digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

CONTACT NUMBERS for the ENTIRE MEDIA!!!!

pmwatch.org — I found this site when looking for MSNBC's contact number and found WAY more than expected. NBC Washington Bureau Address 4001 Nebraska Ave NW, Washington, DC 20016 Tel 202-885-4200 Fax 202-362-2009 Letters world@msnbc.com DC Bureau Chief Tim Russert tim.russert@nbc.com 202-885-4548

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • ganjadude4391, on 10/12/2007, -10/+52Yes I just called that number for Mr Russert and got his assistant, not a machine!
  • boxxa, on 10/12/2007, -40/+2Prank them using google click to call :)
    • ganjadude4391, on 10/12/2007, -11/+45that is not my intentions with giving you guys this list, my intentions was so that we could be more vocal. Writing Emails does good but lets be realistic, most people will not read bulk email, they will have to deal with us calling their offices

      BTW they are office numbers, NOT personal cell numbers I am trying to be as civil as possible)
    • smackywentz, on 10/12/2007, -8/+22Thanks ganjadude this list is awesome. I just hope that no one spams the hell out of everyone on this list and we lose an awesome way to tell the media what we think. Sadly, it's going to happen.
    • heliox, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9WTF tell the media?

      "Stop the presses! Smackywentz wants to tell us his thoughts on the war (or gardening or whatever)."

      Don't get me wrong, it's a fine list that may come in handy. But tell me again why NBC or the Wall Street Journal or Christian Science Monitor gives a ***** what we think? They have their own agenda and editorial staff.
  • godd4242, on 10/12/2007, -8/+10Voice for the people.
  • Mahstah, on 10/12/2007, -21/+2Palestine Media Watch? Hardly a site I'd like to promote.

    Providing propaganda contact information to Hamas terrorists since 2006!
    • ganjadude4391, on 10/12/2007, -10/+5...... who cares what the source is as long as its accurate... which it is ive called a few numbers and they are all direct lines
    • ggnictee, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8Seriously, who cares where they found them, they found them. It’s the first real piece of investigative journalism associated with these outlets since Watergate.
      They waste a whole fifth of the first amendment on Freedom for the Press and this is what we get. People who get the majority of their news from Comedy Central are better informed then their viewers.
      Sigh.

      Ps: yes, we should use these responsibly or they will change them. Remember even if you disagree and the other guy is a complete idiot, that’s no reason to be uncivil.
    • superal1394, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6@mahstah: Because Palestine isn't a legitimately opressed race, of whom most are peaceful, the only problem being the American supported Israelis insist on taking what isn't and never was theirs. Israel kills and terrorize more Arabs a year than Arab terrorists kill Arabs, Westerners, ect. a year, all put together.
    • worldofsmut, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@Superal1394 claims "Israel kills and terrorize [sic] more Arabs a year than Arab terrorists kill Arabs, Westerners, ect. [sic] a year, all put together."
      This is a total lie. Jordan killed more Palestinians in a single DAY in September 1970, than Israel has in the last 50 years. Similarly, Muslim on Muslim violence (noting not all Arabs are Muslim and there's a key difference) far, far exceeds the absolute worst the Israelis or Americans could mete out.

      Of course, what's more lies (and functional illiteracy) from brainwashed Palestinian propagandists eh? Admittedly lying is somewhat more sociable than blowing yourself up, but it all comes from the same wholesale lack of morals and human decency.
  • teddyrux, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21Somehow I don't think that "lettes@nytimes.com" is the correct email address for Letters at the New York Times.
    • worldofsmut, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3No but I am sure all those Palestinian advocates who sent letters to "lettes@nytimes.com" were convinced they didn't get printed because of Zionist Media Control...
  • pjisback, on 10/12/2007, -2/+25E-mailing Peter Jennings is probably not really going to go very far anymore.
    • spvaland, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Or will it go farther than we can even imagine?
    • macgarp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8also Crossfire was canceled about a year ago. :P
    • ganjadude4391, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2ok so its a little dated, but there are most are good and the network lines are all good
  • Perno, on 10/12/2007, -8/+74Me: Hi, is this Katie Couric?
    KC: Why, yes.
    Me: WHAAAASAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPP!????
    • crazybrit, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18That didn't actually happen, did it?
    • romman00, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10recording or it didn't happen..
    • pilotmike, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19Did you ask her why she was answering the phone at her old job at The Today Show on NBC when she works on the CBS Evening News?
    • ganjadude4391, on 10/12/2007, -3/+24this is an example of what NOT to do with these numbers.
  • Billiam627, on 10/12/2007, -5/+69I'm sure we can trust Digg users to use these numbers maturely
    • slapshot24, on 10/12/2007, -2/+43I'm sure it's a good idea to invade Russia in the winter.

