Media Bias | Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion - Part 58
Accessibility by WAH
Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

Media Bias Tag

Posted by Amy Miller on November 07, 2015 9 Comments
Back in October, the ladies of "The View" decided to take out their political frustrations on Carly Fiorina's...appearance. The height of discourse, this show is not. At any rate, their comments ignited a firestorm of intense politicking that culminated with a second appearance for Fiorina---and a panel in high dudgeon. Whoopi Goldberg kicked things off by bringing up View-gate, and Fiorina took the ball and ran with it. Via Fox News:
“You know what, look I’ve been called all kinds of things, Whoopi… I’ve been called a bimbo from the time I was a secretary to the time I was a CEO. I think we need to be able to have civil conversations in this country about our differences… so I'd just like to have a conversation about where we agree and where we disagree,” Fiorina said.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on November 06, 2015 53 Comments
I first heard about this story in the car listening to Rush Limbaugh. It sounded bad. Politico was reporting that a supposedly central part of Dr. Ben Carson's personal narrative was fabricated, EXCLUSIVE: Ben Carson admits fabricating West Point Scholarship [link to Wayback Machine preserved version since edits made by Politico later on]. The issue was whether Carson had lied about applying for and being granted admission to West Point on a scholarship (emphasis added):
Ben Carson’s campaign on Friday admitted, in a response to an inquiry from POLITICO, that a central point in his inspirational personal story was fabricated: his application and acceptance into the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.
I don't know how central it was to his narrative - I had never heard about it, but then again, I don't follow Carson that closely. Here was the passage in question from Carson's autobiography:

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on November 03, 2015 43 Comments
In this particular tale of media hit job turned embarrassment, we have what might be one of the best public displays of gun ignorance presented as fact I've ever seen. The only things missing are a barrel shroud and a couple rounds of rubber bullets. Gizmodo reporter Wes Siler thought he'd pegged Republican Presidential Candidate Senator Ted Cruz as a gun safety hypocrite. Last weekend, the Junior Senator from the Lone Star State went pheasant hunting. Note the unloaded, break-action shotgun resting on Cruz's shoulder.

Posted by Amy Miller on November 03, 2015 18 Comments
Back in October, I covered a Gallup poll that showed the majority of Americans don't support a handgun ban. At the time, only 27% of Americans said they would support such a ban. Two studies covered by Legal Insurrection later that month revealed that the Obama Administration's renewed push for stricter controls and limited carry actually runs contrary to the social science of controlling violence and keeping people safe. The thing is, you'd never know it with the way the mainstream media covers issues like gun control, urban violence, and the Second Amendment. The scope and tragedy of deaths due to gun violence aren't just fodder for "very special episodes" of shows like Dateline---they're chum in the water for an opportunistic media determined to forward the interests of anti-gun, pro-regulation activists. Case in point: in the wake of the Umpqua Community College shooting in Rosebud, Oregon, the New York Times unleashed an apparent expose on Sheriff John Hanlin, drawing out his past, pro-gun thought crimes and using them to turn the conversation away from mental illness and toward the Brady Campaign's push for Hanlin's firing---and a strict, anti-gun agenda. We saw it coming from a mile away, but that doesn't make it any less frustrating. We as conservatives have learned not to trust the media when it comes to reporting on guns---which is what makes this next video so refreshing. Atlanta-area journalist Ben Swann has committed a cardinal sin: he looked directly into the camera and defended the Second Amendment. Watch:

Posted by Mike LaChance on November 03, 2015 12 Comments
The CNBC debate has sparked a number of conversations on the very real issue of liberal bias in the media. As Professor Jacobson pointed out last night, this is an opportunity for Republicans. When the issue is being discussed seriously on MSNBC, you know we've reached a turning point. Yesterday on Morning Joe, host Joe Scarborough challenged his panelists to answer a simple question. Mark Finkelstein of NewsBusters has the story:
Scarborough: No Republican Has Hosted Network Sunday Show or Newscast in 50 Years In the wake of the CNBC debate debacle, Joe Scarborough went on an epic rant on liberal media bias on today's Morning Joe. He summed things up this way, in challenging the panel: "you can't do it and nobody here can do it: name the single Republican that has hosted a Sunday show, that has been an anchor of a news network for the big three networks over the past 50 years: you can not do it."

