As you sit down to dinner, this story illustrates eating out like you have never experienced before. We are talking about super-secret, illegal dining experiences hosted in homes.
CBS 2 investigative reporter Tamara Leitner went undercover to see firsthand how this underground world works.
It may look like a dinner party, but it’s really an underground supper club.
The diners are a mix of New Yorkers and tourists. CBS 2’s undercover cameras captured one experience — eight people who didn’t know each other eating a meal in a stranger’s home.
That hostess, Naama Shafi, writes about food but is not a chef. Leitner found her through a website, which connects amateur foodies and professional chefs in 20 different countries with people who want unique dining experiences.
Clandestine dinner parties like the one Leitner attended have become more common in New York City. And insiders told Leitner they are completely unregulated.
The Health Department refused to discuss the issue on camera but in a statement told CBS 2: “In New York City, people who offer meals to the public for money are considered food service establishments and need permits. The city does not allow meals to be served to members of the public in someone’s home.” Read more >>
NBC’s ratings woes aren’t just limited to weekday mornings, evenings and late night. The network’s Sunday morning flagship Meet the Press–the longest-running show on network television, as its announcer reminds the audience every week–has recently fallen to a 21-year low. And as of the past few weeks, the show has come in third place on Sunday morning, trailing CBS’ Face the Nation and ABC’s This Week.
More than four years ago, the Los Angeles Times warned that the perennial “king of Sunday morning TV news talk shows could soon lose its crown,” a prediction that has been borne out in the years since. According to Nielsen data, Meet the Press is averaging its smallest total viewer audience (2.913 million) in 21 years and smallest 25-54 demo performance (854,000) in more than 21 years, dating back to the 1991-1992 season.
CBS’ Face the Nation is the clear winner, taking the number one spot away from Meet The Press for the first time in 15 years for total viewers and in 18 years for the 25-54 demo. The show even managed to maintain its lead last week when CBS was blocked from three major markets–New York, Los Angeles and Dallas–due to an ongoing dispute with Time Warner Cable. And this summer, on June 28th and August 4th, ABC’s This Week jumped to number two in total viewers and the demo, pushing Meet The Press to third place, a position in hasn’t seen in years. Read more >>
A volunteer group of citizen crime fighters is calling the Magnificent Mile – a popular tourist destination in Chicago – the “Muggers’ Mile,” to spotlight robberies along Michigan Avenue.
CBS 2’s Susanna Song reports the Guardian Angels routinely patrol the Magnificent Mile, and the CTA Red Line subway that runs nearby.
They said criminals have been turning the popular stretch of Michigan Avenue into their own ATM, and attacks there have grown more violent. However, police said robberies in the area are down compared to last year.
Members of the Guardian Angels were at the corner of Michigan and Chicago avenues Tuesday morning, handing out flyers with safety tips to shoppers and tourists, while making their normal patrols.
The men in red berets said they came up with the Muggers’ Mile nickname, because they want to avoid the moniker from becoming reality. Read more >>
RHerlinda Garcia said she became a "whole different person" after her doctor told her she had stage IV breast cancer. The 54-year-old mother of four had gone through a procedure to remove a tumor from her left breast when she got the grim diagnosis.
"When you're told you have stage IV terminal cancer, that's it," she said to CBS affiliate KHOU in Houston. "I put trust in the doctor."
She underwent a grueling eight rounds of chemotherapy over seven months. Then she went to another doctor to treat her anxiety, and he gave her some shocking news: She never had cancer in the first place. One of the nation's top hospitals, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, performed additional tests and confirmed that her original diagnosis was false.
"I was happy, but at the same time, I had that anger. The damage had been done," she said.
Medical mistakes this extreme are, fortunately, rare. "In 33 years in medicine, I've never heard of a case like this," said CBS News chief medical correspondent Dr. Jon LaPook. Read more >>
Chicago Police Supt. Garry McCarthy says his department is taking seriously a purported directive from a Chicago street gang to kill members of law enforcement. The gang reportedly has even created a so-called “hit squad” to carry out the mission, CBS 2′S Mai Martinez reports.
Being a police officer just got more dangerous in Chicago. According to information gathered by the Cook County Sheriff’s office, a street gang wants to ambush and kill police officers near 19th and Oakley west of the Loop.