      And the foxes will do a great job guarding the henhouse.
    • fsjonsey, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1like the way you troll every conservative submission?
  • cookiecaper, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1wrong story [face_bashful]
  • Regulator980, on 10/12/2007, -32/+6Did anyone else see 09-f9-11-02-9d-74-e3-5b-d8-41-56-c5-63-56-88-c0 at first glance in the summary of this story? It's like every time I see a string of numbers and dashes I expect to see that damned code.
    • JoshuaH, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15Your a day late at submitting that if you wanted to get dugg up.
  • Shaddai, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9NBC employees do not have nbc.com email addresses. There is more to it than that. And trust me, Matt Lauer's email address is not that simple to figure out. Higher profile people within the company usually have a different format to their email addresses, it might not even be their name.
    • PabloIV, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It's like with most congressmen, or other politicians. Standard email format for the House is, name.surname@mail.house.gov, but the ones using the congressman's names are usually treated as the office's general Inbox, only in very rare cases do Reps use THAT e-mail as THEIR e-mail.
  • Saccharin, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5To arms Diggers! Let us give those unpaid interns hell!
  • XRnRX, on 10/12/2007, -5/+40I hate to break it to you but the "entire media" does not reside solely in the US
    • superal1394, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3however, the media that is in control of the nation that currently has the most powerful military and economy in the world and has a part in every conflict currently going on in the world today IS in America.

      While the BBC is my personal choice for news, most Americans turn to CNN, MSNBC and *shudders* Fox.
    • cmadach, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5to Americans it does
  • br0wn0ut, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11You know, as much as I think this list has the potential for good, I'm really afraid it's going to be used for evil. Please, please do not use this flippantly. And as much as I think that DRM sucks, I don't even think that issue is one worth calling these people about. We have the chance to use our power to send the government a message about the war, about global warming, about stuff that is more than just entertainment -- stuff that really matters. I'd like to see diggers working together to figure out a concentrated message and blast it out to every single email and number -- one message, one voice about something important.
    • ganjadude4391, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1that is exactly why i put it here
  • XISUPERMANIX, on 10/12/2007, -6/+33Too bad Bill O’Reilly isn't on there, I'd pay good money to prank call that douche bag.
    • fsjonsey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8How mature of you to not stoop to his level. Oh, wait, nevermind.
    • Maceebe, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Bill O'Reily is one of the most honest TV personalities ever
  • manmademark, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3Tried to ring DC Bureau Chief Alison Bethel about running something on Mike Gravel but someone on digg (obviously) is tieing up the line. Please if all you have to call these people about is "WHAAAASAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPP!???? " GTFO the line and let me in damn it.
  • pittpat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8This list is somewhat outdated. Ted Koppel, Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, and Peter Jennings all listed.
    • steve06000, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Yeah, seems a little out of date... NBC's domain is nbcuni.com (NBC Universal), Tom Brokaw no longer anchors Nightly News, Jeff Zucker is not a producer but head of programming at NBC, Dan Rather is "retired", Crossfire was nixed from CNN in '05, and Peter Jennings is dead.

      But I guess that's all good news in Palestine.
  • MattDrudgeIsGay, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1Being Matt Drudge, I've had those numbers for years. Big Deal!!
  • cbergeron, on 10/12/2007, -7/+9Please bury this! Calling these people will only make Technologists like us (all IT professionals/crackers/hackers/etc) look bad. It will give _them_ reasons to say we're all "Hax0rs" and criminals because we have access to too much information.

    As IT professionals, we should be responsible and exercise caution when we post information like this on the web. Some day, we may be the recipients of the wrath we are trying to needlessly bring to others. We should put information like this into our back pockets until the day we really have to play this hand at the table.

    Posting these numbers publicly is going to hurt the IT community much more than it will help it. If you digg this post, do not _ever_ complain about losing your civil rights.

    Elected officials use information such as this to support their arguements that "the internet must be contained". Information should be free, but it should also be used responsibly.
    • RichardCronin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9i am not a technologist. i dont even know how i got here.
    • banjokelly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1cbergeron: If we've learned anything this month isn't it that information will out no matter who wants it hidden; elected officials or big business, or celebrities and their voicemails?

      We've got to think about how the world is going to run in light of the fact that the ordinary literate person is going to have a lot more power (the kind that comes from information) and direct access than before.

      For a good while more it will just be a Darwinian free for all where information will be used to bash people over the head as soon as it becomes available, while governments scratch their heads about what to do. At some stage as you suggest people are going to insist on making new rules. But I don't think government has a chance here, officialdom might try but they cannot possibly succeed because of the nature of information making it easy to copy. If the big ISPs disturbed net neutrality, then they would be bypassed by a free net. It's just not possible to contain and control information anymore.