Posted by William A. Jacobson on November 02, 2015 33 Comments
On Saturday night, I wrote that the GOP needs to make an example of NBC News after the CNBC moderating debacle. The point was not that NBC News is the worst offender, it's that it was the wrong place at the wrong time for NBC News, and the right place at the right time for the GOP to pick a fight with the media. The RNC decision to pull NBC News (and its affiliate, Telemundo) from the debate to be co-moderated with National Review was a first step. But it is not enough. The GOP needs to reset the narrative of the networks being in control. For too long GOP presidential candidates have been subjected to Democrat-agenda journalists during Republican primary debates. George Stephanopoulos' grilling of Mitt Romney in the 2012 Republican debate was a classic of the genre:

Posted by Amy Miller on November 02, 2015 24 Comments
October's CNBC-hosted Republican debate threw into full relief the bias inherent in the mainstream media's handling of electoral politics. In the wake of the broadcast, both the MSM and RNC leadership fielded comments and accusations from candidates (and conservative bloggers...) rendered beyond frustrated at the CNBC moderators' questions, tone, and approach to a slate of candidates they treated like a lineup of hostile witnesses. Donald Trump has spent a great deal of time since that debate lashing out at the media over its treatment of conservatives, and his latest move is one that his supporters hope will set him further apart from the pack. Republican campaign reps gathered together this weekend in a meeting organized by GOP attorney Ben Ginsberg to craft a list of demands the entire slate of GOP candidates could present to network executives before the next debate. Representatives from Trump's campaign attended this meeting---then promptly announced their intention to independently negotiate with the networks apart from Ginsberg's efforts.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on October 31, 2015 73 Comments
The GOP has a long history of subjecting its candidates to abuse by debate moderators. From George Stephanopolous to Candy Crowley, debates are a time for network journalists to earn their battle badges by damaging Republicans. And the GOP just sucks it up and takes it. So why would the CNBC moderators have thought the most recent Republican Primary debate should be any different? CNBC did what it thought it was supposed to do -- mock and snicker at Republican candidates. Belittle them. Dismiss their intelligence and portray them as kooks.

Posted by New Neo on October 31, 2015 12 Comments
Jonah Goldberg points out something that the MSM has been purposely ignoring:
Carson has the highest favorables of any candidate in the GOP field. But...most analysis of Carson’s popularity from pundits focuses on his likable personality and his sincere Christian faith. But it’s intriguingly rare to hear people talk about the fact that he’s black. One could argue that he’s even more authentically African-American than Barack Obama, given that Obama’s mother was white and he was raised in part by his white grandparents... He was a towering figure in the black community in Baltimore and nationally — at least, until he became a Republican politician. And that probably explains why his race seems to be such a non-issue for the media... How strange it must be for people who comfort themselves with the slander that the GOP is a cult of organized racial hatred that the most popular politician among conservatives is a black man. Better to ignore the elephant in the room than account for such an inconvenient fact. The race card is just too valuable politically and psychologically for liberals who need to believe that their political opponents are evil.
Not strange at all.

