Category Archives: Media Bias

CNN: Ashley Judd is “left-leaning”; Santorum, Thatcher, Hannity, O’Reilly, King, Broun, etc. are “right-wing”

CNN.com’s report on the bugging of Sen. McConnell’s (R-Ky.) office characterizes his erstwhile future opponent Ashley Judd as “left-leaning.” Meanwhile, recent news or opinion articles have referred to Rick Santorum, Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly, Margaret Thatcher, and Republican Reps. Paul Brown (Ga.) and Steve King (Ia.), among others, as “right-wing.”

In fact, a search of recent CNN.com articles finds no individual in American politics identified as the parallel “left-wing” or “leftist” (the last seems to be in 2003, “Lieberman lashes left-wing Democrats“). Donald Trump seems to be the only “right-leaning” figure that has warranted a recent mention.

CNN gives more insight into its perspective on the political spectrum in an article about Jay-Z and Beyonce’s visit to Cuba, mentioning multiple times “right-wing” American critics of the regime but only mustering the language “cautious program of reform” to refer to Raul Castro’s regime.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Media Bias

NYT more interested in promoting its agenda than reporting on the Catholic Church in article about papal succession

The breathless lead headline in today’s New York Times refers to “a Church at a crossroads”:  the article cites “a succession battle” and “a struggle between the staunchest conservatives, in Benedict’s mold, who advocated a smaller church of more fervent believers, and those who feel the church can broaden its appeal in small but significant ways. . .”
This is quintessential Times “reporting.”  Nowhere does the article substantiate that the selection of a new pope would be an actual “battle” or “struggle,” much less among these supposed factions—namely, those who hold mainstream Catholic beliefs versus the editorial board of the New York Times.  In fact, a paragraph late in the article counters the Times‘ own alternate reality: “Nearly all of the 117 cardinals who will vote for the new pope were appointed by Benedict and his predecessor, John Paul II, both strong traditionalists, and it is likely that the next pope will share their vision and doctrine.”
The Times‘ hyperbolic characterization of legitimate challenges that face the Church as amounting to a “crossroads”—and its focus as much on leftist social causes like ordination of women as on the real issues like sexual abuse, bureaucratic corruption, and declining adherence in Europe—reflects its usual fervor to skewer “conservative” straw men instead of reporting the facts.  Apparently, the reporters aren’t keen observers of the church and didn’t talk to any for the story.  Just another case of the paper imposing its heavy-handed world view on a news story.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media Bias

Tortured logic by the NYT to try to undermine Romney’s argument

The Times is desperate to portray as false a new Romney ad running in Ohio accusing a bailed-out Chrysler of moving production to China.  From characterizing the ad as “misleading” in the first paragraph, the article goes on to matter-of-factly accuse Romney of “including statements that stretch or ignore the facts”; claim that he “incorrectly said outright . . . that Jeep was considering moving its production to China”; presume that a Bloomberg article on Jeep’s thinking “had been misread by several conservative blogs” because of a “poorly worded quotation from Chrysler in a news article that was misinterpreted by blogs”; dredge up Romney’s “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt” headline from four years ago; and gleefully sniff, “Democrats are hoping that Mr. Romney’s latest move will draw a backlash” in Ohio.

Only one problem:  Romney is right.  The Times (and Chrysler, in a strident statement issued for the article) doth protest too much.  In the nineteenth paragraph (out of 21), the article bothers to quote a Romney spokesman that every Jeep, including those sold in China, is currently produced in the U.S., whereas Jeep is now planning to produce Jeeps for the Chinese market in China.  So it is shifting investment from the U.S. to China.  Neither the Times, the Obama campaign, nor Chrysler refuted this basic fact.  The article acknowledges that the ad’s wording was careful, so it seems to us that nothing in the ad was untrue and the spirit of it was quite correct.  (We are leaving aside for the purpose of this post a criticism of the odious protectionist, anti-business pandering of which both sides are guilty when it comes to this issue.  We deplore it, and praise the spirit of Romney’s “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt” thinking.)

The Obama water-carrying that this article represents is extreme even by Times standards.  By the way, the article is in the news section on page A1, not an editorial.  At least it didn’t run the story as a “fact check.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Media Bias

Non sequitur of the day from the New York Times

Utterly sloppy—not to mention scurrilous—reporting in this “News Analysis” in the Times:

Mr. Obama and his detail have been keenly aware of the risks inherent in the job of protecting the first black president and his family. That has been true since Mr. Obama started receiving Secret Service protection in the spring of 2007, nine months before the Democratic primaries began.

The article does not provide any further “analysis” of such racially-motivated threats to the president.  The first sentence is a complete non sequitur, but we can suppose that New York Times reporters are so inured to the narrative of America as an institutionally racist country that they casually refer to “inherent” “risks” without any substantiation.  Even if we grant that the Secret Service felt the need for an abundance of caution, due to the candidate’s race, in spring 2007, we don’t see any evidence on which anyone—except, perhaps, the usual suspects such as the Southern Poverty Law Center—can legitimately assert that President Obama faces more “risks” than any other president by virtue of his race.  Yet the Times article mentions this in passing as if it’s an established fact.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media Bias

ABC’s John Berman: Blinded by bias (and/or no sense of humor)

As a political reporter for a mainstream media network, John Berman is presumably a liberal.  His blog post today corroborates our speculation:  he has no sense of humor, and apparently holds a seething bias against Rick Santorum by looking for a gaffe when there wasn’t one.  Or maybe he’s just dense.

In what he characterizes as “Santorum’s Football Fumble,” he reports the following:

Rick Santorum sprinted into Akron, Ohio this week before checking the playbook.  A few miles from the Cleveland Brown’s home turf, Santorum attempted to start a pep rally for the Pittsburgh Steelers.  His revelry call, ‘Is this Steelers country?’ was met with boos from the crowd. One of the first rules of campaigning…know where you are.

Uh, John, he was teasing the crowd, as you can obviously see by his facial expression in the video you link.  Santorum is from Pennsylvania, home of the Pittsburgh Steelers, arch-rival to the Browns.  He was making a joke, and a pretty good one at that.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media Bias