A Witchhunt

The caption to this photo reads:

A witchhunt orchestrated by George W. Bush
supporters against government lawyers representing
Guantanamo inmates has backfired, as conservatives
joined the outcry against the McCarthy-like attacks.
Liz Cheney, pictured in 2009, daughter of former vice
president Dick Cheney, has come under fire from left
and right for orchestrating the campaign.

I thought the "al-Qaeda 7" ad (see here) was unfair in the way
it was presented. However, in no way is it a "witchhunt." And if
you want to talk about McCarthy-ism then you might want to
read Marc Thiessen's column on that.

Palin: The Mainstream Media Is Quite Broken

Last night on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, Sarah Palin
declared the mainstream media broken. I agree. Transcript
via Newsbusters:

SARAH PALIN: It's kind of full circle for me. I studied
journalism. My college degree there in communications.
And now I am back there wanting to build some trust
back in our media. I think that the mainstream
media is quite broken. And I think that there needs
to be the
fairness, the balance in there. That's why I joined Fox.

[ Cheers and
applause ]

LENO: Oh, fair and balanced.

PALIN: Fair and balanced, yes. You know because,
Jay, those years ago that I studied journalism,
it was all about the who, what, when, where and
why. It was not so much the opinion interjected in hard
news stories. So, I would like to see, well, in order to build
trust in the media because it is a corner stone of our
democracy, Americans deserve to have more of that
factual fairness.

LENO: You know, I watch, I'm always amazed -- [ applause ]
I think it's fair to say MSNBC, a lot of people feel has one opinion
and Fox has another opinion. But you know what it is, I watch
both. I mean, I switch around. And I like to get all sides of
all stories.

[ Applause ]

I mean, I'm always amazed that people feel, "Oh, you only want --"
if you like -- I just don't watch what I like. I like to watch
what other people like just to get a feel for it.

PALIN: That is healthy and that's helpful. As long as there is
not the opinion under the guise of hard news story
though. I think that there needs to be clear differentiation.

Leno and Palin hit on many of the big issues facing our media. One is
that people are becoming partisan in their media habits. Mr. Leno says,
"I don't watch what I like. I like to watch what other people like other
people like just to get a feel for it." Too many are getting their news
from outlets that confirm their perspective and not challenge it.

Another issue that is touched on is the lack of differentiation between
opinion and hard news. When a network has a television pundit like
Keith Olbermann doing election night coverage, it's a problem.

So what do you think: Is the mainstream broken? And if so, how shall
it be fixed?

Video of the interview:

Are the Press Being Unfair To Obama?

It's usually conservatives that have qualms about double standards in media
coverage. Politico is wondering if the press is unfairly criticizing President
Obama compared to the treatment they gave President Bush under similar
circumstances. Excerpt:

Eight years ago, a terrorist bomber’s attempt to blow up a
transatlantic airliner was thwarted by a group of passengers,
an incident that revealed some gaping holes in airline security
just a few months after the attacks of Sept. 11. But it was six
days before President George W. Bush, then on vacation, made
any public remarks about the so-called shoe bomber, Richard
Reid, and there were virtually no complaints from the press or
any opposition Democrats that his response was sluggish or
inadequate.

That stands in sharp contrast to the withering criticism President
Barack Obama has received from Republicans and some in the
press for his reaction to Friday’s incident on a Northwest Airlines
flight heading for Detroit.

I'll let you decide.

I will say that Republicans have been running on national security issues
and a strong military for a while now. It is tougher for Democrats and the
media to paint Republicans as being lax on the issue. Just like Democrats
are always reaching out to minority and women groups so it would be difficult
to tag them as being racist or sexist. However, Republicans are frequently
charged with being racist or sexist.

The news media has a running narrative on both political parties. They
are going to run with a story that fits that narrative. Sometimes the
narrative is unfair or even worst, untrue.

Spot the Bias!

Let us play a game of "Can you spot the bias?" First here is an example from
the neutral and objective news organization, Associated Press:

WASHINGTON – From his home and on a friendly network,
Rush Limbaugh lobbed pot shots across the airwaves Sunday
at President Barack Obama — "immature, inexperienced, in
over his head," offering the country "radical leadership" and
laying siege to the economy.

