Archive for the ‘Biased Media’ Category
by Thomas E. Brewton
Two of the basic recommendations in the Iraqi Study Group Report are utterly unrealistic. In each case the Study Group, in typical liberal-socialist fashion, bases its proposals upon the theoretical assumption that everyone sees the world as they do.
First, stating that the war in Iraq cannot be won without unified support here in the United States, the Study Group recommends that appropriate steps be taken to gain support from those opposed to the war.
One might as well have called for Hitler's support of the Allies' D-Day invasion in World War II. We are engaged in a cultural civil war in the United States in which fundamental compromise is impossible. Liberal Republicans and Democrats are engaged in a jihad against our founding Judeo-Christian principles, a jihad in which there is no middle ground.
I am reading Ann Coulter's, "How To Talk To Liberal If You Must" and I found her statements on how the liberal press usually present their liberal one-sided views quite startling. Especially when I see the obvious evidence of such reporting in today's news.
In today's Huntsville Times, at least they are presenting the non-liberal view in defense of Judge Roy Moore and the liberal-media attack against him by associating him to a convicted child killer.
Roy Moore, the ousted state chief justice, doesn't like his name being linked with accused child killer Kevin Andre Towles.
Instead of questioning Moore why he gave Towles probation on 1996 charges of cocaine and marijuana possession, the former Etowah County circuit judge said Thursday that the media should ask why more recent judges didn't send the 31-year-old Towles to prison when they had the chance.
by Jim Kouri, CPP
The latest paramour of the denizens of the mainstream media is obviously Senator Barack Hussein Obama, Illinois Democrat. With their superficial sensibilities, the entire big media — including Fox News Channel — appear to want to give Sen. Obama a collective lap-dance. Like lovesick school girls they get absolutely giddy at the sound of his name.
This media blast of passion and adulation has created a news household name. In fact, a friend who's a true progressive told me she loved Obama. When I pressed her for more information, it turned out she didn't even know what he looked like or what he stood for; her love for him was based on — you guessed it — media coverage.
Imagine the surprise when these partisan cheerleaders got wind of a poll that showed Democrats favored Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama 33% to 12%. In fact, Obama beats Gore by one measly little point. Okay, so that was a Fox News/Opinion Dynamics Poll.
For my friends on the left who distrust Fox, Obama didn't do much better in a CNN poll:
Media Dismiss Insult as Mistake, Hope Issue Will Vanish For Elections
Alexandria, VA–Senator John Kerry grossly insulted the intelligence of American soldiers by telling college students they would “get stuck in Iraq” if they didn't work hard in school. Yet the liberal media, instead of seizing the opportunity to condemn this offense as they have done with conservatives who make gaffes – for example, Senator George Allen’s “macaca” comment – brushed off Kerry’s insult as, among other things, “an idle political remark.”
“With his rich history of besmirching the military, John Kerry and his cheap insult against our U.S. troops should be held to the same standard as other political misconduct,” said Media Research Center President Brent Bozell. “But liberal anchors have dismissed it as merely an ‘idle political remark’ and have left it up to the White House to demand an apology.”
“Their reaction pales in comparison to the weeks upon weeks of coverage still devoted to lambasting Senator George Allen for his ‘macaca’ comment. If a conservative denoted a particular group of people as stupid, these same reporters would exploit every opportunity to drive the GOP into the ground in the week before elections. The liberal hypocrisy and media bias are loathsome.”
Examples of Downplaying Kerry’s Comment:
-
CBS’s Katie Couric mimicked a potential GOP ad, impersonating “John Kerry insults the troops. Do we really want the Dems to take over?”
-
ABC anchor Charles Gibson characterized it as merely an “idle political remark.”
-
CNN’s White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux stated “we hope and we think that all of this is going to go away tomorrow.”
-
MSNBC’s Chris Matthews referred to the controversy over Kerry’s comments as a “brouhaha” and a “rhubarb.”
-
CNN’s Jack Cafferty said “one can only hope” the issue goes away quickly
Source: Media Research Center
by Sher Zieve
It’s difficult to believe that the American Left could hunker down even further, under the saturated-with-innocent-blood covers, with terrorists who have unequivocally announced their intentions to destroy us. But, it has. Recently, The Factor’s Bill O’Reilly asked leftist celebs Rosie O’Donnell and David Letterman if they wanted the United States of America to win the war against terrorists. Neither would answer. In fact, when O’Reilly commented to Letterman that it was an easy question requiring a simple yes or no answer, instead of answering Letterman said that he was "being thoughtful".
Thoughtful? Letterman has to "think" about whether or not he wants the US or the Islamic terrorists to win? These Islamists regularly and with impunity blow up infrastructures in the UK, Indonesia, Spain and myriad other countries (including the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in the US) and behead people on videotape. And this leftist representative of the New York and Hollywood Industrial Entertainment Complex has to think about whether or not he wants the US or the terrorists to win?
