Media Hypocrisy and Bias

Re: Media Hypocrisy and Bias

« Reply #390 on: September 20, 2009, 08:06:13 PM »

TonyBlair

Verified Member
CTH Professor

Reputation: +54/-0
Posts: 3824

Michael Moore's Capitalist Sugar-Daddy [Greg Pollowitz]

Hypocrisy on display.

Los Angeles Times:

He's been called a bully and a monopolist. Al Gore once labeled him "Darth Vader." The Wall Street Journal described him as "ruthless" and alleged "self-dealing" in a maze of complicated business transactions.He is a master of the tax-free deal, completely disdains government and most federal regulations, and has expressed a fondness for Rush Limbaugh. This summer he was slapped with a $1.4-million fine by the Justice Department for illegal stock purchases.

Sounds like the perfect target for a hard-hitting Michael Moore documentary, no? But no, we're talking about Moore's latest sugar daddy: cable mogul John Malone.

That's right, Moore's "Capitalism: A Love Story" is being co-financed and distributed domestically by Overture Films, which is a unit of Malone's Liberty Media. Moore, who has been railing against Big Media during press junkets promoting the movie, is in bed with the Goldman Sachs of the media world. Liberty also owns satellite broadcaster DirecTV, a stake in satellite radio operator Sirius XM, a big chunk of Barry Diller's IAC/InterActiveCorp, the Atlanta Braves and a piece of the Denver Nuggets. Malone, who is considered the father of the modern-day cable industry, himself has a piece of cable programming giant Discovery Communications, on whose board he sits.

http://media.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OTAwMzExYjUwYTMxZDBlZWUyN2QyN2ZjNGY1NTQyZmY=


	Logged

We could say [Democrats] spend money like drunken sailors, but that would be unfair to drunken sailors. It would be unfair, because the sailors are spending their own money. --Ronald Reagan

Al Gore didn't invent the internet, he invented global warming

The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants - Camus

The person who advocates government planning of the economy always assumes that it is his plan that will be put into effect. --Hayek

Re: Media Hypocrisy and Bias

« Reply #391 on: September 26, 2009, 02:48:03 PM »

TonyBlair

Verified Member
CTH Professor

Reputation: +54/-0
Posts: 3824

Sarkozy Mocks Obama at UN Security Council

by Maura Flynn

One of my favorite features of the Newseum in Washington, DC is the daily display of newspaper front pages from around the world. Today, Canada’s National Post was a standout with Alex Spillius’ coverage of a clash between Presidents Obama and Sarkozy.

For reasons yet to be determined, the National Post appears to have de-linked their own front page story on their website. Mr. Spillius reported a similar (albeit watered-down) version in the UK’s Telegraph.

Obama: “We must never stop until we see the day when nuclear arms have been banished from the face of the earth.”

Sarkozy: “We live in the real world, not the virtual world. And the real world expects us to take decisions.”

The rest of Sarkozy’s remarks were, well, remarkable:

“President Obama dreams of a world without weapons … but right in front of us two countries are doing the exact opposite.

“Iran since 2005 has flouted five security council resolutions. North Korea has been defying council resolutions since 1993.

“I support the extended hand of the Americans, but what good has proposals for dialogue brought the international community? More uranium enrichment and declarations by the leaders of Iran to wipe a UN member state off the map,” he continued, referring to Israel.

The sharp-tongued French leader even implied that Mr Obama’s resolution 1887 had used up valuable diplomatic energy.

“If we have courage to impose sanctions together it will lend viability to our commitment to reduce our own weapons and to making a world without nuke weapons,” he said.

Mr Sarkozy has previously called the US president’s disarmament crusade “naive.”

