Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

Media Bias Tag

Posted by Mirabelle Ward on May 17, 2015 20 Comments
In November of 2012, the UN voted 138 to 9, with 41 abstentions, to recognize a state of “Palestine” in the West Bank and Gaza.  There was no requirement that such "state" cease terrorism, its violence and hostilities towards its neighbor Israel, even recognize Israel for what it is and what it was always intended to be, a Jewish state. What shocked me at the time was not the outcome of the vote, but that fact that, except for the Czech Republic, every single member of the EU either voted in favor or abstained. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s speech preceding the vote, referring to Israeli “aggression” rather than defense in Gaza, and claiming to want peace despite having rejected a far-reaching peace proposal only four years prior, was mendacious from the first sentence to the very last applause line. How was it, I wondered, that the European nations were unable to see through his charade?

Posted by Amy Miller on May 16, 2015 20 Comments
Democrats want you to know that they believe Republicans are responsible for the tragic train crash this past week that killed 8 and started a conversation about safety in Amtrak's most heavily-traveled corridor. During a recent press conference with House Speaker John Boehner, IBT's senior political writer Ginger Gibson made the mistake of playing into that narrative---and got more than a little embarrassed. Watch: From MRC TV:

Posted by Mike LaChance on May 16, 2015 7 Comments
The Stephanopoulos story keeps getting worse, especially when compared to the experience of other journalists. Geraldo Rivera of FOX News claims he was fired by ABC News in 1985 for a paltry $200 donation to a friend who was running for mayor in New Bedford, MA. It's amazing what you can learn by following Instapundit's Twitter feed: Here's the related story from Jessica Chasmar of the Washington Times:
Geraldo on Stephanopoulos apology: ABC fired me over $200 donation Geraldo Rivera on Friday questioned why he was fired from ABC News 30 years ago for making a $200 political donation to a family friend, while the network appears to be standing firm behind George Stephanopoulos, who apologized Thursday for donating $75,000 to the Clinton Foundation. “In 1985, after fifteen great years, I was fired by ABC News,” Mr. Rivera wrote in a Facebook post, Mediaite reported. “The official reason for my firing was a non-disclosed $200 donation to a family friend running in a non-partisan mayoral campaign in New Bedford Massachusetts.”
Rivera discussed the issue on FOX and Friends this week:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on May 14, 2015 25 Comments
Remember how former Clinton advisor and now ABC News host George Stephanopoulos raked the "Clinton Cash" book author over the coals? We smelled a rat at the time:
George Stephanopoulos worked in the Bill Clinton administration as a senior adviser. In what way is he qualified to question the author of a book which seeks to expose alleged corruption of the Clintons? Peter Schweizer holds his own in this interview despite the aggressive and skeptical questions hurled at him throughout the discussion. Stephanopoulos is not so much a journalist, he’s a member of the palace guard. It’s quite clear which side he’s on in this situation.
Rat confirmed, via Politico, George Stephanopoulos discloses $50,000 contribution to Clinton Foundation:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on May 13, 2015 6 Comments
Much of the war against Israel is fought in the media and through deceptive "Non-Governmental Organizations" which issue endless distorted reports against Israel. There hardly is any pretense of objectivity anymore -- there is an attempt to tie Israel's hands when dealing with groups like Hamas and Hezbollah which strategically use civilians as shields. In Gaza, the media was intimidated by Hamas, and maintained a near-silence about the use of the main hospital in Gaza as a Hamas headquarters, and the firing of rockets from near schools, apartments and hospitals. But a few reports leaked out and some reporters admitted to the distorted reporting after leaving Gaza: http://youtu.be/Nu-e5qWXx-k This media war is important because one side (Hamas, Hezbollah) uses media outrage as a strategic weapon to shape the physical battlefield.  And biased, agenda-driven NGOs and media organizations are part of the plan. The lastest distortion, which has received wide play on anti-Israel websites and on Facebook, was issued by "Breaking the Silence."

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on May 11, 2015 22 Comments
Yesterday, a video released by Digitas Daily featured a condensed version of Bloomberg host Mark Halperin conducting a super creepy interview with Sen. Ted Cruz. In a series of bizarre questions, Halperin grilled Sen. Cruz on his Cubaness. The interview was so bad, the left-wing group Think Progress condemned it as, "the most racist interview of a 2016 candidate." Think Progress came to the same conclusion as many on the right: Halperin seemed determined to get Cruz on the record about the minutia of his Hispanic heritage. Facing the wrath of the Internet, Mark Halperin released an apology today:

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on May 10, 2015 29 Comments
Thanks to Mark Halperin, we can all rest easy knowing that Presidential hopeful Ted Cruz, is in fact, authentically Cuban. In a bizarre interrogation line of questioning on Bloomberg's 'With All Due Respect', host Mark Halperin grilled Sen. Cruz on his Cubaness. Questions began with, "when you filled out your application to Princeton, to Harvard Law school, did you list yourself as an Hispanic?" Then moved to cuisine, "do you have a favorite Cuban food, Cuban dish?" Cruz tried to answer but was interrupted by Halperin demanding to know his favorite Cuban dish. And it didn't stop there. Halperin continued his interrogation until making a final demand -- that Sen. Cruz welcome Sen. Sanders to the presidential race, with the requirement that he do so, "on Espanol," whatever that means.