The network was Fox News. Yes, Fox News tilts to the right. However,
Rush Limbaugh was interviewed by Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday,
who usually does a good job of not inserting his opinion. When Obama
appears on MSNBC will the AP describe it as a "friendly network"? I think
not.

Later in the article:

The banter began on the hourlong "Fox News Sunday," Limbaugh
the lone guest, interviewed from his home in Palm Beach, Fla., on a
network the Obama administration has labeled as the voice of the
far-right wing of the Republican Party.

This part is misleading because Rush Limbaugh was the lone guest, however,
it makes it seem like he was on for the full hour. He wasn't! They had 30 minutes
of round table discussion with their panelists, like every Sunday political news
show.

Now for our second example of neutral and objective journalism, let us head over
to the New York Times. Excerpt:

Mr. Grayson could be the latest incarnation of what in the American
political idiom is known as a wing nut — a loud darling of cable television
and talk radio whose remarks are outrageous but often serious enough
not to be dismissed entirely. Mr. Grayson is the more notable because
he hurls his nuts from the left in a winger world long associated
with the right.

First, I have know idea when The New York Times started using the slang
word "winger" in their official reporting, that is off putting. Wingers are
associated with the right? According to who? Just because everyone in your
liberal publication thinks "winger" is associated with the right doesn't make
it true. However, I must give kudos to The New York Times for even
reporting on the stupid things Representative Grayson says.

Another excerpt from The New York Times piece I found interesting:

Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, who is
known for slinging devastating zingers at his political opponents, said
that Mr. Grayson had the potential to be a smart, serious lawmaker. He
said that Mr. Grayson needed to be careful to avoid inappropriate remarks like the one about Ms. Robertson but that the speech on
health care was within bounds. “That was legitimate satire,” he said,
adding: “I welcome Grayson’s taking the fight to them. I think he has got to
be a little more careful about his punches, but I am glad he’s throwing them.”

Anyone else find it odd that Barney Frank finds what Grayson said about
Republicans wanting people to die (and possibly his remarks about Dick
Cheney...the sentence bolded doesn't include the Cheney comments)
acceptable?

Obama Political Hack Tells Former Clinton Political Hack Turned Journo: Fox News Isn't News

Enjoy the irony: President Obama's top advisor telling Bill Clinton's
former communication director turned journalist that Fox News
is too biased:



Last time I checked Fox News hasn't tried to pass off Karl Rove
as a serious, unbiased journalist.

Update: Here is a video of serious journalist George Stephanopoulos
being a political hack back in the day:

Jake Tapper on Media's "Unrequited" Love Affair with Obama

"There are some of us that try to report a little more on our feet than on our
knees."

The good stuff is at 10:14

I Wonder Why?

I wonder why journalists and J-schools get labeled for being liberal
bastions? Take a look at Jeff Jarvis' and Jay Rosen's Twitter accounts,
both are journalism professors. Hey, at least they are not trying to
teach objectivity anymore!

It's a systematic problem we have in the news business. Reporters,
editors don't decide to be take a liberal slant when they get into the
news room. As Jarvis and Rosen demonstrate they are taught from
a left-wing slant the moment they step into journalism school.

Objective Reporter for Dec. 30, 2008

I'm going to start a new series called "Objective Reporter." In this continuing series
I will take the time to highlight some our great, objective, unbiased reporters we have
in our news media. If I would have started this series yesterday I would have either
chosen Chris Matthews' neutral and fair documentary about the Bush presidency or
Vanity Fair's equally fair "Oral History" of the Bush years. However, I just came up
with this fabulous idea today so the lucky journalist who gets featured today is: Rick
Sanchez. For those who read my blog you are probably already familiar with Mr.
Sanchez's balanced and non-editorializing reporting. Well today he takes objectivity
to a whole new level. Here is Rick Sanchez's neutral and grammatically incorrect
tweet from earlier:

israel is beacon of democracy, even more than US. why can't they figure this
out? r they really trying? other reasons ? stuborn? Politics?