      Because law and government won't be able to do it, I think it will therefore have to be a people led imposition of rules (Maybe a new etiquette of gentle-many information behavior will emerge around using info based on the fairness of the way you acquired it. Like an old British class system it might exclude those who acquire and use information improperly (e.g. like to invade a person's privacy etc.).

      The point is something's changing about information, and we can't stop it. If you want to ignore that, that's your choice, but it will only mean that someone else besides you will set the rules of the new game. They might do a better job than you, or a worse one.
  • meteors, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5Terrific. More Palestinian crap.

    If you love them so much, you should go live with them.


    -j
  • DesignEx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I forecast much stronger spam filters for members of the media.
  • gregpc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+22I hate to break this to everyone, but finding these people isn't especially hard. I've been doing PR for 15+ years and if you need to reach someone you can simply call the network and ask for them. You'll be passed to the same assistants that the numbers here will get you. (There are, of course, other resources and paths that are more likely to succeed . . .)

    Trust me though, calling any of these people will net you exactly nothing. What are you going to say if you were to get Tim Russert on the phone? Do something on DRM? Right - have you ever seen his show? I spend a fair amount of my time trying to help companies understand that the mainstream media is becoming increasingly marginalized by social media and here we have a social media community dreaming of ham-handed ways to work with the traditional press. Brilliant.
  • Zola1, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0There r many more left, and they aren't martians
  • digjam, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1and why again? were u trying to get the msnbc number on the net???

    were u thinking of sending some propoganda materiala aka cho seung
    • ganjadude4391, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1HAHAHA not at all, i was trying to get MSNBC because i was pissed at them for the Mike Gravel thing
  • danarama, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1I think digg members should get together and jam everything. I mean EVERYTHING! Including Rosie's arse hole.
  • numbered, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Hey if you get a hold of "the media", tell them I want my shirt back. Oh and make sure they wash it first.

    • numbered, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4This message has been brought to you by alcohol. "The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems."
  • Beatmiser, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I sincerely hope that Digg users choose not to misuse these numbers. This community is already looking foolish after yesterday's fiasco. Let's not circle the bowl. The mainstream press doesn't care what a bunch of basement dwellers do.
    • ganjadude4391, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2you are right about being responsible, but was yesterday foolish???

      we proved a point

      digg didnt cave for long

      eventhough they caved once the "revolt" happened it actually cause more media attention hell it was in the BBC

      so in the end more people know about digg than before and digg proved it cant be ***** with by big companies


      we need to be smart on the phones though if we wanna make an impact, but on the other hand msnbc getting 100,000 calls saying we want Gravel might make a difference
    • shagen454, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Who cares about what the mainstream media thinks? That's what this is about in the first place. American media stinks. That said, yeah, don't misuse those numbers.
    • fsjonsey, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I can just imagine the prince albert in a can jokes.
  • pogfreak, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0I just had phone sex with Tim Russert!
  • shagen454, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Where's O'Reilly's email and phone number? That's what I want!
  • zonk3r, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Quick! Alert The Media!!
  • blankartist, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1That masthead is using the M and W from the Mountain Dew logo. Awesome.
  • fsjonsey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I think this is relevant.
    http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/index.php/X_is_not_your_personal_army

  • cliffdonovan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1This is good information. Thank you for putting it up!
  • exitearth, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1wow, today i sent out a message to a friend of mine on myspace about this very subject. i asked for an email list but this will do nicely, thanks soo much, i will use this to email all of them to alert them that fox does not want to allow Dr Ron Paul from a public debate, even though he is qualified to do so and wants to. thanks a ton dude, dont listen to that diggvet that says its a dick move, thanks.
  • tehpunkprodigy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I also loved how you have started commenting on every popular video, telling them to digg your story. GTFO spammer
  • ThatSamIAm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Not sure what the big deal is. All or most of these publications and media outlets have this information available on their web sites. This gentle-person has simply aggregated it for our convenience -- for which I am grateful, as the King of Global Spam and Telemarketing Harassment (just kidding).

    Seriously, there's nothing here that's "confidential" -- it would probably take 3-4 hours to extract this info from these media outlets web sites.
    • ggoyal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I was about to say just that. Anyone who's seriously interested can get a directory containing much more info regarding a particular trade anyways. In India, we have directories of all media houses / newspapers / media reporters & big shots / NGOs / Ministers etc.

