Media Bias




Thursday night, Gwen Ifill is scheduled to be the moderator at the VP debate. Last night, concerned citizens on the Internet and Greta Van Susteren of Fox News broke the story about a conflict of interest concerning Ms. Ifill as a moderator for this debate.

Ms. Ifill has a book coming out that currently has TWO TITLES:

The title on her PBS Website is The Breakthrough: Politics in the Age of Obama
http://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/gwen/

OOPS! Gwen Ifill apparently read my post on RealClearPolitics.com today -- so she "fixed" her Webpage. Here is a PDF containing the cached copy from Google, showing how the book title appeared until this morning:
http://64.37.107.199/ifill_tower/20080924_ifill_webpage_before.pdf

The title on Amazon.com is The Breakthrough: Politics And Race in the Age of Obama
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/038552501X/

Why try to hide it? A pig with lipstick is still a pig. This is just another Winky-Wink where someone is trying to do something that is not about race, when in fact, it is.

Although the book was not a secret, Ms. Ifill and/or the debate committee did not inform John McCain's campaign of the book. As of this writing, Ms. Ifill and the debate committee have not returned calls from Fox News or anyone else that I am aware of.

Ms. Ifill stands to make a lot more money from her book if Obama is elected, a book which is scheduled to be published on Inauguration Day (see Amazon.com link above). This is an obvious conflict of interest.

This is not good news for either V.P. or Presidential candidate, the moderator, the two parties, the public, the debate committee or anyone. Ms. Ifill should recuse herself, heck she can blame it on her recent broken ankle injury, and the debate committee should take responsibility for handling this properly.

By the way, if you are still thinking Ms. Ifill can handle this without bias, take another look. Ms. Ifill also gave her opinion on Gov. Palin's speech at the GOP Convention and on Gov. Palin in another interview - here are the videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpXKBZVuK9I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zafLsAtp_Q

This is about as unbiased as it gets with media these days -- except for Greta Van Susteren. Thank you Greta for listening to our concerns and reporting this story! I am not a party member, but yours is now the news show I will watch.

GretaWire blog:
http://gretawire.foxnews.com/2008/10/01/oh-oh-6/








Tony Blankley has written an op-ed in The Washington Times that presents the sad truth that the mainstream media in America have become "straight out propagandists" for Barack Obama in this campaign. He compares their actions to the "Goebbel's disciples," a reference to Joseph Goebbels, the propaganda minister for Adolph Hitler. Blankley uses a devastatingly accurate phrase to describe the portrait of Obama the media has painted for the American public -- the "Man who never was."

The mainstream media have gone over the line and are now straight out propagandists for the Obama campaign. While they have been liberal and blinkered in their worldview for decades, in 2007-08 for the first time, the major media are consciously covering for one candidate for president and consciously knifing the other. This is no longer journalism — it is simply propaganda. (The American left-wing version of the Volkischer Beobachter cannot be far behind.) And as a result, we are less than seven weeks away from possibly electing a president who has not been thoroughly and even half way honestly presented to the country by our watchdogs — the press.

The image of Barack Obama that the press has presented is not a fair approximation of the real man. They have consciously ignored whole years in his life, and showed a lack of curiosity about such gaps that bespeaks a lack of journalistic instinct. Thus, the public image of Mr. Obama is of a "Man who never was." I take that phrase from a 1956 movie about a real life WWII British intelligence operation to trick the Germans into thinking the Allies were going to invade Greece, rather than Italy, in 1943. Operation "Mincemeat" involved the acquisition of a human corpse dressed as a Maj. William Martin, R.M. and put into the sea near Spain. Attached to the corpse was a brief-case containing fake letters suggesting that the Allied attack would be against Sardinia and Greece.

To make the operation credible, British intelligence created a fictional life for the corpse — a letter from a lover, tickets to a London theater, all the details of a life — but not the actual life of the dead young man whose corpse was being used. So, too, the man the media has presented to the nation as Mr. Obama is not the real man.

The mainstream media ruthlessly and endlessly repeats any McCain gaffes, while ignoring Obama gaffes. You have to go to weird little Internet sites to see all the stammering and stuttering that Mr. Obama needs before getting out a sentence fragment or two. But all you see on the networks is an eventual one or two clear sentences from Mr. Obama. Nor do you see Mr. Obama's ludicrous gaffe that Iran is a tiny country and no threat to us. Nor his 57 American states gaffe. Nor his forgetting, if he ever knew, that Russia has a veto in the United Nations. Nor his whining and puerile "come on" when he is being challenged. This is the kind of editing one would expect from Goebbels' disciples, not Cronkite's.

More appalling, NBC's "Saturday Night Live" suggested that Gov. Sarah Palin's husband had sex with his own daughters. That scene was written with the assistance of Al Franken, Democratic Party candidate for Senate in Minnesota. Talk about incest.