You see Mr. Sanchez is staying neutral by not picking sides but only insinuating by
his questions that Israel is "stuborn." Way 2 go Rick Sanchez! Isn't Twitter the best
place to figure out all the violence going on in the Middle East? I know tweeting 'I want
peace in the mid-east 4 every1" and "It's a continuouz cycle of violence" makes me
feel a whole lot better about myself.

I know some of you are saying well it's his own personal Twitter account. However,
that doesn't change the fact that CNN promotes his Twitter account on television
and their Web site.

Exit questions: Do you think Rick Sanchez will ask Israel's New York Consulate a
question during tomorrow's Twitter conference? What do you think the question
will be?

What if Gov. Palin Sounded Like This? You Know?

Senate hopeful Caroline Kennedy has been compared to Gov. Palin.
See here and here. So I have ask, how would've the media reacted if
Gov. Palin sounded like this:

Don't Question John Roberts' Journalistic Integrity!

Via Newsbusters. John Roberts gets huffy puffy with Joe the Plumber when he
laughs when the news anchor insists he isn't out campaigning for anyone:



John Roberts states, "Excuse me, Joe. Why would you cast aspersions on my
journalistic integrity. I don't even know you?"

Let's take a look Roberts' journalistic integrity. I did a quick Google search and found
that Mr. Roberts isn't always fair and balanced.

Compare and contrast how Mr. Roberts interviewed Sen. John McCain and
President-elect Obama. Here's Roberts interviewing Mr. Obama:



Here is how Mr. Roberts interviewed Sen. McCain. Is it just me or was much
nicer to Mr. Obama?

Here is Mr. Roberts taking Mitt Romney to task over something he said on his
program. I can't find an opinion piece Mr. Roberts wrote negating something said
by a Democrat on his program.

Here is Mr. Roberts on the Laura Ingraham's radio program defending a piece
that appears to be severely one-sided. Although, I do give him credit for going
on the show and defending it, even if his defense was somewhat weak.

Here is a partial transcript of an interview Mr. Roberts did during the whole
Scott McClellan fiasco:

MIKE ALLEN, POLITICO.COM: Well, John, that's right. And you hear
Republicans saying things like 'pathetic' and even making fun of the title,
saying that instead of being called 'What Happened' it should be called
'What Happened?'

ROBERTS: He claims that President Bush used 'propaganda to sell the
war.' Let's look at what he says in the book. 'And his advisers confused
the propaganda campaign with the high level of candor and honesty so
fundamentally needed to build and then sustain public support during
a time of war.' He finally articulates what we all came to believe,
Mike,and further goes on to say that this war was unnecessary.

Way to stay neutral and objective, Mr. Roberts.

Here is talk show host Hugh Hewitt explaining to anchor John Roberts during
the election that the news media are highlighting Gov. Palin's gaffes and ignoring
Joe Biden gaffe's by using repetition and emphasis and Roberts doesn't seem
to understand where Hewitt is coming from. Partial transcript:

ROBERTS: So here's a question many people are asking. Why do they not
put her out there more? Since she was nominated she's done three major
network interviews, one sort of off the cuff gaggle with the traveling press
at the ground zero and she's done a couple of radio interviews including
yours. In the same period of time, Joe Biden has been out more than 90
times. He did the spin post debate Friday night after the Mississippi debate.
Why are they not putting her out there more?

HEWITT: My guess is that the charge of the light brigade is in their mind.
They know that there are literally 1,000 mainstream media reporters
representing hard left points of view in the media outlets that are
represented by the "New York Times" and the "Washington Post" and
your network and the other big networks that are waiting to ambush her.
As a result, they're going to try and gauge what the situation is out there.
They did not rush off to conservative media. They did not rush off to new
media. They simply said let's have time with the voters. Let's have some
time with John McCain to get up to speed on some crucial issues.