Posted by David Gerstman on May 08, 2015 12 Comments
Iran released the Maersk Tigris, the cargo ship it seized at sea last week. The New York Times reports:
The Maersk Line, the Danish shipping giant, confirmed in a statement that the vessel and its 24-member crew, forced to anchor near Iran’s southern port of Bandar Abbas since its seizure on April 28, were now free and en route to the port of Jebel Ali in the United Arab Emirates. ... The Maersk Tigris is registered in the Marshall Islands. It is managed and staffed by Rickmers Shipmanagement, a subsidiary of Germany’s Rickmers Group, a maritime services company, which reported that the crew was in good condition. ... The apparent stand-down reflected what political analysts called a wish by both Iran and the United States to avert an escalation of tensions that could sabotage the nuclear talks between Iran and a group of six powers that includes the United States.
From the language of the report it appears that Maersk agreed to a settlement of the claim an Iranian company had against it. CBS offered the judgment of one of its security analysts.
The Iranian decision to board the vessel was "a reflection of the fact that tensions are running very high, and these tensions don't really have borders," explained CBS News senior national security analyst Juan Zarate. "These are conflicts that are happening on the ground, they're happening in the shipping lanes, and there are places and points of vulnerability that could... serve as flashpoints for conflict."

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on May 07, 2015 24 Comments
After showing the internet how little he knew about free speech yesterday, Chris Cuomo attempted to rectify his Constitutional missteps in a short video. "I got beat up for this tweet I made; it was a clumsy tweet. I was caught up in a back and forth..." he began. First, the tweet: We've been searching high and low for Cuomo's version of the Constitution to no avail. But in the mean time, not only do we say we love the Constitution, we've actually read it (though not on the counsel of Cuomo). Our version of the first amendment completely disagree's with Cuomo's because it simply states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
But maybe words are hard?

Posted by David Gerstman on May 07, 2015 7 Comments
Last week Iran's foreign minister and chief nuclear negotiator Mohammad Javad Zarif appeared in "a conversation" with columnist David Ignatius of The Washington Post at NYU sponsored by the New America Foundation. There were those in the media who described Zarif as "suave" and "diplomatic," but not everyone was impressed with Zarif's performance. Matthew Continetti went after the supposed moderate in The Appalling Mr. Zarif.
What made Zarif’s appearance all the more nauseating was his pretense of moral standing. He has none. His lecture to the United States took place as his regime held a container ship it had seized in international waters, and as evidence emerged of Iranian violations of U.N. sanctions. It is the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and its proxies such as Hezbollah and the Houthis and other Shiite militias that are fomenting and exploiting sectarian conflict in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and Iraq. Iran’s human rights record is abysmal. Since Zarif returned to government in the administration of Hassan Rouhani, there has been a “surge” in executions in Iran. “The authorities restricted freedoms of expression, association, and assembly, arresting, detaining, and prosecuting in unfair trials minority and women’s rights activists, journalists, human rights defenders, and others who voiced dissent” say the right-wing extremists at Amnesty International, whose most recent report catalogues the torture and cruel and unusual punishments of the Iranian regime. ... At NYU Zarif said America will have to lift sanctions on Iran “whether Senator Cotton likes it or not.” The “polite” and “respectful” audience broke into laughter—at Cotton. “I couldn’t resist,” Zarif said. No troll could.

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on May 06, 2015 27 Comments
Days later and establishment media types are still struggling to define the Garland shooting at Sunday's "draw Muhammad" event. CNN anchor Chris Cuomo, son of late New Governor Mario Cuomo, waded into the free speech pool today. Needless to say the ill-fated soirée was short-lived. Whilst debating the merits of the first amendment, Cuomo fired off this misinformed statement: Well, I've read the Constitution and I'm pretty sure no where in the first amendment or elsewhere is "hate speech" excluded from protection. "Hate speech" of course being the term progressives toss around any time words or phrases offend their delicate sensibilities or confront their requisite acquiescence to what Tom Wolff describes as, radical chic.