“This is in regards to one particular officer who’s done an incredible job who we’re paying special attention to make sure that he’s covered,” McCarthy told reporters Monday. They’re also alerting all officers. CBS 2 obtained a copy of an Officer Safety Alert issued last week that says, “The purpose of this squad will be to kill law enforcement officers.”
According to some of the information gathered, gang members intend to coax police officers into chasing them into alleys or gangways. Once inside, other gang members would shoot the officers. Read more >>
In already bad month is getting worse for NBC. For the first time in sweeps history, the network is projected to finish fifth in the key adults 18-49 demographic. That’s a crushing blow for NBC, which went from flying high in November with a sweep win & Steve Burke breaking his usual silence last fall to brag to the New York Times about the network’s performance to its shows cratering and ratings plunging.
From the beginning of the February sweep on January 31 through February 19, NBC has averaged a 1.2 rating among adults 18-49. That’s below the 1.5 that Univision has been averaging so far over the 20 night of the sweep period. In fact, Univision has bested NBC every single night of the sweep so far among adults 18-49 and is poised to overtake NBC for its first fourth-place sweep finish in the demo.
While this isn’t the first time Univision has topped one of the Big Three for a month (it ranked higher than CBS in July 2010 and 2012), it is the first time the Spanish-language network has beaten NBC and the first time it has come in fourth place in an in-season sweep. In addition to Univision, NBC also ranks below the 1.7 18-49 rating that ABC has been averaging this sweep, as well as the 2.0 rating for Fox and the 4.9 rating for leader CBS, which of course is buoyed by its broadcast of the Super Bowl on February 3 and the Grammy Awards on February 10. Read more >>
US broadcast networks are suffering a precipitous drop in television ratings so far this season, posing a significant threat to the system on which $70bn in television ads are traded each year. Media executives argue that television watching is at an all-time high, with people viewing shows via digital recorders, on-demand videos and online streaming to computers and mobile devices.
However, executives say that the Nielsen ratings system used in the television business does not accurately capture that shift in viewership, and that they will push the industry to develop new standards so that they get paid for the additional viewing.
So far this season, average primetime ratings for live and same-day viewing among 18-49-year-olds has fallen by more than 10 per cent for ABC, CBS and Fox, according to UBS investment research. Fox has suffered the largest decline, with ratings in that audience group falling by nearly a third so far this season. Read more >>
Owner: If You've Got $300-$600 You Can Find Out If, Indeed, That Baby Is Yours
It is a sign of the times — getting a quick DNA test is now as easy as walking up to a truck. The “Who’s Your Daddy” recreational vehicle is selling DNA tests, mostly to fathers who suspect their children may not actually be theirs.
“They flag us down, they pull us over, they talk to us,” owner and operator Jared Rosenthal said Wednesday. “Sometimes, because of the nature of the services, they want to be a little more discreet about it, but they do come or they’ll call the number.”
In this business, Rosenthal said he deals with all kinds of crazy situations all day, every day. “We have people that want to get the specimen from their spouse without them knowing about it,” Rosenthal said. “We deal with a lot of drama, it’s constant drama.”
There have been instances where men have walked in with a baby to give DNA samples only to find out later they’re not related. When asked by CBS 2’s Dave Carlin why he was taking the DNA test from the traveling truck, one unidentified man explained, “I’m paying child support anyways and I would do it anyways. You just want to know.” Read more >>
Image by Getty Images via @daylifeU.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta let slip on Sunday the big open secret that Washington war hawks don’t want widely known: Iran is not developing nuclear weapons.
Appearing on CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday, Panetta admitted that despite all the rhetoric, Iran is not pursuing the ability to split atoms with weapons, saying it is instead pursuing “a nuclear capability.”
That “capability” falls in line with what Iran has said for years: that it is developing nuclear energy facilities, not nuclear weapons.
“I think the pressure of the sanctions, the diplomatic pressures from everywhere, Europe, the United States, elsewhere, it’s working to put pressure on them,” Panetta explained on Sunday. “To make them understand that they cannot continue to do what they’re doing. Are they trying to develop a nuclear weapon? No. But we know that they’re trying to develop a nuclear capability, and that’s what concerns us. And our red line to Iran is, do not develop a nuclear weapon. That’s a red line for us.” More...
An internal U.S. Department of Homeland Security document indicates that a controversial program designed to predict whether a person will commit a crime is already being tested on some members of the public, CNET has learned.