And Joe Biden he can go out and do 90 different interviews,
John, because no matter what he says, you guys don't care. The
other day he stood up and said FDR addressed the country on television
at the time of the great panic of 1929. Well he wasn't the president. There
wasn't television and yet Joe Biden doesn't pay any kind of price. Can
you imagine if Sarah Palin had said FDR addressed the nation on the
day of the great crash on television?


ROBERTS: In fairness, Hugh, we actually did do a piece on Joe Biden's
gaffes just the other day.



HEWITT: On Joe Biden's gaffes but on that one.


ROBERTS: Yes, we did.


HEWITT: Can you imagine what would have happened to Sarah Palin?


ROBERTS: We did mention that one.


HEWITT: Again John, it's not about mentioned. It's about the emphasis
and repetition. If Sarah Palin had said that FDR spoke on television as
president in 1929, do you doubt for a moment honestly that it would have
led every newspaper in America and would have dominated every media
broadcast for three days?

Doing a piece on Joe Biden's gaffes is not the equivalent of continually running sound
bites of Gov. Palin's gaffes. You can watch the video here.

So by doing a simple Google search I found examples of CNN's John Roberts throwing
his own journalistic integrity out the door so it fits his political agenda. Perhaps Joe
the Plumber was perfectly right to laugh.

Update: I just wanted to confirm Newsbuster's transcripts about Mr. Roberts saying,
"He finally articulates what we all came to believe..." Sure enough I found the CNN
transcripts. He did say that.

Morning Joe: Perhaps We Should've Looked Into Obama's Chicago Ties During the Election

Well, yeah, that's the news media job. Joe Scarborough notes in the
video embedded below that news organizations had enough resources to
send to Wasilla, Alaska. However, why couldn't anyone say this during the
election? So now Joe Scarborough speaks out. Your killing me, Joe.

According to Reuters I'm Jumping with Joy Right Now

Via Michelle Malkin. Apparently, conservatives are evil people and take glee
over someone's downfall and corruption. I am sure liberals were absolutely
heartbroken as George Bush's approvals dropped over the years. From the
Reuters article:

ATLANTA (Reuters) - U.S. conservatives rubbed their hands with glee
on Wednesday over news that the Democratic governor of Illinois has
been accused of attempting to sell the U.S. Senate seat of President-elect
Barack Obama.

Federal prosecutors said Obama was not connected to charges on
Tuesday that Gov. Rod Blagojevich tried to sell the seat Obama
vacated shortly after winning the presidency on November 4 for
financial and other benefits for himself and his wife.

More on the Death of Journalism

Quote from Victor Davis Hanson:

There is now no journalism as we knew it. It died during the campaign. And so
we have no mainstream media audit of politics other than the vestigial shrill
warnings about the last three months of the dangerous Bush administration.
From the New York Times, NPR, PBS, or Newsweek, we will hear little whether Obama is choosing a good or bad team, or said silly things or contradicts what
he promised. They simply have lost all credibility and now the republic is left
largely with bloggers, talk radio, and a few newspapers as mostly partisan auditors. This puts the mainstream media in a terrible bind. If Gitmo is not closed immediately, are the victimized detainees there suddenly redefined as terrible
killers who can’t be let out? If adhered to, does the Petraeus-Bush withdrawal
planto leave Iraq by 2011, suddenly become sober and judicious? If not tampered with, do FISA and the Patriotic Act morph into reasonable measures? Does the economy suddenly improve on January 21, and Afghanistan become stable? Will anyone believe a Katie Couric, Chris Matthews, the front page of the New York Times, or listen to Andrea Mitchell when they speak of Obama? The media has bet that there was no efficacy to Guantánamo, the Patriot Act and similar provisions,
and Iraq. But the fact is in the same period we were not attacked. If there were a connection between the two (and many of us think that there was), then shutting down Gitmo, repealing the Patriot Act, and getting quickly out of Iraq could be done within the first yeareasily and without risk. But will it happen, and if so, what would
be the reaction following another 9/11-like attack?

NBC Now Selling Obama Memorabilia

Wow. Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that NBC is the tank?
I wonder if this NBC video has Chris Matthews historic "thrill up my leg"
moment?