This attitude is both reprehensible and appalling. It is also the attitude voiced by the many (including George Clooney, Alec Baldwin, Barbra Streisand and multiple others) elitist leftist celebrities who have become extremely wealthy due to the ideologies and opportunities within the USA. Opportunities that, should the terrorist entities take over or destroy the country, would be lost to all of us. But, the socialist Democrat "principles" allow for only the haves and the have-nots —"the rich get richer and the poor get poorer". One only need look to France’s form of government for proof.
Prime examples of Democrat politicians working to destroy the US seem to crop up almost each and every day. We have Senate Minority leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and House Minority leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) voting against any programs that would protect the country — including the Patriot Act and the NSA terrorist surveillance programs. Both of these politicos falsely claimed the NSA program is wiretapping American citizens, instead of the reality that it was monitoring terrorist and potential terrorist calling patterns. Instead, the Democrats and even some of our liberal Republican leaders are proposing and passing legislation that gives terrorists US Constitutional rights! Shameful.
By Thomas E. Brewton
Modern mass production with interchangeable parts was a good idea in the automobile industry a century ago. But is it a good idea to homogenize national cultures, either in the interests of economic prosperity, or to further the socialist ideal of a one-world government?
Carol Derbis drew my attention to the potential dangers of the proposed North American Union, which aims at making NAFTA into an analog of the European Union, eventually uniting Mexico, Canada, and the United States on political and cultural grounds, as well as on economic policies.
As she writes, we must have full and public Congressional hearings before the proposal goes much further.
Chris Adamo addressed the issue last year, as did Jerome R. Corsi in this article earlier this year.
Those who fear the worst say that President Bush intends to abrogate United States sovereignty. That seems unlikely, but any surrender of our own Constitutional rights to a supranational agency, however limited the surrender, is a very bad policy. Our experience with the UN makes that abundantly clear.
Apart from the huge controversy over illegal immigration from Mexico, there are plenty of other negatives to consider.
Foremost among them is spotlighted by this website's Statement of Purpose:
The View from 1776 presents a framework to understand present-day issues from the viewpoint of the colonists who fought for American independence in 1776 and wrote the Constitution in 1787. Knowing and preserving those understandings, what might be called the unwritten constitution of our nation, is vital to preserving constitutional government. Without them, the bare words of the Constitution are just a Rorschach ink-blot that politicians, educators, and judges can interpret to mean anything they wish.
As relatively little has been elaborated about the North American Union concept in the media, one can only conjecture about the exact intentions and methods. Whatever the specifics of the proposed North American Union, it can be said that it has the potential to promote further cultural disintegration in our nation, which is as lethal a danger as Islamic jihad.
Liberals (and it has to be said that most Republicans as well as Democrats have evident left-leanings) have been educated in our colleges and universities to accept the social sciences view that human beings respond only to material factors. Thirst, hunger, the need for clothing and shelter, and the sexual urges are said to be the ultimately controlling factors in human society.
One has to be oblivious to history, however, to believe that the list of social influences is limited to the atheistic materialism of socialism. Our colonial ancestors were definitely motivated by the economic issues of taxation to issue the Declaration of Independence. But there was a far deeper ethos underlying their action: the centuries old English tradition of inalienable natural- law rights of individuals to be free from the arbitrary exercise of power by the sovereign. Those conceptions grew out of the Judeo- Christian moral traditions that constituted Western Civilization.
Moving in the direction of a political and cultural North American Union is to unwind the very substance of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
Thomas E. Brewton is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc.
The New Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers, journalists and grass-roots media outlets.
His weblog is THE VIEW FROM 1776
http://www.thomasbrewton.com/
Email comments to viewfrom1776@thomasbrewton.com
Network Double Standard on Congressional Sex Scandals is
Obvious and Politically Driven
Alexandria, VA–The network news media are aggressively promoting the Mark Foley scandal to keep the issue alive as the November elections approach. ABC reporter Jake Tapper says, “This is the scandal that will not go away.”
The issue will not go away because, as a new Media Research Center report documents, the morning and evening news shows on ABC, CBS, and NBC have, over the last 12 days, aired more than 150 stories on Foley. Yet when Democratic Rep. Mel Reynolds had sexual relations with a 16-year-old campaign worker, conspired to have sex with the worker’s 15-year-old friend, solicited child pornography, and was convicted on 12 counts of sexual assault and obstruction of justice, the networks ran a total of only 19 stories over the course of an entire year.
In reaction to this undeniable double standard in coverage, MRC President Brent Bozell issued the following statement:
“The numbers are clear and shocking: one hundred fifty-two stories on Mark Foley over 12 days, yet only 19 stories on Mel Reynolds over an entire year. This double standard reeks of political partisanship and proves how far the liberal media will go to downplay the sexual degeneracy of a liberal Democrat and trumpet the sexual degeneracy of a Republican.