If this sounds a bit like the Tom Cruise movie called "Minority Report," or the CBS drama "Person of Interest," it is. But where "Minority Report" author Philip K. Dick enlisted psychics to predict crimes, DHS is betting on algorithms: it's building a "prototype screening facility" that it hopes will use factors such as ethnicity, gender, breathing, and heart rate to "detect cues indicative of mal-intent."
The latest developments, which reveal efforts to "collect, process, or retain information on" members of "the public," came to light through an internal DHS document obtained under open-government laws by the Electronic Privacy Information Center. DHS calls its "pre-crime" system Future Attribute Screening Technology, or FAST.
"If it were deployed against the public, it would be very problematic," says Ginger McCall, open government counsel at EPIC, a nonprofit group in Washington, D.C.
It's unclear why the June 2010 DHS document (PDF) specified that information is currently collected or retained on members of "the public" as part of FAST, and a department representative declined to answer questions that CNET posed two days ago.
Elsewhere in the document, FAST program manager Robert Middleton Jr. refers to a "limited" initial trial using DHS employees as test subjects. Middleton says that FAST "sensors will non-intrusively collect video images, audio recordings, and psychophysiological measurements from the employees," with a subgroup of employees singled out, with their permission, for more rigorous evaluation. More...
Here’s how President Barack Obama answered CBS’s Scott Pelley’s question about whether he could guarantee that Social Security checks would go out on August 3, the day after the government is supposed to reach its debt limit: “I cannot guarantee that those checks [he included veterans and the disabled, in addition to Social Security] go out on August 3rd if we haven’t resolved this issue. Because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it.”
And Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner echoed the president on CBS’s Face the Nation Sunday implying that if a budget deal isn’t reached by August 2, seniors might not get their Social Security checks.
Well, either Obama and Geithner are lying to us now, or they and all defenders of the Social Security status quo have been lying to us for decades. It must be one or the other.
Here’s why: Social Security has a trust fund, and that trust fund is supposed to have $2.6 trillion in it, according to the Social Security trustees. If there are real assets in the trust fund, then Social Security can mail the checks, regardless of what Congress does about the debt limit.
President Obama’s budget director, Jack Lew, explained all this last February in USA Today:
“Social Security benefits are entirely self-financing. They are paid for with payroll taxes collected from workers and their employers throughout their careers. These taxes are placed in a trust fund dedicated to paying benefits owed to current and future beneficiaries. … Even though Social Security began collecting less in taxes than it paid in benefits in 2010, the trust fund will continue to accrue interest and grow until 2025, and will have adequate resources to pay full benefits for the next 26 years.”
Notice that Lew said nothing about raising the debt ceiling, which was already looming, and it shouldn’t matter anyway because Social Security is “entirely self-financing” and off budget. What could be clearer?
Unconvinced, syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer wrote a subsequent column questioning Lew’s assertions. “This [Lew’s] claim is a breathtaking fraud. The pretense is that a flush trust fund will pay retirees for the next 26 years. Lovely, except for one thing: The Social Security trust fund is a fiction. … In other words, the Social Security trust fund contains—nothing.”
Social Security status-quo defenders have assured us for the past 25 years that Social Security is fully funded—for the next 25 years, or 2036. So if there are real assets in the Social Security Trust Fund—$2.6 trillion allegedly—then how could failure to reach a debt-ceiling agreement possibly threaten seniors’ Social Security checks?
The answer is that the federal government has borrowed all of that trust fund money and spent it, exactly as Krauthammer asserted. And the only way the trust fund can get some cash to pay Social Security benefits is if the federal government draws it from general revenues or borrows the money—which, of course, it can’t do because of the debt ceiling.
Thus, the answer to my initial question is that the president is telling the truth now in the sense that he is conceding there’s no money in the trust fund to pay benefits; but he and other Social Security status-quo defenders have been deceiving the public for decades.
And here’s the real irony: Anytime someone has proposed personal Social Security retirement accounts as a way to ensure that people have real assets in their own account without bankrupting the government or future generations, defenders of the status quo would pounce, calling such a reform, in Al Gore’s words, a “risky scheme.” They have vociferously claimed that those trust fund assets are real and that only by having the government manage and control the accounts would seniors be guaranteed to get their retirement checks.