Plus, there is the all important question of who gets to play Barack Obama
in a movie:

Journalism No More

Newspaper ad revenues are plummeting. Television news stations are having
to cut their resources dramatically. New technologies are making way for "citizen
journalism." The mainstream news media is grasping on to what little credibility
they have left. One would think it be in their best interest to be extra cautious in
order to save what's left of their credibility and inevitably their audience. But that
premise is wrong.

Instead this election year they've thrown caution to the wind and have been a cheer
leader for Barack Obama. They've gotten a tingle up their leg. They've hired a
photographer who smeared Sen. McCain. They've sent their hounds to Alaska to
investigate every bit of Gov. Palin's history but refuse to put the same resources into
looking into Barack Obama's legislative history in the Illinois State Senate. They've
scrutinized "Joe the Plumber" but they can't even use Google to find out if the people
asking questions at a Republican debate are avid supporters of Democrats. The public
editor of the New York Times admitted it was a mistake for them to run a poorly
sourced article about McCain and a lobbyist. They've trolled around Facebook to get
dirt on Cindy McCain. The L.A. Times has refused to release tapes that might be
detrimental to Barack Obama.

I ask you this my liberals friends: What if the shoe was in the other foot and your
political party was the one being scrutinized with such aggressiveness by the
mainstream media while mistakes on the other side of the aisle were being
shielded? Would you wouldn't so easily dismiss the bias claims?

However, the most egregious error committed by the mainstream media recently
is not political at all. They were incredibly slow in reporting in progress in Iraq. As
soon as causalities went down they left. If you are going to continually report the
bad then why not the good? If a news organizations' political reporting is lackluster
then it should be able to survive. However, when the war reporting of a news
organization is lacking then I think it's safe to say it's an utter disaster. I don't
think anyone could seriously claim that they are satisfied with the way Iraq and
Afghanistan have been covered by American media. And our news outlets can't
excuse themselves by say 'the American people don't want to hear about Iraq
anymore." From a study from last year:

While public interest in the Iraq war has declined since the beginning of
the year, a growing number of Americans say news organizations are
devoting too little, rather than too much, coverage to the war. A third
of Americans say news organizations are undercovering the war, a
10-point increase since June (23%). In particular, the public
believes that the challenges and experiences of U.S. soldiers
both while serving in Iraq and after returning to the United
States are receiving too little news coverage.

Obviously, there are stories still to tell in Iraq and Afghanistan but it hardly makes
it on the evening news.

I'm a firm believer that journalism is a public service. News organizations
serve the public by reporting current events and important information. They are
not suppose to serve their political ideology. They are suppose to prioritize news
stories and allocate resources accordingly.

Our current news media is embarrassing and extremely superficial. While conservatives
might complain about political reporting being biased, it's not the only problem that exists
within mainstream American journalism. Big news outlets are losing their power
with the onset of new media and I think we can all breathe a huge sigh of relief. It's
about time!

What's Missing?

Sometimes bias presents itself from what's missing in a news article.
Read this article and tell me if there is a small bit of information missing?
An excerpt:

The national proclamation issued this year asked God's
blessings on our country and called for Americans to observe
the day with appropriate programs, ceremonies and activities.

Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle is named in the suit because he is
one of 50 governors who issued proclamations calling for the
prayer day. The foundation is based in Madison.

Shirley Dobson, chairwoman of the National Day of Prayer
Task Force, and White House press secretary Dana Perino
also are named.

The foundation has filed numerous lawsuits in recent years,
including one rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court last year
that attacked President Bush's faith-based initiative.

The question I had immediately after reading this article was: Since when
has this National Day of Prayer been around? The article didn't state
this information so I went to the National Day of Prayer official Web site
and behold I found the answer:

It was created in 1952 by a joint resolution of the United States
Congress, and signed into law by President Harry S. Truman

I'm curious why they would leave out that information since it provides
historical context. For a moment I thought President Bush signed into law this
legislation and that's why they were suing him. They took the time to mention
the foundation is based in Madison, why not mention that it's been around for
more than 50 years? I did a word count and the article is a measly 224 words,
I doubt it was length the problem.

