public policy is discussed, debated and decided – all without editing, commentary or analysis and with a balanced presentation of points of view (Sharp emphasis)";
Sharp: Untrue. That has not occurred with the death penalty. Overwhelmingly, C-Span has presented anti-death penalty voices, most notably The Death Penalty information Center (DPIC), which tells C-Span that they are neutral on the topic, when, it is, blatantly, obvious that such is not the case, as I have, already presented to C-Span (2), with no reply from them.
How obvious? Why has C-Span never heard these anti-death penalty rebuttals or pro-death penalty research (3), before, from DPIC? Too obvious?
What that means, in effect, is that C-Span has edited, nearly, everything, by, overwhelmingly, enforcing an anti-death penalty narrative, as I have detailed (2).
another example:
see C-SPAN Classroom, Bell Ringer: Death Penalty in the United States, Feb 5, 2024, Clip 1: The Execution of Kenneth Smith, Clip 2: Death Penalty in the United States & Clip 3: Forms of Execution, each, exclusive, with Executive Director of the Death Penalty Information Center Robin Maher discussed the overall state of the death penalty in the United States
C-Span/DPIC misled their audience. Nitrogen is not a lethal gas (4). Geeges stated that nitrogen gas suffocates the murderers. There is no suffocation effect with nitrogen hypoxia (4).
I have 16 nitrogen gas/hypoxia articles, here (4), which rebut the vast majority of comments on nitrogen hypoxia, that C-Span/DPIC stated. Fact check and vet.
another example:
C-SPAN VIDEO: PHILLIP MORRIS ON DEATH ROW AND WRONGFUL SENTENCES, NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC CONTRIBUTING WRITER PHILLIP MORRIS DISCUSSED HIS ARTICLE, “SENTENCED TO DEATH, BUT INNOCENT.", APRIL 24, 2021 | PART OF WASHINGTON JOURNAL 04/24/2021 WASHINGTON JOURNAL
The Death Penalty Information Center is the forefront of these frauds.
Neither C-Span nor NatGeo fact checked nor vetted the alleged "innocent" from death row, with such claims, in reality, having a 71-83% fraud rate (5).
What Morris and C-Span left out: all balance, all fact checking and all vetting. How and why does that happen? It is intentional. Is there any other way for it to happen?
Question: Would C-Span, ever, present that the death penalty saves more innocent lives, in four ways, than does life without parole (6)? Yes? Happy to do a show with DPIC's Mayer.
2) C-Span's Mission - To provide elected and appointed officials and others who would influence public policy a direct conduit to the audience without filtering or otherwise distorting their points of view;
Sharp: C-Span has violated that, repeatedly, with regard to the death penalty, filtering out pro-death penalty viewpoints and excluding their point of view and presenting the worst anti-death penalty lying group, The Death Penalty Information Center, as a neutral source, which requires an astounding level of no fact checking, no vetting and no balance, by C-Span, to buy into that lie, or it is intentional? . . . as well as refusing to look at a balance of pro-death penalty research and present pro-death penalty experts (2), none of which can be denied, honestly and which, clearly violates C-Span's mission.
BIG BUT . . . C-Span may not filter out the pro death penalty side but, instead, appears to not even know that it exists. If you look at my death penalty intro, here (3), or the other 6 pro-death penalty experts (3), you may note that you are unaware of nearly all of it, which confirms my statement.
example:
Video Clip: Constitutionality of the Death Penalty (Justice Breyer), C-Span Classroom, June 30, 2015, CLIP OF OPEN PHONES,
After listening to the clip, think of what it would have been like for C-Span Classroom to have fact checked and vetted Breyer. I did and sent him my full rebuttal, here (7).
My guess is (C-Span) thought Breyer was so authoritative that you didn't even question his comments. Yes? That is not what responsible journalists should do. Correct?
Balance? C-Span?
3) C-Span's Mission - To provide the audience, through viewer call-in programs, direct access to elected officials, other decision-makers and journalists on a frequent and open basis;
Sharp: By far, most frequently anti-death penalty, with the open basis, overwhelming, to the anti-death penalty view, as is undeniable.
In Closing
Has C-Span Violated Their Mission? Do they care?
DPIC's Mayer is a death penalty expert, meaning, she knows what I know.
FN
1) C-Span's Mission
2) What a mess - C-Span & The Death Penalty Information Center
Media Disaster originally sent 3/5/2024
Edit sent 3/23/2024
3) Research, w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of anyone within a public policy debate and which rebut all anti-death penalty claims.
Most will realize that the media has been using only anti-death penalty claims and , then, failed to fact check, vet, not use critical thinking, with that research, while avoiding all pro-death penalty research and experts. How do I know most will realize this? Because they wouldn't have seen any of this, prior:
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
(7 pro-death penalty experts listed)
4) Nitrogen Gas; Flawless, proven, peaceful, unrestricted method of execution
NOTE all the dates
5) The Death Row "Exonerated"/"Innocent" Frauds
71-83% Error Rate in Death Row "Innocent" Claims,
Well Known Since 1998
and
6) The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-death-penalty-do-innocents-matter.html
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-death-penalty-do-innocents-matter.html
and
Deterrence, Death Penalties & Executions
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2019/04/deterrence-death-penalties-executions.html
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2019/04/deterrence-death-penalties-executions.html
7) Justice Breyer's Errors in Death Penalty Assessment
======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victims' families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
======
Victim Services
Victims' Voices
======
Research, with sources, fact checking, vetting & critical thinking, as required of anyone within a public policy debate and which rebut all anti-death penalty claims.
Most will realize that the media has been using only anti-death penalty claims and , then, failed to fact check, vet, not use critical thinking, with that research, while avoiding all pro-death penalty research and experts, for decades. How do I know most will realize this? Because they wouldn't have seen any of this, prior:
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
(7 pro-death penalty experts listed)