“The Republican is accused of repugnant behavior, via e-mail primarily, toward minors. The Democrat was charged, prosecuted, convicted and sentenced to prison for very real sexual assault toward a minor along with obstruction of justice. The same networks that gave absolute minimal coverage to the Democrat are now flooding the airwaves with stories about the Republican, on the eve of the elections. If this isn’t evidence of a liberal media agenda, nothing ever will be.”
To read the complete MRC report, “Foley Feeding Frenzy: Networks Air 150+ Stories,” go to http://www.mrc.org/.
ABC, CBS, NBC Painting Tough Curbs On Illegals As ‘Far Right’ Harshness
Alexandria, VA—A new Media Research Center study released today shows that for this past spring’s extensive coverage of illegal immigration, the broadcast networks – ABC, CBS, and NBC – largely portrayed illegals and their lobbyists as heroic and deserving of support while proponents of secure borders were portrayed as “harsh” and “hard line.” This spin defies polls showing upwards of 90 percent of Americans view illegal immigration as a serious problem.
This blatant disconnect between the views of the American people and the elite media, as well as the administration, on the issue of illegal immigration is startling and fully detailed in the MRC Special Report, Election in the Streets.
“This new MRC study proves that the liberal media at ABC, CBS, and NBC have a left-wing political agenda when it comes to illegal immigration, and they will ignore the views of most Americans and misinform the public and our policy leaders to advance that agenda,” said MRC President L. Brent Bozell III. “Journalists must provide a complete, balanced picture of the immigration crisis and stop peddling propaganda.”
Major points in the study include the following:
-
309 broadcast network news stories were analyzed between March 24 and May 31, showing that in contrast to hundreds of words emphasizing a huge “wave” of “pro-immigrant” activism, the networks aired only 16 mentions of nationwide polls on immigration. ABC, CBS, and NBC largely ignored poll numbers – including from their own polls – proving that overwhelming majorities of Americans see illegal immigration as “out of control.”
-
Networks gave advocates for amnesty and guest-worker plans twice as many sound bites as those wanting tighter border control.
-
Networks used the “conservative” label 89 times while “liberal” was used only 3 times – all by ABC. CBS and NBC never tagged those pushing for more lenient policies as “liberal.”
-
Only 6 stories discussed how illegals cost more to government than they provide in taxes.
-
Networks never questioned the propriety of illegals protesting and lobbying on immigration while in violation of federal laws.
To schedule an interview with MRC President Bozell or an MRC spokesperson, please contact Tim Scheiderer (x. 126) or Colleen O’Boyle (x. 122) at 703.683.5004.
Thirty-five years ago I took a college course, Theater 101. One of the topics heavily discussed was the use of guerrilla theater in the demonstrations and riots of the late 1960s. Guerrilla theater was staged activity for the benefit of the news services cameras. It was used and developed by the anti-war and anti-establishment. Those with fake wounds or superficial head wounds received by law enforcement and National Guard troops during many of the riots and demonstrations were photograph and filmed to show the "brutality" of the Establishment that they were protesting against.
The object of guerrilla theater was the gain the sympathy of the pubic of the deeds of a few.
In the August 1 post, IDF: Qana building fell hours after strike, I discussed the possibility that some of the photos taken by the news services may have been deliberately staged to get a sympathetic reaction using the shock value of the pictures of the dead. In the pictures from EU Referendum, there was one individual who was seen in almost all the shots. They named him "Green Helmet".
On The Jawa Report, they have posted a German made guerrilla theater video of the same "Green Helmet" actually staging and setting up the shot using for a prop, a body of a boy on a stretcher. He is shown going through a trial run. He then directs the camera and all the others on the "set" to be sure the camera gets the right shot of the action.
From the NewsBuster's blog:
Rachel Neuwirth writes in The American Thinker that the media have made the job of the terrorists much easier as the media provide the version of reality the terrorists hope to convey. The media never blame the terrorists who hide behind civilians who get killed, and Neuwirth writes that therefore the media are "directly complicit in enabling this tactic to continue and for more Lebanese civilians to be killed."
A major segment of the global media is behaving in a manner that makes terrorism and mass killings more likely rather than less likely. They enable and encourage terrorist slaughter of innocents by supplying providing a propaganda bonanza for the terrorist cause. Without the gain, there would be less incentive for the horrific behavior.
This is true now with Israeli defense measures against Hezbollah terrorism, and has been true for many years, especially during the long Arab-Israeli conflict. Not enough attention has been paid to media manipulation. It is long overdue that this be exposed and the media be confronted and held accountable.
When will the liberal media get it straight?