Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

Media Bias Tag

Posted by Fuzzy Slippers on January 18, 2016 13 Comments
Last year, George Stephanopoulos had a particularly antagonistic interview with the author of Clinton Cash, and shortly thereafter, it was revealed that he had donated a substantial sum of money to the Clinton Foundation.  ABC stood by their man, though he did have to apologize on-air. The Washington Free Beacon is now reporting that Stephanopoulos has simply stopped disclosing his donations to the Clinton Foundation.
ABC news anchor George Stephanopoulos has stopped disclosing his donations to the Clinton Foundation prior to his interviews with presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Stephanopoulos interviewed Clinton twice over the past week, once Thursday morning on Good Morning America and again on Sunday’s This Week.

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on January 13, 2016 78 Comments
It must be old campaign oppo dump day in America. Earlier today, an old, deceptively edited campaign ad from Marco Rubio's Senate run floated to the surface of the internet. This evening, the New York Times thinks they have a hot scoop with a story about Ted Cruz's Goldman Sachs loans. The New York Times is about four years late to the "exclusive" party though. Cruz's Goldman Sachs loans are old news. According to their 2012 personal filings, the Cruz's took loans from both Goldman Sachs and Citibank. His wife, Heidi Cruz, works for Goldman Sachs, but is currently on leave. These loans were not, however, disclosed in the FEC filings for Cruz's campaign, Ted Cruz for Senate Committee. First, the NYT story:

Posted by David Gerstman on January 07, 2016 23 Comments
At a time when tensions in the Middle East are rising, it is perhaps a time to once again review President Barack Obama's qualifications for office. To be sure his qualifications were fabricated, or at least oversold. This wasn't just the doing of the Obama campaign. Campaigns are supposed to do present their candidates in the best possible light. The problem  was that America's supposedly independent media boosted the first terms senator's prospects with little or no skepticism. This was certainly the case in reporting where most reporters bought into the historical aspect of Obama's candidacy as well was the rebuke to Republicans for the failings of the Bush presidency. (If not the failings, then the aspects that the liberal media disagreed with.) For the purpose of this exercise let's look at parts of The Washington Post's 2008 endorsement of Obama. I am using the Post as an example of what we saw so frequetly because even though the Post is a liberal paper, its editorial position regarding foreign policy is generally responsible. However in the Post's enthusiasm for Obama, all caution was disregarded and they promoted a man who did not really exist.

Posted by Jonathan Levin on January 04, 2016 0 Comments
CAMERA - the Committee for Accuracy in Middle-East Reporting in America - has released its Top Ten MidEast Media Mangles for 2015. There are some doozies, from all the usual sources: The New York Times, BBC, Washington Post, MSNBC, AP, The Guardian and Ha'aretz.  There's also the perennial phenomenon of media silence regarding Palestinian incitement that is the bedrock of the Israeli/Arab conflict.  In a first, Elle made the list as well (apparently terrorist chic is in style). CAMERA's full exposition is here, but in brief the top ten are:

1. Ignoring, absolving and questioning the spate of Palestinian knife terror attacks.

Posted by Mike LaChance on January 03, 2016 36 Comments
Protesters have taken over a small federal building in Oregon and some of them are armed. One of them is Ammon Bundy, son of rancher Cliven Bundy who was in the news last year for clashing with federal authorities over land use. The reason for the protest seems to be two-fold. The situation which set off the protest was the prosecution of a pair of father and son ranchers named Hammond. The Hammonds are not part of the protest however and are expected to surrender themselves to authorities Monday for separate charges. The second aspect of the protest is a grievance over the federal government taking over land that used to be owned by ranchers.

Posted by Jonathan Levin on December 27, 2015 32 Comments
The renewed attention on media bias since the Washington Post cartoon about Ted Cruz's children reminded me of Kyle Smith's December 14, 2015, review of Bridge of Lies in Commentary. Smith writes that Hollywood loves "based on a true story" scripts for their emotional draw and their putative lessons about our society.  But all too often those lessons really aren't what Leftist Hollywood wants them to be, so movie makers change the facts to comport with their view of the world. Smith describes how several Oscar-hopefuls amended reality to fit the liberal narrative.  Imitation Game is based on the life of Englishman Alan Turing, a genuine hero of the Western world whose decryption work at Bletchley Park was indispensable to winning WWII and the creation of the computer age.