Well, we have the status quo and seniors may not get their checks. Had we shifted to a system of pre-funded, personal Social Security retirement accounts years ago, this wouldn’t even be an issue—because retirees would have their own money in their own accounts.
Yes, the accounts likely would have declined when the stock market went down, though not if the reform were structured like three Texas counties did 30 years ago (see here). But in case you haven’t noticed, Social Security revenues also declined during the economic downturn—because fewer people were working—so that the government is paying out more in benefits than it is taking in, and hence needing additional federal revenues, a fact admitted by Lew.
If the budget crisis has done nothing else, it has exposed the decades-long lie about the solvency of the Social Security trust fund. The trust fund may be backed by the “full faith and credit of the federal government,” as defenders constantly remind us, but if it had real assets the president wouldn’t be talking about seniors missing their checks.
President Barack Obama's $787 billion stimulus plan was the most expensive bill in history. Still, it received strong media support - blazing the way for the controversial bill to pass. Network journalists didn't just back the bill during that debate. Once it had passed, ABC, NBC and CBS spent nearly a year promoting "President Obama's stimulus cavalry," as NBC's Lisa Myers put it.
That much money was supposed to enter the economy through many different channels. Typically, where stimulus dollars went, journalists followed. They roamed the nation looking for proof the stimulus was succeeding, and sometimes proof it wasn't.
The Business & Media Institute analyzed 172 stories about the stimulus from Feb. 17, 2009, when the bill was signed, to Jan. 31, 2010. In those stories, the three evening news shows turned to proponents nearly three times as often as opponents of the plan (269 to just 111). Reporters called the Obama program or its many offshoots "good news," or turned to others whose positive views on the stimulus went further, with one calling the program a "lifesaver."
"It's the government that`s going to have to pull us out of this recession," Anthony Mason of CBS "Evening News" said on March 6. That was a consistent theme for the journalists involved. With the economy beaten down by the Great Recession, Americans needed Obama and the government to fix things and boost employment.
Anchor Katie Couric added to that theme when she introduced the story. "In a moment, we'll be telling you about all the jobs the stimulus plan is creating, but first why those jobs are so desperately needed."
That pro-stimulus approach impacted the reporting. All three broadcast networks promoted the stimulus prior to the vote. The same news media that backed Barack Obama during the election then turned to his "bold" push for a stimulus plan. Two broadcast networks - ABC and NBC - showed particularly strong support for the president by relying on pro-stimulus voices by a more-than 2-to-1 ratio (139 to 56). As reporter Scott Cohn told the NBC "Nightly News" audience about a struggling Indiana community. "Economic stimulus isn't just a political debate around here. It could be a matter of survival."
In the year following the passage of the stimulus package, network journalists embraced both the spending and the programs that went along with it. Story after story detailed how a few hundred thousand dollars or a few million dollars would aid essential programs and, in Obama's words, "save or create" millions of jobs.
That was what viewers of ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson," CBS "Evening News" and NBC "Nightly News" heard for almost a year. Those three favored pro-stimulus speakers 71 percent to 29 percent (269 to just 111).
NBC was the worst of the three networks. It relied on stimulus supporters in its stories by more than a factor of 3-to-1 (110 supporters to just 31 critics). At the same time, NBC only included any sort of criticism of the $787 billion plan in 43 percent of its stories.
While CBS included some criticism of the stimulus in three fourths of its stories (30 out of 40), the network still found several ways to boost the president. During an April 29 broadcast, Anthony Mason described Obama in laudatory terms. "As he's tried to lead the country through the crisis, President Obama has offered both caution and hope."
Another CBS story celebrated how D.C. had turned into a new financial capital. Mason told viewers about "matchmaking sessions to link them with government agencies giving out stimulus money." He even quoted Washington power broker and "King of K Street" Thomas Hale Boggs Jr. who seemed thrilled that the "total pie is way over $2 trillion" to grab for clients. As Mason added, "Government officials like these at the Transportation Department can't give it out fast enough."
That report included only mild criticism of the feeding frenzy.
ABC's coverage of the stimulus also ignored critics more than half the time, but lacked CBS's blatantly positive comments about the plan or the president who promoted it.
Even when reporters showed some of the obvious flaws of the stimulus program, they still depicted it as "working." NBC's Lisa Myers pointed out one of the marketing angles of the Obama bill including signs crediting new work to the government. "At this road project in Maryland a sign tells all who pass by that the money for repaving came from the stimulus package." She went on to say that the Obama administration has urged states to put up such signs, even though they "can cost as much as $1,200."