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on May 05, 2015 40 Comments
Sunday, a couple of wanna-be jihadists' attempt to silence free speech at a "draw Mohammad" event were foiled. The Garland tragedy provided many causes for concern. But for the authors of this Washington Post article... well, they're most put off by the rudeness of Pamela Geller and event organizers who (gasp!)... haven't apologized? Now, one would think members of the media, particularly media employed by a legacy establishment such as the Washington Post, would applaud those who stand firm against the enemies of free speech. Alas... Sadly, the headline isn't the worst part of the article published late yesterday evening. Sandhya Somashekhar, the article's author went so far as to suggest the event was intentionally designed to "bait" Mohammad image loyalists. "If the contest was intended as bait, it worked," she wrote. Somashekhar also attempted to draw a parallel between the always provocative Pamela Geller and the fact that tension in the local Muslim community is quite high... even though the shooters began their fatal trek in Phoenix, Arizona, according to police.

Posted by Mike LaChance on May 03, 2015 16 Comments
You can tell 'Clinton Cash' author Peter Schweizer has touched a nerve by the amount of push back he's getting from the media. U.S. News & World Report wonders if the book is just a hatchet job, while Newsweek has written an "Everything you need to know" piece on the book. Schweizer appeared on the FOX News program Media Buzz this morning, and Howard Kurtz grilled him about assertions made in the book. Towards the end of the interview, Kurtz makes an issue out of Schweizer's political affiliations as evidence of his inability to be objective. That never seems to be an issue on the other side, even though the Obama administration has been a virtual revolving door for members of the media. Watch the entire exchange below:

Posted by Mike LaChance on April 26, 2015 15 Comments
George Stephanopoulos worked in the Bill Clinton administration as a senior adviser. In what way is he qualified to question the author of a book which seeks to expose alleged corruption of the Clintons? Peter Schweizer holds his own in this interview despite the aggressive and skeptical questions hurled at him throughout the discussion. Stephanopoulos is not so much a journalist, he's a member of the palace guard. It's quite clear which side he's on in this situation.

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on April 19, 2015 44 Comments
Breitbart News caused a stink when it reported on presidential candidate Marco Rubio's alleged comments on Obama's unilateral executive immigration programs. The headline inaccurately suggested that Rubio supported President Obama's executive immigration overreach. As we will discuss, this was only one of numerous mistranslations. Screen Shot 2015-04-19 at 5.55.35 PM The latest offense involves Senator Rubio's recent interview about immigration policy with Univision. Senator Rubio reiterated his well documented position on the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) programs. Rubio clearly says the programs will have to end. Interestingly enough, Sen. Cruz shares Sen. Rubio's opinions on DAPA and DACA.

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on April 17, 2015 13 Comments
Yesterday Gawker Media's staffers announced their open flirtations with unionization. While union strongholds nationwide are diminishing in favor of greater employee choice and right to work, Gawker is hoping to be the first online publication subject to union demands. Hamilton Nolan explained why he finds unionization appealing because he wanted to get ahead of the gossip. Yes, really. But then what is Gawker if not gossipy?
Every workplace could use a union. A union is the only real mechanism that exists to represent the interests of employees in a company. A union is also the only real mechanism that enables employees to join together to bargain collectively, rather than as a bunch of separate, powerless entities. This is useful in good times (which our company enjoys now), and even more in bad times (which will inevitably come).
Speaking from personal experience, I've never been employed by an entity with unionized employees. But when you live in a great right to work state like Texas, that whole organized labor problem solves itself. Perhaps I've been exceptionally fortunate or maybe it's because I've always understood my roll as an employee is simply to complete the job I was hired to do, but not once in my professional life have I encountered a workplace situation where I thought, "Gee, a hoard of angry people picketing, striking, and demanding the boss capitulate is a GREAT idea! Let's do that!" Nor have I ever felt I needed the assistance of groupies to convey a point. I've never felt 'powerless' because my expectation of work was not to garner power, but to do a job, and then get paid because I did the job I was hired for. I'm also not a pansy. But I digress... back to Nolan's union rationale:

Posted by Mike LaChance on April 17, 2015 21 Comments
By now, you've probably noticed that most of our completely unbiased media is treating Hillary Clinton with the same hard hitting scrutiny they're applying to Republicans candidates. Don't take my word for it. Here's Chris Cillizza of the Washington Post: According to Cillizza, it's all in our minds:
Look, I get it. Hillary Clinton is a Democrat. Conservatives have been convinced for a very long time that the media is populated almost exclusively by Democrats who, because they are secretly rooting for that party's candidates, are willing to overlook things that they would never overlook if it was a Republican. And, there is no Democrat this side of Barack Obama that drives Republicans crazier than Hillary Clinton.
Doug Powers responds: You've probably seen the media's mad dash for Hillary's "Scooby" van:
Accessibility by WAH