But worse than all the unfair and distorted reporting and image projecting, is the shocking gaps in Mr. Obama's life that are not reported at all. The major media simply has not reported on Mr. Obama's two years at Columbia University in New York, where, among other things, he lived a mere quarter mile from former terrorist Bill Ayers— after which they both ended up as neighbors and associates in Chicago. Mr. Obama denies more than a passing relationship with Mr. Ayers. Should the media be curious? In only two weeks the media has focused on all the colleges Mrs. Palin has attended, her husband's driving habits 20 years ago and the close criticism of Mrs. Palin's mayoral political opponents. But in two years they haven't bothered to see how close Mr. Obama was with the terrorist Ayers.

Nor have the media paid any serious attention to Mr. Obama's rise in Chicago politics — how did honest Obama rise in the famously sordid Chicago political machine with the full support of Boss Daley? Despite the great — and unflattering details on Mr. Obama's Chicago years presented in David Freddoso's new book, the mainstream media continues to ignore both the facts and the book. It took a British publication, the Economist, to give Mr. Freddoso's book a review with fair comment.

The public image of Mr. Obama as an idealistic, post-race, post-partisan, well-spoken and honest young man with the wisdom and courage befitting a great national leader is a confection spun by a willing conspiracy of Mr. Obama, his publicist David Axelrod and most of the senior editors, producers and reporters of the national media.

Perhaps that is why the National Journal's respected correspondent Stuart Taylor has written that "the media can no longer be trusted to provide accurate and fair campaign reporting and analysis." That conspiracy has not only photo-shopped out all of Mr. Obama's imperfections (and dirtied up his opponent Mr. McCain's image), but it has put most of his questionable history down the memory hole.

The public will be voting based on the idealized image of the man who never was. If he wins, however, we will be governed by the sunken, cynical man Mr. Obama really is. One can only hope that the senior journalists will be judged as harshly for their professional misconduct as Wall Street's leaders currently are for their failings.








September 23, 2008
Press Strangely Non-Whiny about Obama's Private Meetings
From Ace of Spades
http://ace.mu.nu/

When Barack Obama had his magical mystery tour of Europe, he met with foreign leaders. Here's an interesting nugget about those meetings from the NYTimes:

On his second visit to Israel, he sought to reassure voters of his capacity to serve on the international stage. The audience for the trip, despite a private series of dawn-to-dusk meetings, clearly was the American electorate as much as the foreign leaders.

Interesting contrast. They simply reported the meetings were private. No demand for access, no snarky blog posts about how long they were allowed into the meeting. No votes to ban coverage. When Obama met with the Prime Minister of Pakistan, the meeting was private as well. The British press even wrote a story about how the privacy of the meeting with Gordon Brown.

I must have missed the part where the media pouted and stamped their feet about being cut out of that meeting.

And he's the presidential candidate for the Democrats, so his meetings should be considered even more newsworthy to the press, right?

Newsbusters noticed the same trend.

Funny how their outrage seems to be so darned selective, isn't it?








Hackers break into Sarah Palin's e-mail account

Sep 17 09:11 PM US/Eastern
By TED BRIDIS
Associated Press Writer 51 Comments

Hackers Break Into Palin’s E-Mail Account & Post Messages, Pictures Online

WASHINGTON (AP) - Hackers broke into the Yahoo! e-mail account that Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin used for official business as Alaska's governor, revealing as evidence a few inconsequential personal messages she has received since John McCain selected her as his running mate.

This is an excerpt. See full article here.

______________________________________________________________________________________

OBSERVATION: Just this evening in my Mass Media Law class, I learned of a case called, U.S. v Progressive (1979) which my professor called "a favorite tactic of the media."

They can get away with publishing this material as long as someone else does it first. The trick is to get someone else to do it.

This may go a little deeper than a geek in someone's basement.






We knew it from watching the Sarah Palin interview with Charles Gibson over the past two days. It was incredibly biased against Palin in terms of the tone, the questions, the lead-in pieces on 20/20 -- everything. Now The Anchoress has done a fantastic job of comparing and contrasting the way Charles Gibson interviewed Barack Obama three months ago, and how he chose to interview Gov. Sarah Palin:

Even the camera angle was designed to be prejudiced against Palin. She is filmed from the side and slightly with her back to the camera. …In contrast, the film crew placed the long shot camera facing Obama so at all times when he is speaking the camera looks him in the face rather than looking at his back.

…Obama was asked much easier questions mostly about feelings about winning, breaking the glass ceiling and 2008 campaign decisions. In contrast, Palin was asked numerous specific policy and military strategy questions that required extensive knowledge about treaties, U.S. anti-terrorism strategy and world history. And Gibson misquoted Palin… The following is a breakdown of the questions asked of the nominees:

Obama interview:

How does it feel to break a glass ceiling?
How does it feel to “win”?
How does your family feel about your “winning” breaking a glass ceiling?
Who will be your VP?
Should you choose Hillary Clinton as VP?
Will you accept public finance?
What issues is your campaign about?
Will you visit Iraq?
Will you debate McCain at a town hall?
What did you think of your competitor’s [Clinton] speech?

