Media Bias | Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion - Part 63
Accessibility by WAH
Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

Media Bias Tag

Posted by Jay Caruso on May 30, 2015 22 Comments
Whether one believes in God or not, whenever natural disasters strike and deaths are involved, people often ask, "Why?".  They ask:  "Why did this happen?"; "Why did this have to happen now?"; and sadly, "Why did ________ have to die?" The worst response is when somebody tries to politicize such tragedies, especially in the context of assigning bad weather to an "angry God." Evangelical Christians such as Pat Robertson and the late Jerry Falwell have been known to enjoy the taste of their own feet as they have, at times, pointed the finger of blame at various behaviors by people as the reason for some kind of natural disaster. Pat Robertson, in 2012 was raked over the coals for suggesting deadly tornadoes that ripped through the Midwest could have been avoided if people had merely been more willing to pray about it. News outlets that covered it included The Huffington Post, The Daily News, The LA Times, CNN as well as left wing outlets such as Crooks & Liars, Media Matters, Raw Story and others.

Three days ago, Al Sharpton suggested the following with respect to the floods that have claimed the lives of over 20 people in Texas:

https://twitter.com/TheRevAl/status/603640706104721409 Notwithstanding Sharpton's concern over whether or not the citizens of Texas were spending too much time messing with their thermostats, Sharpton's "question" is really a political statement aimed at a state that is pretty red politically. Governor Greg Abbott handily defeated Wendy Davis and ended her 15 minutes of fame. The state has two Republican Senators in Ted Cruz and John Cornyn. Former Governor Rick Perry is likely going to run for president, along with Cruz.

Posted by Andrew Branca on May 28, 2015 37 Comments
I don't suppose it will ever end--the mainstream media will continue to cover trials involving deadly force, will continue to blindly label them Stand-Your-Ground cases, and will continue to demonstrate its utter ignorance of what Stand-Your-Ground actually is. The most recent example comes in the form of a Stand-Your-Ground piece written by a David Love, whose bio describes him as: "David A. Love is a writer based in Philadelphia. His work has appeared on CNN and been published by The Grio, The Progressive, and The Guardian." Looks impressive, no? Well, maybe the bio does. The piece on Stand-Your-Ground? Not so much. I realize that David is almost certainly not responsible for the headline of the post, but let's start there--after all, it's how the piece is introduced to the reading public. It's also where the piece goes immediately off the rails:  "These are the States That Have 'Stand Your Ground' Laws."  This point is then helpfully illustrated, literally, with a graphic image of the United States color coded to indicate which states qualify as "Stand-Your-Ground" states:  red-states are purportedly SYG, blue-states are purportedly non-SYG.  (That image is the featured pic at the top of this post. Interestingly, it was sourced in the Love's piece as being from al Jazeera.com.  Huh.) Before we dive into the errors of the illustrative map, however, let's take a moment to refresh our recollection on what Stand-Your-Ground actually means, legally speaking: it simply means that the state does not impose a legal duty on an otherwise lawful defender to make use of a safe avenue of retreat before they can use force in defense of themselves or another. Got it? Good. Now let's take a look at the 16 states indicated in the map as blue, and thus purportedly non-SYG that impose a legal duty retreat.

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on May 26, 2015 19 Comments
Last week, Bloomberg News' Mark Halperin asked a panel of Iowa Democrats to name one accomplishment from Hillary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State. Just one little accomplishment... One? Something? ANYTHING? A grand total of zero panel members could recall a single noteworthy accomplishment of Mrs. Clinton's. But we should cut them some slack because they're not wrong. To date, Hillary Clinton has done nothing notable aside from being married to a President, serving as a perfectly forgettable and ineffective Senator, and begrudgingly stepping aside in 2008 to make way for the Obama Presidency. She also pushed some button in Russia, and that seems to be going just swell. Do winning elections and screwing up major diplomatic relations constitute resume-worthy fodder? Carly Fiorina said it best shortly after Hillary made her official 2016 candidacy announcement, "Hillary Clinton’s a highly intelligent woman, hardworking, she’s dedicated her life to public service but unfortunately she does not have a track record of accomplishment or transparency." Expecting a Commander in Chief to have some kind of accomplishments that show their qualifications before getting hired for the job is reasonable, right? Maybe, just not if those accomplishments happened while serving has the head of the State Department, according to U.S. News and World Report's Susan Milligan. On Hardball with Chris Matthews' Milligan said the question posed to the Iowa Democratic panel was "unfair."

Posted by Andrew Branca on May 22, 2015 20 Comments
I've long assumed that just about anything written by a journalist has only the most tenuous relationship to reality (see Michael Crichton's "Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect"). Few news agencies are as skilled at the AP, however, at crafting headlines--often the only part of a story a casual reader notes--that communicate a narrative that's precisely the opposite of the underlying facts. As one example, here's a prevaricating AP headline from October 22, 2014: AP Isreali man shoots Palestinian In that case the actual facts turned out to be that the man shot was engaged in a terrorist attack on a bus stop, and had already managed to kill a 3-year-old before being engaged and stopped by Israeli police.  Replace the word"man" with "terrorist" and the headline would have accurately narrated the events.  Instead, the headline falsely implies an act of unjustified violence by Israeli authorities.  (In that case the AP withdrew the headline an hour in the face of considerable outrage.)

Posted by Miriam Elman on May 20, 2015 5 Comments
Last Sunday tens of thousands of Israelis participated in the annual Jerusalem Day march and flag procession, which runs through the Old City’s Muslim Quarter en route to the Western Wall. Jerusalem Day—Yom Yerushalayim—celebrates the reunification of the city following the 1967 Six Day War. As a tribute to the holiday, in an earlier post I offered at least five reasons that Yom Yerushalayim is worth celebrating.
Last week, Israel’s Supreme Court rejected a petition to change the “provocative route” of the march to avoid potential confrontations between the revelers and east Jerusalemite Palestinians. Two Israeli leftist NGOs argued that in previous years the flag-bearing procession had sparked violence and “unnecessary disruption for local residents”.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on May 20, 2015 20 Comments
In 2011, ABC News launched a major rebranding effort focused on the slogan "See the Whole Picture," featuring key news personalities including George Stephanopoulos:
Today ABC News launched a major re-branding initiative. The last time that ABC News spoke directly with its audience about what defines ABC News was over a decade ago with "More Americans Get Their News from ABC News than Any Other Source" - a statement that is still true today. ABC News President Ben Sherwood laid out the foundation of the new campaign to ABC News staff in an email on Monday morning: Starting today and over the course of 2012, you're going to see new on-air promos that feature images of an unprecedented gathering of ABC News anchors and correspondents and a call to action: When viewers turn to ABC News, they will "See the Whole Picture." Believe it or not, it's been more than a decade since ABC News consistently put forward a message or slogan. This new promise - "See the Whole Picture" - will help unify ABC News and differentiate our efforts from the competition.

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.