Posted by New Neo on October 29, 2015 70 Comments
It turns out that instead of a snoozefest, the third debate was fascinating. And it was all thanks to the incredibly clear anti-GOP bias of CNBC. What am I talking about? Group dynamics, that's what. I've studied groups and I've run groups. Groups don't happen just because you get a bunch of people together in a room, even if they're sitting in a circle, holding hands and singing "Kumbaya." There comes a time in the life of a collection of people when they become a group, even if only temporarily---even a group of people that's pitted against each other in competition, like the candidates last night. If you give them a common enemy against which to unite, they sometimes become a group, and that's what happened Wednesday evening. It took a little time. Even though the candidates knew they were in enemy territory with these moderators, I think even they were surprised at the extent of the bias and the sharpness of the "gotcha" questions. So it took a while to know how to react. Trump had already called one question "not nicely asked," but Cruz was most definitely the leader, the first to go on a lengthy offensive against the moderators. And what an attack it was! Take a look:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on October 23, 2015 11 Comments
We have seen various levels of incitement in recent weeks, frequently involving false claims of Israeli murder of Palestinians. Palestinian knife-attackers who are shot dead frequently are portrayed as the victim. The most infamous example of such incitement was when Mahmoud Abbas claimed in a televised speech that a 13-year old Arab boy who stabbed a 13-year old Jewish boy was executed by Israel. In fact, the 13-year old Arab boy was alive and being treated (he was not shot, a car hit him during the attack) in an Israeli hospital; he since has been discharged. When Israel showed video of him in the hospital to dispel Abbas' lie and to try to calm the situation, Israel was accused of violating the boy's privacy (seriously). Another incitement took place yesterday, over the death of Hashem Azzeh, a 54-year old Palestinian live in the section of Hebron (H2) which by a 1997 agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority is under complete Israeli security control. Hashem is described as a "peace activist" struggling to survive with his family in the Israeli-controlled section of Hebron. That section, as I reported from my trip to Hebron and the Cave of the Patriarchs last June, is part of what was a several-hundred year old Jewish community which was driven out during 1929 Arab riots, in which 67 Jews in Hebron were massacred. That small section of town has been reclaimed by a few hundred Israeli Jews, causing daily strife and requiring a heavy Israeli military presence. There are tall metal sniper shields to protect people and armed soldiers almost at every corner. There have been attacks on Arabs as well as on Jews, and Hebron is one of the most difficult situations of conflict.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on October 20, 2015 4 Comments
Last Friday MSNBC used an anti-Israel series of maps [Featured Image] frequently spread by "pro-Palestinian" boycott activists. The map sequence purports to show "Palestinian Loss of Land" since 1946. As we documented in our post, MSNBC uses anti-Israel propaganda map, the maps are a lie both individually and in sequence. The land in the first map was part of the British Mandate of Palestine, not a country of Palestine, and most of the land on the map was public land, not land owned privately by Palestinian Arabs. The second map, the UN partition plan, was the division of land the Arabs rejected and went to war over. The third map, post Israel Independence, purports to show the West Bank and Gaza as Palestinian, but in fact that land was controlled by Jordan and Egypt, respectively. The last map, showing Palestinian control under the Oslo Accords, represents a gain of land, not loss. This annotation of the maps has some of the details. Map That Lies - Annotated With all that in mind, here's the original MSNBC broadcast:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on October 17, 2015 15 Comments
There is a standard fixture at anti-Israel BDS rallies and events -- a map purporting to show loss of Palestinian land to Israel. But it's a completely misleading and false map. Yet MSNBC used it on air today -- a demonstration of how Big Lies become truth when repeated often enough:
The map has been debunked so many times in the past, a simple Google search would have demonstrated the problem. Elder of Ziyon blog has written a definitive taken down of the map in 2012, The Map That Lies. The Tower magazine has an exhaustive research post on why the map is a lie, The Mendacious Maps of Palestinian “Loss”.  Even The Economist had an explanation why the map was deceptive in 2010, when blogger Andrew Sullivan used the map. Most important is that Map 1, which purports to show "Palestinian land" as comprising most of the British Mandate (after Britain already has lopped off most of the Mandate land to create Jordan) does not show "Palestinian" land at all. As Elder of Ziyon explained, that land was mostly public land, and there was no country of Palestine:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on October 16, 2015 14 Comments
In the recent spate of knifings, firebombings and rock attacks, the international press has done a masterful job of portraying the Palestinian attackers as the victims through misleading headlines. This is consistent with the international media bias seen during the 2014 Gaza conflict. The international press plays a critical role in instigating attacks for the cameras. This video posted in 2012 shows how the theater takes place:
Nonetheless, the international press is free to roam in areas controlled by Israel. So this should come as a shock to the international press -- a Palestinian wearing the type of clothing (including a large "PRESS" sign) worn by reporters stabbed an Israeli soldier:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on October 10, 2015 18 Comments
Sometimes anti-Israel media bias is blatant, like the NY Times disgusting attempt to deny that Jewish Temples stood on the Temple Mount. A serious backlash forced the Times to issue a correction -- but why did it even attempt to feed into the incitement that denies the Jewish connection to the Temple Mount? Other times it is more subtle, like the the headline from The Independent in Britain about the shooting of a 16 year old Palestinian boy in Jerusalem. The headline, which is what most people read and sets the theme of an article, portrays the boy as the victim, and only obliquely references some connection to stabbings in Jerusalem. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israel-unrest-seventh-palestinian-killed-by-security-forces-after-jerusalem-stabbing-as-wave-of-a6688781.html In fact, the 16 year old had just stabbed two elderly religious Jews on their way home from Shabbat prayers at the Western Wall. They survived, but one is in serious condition. Here's that 16 year old as he went on his stabbing spree, and then attacked a policeman. At that point he was shot dead. (Images via @IdoDaniel Twitter)