But Myers then followed with a more typical report including three people, two supporting the program and just one opposed.
The pro-stimulus position of the three networks was almost identical to the one taken leading up to the passage of the bill. Then both ABC and NBC showed particularly strong support for the president by relying on pro-stimulus voices by a more-than 2-to-1 ratio (139 to 56). That 71 percent total was the same percentage of pro-stimulus voices these two networks used throughout the year (183 positive to just 74 critics). More...
The facts and figures presented by CBS's Steve Kroft were disturbing as were the details concerning how shysters bilk the system for an estimated $60 billion a year.
As Kroft warned viewers in the segment's teaser, "We caution you that this story may raise your blood pressure, along with some troubling questions about our government's ability to manage a medical bureaucracy" (video embedded above; here's partial transcript, h/t Marc Sheppard):
STEVE KROFT, CBS: Of all the problems facing the United States right now, none are more important than healthcare. President Obama says rising costs are driving huge federal budget deficits that imperil our future, and that there is enough waste and fraud in the system to pay for health care reform if it was eliminated.
At the center of both issues is Medicare, the government insurance program that provides health care to 46 million elderly and disabled Americans. But it also provides a rich and steady income stream for criminals who are constantly finding new ways to steal a sizable chunk of the half a trillion dollars that are paid out each year in Medicare benefits.
In fact, Medicare fraud - estimated now to total about $60 billion a year - has become one of, if not the most profitable crimes in America.
We caution you that this story may raise your blood pressure, along with some troubling questions about our government's ability to manage a medical bureaucracy.
Kroft spoke with FBI special agent Brian Waterman and Kirk Ogrosky, a top justice department prosecutor:
BRIAN WATERMAN, FBI: There's a healthcare fraud industry where people do nothing but recruit patients, get patient lists, find doctors, look on the Internet, find different scams. There are entire groups and entire organizations of people that are dedicated to nothing but committing fraud, finding a better way to steal from Medicare
KROFT: Is the Medicare fraud business bigger than the drug business in Miami now?
KIRK OGROSKY, JUSTICE DEPARTMENT: I think it's way bigger.
KROFT: What changed?
OGROSKY: The criminals changed...
WATERMAN: Sophistication.
OGROSKY: They've figured out that rather than stealing $100,000 or $200,000, they can steal $100 million. We have seen cases in the last six, eight months that involve a couple of guys that if they weren't stealing from Medicare might be stealing your car.
WATERMAN: You know, we were the king of the drugs in the '80s. We're king of healthcare fraud in the '90s and the 2000's.
Kroft also spoke to Attorney General Eric Holder:
ERIC HOLDER, ATTORNEY GENERAL: We have to understand this is a major fraud area. [...]
KROFT: Why do you think it's been so attractive for the criminals?
HOLDER: Because I think it's been pretty easy. I think that they have found a way in which they have been able to get pretty substantial amounts of money with not a huge amount of effort and at least until now, without the possibility of great detection.
KROFT: With much fewer risks.
HOLDER: Much fewer risks. You'll see some of these people and they'll say "You know there is not a chance that you are going to have some other drug dealer shooting at you." The chances of being incarcerated were lower, the amount of time that you would spend in jail was smaller. All of which is different now.
Kroft then spoke to a man who claimed to have defrauded Medicare out of $20 million, after which Kroft said, "According to the FBI, all you have to do to get into this business is rent a cheap storefront office, find or create a front man to get an occupational license, bribe a doctor or forge a prescription pad, and obtain the names and ID numbers of legitimate Medicare patients you can bill the phony charges to."
WATERMAN: There's a whole industry of people out there that do nothing but provide patients.
Kroft narrated, "Once the crooked companies get hold of the patient lists, usually stolen from doctors' offices or hospitals, they begin running up all sorts of outlandish charges and submit them to Medicare for payment, knowing full well that the agency is required by law to pay the claims within 15 to 30 days, and that it has only enough auditors to check a tiny fraction of the charges to see if they are legitimate."
Later, Kroft asked Waterman, "There's something I don't understand. I mean, you're saying essentially people just fill out the phony paperwork, they send a bill to Medicare and they pay it."