No American newspapers seem to have featured Sarkozy’s justifiably derisive remarks about Obama’s naivete regarding the realities of nuclear technology. Still we can be grateful for the freedom of the press, as embodied and celebrated by the Newseum — including the chilling reconstruction of segments of the Berlin Wall. These serve as a reminder that however oppressive or myopic the powers-that-be, news cannot be stifled.

http://biggovernment.com/2009/09/25/sarkozy-mocks-obama-at-un-security-council-hello-big-media/


	Logged

Re: Media Hypocrisy and Bias

« Reply #392 on: September 29, 2009, 06:23:53 PM »

TonyBlair

Verified Member
CTH Professor

Reputation: +54/-0
Posts: 3824

Hmmm...now that the New York Times watches Fox News perhaps it will start to figure out what is going on...

HA HA HA HA HA HA

HA!

Clark Hoyt, the New York Times ombudsman thinks the paper should stop running scared from Glenn Beck. Hoyt took the Times to task this weekend over their coverage (or lack thereof) of the ACORN and the Van Jones debacle, both incidents which arguably developed into national stories due to their flames being relentlessly fanned by “the polemical world of talk radio, cable television and partisan blogs.” A world, says Hoyt, that the Times has trouble dealing with.

"But for days, as more videos were posted and government authorities rushed to distance themselves from Acorn, The Times stood still. Its slow reflexes — closely following its slow response to a controversy that forced the resignation of Van Jones, a White House adviser — suggested that it has trouble dealing with stories arising from the polemical world of talk radio, cable television and partisan blogs. Some stories, lacking facts, never catch fire. But others do, and a newspaper like The Times needs to be alert to them or wind up looking clueless or, worse, partisan itself."

Apparently part of the problem is that Times editors do not watch enough Fox. Or any Fox as the case may be. Says Jill Abramson there was an “insufficient tuned-in-ness to the issues that are dominating Fox News and talk radio.”

"Some editors told me [Hoyt] they were not immediately aware of the Acorn videos on Fox, YouTube and a new conservative Web site called BigGovernment.com. When the Senate voted to cut off all federal funds to Acorn, there was not a word in the newspaper or on its Web site. When the New York City Council froze all its funding for Acorn and the Brooklyn district attorney opened a criminal investigation, there was still nothing."

Which is a major problem. You may not like Glenn Beck, you may think he is a nut job. You may think what he does is not journalism, you may think that in a perfect world of objective, reasoned, researched news reporting he should not have a place. But you ignore him at your own peril. Actually, there is the argument to be made that the Times ignores him at everyone’s peril — it is their job, after all, to watch and report on things the rest of us may not have the stomach for or any interest in. They are supposed to be watching Fox News so that other people don’t have to, not the other way around.

According to Hoyt the Times has recognized this and assigned an editor to watch Fox(!) along with a bunch of other sites they don’t normally like to sully themselves with “to brief them frequently on bubbling controversies.” Ha! They should just read Mediaite more. Alas, managing editor Bill Keller “declined to identify the editor, saying he wanted to spare that person “a bombardment of e-mails and excoriation in the blogosphere.” Good luck with that.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/nyt-assigns-itself-more-glenn-beck-viewing/


	Logged

Re: Media Hypocrisy and Bias

« Reply #393 on: October 01, 2009, 05:49:23 AM »

TonyBlair

Verified Member
CTH Professor

Reputation: +54/-0
Posts: 3824

Good night, Dan

Five appellate judges unanimously tossed former CBS News anchor Dan Rather's $70 million lawsuit against his former network. We're not surprised.

It all dates back to that infamous 2004 smear of George W. Bush -- timed to hurt the 43rd president's re-election bid -- that was almost immediately undone by bloggers, who discovered that it relied on clearly forged documents.

The story, built on years of research by Rather's producer, charged that Bush had weaseled out of his Vietnam-era Texas Air National Guard service and then lied about it.