Posted by David Gerstman on December 26, 2015 3 Comments
Anti-Israel bias in The New York Times isn't news. But an article this week once again highlights how the Times promotes those who criticize or demonize Israel pretty uncritically, Israeli Veterans’ Criticism of West Bank Occupation Incites Furor. The report in question was about the group Breaking the Silence, which the paper described as "a leftist organization of combat veterans that says it aims to expose the grim reality of Israel’s occupation of the West Bank." Of course that's not all, it also has brought up of accusations, often unsubstantiated, of IDF misconduct during war too. Still the story of Breaking the Silence is portrayed as a referendum on Israel and its morality. We read of the organization as being "at the center of a furor that is laying bare Israel’s divisions over its core values and the nature of its democracy," and "[highlighting] what it views as the corrosive nature of the occupation of the West Bank on Israeli society."

Posted by Jonathan Levin on December 24, 2015 10 Comments
It's a peculiar tradition.  As Christians prepare to celebrate Christmas, the media churns out articles blaming Israel for Christian struggles in the Holy Land. The Foundation for the Defense of Democracy's Cliff May wrote about the phenomenon in 2007:
In this holiday season, there are journalistic conventions one comes to expect: stories lamenting the commercialism of Christmas; stories summing up the 12 months gone by and predicting the direction of the New Year; and stories blaming Israelis for the problems afflicting the Holy Land.
Back then, May debunked accusations the Israel prevented Christians from visiting Bethlehem. This year, USA Today reports that the 2,000 year-old Christian community in Gaza is disappearing. Instead of looking to Hamas, the Islamist, Specially Designated Global Terrorist Organization that controls Gaza, writer Matthew Vickery (previously with al-Jazeera) blames "[t]he ongoing Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip and the highest unemployment rate in the world."

Posted by William A. Jacobson on December 23, 2015 38 Comments
Washington Post cartoonist Ann Telnaes drew a cartoon showing Ted Cruz's children as monkeys dancing to his tune. The pretext was that the children appeared in a campaign ad. As if this is the first time children have appeared in a political context. There was a firestorm of controversy, and the cartoon was pulled: I have mixed feelings about the controversy. On the one hand, I'm against the culture of outrage that pervades campuses and increasingly the media. But I also understand why lines need to be drawn for candidates, particularly as to minor children.

Posted by Jonathan Levin on December 22, 2015 10 Comments
The Boycott, Divest & Sanction ("BDS") movement and the broader campaign to delegitimize Israel has had a tough few weeks.  In academia and industry, the boycott campaign has been exposed as potentially discriminatory and unlawful, and yet another panel of experts has affirmed that Israel's use of force against Hamas is not only legitimate, but exemplary. Law Professors Eugene Kontorovich and Steven Davidoff Solomon of the Northwestern University and University of California - Berkeley, respectively, make the case that boycotts by academic associations are unlawful.  As one might expect, academic associations each have a stated purpose, typically to collect, share, expand and advance knowledge in the relevant field.  Profs. Kontorovich and Davidoff explain that such associations cannot legally do anything other than pursue those stated purposes, and:
Boycott resolutions that are beyond the powers of an organization are void, and individual members can sue to have a court declare them invalid. The individuals serving on the boards of these organizations may be liable for damages. Consider the American Historical Association. Its constitution—a corporate charter—states that its purpose “shall be the promotion of historical studies” and the “broadening of historical knowledge among the general public.” There’s nothing in this charter that would authorize a boycott. And an anti-Israel boycott will do nothing to promote “historical studies” or broaden “historical knowledge.” A boycott by definition restricts study and research: The explanatory material attached to the [American Anthropological Association ("AAA")] resolution, for example, says it would restrict the organization from sharing scholarly journals with Israeli universities.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on December 14, 2015 25 Comments
I noted the other night that Donald Trump may have opened the "Overton Window" for Ted Cruz, by making Cruz acceptable to both Republican establishment types and general election voters who otherwise would have considered him Cruz conservative. I noted the fear of a liberal who wrote:
Donald Trump looks like the warm-up act. Whoever follows him from the Republican party looks reasonable (and sane) by comparison.
How will the mainstream media react if Cruz's current poll surge holds and he looks like a viable challenger to Trump? We know the answer, because there's a history here, one I documented back in August 2013. And ironically, it's a theme Trump appears to be taking up in a recent attack on Cruz. I called it the crazying of Ted Cruz, focusing on a Daily Beast article trying to portray Cruz as "creepy":
A lifetime of achievement that would normally be heralded by liberals if achieved by a liberal Hispanic, devolves into creepiness on the slimmest of pretexts. This is all part of the crazying of Ted Cruz by liberal publications like the Daily Beast. It doesn’t matter what the substance is, they just want to associate the word “creepy” with Ted Cruz in the minds of the public, many of whom don’t read past the headline.