WATERMAN: That's why you have companies that can run for 60, 90 days, and bill for ridiculous things. Because there are very few checks and balances to even determine whether these things a, were medically necessary, b, were ever given, or c, even physically possible for a patient with the kind of conditions they have.
A bit later in the segment, Kroft spoke with Kim Brandt, Medicare's director of program integrity. After he shared with her some of the scams he'd previously witnessed or been told about, he asked how crooks get away with it:
KIM BRANDT, MEDICARE DIRECTOR: We're as frustrated by that as the law enforcement officials that you went out with. And in fact, our primary focus over the past years has been to tighten our enrollment standards to make it so it's much harder for people like that to be able to get in the program, and to be able to commit that kind of fraud.
KROFT: Look, I'm sure that you're aware of these problems. But it doesn't seem like you're doing a very good job. I don't mean you personally, but I mean, the government. This is still like a huge problem, and getting worse, right?
BRANDT: Well, it really does come down to the size and scope of the Medicare program, and the resources that are dedicated to oversight and anti-fraud work. One of our biggest challenges has been that we have a program that pays out over a billion claims a year, over $430 billion, and our oversight budget has been extremely limited.
Just imagine what the fraud will be like if the government is responsible for everyone's healthcare.
As the segment drew to a close, Holder told Kroft something that should scare the heck out of everyone who wants government run insurance for all Americans: "I think people I don't think necessarily thought that something as well intentioned as Medicare and Medicaid would necessarily attract fraudsters. But I think we have to understand that it certainly has."
Yes we do.
Yet, shortly after this marvelous segment came to a close, "60 Minutes" concluded this installment with Andy Rooney telling viewers:
I'm not much interested in hearing anymore talk about health care.
President Obama wants to overhaul what they call the "health care industry." Well good, but I hate that phrase the "heath care Industry." I just don't like to think of my health as an industry.
The fact is though being sick is often the least of our health problem. Even if you're insured, what hospitals charge now is ridiculous. I had what they call "an outpatient procedure" recently and it cost my insurance company $9,361. I say it cost my insurance company but let's face it. In the end, I'm the one who pays.
The U.S. spends more than any other country on Earth on its health: $2.5 trillion. And what do we get for $2.5 trillion? Well, we're 50th in the world for life expectancy, below the Polynesian French Island Territory of Wallis and Futuna, wherever Wallis and Futuna are.
As Steve Kroft said earlier on 60 Minutes, we are losing billions of dollars on health care fraud. Not on healthcare - on healthcare fraud.
Everyone cheats - companies, hospitals, patients, doctors, drug companies, and government agencies. Cheating goes on everywhere in the get well business.
During my recent outpatient procedure a doctor came into my room, asked how I was doing and said, "By the way I love your work on television." He left without touching me and a couple of weeks later when the bill came, it turned out his visit cost my insurance company $250.00.
I mean who knows what he would have charged if he didn't like my work.
There's just no doubt we need healthcare reform because the way it is now, makes me sick.
Makes you wonder if he even watched Kroft's segment, doesn't it?
Obama has resorted to paranoid Stalinist tactics which simply cannot be tolerated. What's next, dissident concentration camps?
Minneapolis Conservative Examiner
Officials invited the White House press pool to 5 minute interviews with Pay Czar Kenneth Feinberg to discuss Feinberg's announcement to cut executive pay at at least 7 companies.
The press pool is made up of the 5 major news organizations including CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX. FOX has been a member of the White House press pool since 1997.
Officials invited the entire press corps to the round robin interview process with the express exception of FOX News. The Washington Bureau Chiefs of all of the 5 major networks consulted. The group agreed that if FOX were not allowed to participate, that they would boycott the interview with Feinberg in protest.
The White House eventually relented and granted 2 minute interviews for each network including FOX.
This comes on the heels of several Obama administration officials making the rounds on the weekend talk shows on the other 4 major networks and claiming that FOX News is more like "talk radio" and "not really a news organization" like ABC or CNN.
![Cover of "Minority Report [Blu-ray]"](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_v7sfMNCVkmUUnTBufztypy7UwSJBVCQMxqzm-PF8nNAja2l9y0HhLQidHgpUk8yVu1gtSb4M27PnLor77FFYfmR9DOpjIm1imY-WLXVe-oKOJ2OdaQucfMgZeRR53gkh0=s0-d)