Posted by Mike LaChance on October 10, 2015 14 Comments
CNN's Ashleigh Banfield spoke to Democratic strategist Robert Zimmerman about the upcoming Democratic primary debate yesterday. They considered the unthinkable possibility that Bernie Sanders will bring up Hillary's email scandal, which Banfield quickly suggested isn't really a scandal. Matthew Balan of NewsBusters reports (emphasis is his):
CNN's Banfield: Hillary E-Mail Scandal 'Not Even A Scandal' On Friday's Legal View, CNN's Ashleigh Banfield did her best to downplay Hillary Clinton's ongoing e-mail scandal. Banfield asked Democratic strategist Robert Zimmerman if Bernie Sanders would bring up the issue at the upcoming Democratic presidential debate.

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on October 07, 2015 23 Comments
Over at College Insurrection, we posted a story about Harvard's recent debate loss to a team of inmates from New York. Fox News reported Tuesday that the inmates who beat Harvard's team are gaining quite the reputation having also beat teams from West Point and the University of Vermont. Unlike most debate squads, the inmates had no Internet access to assist in their debate prep.
A group of New York inmates has toppled Harvard's prestigious debate team. It took place at the Eastern New York Correctional Facility, a maximum-security prison in Napanoch. The Ivy League undergrads were invited last month to debate the inmates who take in-prison courses taught by Bard College faculty. Harvard's team won the national title this year and the world championship in 2014. But the inmates are building a reputation, too. The club has notched victories against teams from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and the University of Vermont. Against Harvard, the inmates were tasked with defending the position that public schools should be allowed to turn away students whose parents came to the U.S. illegally. Harvard's team responded, but a panel of neutral judges declared the inmates victorious.
Tuesday, hosts of ABC's Good Morning America covered the story, only to mock the inmate debate squad:

Posted by Mike LaChance on October 06, 2015 27 Comments
Carly Fiorina is now polling ahead of Hillary Clinton in Iowa so naturally, the liberal media has sharpened its claws for new attacks on her. The Washington Post recently filed this report:
Carly Fiorina’s first political campaign had a surprising problem: Money Famed California pollster Joe Shumate was found dead in his home one month before Election Day 2010, surrounded by sheets of polling data he labored over for the flailing Senate bid of Carly Fiorina. Upon his death, Fiorina praised Shumate as “the heart and soul” of her team. She issued a news release praising him as a person who believed in “investing in those he worked with” and offering her “sincerest condolences” to his widow. But records show there was something that Fiorina did not offer his widow: Shumate’s last paycheck, for at least $30,000. It was one of more than 30 invoices, totaling about $500,000, that the multimil­lionaire didn’t settle — even as Fiorina reimbursed herself nearly $1.3 million she lent the campaign.