Following an independent investigation that found the documents couldn't be substantiated, Rather read an on-air retraction -- which he has since claimed was forced on him. He continues to insist the original story was true.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/good_night_dan_iebTNZWJCZbGyG7GKgsuHL


	Logged

Re: Media Hypocrisy and Bias

« Reply #394 on: October 08, 2009, 07:09:54 PM »

TonyBlair

Verified Member
CTH Professor

Reputation: +54/-0
Posts: 3824

Shameless Media Manipulation [Veronique de Rugy]

My colleague Paul Dragos Aligica points out this Yahoo News's shameless example of manipulative interpretation of an opinion poll. Aligica writes:

"Voters Back Obama Over Republicans on Health Care, Poll Finds"

buried in content:

"voters disapproved of the way Obama was handling health care, 51 percent to 41 percent. His health-care plan was opposed by 47 percent, supported by 40 percent."

It would be hilarious if it weren't going to cost us so much money.

By the way, Aligica's latest book, In Defense of Thinking, is worth reading.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NmExZTY0NjY4ZWNkZjZmNzVlNTcxZDViZmUyMjFlZGI=


	Logged

Re: Media Hypocrisy and Bias

« Reply #395 on: October 14, 2009, 09:43:27 PM »

TonyBlair

Verified Member
CTH Professor

Reputation: +54/-0
Posts: 3824

Monday Morning Quarter-backtrack [Mark Steyn]

My old London Telegraph colleague, Toby Harnden, has a piece on Rush and the fake slavery/James Earl Ray quotes that's better than anything you're likely to read in the dying US monodailies:

Quote

Even those who have been primary movers in spreading these malicious falsehoods – which would lead to payouts of hundreds of thousands in British libel courts if lawsuits were ever filed there – are brazenly unapologetic.

Thus, St. Louis Post-Dispatch columnist Bryan Burwell pens this column containing the slavery quote and then follows up with another column with a kind-of-sort-of-well-not-really-at-all mea culpa in which he states that the quote seemed “so in character with the many things that Limbaugh has said before that we didn’t verify it beyond the book”.

OK, so it sounded right and it was on the internet or in a book or something so it was fine to just go ahead and print it as stone-cold fact without any attribution? I wonder which journalism school teaches that?

And Burwell caps it off by implying – nudge, nudge, wink, wink – that Limbaugh’s really lying: “Fine, let’s play along for the time being and take him at his word that he was inaccurately quoted in the Huberman book.” I’m no fan of British libel laws but, again, if that had been printed in the UK it would have led to a hefty payout for aggravated damages.

Can anyone play this game? Bryan Burwell says, "I like to have sex with donkeys." What's that? He didn't actually say it? Fine, let's play along for the time being and take him at his word that he was inaccurately quoted...

Rush should buy The St Louis Post-Dispatch.

Meanwhile, the geniuses at Media Matters say: You want chapter-and-verse on those "Slavery was great/Give James Earl Ray the Medal of Honor" quotes? Okay, here's some stuff Limbaugh has said about Obama...

The race deck is all trump cards:

Step One: You can't say that. It's racist.

So you don't. Next:

Step Two: You're using "code language".

As I always say, "code language" is code language for "I’m inventing what you really meant to say because the actual quote doesn’t quite do the job for me." Still, you steer clear of "code language". So then:

Step Three: We'll just concoct it out of whole cloth, and, after running for a week with "Slavery Advocate Wants Medal Of Honor For MLK Killer", our fact-checkers will confirm the accuracy of that statement by citing something you said about Donovan McNabb or Obama's economic policy. Close enough.

PS Can Rush buy the St Louis Rams if he gets Roman Polanski to front the deal?

(See John Hinderaker's conclusion, not to mention the CNN graphic he reproduces.)

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGExZmMxZDExNzY3MzI5ZDgwOGU4NGY2MGU1YmQyNzQ=


	Logged

Re: Media Hypocrisy and Bias

« Reply #396 on: October 15, 2009, 05:48:41 AM »

TonyBlair

Verified Member
CTH Professor

Reputation: +54/-0
Posts: 3824

Hmmm....I have yet to meet a Democrat who admits to watching Fox news. According to this, there are many closet Fox newsies.
Apparently, to some, the truth still has an allure (but if it actually meant something, they wouldn't be Democrats).
You know it's bad for the NYT when Fox ranks higher.