      Further, you can even get a directory of all directors / producers / casting directors / scriptwriters / musicians / lyricists etc. in Bollywood if you know whom to ask.
  • soulonice, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5This list is OLD. Many of these people are not at the job or place listed, and I see yet another another who is deceased.
  • PhilLesh69, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I am so amused that United Press International is not listed in there! :)

    They are a nobody. I used to work for them, and I have the entire executive and editorial contact list, but am restricted by an NDA I stupidly signed when I left. Luckily nobody would want it anyway because I would hand it out freely if I had been thinking and said "***** you, I'm not signing an NDA, what are you going to do, fire me??? But I didn't, so I can't. ;)

  • doczein, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5how do i reach the onion?
  • Schmidtness, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Posting this was a dick move because some 14 year olds might abuse this information? Right. Like 14 year olds don't generally abuse everything. Point is, this info is priceless. The numbers and addresses might change, and soon, but until then this is pure gold. Damn. Whatever happened to wanting to stick it to the powers that be (and the fourth branch media is definitely one of them)? If someone wants to be a phone answerer for Tim Russert (a complete shill and henchman, in my opinion), well some days that phone will ring a lot and those calling in might not be spineless sycophants and fellow phonies. Dick move? What a joke. What a pathetic attitude: oh no, people shouldn't be able to contact the media directly- aren't we supposed to just be whimpering boot lickers who believe everything and never get mad and never want to let some scumbag professional liar know that most people are fed up with the constant stream of ***** and mendacity from all sides of the mainstream?

    Wow. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the modern American.
    • Plooo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The media is not "THE MAN," and you sound like a conspiracy theory whackjob. People, like myself, are upset that once masses of immature jerks start calling the numbers for no reason, people who actually have something important to report won't be taken seriously. Take your "rebel without a cause" attitude elsewhere.
  • acceleration, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1More like contact numbers for the entire *American* media.

    Not one of those numbers were for a news organisation outside of the United States.
  • tina123, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I'm a part of the media, and this is really not a big deal -- Media is SUPPOSED to be contacted -- for stories from the PEOPLE. A machine would be little help.
  • worldofsmut, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Isn't it interesting, that this list was put together by a Palestinian propaganda outfit.

    If a Jewish advocacy group had authored it, I have little doubt there would be comments here from some people claiming it was evidence of how "Jews control the media" etc.

    When lobbyists for terrorists however do it, it is taken for granted as a routine part of democracy, even though this very group opposes the rule-of-law, religious tolerance and basic human-rights. What a pity there is no Palestinian free press...
  • worldofsmut, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Isn't it interesting, that this list was put together by a Palestinian propaganda outfit.

    If a Jewish advocacy group had authored it, I have little doubt there would be comments here from some people claiming it was evidence of how "Jews control the media" etc.

    When lobbyists for terrorists however do it, it is taken for granted as a routine part of democracy, even though this very group opposes the rule-of-law, religious tolerance and basic human-rights. Thank heavens for harrassing American media eh? What a pity there is no Palestinian free press and Arab journalists instead have to worry about being shot for suggesting their leaders are dictators and murderers... The UN of course could not care less.
  • christopheles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Entire Media? Hardly. But I can't imagine anyone wanting to contact some of the sh*ttier papers in America. Let alone a media outlet in another country since "we are the world, we are the children".

    Sorry, it's early and I'm loopy.
  • oblongmouth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Probably said before, but how the ***** is a smattering of US newspapers & TV in any way the ENTIRE MEDIA !!!!11!1!1! ?

    The world is bigger than America - just not quite as vocal
    • worldofsmut, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2You should be criticising the person that made the original claim, rather than attacking America. Moreover, considering the terrorist ^h^h^h^h Palestinian propaganda site the person was browsing when they 'happened' to come across the information, you might also consider their intellect and agenda. P.S. I am not an American, but fed up with childish generalisations about a wonderful country and its people.
    • ganjadude4391, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ok sometimes i forget its the world wide web and not the us wide web but whatever its a headline
    • worldofsmut, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1With a name like "ganjadude" I am sure you forget stuff all the time...
    • Matt2k, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2You go invent your own internet then. With hookers! And Blackjack!

    • ganjadude4391, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1maybe i will.... MAYBE i will muahahahaha
  • pulcinella, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Still a handy list to have. Sweet find!
  • ckdiggs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2First off all, this isn't the ENTIRE MEDIEA LEVLIETONIS!EOIND!!!

    Second of all, if you go to the local library and ask for a copy of Bacon's Media Guide you can actually get the contact information for the entire media.
  • jessicah628, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Get a media map subscription and you can find all of this. If you're not willing to spend the time finding the right contact information yourself, you don't deserve to be talking to the media.

    Lame.
  • ethanpeirce, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0This is OLD. They still list Dan Rather. Anyways who cares about this *****? All of this is public info that can be found on their websites.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 61 of 61 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.