Palin interview:
Do you have enough qualifications for the job you’re seeking? Specifically have you visited foreign countries and met foreign leaders?
Aren’t you conceited to be seeking this high level job?
Questions about foreign policy
-territorial integrity of Georgia
-allowing Georgia and Ukraine to be members of NATO
-NATO treaty
-Iranian nuclear threat
-what to do if Israel attacks Iran
-Al Qaeda motivations
-the Bush Doctrine
-attacking terrorists harbored by Pakistan
Is America fighting a holy war? [misquoted Palin]

There’s no doubt the Charles Gibson interviews showed extreme prejudice against Palin and extreme favoritism towards Obama…He constantly questioned her ability to lead but never questioned Obama’s ability to lead, all the more amazing considering that Palin was the only one with executive experience and the presidency is the highest level executive job in politics.

There's much more at The Anchoress, so head over there to see the full report.








Amazing....

Sarah Palin Us CoverSarah Palin Us Cover






Obama Us CoverObama Us Cover

Nah, there's no media bias against Sarah Palin and Republicans here. What would ever give anyone that idea? ;)

Hat Tip: Ann Schroeder








Oh, Behold the "gentle critics" of the left...

Obama deals gently with Palin on equal pay issue
- news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080901/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_obama_palin

Critics: Palin used 'Bridge...
- news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080831/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_bridge_to_nowhere

Can anyone at the MSM Yahoo-AP crowd explain to me how come anti-right-leftists are plain "critics" [were it reversed, they would call the critics specifically in an identity: "right wingers" or Republicans... or Mccain supporters] and why they go so "gently" with Obama that is never gentle?








The Hill reports that numerous members of the media were seen openly cheering for Barack Obama last night during his acceptance speech in Denver. No surprise - we already knew the vast majority of Mainstream Media were in the tank for him. This just serves as confirmation:

Several members of the media were seen cheering and clapping for Barack Obama as the Illinois senator accepted the Democratic nomination Thursday.

Standing on the periphery of the football field serving as the Democratic convention floor, dozens of men and women wearing green media floor passes chanted along with the crowd.

Two members of the foreign press exchanged opportunities to take each other's pictue while wearing an Obama hat and waving a flag.

Several others nearby screamed "woo" during some of Obama's biggest applause lines.








Here is video of the moron Keith Olbermann at MSNBC (Obama Television) getting caught with an open mic dissing the report being done by colleague Joe Scarborough last night during the Democratic National Convention. Scarborough was talking about how well John McCain has done the past two weeks, closing the gap with Obama in the polls when you hear a voice saying, Jesus, Joe, why don't you get a shovel." Scarborough hears the remark and an exchange ensues.









Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a Democrat, blasted media elites today at an event in Denver for the "embarrassing" coverage of Barack Obama. Rendell was particularly hard on MSNBC, which he called the "official network of the Obama Camapign:"

Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell was supposed to give “closing remarks” during this afternoon’s Shorenstein Center-sponsored panel discussion with all three Sunday show moderators — NBC’s Tom Brokaw, ABC’s George Stephanopoulous and CBS’s Bob Schieffer — but instead, he opened up a can of worms about bias in 2008 election coverage

"Ladies and gentleman, the coverage of Barack Obama was embarrassing," said Rendell, in the ballroom at Denver's Brown Palace Hotel. "It was embarrassing."

Rendell, an ardent Hillary Rodham Clinton supporter during the primaries, now backs Obama in the general election. Brokaw and Rendell began debating campaign coverage, including the on-air comments by Lee Cowan, and when MSNBC came up, Rendell went after the cable network.

“MSNBC was the official network of the Obama campaign," Rendell said, who called their coverage "absolutely embarrassing."

Chris Matthews, Rendell said, "loses his impartiality when he talks about the Clintons.”

At that point, PBS's Judy Woodruff, who was moderating the moderators event, said: "Why don’t we let Governor Rendell sit down."

That was met with applause from the crowd of big-time media figures, which included Arianna Huffington, Gwen Ifill, Al Hunt, and Chuck Todd.

Woodruff allowed Brokaw to respond, and in defending the network, he said that Matthews and Keith Olbermann are "not the only voices" on MSNBC.

Notice that Chuck Todd - the political guru for NBC News - was up applauding when Rendell was told to sit down. There is not a shred of self-respect or fairness at NBC News any longer. Tom Brokaw knows the truth, even though he tried to defend the pathetic MSNBC network. Ed Rendell told the truth today, and NBC should stop being treated as if they are even remotely even-handed or professional.





Syndicate content