Too bad, so sad...

Fox hunting

The White House targets independent media

...Although the Obama team doesn't trust Fox News, a surprisingly large number of Democrats do. A new Pew Research Center for the People & the Press poll released on Sept. 13 shows that Fox News is more trusted - even by Democrats - than the New York Times. While 43 percent of Democrats have a positive view of Fox News, 39 percent feel the same way about the Times. Among Republicans and independents, Fox News does have huge 56 and 26 percentage point leads.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/15/fox-hunting/


	Logged

Re: Media Hypocrisy and Bias

« Reply #397 on: October 15, 2009, 11:56:54 AM »

Vocal Observer Offline

Verified Member
CTH Associate Professor

Reputation: +18/-0
Posts: 1971

I've steadily quit watching FoxNews. Many of their personalities are playing on the emotions/fears of the right just like the left does.

O'Reilly goes with whichever way the wind blows.
Hannity feeds on those that won't think for themselves.
Beck is an opportunist.

At this point, I can only stomach Chris Wallace and Special Report.

Fox just like to others is part of a global media network owned by someone that contributed to Hillary Clinton. They are now part of the MSM, who I don't trust.


	Logged

The Principle of Subsidiarity
Repeal the 17th Amendment

"peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none." - Th. Jefferson

Oh yea... Run Paul Run!

Re: Media Hypocrisy and Bias

« Reply #398 on: October 17, 2009, 07:08:10 AM »

Counter

Verified Member
CTH Associate Professor

Reputation: +15/-1
Posts: 1673

Big Hollywood

Next week the networks will coordinate their shows’ story-lines to promote volunteerism.
In the press release announcing the initiative, all four network execs were positively boastful about their ability to inspire their viewers to ask “How high” when told to jump:

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2009/10/15/leaked-memo-reveals-the-white-house-has-control-of-your-television-set/

Participating programs:
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/bighollywood/2009/10/15/list-of-organically-created-iparticipate-television-programs/

Excerpt:
My ten-year-old daughter loves “So You Think You Can Dance.” I suspect most eight to eighteen-year-old girls do. So, my question to the producers of this hit show is: “Why are you pointing my daughter to a web page asking her to work at Planned Parenthood?”

Serve.gov or Serf.dom?
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/pcourrielche/2009/10/15/obama-controls-your-television-set-part-iii-serve-gov-or-serf-dom/


	Logged

Counter

No Coal. Know Cold.
Know coal. No cold.

Re: Media Hypocrisy and Bias

« Reply #399 on: October 17, 2009, 09:55:45 AM »

TonyBlair

Verified Member
CTH Professor

Reputation: +54/-0
Posts: 3824

The Clinton News Network...libelous AND incompetent.

Re: 'Our Bad' [Greg Pollowitz]

CNN emailed us to ask that we post Rick Sanchez's apology, which was supposed to air yesterday. CNN, however, as well as the other cable newsers, were distracted by the prospect of a six-year-old boy's falling to his death live on camera, so Rick never got to apologize to Rush. Here's Rick's apology, which I'm told will air today:

"Earlier this week we provided quotes attributed to Limbaugh to illustrate why some people and players felt that Rush Limbaugh was too divisive to be an NFL owner. One of these quotes, which was in a column in the St. Louis Post Dispatch and in a book largely about conservatives, was refuted by Limbaugh. We have been unable to independently confirm that quote. We should not have reported it and for that I apologize. I feel it is important to hold folks accountable when they make mistakes, and that should include myself and my team."