The Associated Press Running Late Night Comics ' Jokes as News

NEWS WORTHY!

Prediction: 2008 is the year that mainstream media loses
whatever credibility they have left. You better hope, MSM,
that a Obama presidency is worth because you guys are quickly
going down the tubes.

MSNBC Talent in Short Supply

How sad has the news organization MSNBC become lately? If this NY Times
article is any clue, the cable network had to pull a former nightly news anchor
Tom Brokaw out of retirement because their current pool talent is somewhat
lacking in objectivity. According to the article, Brokaw was an "advocate" of
pulling Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews from election night and presidential
debate coverage. I'm glad to see that NBC News has a grown up now in the
organization. From the article:

But less widely known is that Mr. Brokaw has also played a pivotal role
out of public view, both within NBC and in its dealings with the campaign
of John McCain in particular.

In an interview here after Sunday’s broadcast, Mr. Brokaw said that over
the summer he had “advocated” within the executive suite of NBC News
to modify the anchor duties of the MSNBC hosts Keith Olbermann and
Chris Matthews on election night and on nights when there were presidential
debates. Their expressions of strong political opinions from the MSNBC
anchor desk has run counter to the more traditional role Mr. Brokaw
played on “NBC Nightly News” for more than two decades. NBC said
earlier this month that the two hosts would mostly relinquish their anchor
duties to Mr. Gregory, while being present as analysts.

Apparently the McCain camp wasn't going to do any debate with an NBC moderator
until Tom Brokaw stepped in, understandably:

Keith is an articulate guy who writes well and doesn’t make his arguments
in a ‘So’s your old mother’ kind of way,” Mr. Brokaw said. “The mistake was
to think he could fill both roles. The other mistake was to think he wouldn’t
be tempted to use the anchor position to engage in commentary. That’s who
he is.”

Mr. Brokaw said he had also conducted some shuttle diplomacy in recent
weeks between NBC and the McCain campaign. His mission, he said, was
to assure the candidate’s aides that — despite some negative on-air
commentary by Mr. Olbermann in particular — Mr. McCain could still get
a fair shake from NBC News. Mr. Brokaw said he had been told by a senior
McCain aide, whom he did not name, that the campaign had been reluctant
to accept an NBC representative as one of the moderators of the three
presidential debates — until his name was invoked.

One of the things I was told by this person was that they were so irritated,
they said, ‘If it’s an NBC moderator, for any of these debates, we won’t go,’ ”
Mr. Brokaw said. “My name came up, and they said, ‘Oh, hell, we have to do
it, because it’s going to be Brokaw.’ ”

Mr. Brokaw will moderate the second debate, on Oct. 7, in Nashville.

Let's remember that NBC late night comics have been making jokes about how much
in the tank MSNBC is in. Here's Conan O'Brien:

Second Term

This is just an example of an unbiased media reminding the folks that McCain
might croak or something.

Um, did Matt Damon become a contributor the Associated Press?

Bash the Media Time!

It's been said over and over again: The mainstream media despises conservatives
and they don't even try to hide anymore. What they don't seem to realize how much
their Democrat lovin' bias backfires. They are going to push their agenda and they
don't care how much credibility they lose. However, that doesn't mean conservatives
aren't going to call them out on their lack of objectivity. McCain campaign manager,
Steve Schmidt, went after on The New York Times calling them a "pro-Obama
advocacy organization." Here's the audio:



To be honest I don't even know if the article in Times is correct. It may be.
However, that's what happens when a news organization advocates for a certain
political party, they can't be trusted. Therefore, instead of arguing about the facts
all the accused has to do is say "you're a political partisan." End of conversation.
That's why news organizations should to stay objective.

And don't think people don't angry about how the unfairness. Listen to this woman:



I would note that Republicans have been running against Democrats and the media
for decades now and still manage to squeeze out a win most of the time. So no need
to fret. Perhaps in some ways having the mainstream media on the Dems side actually
is actually a hindrance to them.