Posted by Mike LaChance on December 14, 2015 23 Comments
Here's something you may have missed over the weekend. While most Americans are concerned about terrorism and the growth of ISIS, President Obama and other world leaders met in Paris to discuss climate change. When an agreement was reached, journalists reacted like excited teenage girls. T. Becket Adams of the Washington Examiner has the story:
Reporters shout, jump for joy after climate change agreement Journalists appeared to erupt in cheers Saturday afternoon after representatives from nearly 200 countries agreed to adopt the Paris Agreement, a major accord vowing to fight global warming.

Posted by David Gerstman on December 08, 2015 12 Comments
In the early days of blogging there was a blog called Oh, that liberal media, which regularly exposed instances of liberal media bias. In fact in the early days of blogging that was one of the top achievements of the blogosphere, to point out the easy political bias most supposedly objective news sources engaged in. I used to think that the blogosphere would serve as a necessary corrective to the media, but that hasn't happened. In recent years, I don't think that the criticism has had the same effect, even if in some ways the media cocoon has worsened. I think that conservative media critics have convinced all those who can be convinced of the bias and now either people accept the bias because they agree with it or look to alternative news sources because they don't trust the MSM. And the MSM started paying less attention to the criticism. Most of those who were persuadable have been persuaded. (As far as those who deny that such bias exist ... it's hard to deny when prominent journalists have boasted of the bias.) But I still believe that it's possible for the media to jump the shark. At some point the media will show that they are so hopelessly out of touch with most voters, that even non-ideological types would cease to believe them.

Posted by Mike LaChance on December 02, 2015 22 Comments
You may have noticed that the narrative around violent crimes changes depending on who committed the act. When someone with a Muslim sounding name is the suspect, we're repeatedly told by the media and public officials not to rush to judgement. If however, there's even the slightest chance that the perpetrator is in any way conservative, people start talking about violent Republican rhetoric and everyone right of center is suddenly urged to reexamine their views. It's a scenario we've documented on this blog multiple times: Ted Cruz is sick of this narrative and talked about the issue with Hugh Hewitt.

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on November 30, 2015 19 Comments
Monday, Robert Dear, the 57-year-old suspect in the Colorado Springs clinic shooting attended an advisement hearing alongside his public defender. Dear will be represented by the same public defender who defended the Aurora theater shooter some months back. The hearing contained no discussion of motives. Colorado local news reported:

Posted by David Gerstman on November 12, 2015 17 Comments
In a look at the history of the tensions between President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, The New York Times several days ago started with an interesting anecdote.
For President Obama, it was a day of celebration. He had just signed the most important domestic measure of his presidency, his health care program. So when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel arrived at the White House for a hastily arranged visit, it was likely not the main thing on his mind. To White House officials, it was a show of respect to make time for Mr. Netanyahu on that day back in March 2010. But Mr. Netanyahu did not see it that way. He felt squeezed in, not accorded the rituals of such a visit. No photographers were invited to record the moment. "That wasn't a good way to treat me," he complained to an American afterward. The tortured relationship between Barack and Bibi, as they call each other, has been a story of crossed signals, misunderstandings, slights perceived and real. Burdened by mistrust, divided by ideology, the leaders of the United States and Israel talked past each other for years until the rupture over Mr. Obama's push for a nuclear agreement with Iran led to the spectacle of Mr. Netanyahu denouncing the president's efforts before a joint meeting of Congress.
It's interesting because this is not at all how I remembered it. I remember that the lack of attention to the meeting was perceived as an intentional slight of Netanyahu. A quick check of the contemporaneous reporting confirmed this.

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on November 11, 2015 38 Comments
Tuesday night, Fox Business and the Wall Street Journal hosted a Republican Presidential debate. Making a concerted effort to keep questions substantive and issue focused, moderator Neil Cavuto went so far as to say the debate was, "not about the moderators." Imagine that. A candidate debate in which candidates actually debate issues. What a novel idea! Fox Business nailed it. Questions were issue oriented and highlighted candidate policy differences. CNBC's handling of the last Republican presidential debate was so terrible, the debate highlight reel consisted of candidates channeling their inner Gingrich to swat back at absurd questions. The network's handling of the debate caused the Republican National Committee to suspend their relationship and any future debate arrangements. But because Tuesday's Fox Business debate ran as planned, political writers found the lack of entertaining, non-policy moments dull. Like Politico's Glenn Thrush:
Accessibility by WAH