I also asked CNN to provide me with the link to the Dispatch piece as well as the name of the book. Here's the piece from the Dispatch and the name of the book CNN emailed to me is 110 People Who Are Screwing Up America by Bernard Goldberg. That is not, in fact, the truth. So I fact-checked CNN's fact-check and figured out they meant 101 People Who are Really Screwing America by Jack Huberman. Amazon says the quote is on page 232.

http://media.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDAwNjI5ZjZhZjlmMzJlYjJhNjQyYmQyODdjMjk4NDE=


	Logged

Re: Media Hypocrisy and Bias

« Reply #400 on: October 20, 2009, 06:43:36 PM »

TonyBlair

Verified Member
CTH Professor

Reputation: +54/-0
Posts: 3824

Top White House Official Says Obama Team 'Controlled' Media Coverage During Campaign

White House Communications Director Anita Dunn is seen in a video from January talking about how the Obama campaign exercised absolute "control" over media coverage.

FOXNews.com

The Obama campaign's press strategy leading up to his election last November focused on "making" the media cover what the campaign wanted and on exercising absolute "control" over coverage, White House Communications Director Anita Dunn told an overseas crowd early this year.

In a video of the event, Dunn is seen describing in detail the media strategy used by then-Sen. Barack Obama's highly disciplined presidential campaign. The video is footage from a Jan. 12 forum hosted by the Global Foundation for Democracy and Development in the Dominican Republic.

"Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn't absolutely control," Dunn said, admitting that the strategy "did not always make us popular in the press."

The video drew attention after Dunn kicked off a war of words with Fox News last Sunday, calling the network "opinion journalism masquerading as news." The White House stopped providing guests to "Fox News Sunday" in August after host Chris Wallace fact-checked controversial assertions made by Tammy Duckworth, assistant secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Dunn complained about the fact-checking last Sunday. In the January forum, she provided details about the lengths to which the Obama campaign went to control the media message.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/19/white-house-official-says-obama-team-controlled-media-coverage-campaign/


	Logged

Re: Media Hypocrisy and Bias

« Reply #401 on: October 27, 2009, 06:38:54 PM »

TonyBlair

Verified Member
CTH Professor

Reputation: +54/-0
Posts: 3824

Air America Calls Out Olbermann for Sexist Attack on Michelle Malkin

By Noel Sheppard

Here's something you don't see every day: a far-left media outlet calling out one of the far-left's heroes to defend one of the far-left's most hated conservatives.

As NewsBusters' Brad Wilmouth reported on October 13, Olbermann on "Countdown" that evening called Malkin "a big mashed-up bag of meat with lipstick on it."

Air America's Megan Carpentier was quite displeased at this sexist display (h/t NB reader Joseph McMahon)

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/10/27/air-america-calls-out-olbermann-sexist-attack-michelle-malkin


	Logged

Re: Media Hypocrisy and Bias

« Reply #402 on: October 30, 2009, 01:21:16 PM »

Vocal Observer Offline

Verified Member
CTH Associate Professor

Reputation: +18/-0
Posts: 1971

New York Times refuses to publish Archbishop Dolan's op-ed on anti-Catholic bias
Is NYT confirming the claim?

Quote

“If you want recent evidence of this unfairness against the Catholic Church,” writes the Archbishop, “look no further than a few of these following examples of occurrences over the last couple weeks.”

On October 14, in the pages of the New York Times, reporter Paul Vitello exposed the sad extent of child sexual abuse in Brooklyn’s Orthodox Jewish community.

“Yet,” Archbishop Dolan observes, “the Times did not demand what it has called for incessantly when addressing the same kind of abuse by a tiny minority of priests: release of names of abusers, rollback of statute of limitations, external investigations, release of all records, and total transparency.”

“Given the Catholic Church’s own recent horrible experience, I am hardly in any position to criticize our Orthodox Jewish neighbors, and have no wish to do so... but I can criticize this kind of ‘selective outrage,’” he insists.

The op-ed explains that “In 2004, Professor Carol Shakeshaft documented the wide-spread problem of sexual abuse of minors in our nation’s public schools; while in 2007, the Associated Press issued a series of investigative reports that showed numerous examples of sexual abuse by educators against public school students.”

“Both the Shakeshaft study and the AP reports were essentially ignored, as papers such as the New York Times only seem to have priests in their crosshairs,” the Archbishop writes.

Quote

“I do not mean to suggest that anti-Catholicism is confined to the pages New York Times,” writes Archbishop Dolan, who also admits that “the Catholic Church is not above criticism.”

“We Catholics do a fair amount of it ourselves. We welcome and expect it. All we ask is that such critique be fair, rational, and accurate, what we would expect for anybody. The suspicion and bias against the Church is a national pastime that should be ‘rained out’ for good.”

The Archbishop of New York, also an alumnus of the Catholic University of America with a doctorate in Church History, writes that “my own background in American history should caution me not to hold my breath.”

“Then again, yesterday was the Feast of Saint Jude, the patron saint of impossible causes.”

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=17538


	Logged

The Principle of Subsidiarity
Repeal the 17th Amendment

"peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none." - Th. Jefferson

Oh yea... Run Paul Run!

Re: Media Hypocrisy and Bias

« Reply #403 on: November 01, 2009, 10:29:54 AM »

TonyBlair

Verified Member
CTH Professor

Reputation: +54/-0
Posts: 3824

The White House says "jump" and the NYT says "how high, sir."

Did White House pressure NYT into changing Dover story?
posted at 10:12 am on October 30, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

Originally, the New York Times reported on President Barack Obama’s visit to Dover AFB and the arrival of fallen serviceman by explaining that the White House wanted Obama to be seen as concerned and aware of the sacrifices made in America’s war policies:

A small contingent of reporters and photographers accompanied Mr. Obama to Dover, where he arrived at 12:34 a.m. aboard Marine One. He returned to the South Lawn of the White House at 4:45 a.m.
<…>
The images and the sentiment of the president’s five-hour trip to Delaware were intended by the White House to convey to the nation that Mr. Obama was not making his Afghanistan decision lightly or in haste.

Following that link now, the second paragraph quoted is nowhere to be seen. The Jeff Zeleny report contains no editorial announcement of changes after its publication, and no indication of any retraction. Greyhawk at Mudville Gazette and Nice Deb both noticed the change, however, and Greyhawk also noticed that the NYT didn’t quite redact that paragraph from everywhere on its servers. The story now reads like this:

The trip was a symbolic one for Mr. Obama, given the gravity of his coming announcement of a new strategy for Afghanistan.

The image of the commander in chief standing on a darkened tarmac, offering a salute to one of the soldiers, highlighted the poignancy of a decision he is facing.

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/10/30/did-white-house-pressure-nyt-into-changing-dover-story/


	Logged

Re: Media Hypocrisy and Bias

« Reply #404 on: November 10, 2009, 03:08:38 AM »

Vocal Observer Offline

Verified Member
CTH Associate Professor

Reputation: +18/-0
Posts: 1971

The Myth of Objective Journalism
http://stephenhopkins.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/the-myth-of-objective-journalism/

Quote

I would add to the video content, this would be a great time to develop a “counter” newspaper, call it republican or the right side, to the leftist Columbus Dispatch. Not knowing the markets in Cincinnati, Cleveland or Toledo, I would think the chances of getting a newspaper off the ground and oriented toward freedom and liberty in the capital city might be possible, if not successful (not that the Ohio Republican Party have been oriented toward freedom and liberty in the last 20 years; I prefer to use the word in the literal context of the word republican, not the party).

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/y4hruz5_Euo&rel=0" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/y4hruz5_Euo&rel=0</a>


	Logged

The Principle of Subsidiarity
Repeal the 17th Amendment

"peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none." - Th. Jefferson

Oh yea... Run Paul Run!

Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 30

« previous next »

Recent

Your Info

Statistics

Members

Stats

Users Online

Links