Liberal Journalists Bias Toward Obama, Helped Win Election

Some believe the media to be impartial. Wisdom says otherwise. Now Jonathan Strong over at The Daily Caller has exposed the liberal journalists for what they are.

According to records obtained by The Daily Caller, at several points during the 2008 presidential campaign a group of liberal journalists took radical steps to protect their favored candidate. Employees of news organizations including Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage.

Read more >

Please share this information with everyone you know. The injustice is infuriating.

Another Example of Media Bias

Careful guys, your bias is showing.

I wonder if anyone has saved actual copies of newspapers from these dates? That’s be an interesting piece. [via Right U R]

Post Admits to Obama Bias, World Says ‘No Doy’

From the FRC comes this startling completely expected report that there’s bias as the Washington Post. To be fair, I should say it’s surprising to hear them admit it.

Now that the election is over, the Washington Post would like to get something off its chest. In an article today that read more like a confession, Post ombudsman Deborah Howell confirmed what most Americans already took for granted-the paper’s 12 months of campaign bias. Her piece, “An Obama Tilt in Campaign Coverage,” put the editorial board on the hot seat through head-to-head comparisons of the amount of coverage and kind of coverage each presidential candidate received. “…[R]eaders have been consistently critical of the lack of probing issues coverage and what they saw as a tilt toward Democrat Barack Obama,” Howell writes. “My surveys, which ended on Election Day, show that they are right on both counts.” Conceding that the paper was “deficient in stories that reported more than the two candidates trading jabs,” she admits, “Obama deserved tougher scrutiny than he got, especially of his undergraduate years, his start in Chicago, his relationship[s]… The Post did nothing on Obama’s acknowledged drug use as a teenager.” She goes on to list the following:

• The op-ed page ran far more laudatory opinion pieces on Obama, 32, than on Sen. John McCain, 13.
• There were far more negative pieces about McCain, 58, than there were about Obama, 32.
• Stories about Obama in the news pages, 946, outnumbered those devoted to McCain, 786.
• Obama was on the front page 176 times, McCain 144 times.
• Only 13% of the stories from June 9 to November 2 were about issues, and 66% of the remaining articles were about Obama compared to 53% on McCain.
• “Some readers thought the Post went over Palin with a fine-tooth comb and neglected Biden. They are right.”

It’s rare for the mainstream media to own up to its shortcomings, but my question is not whether there was prejudice, but what the Post plans to do about it. The damage to this election cycle has already been done. Can we count on the paper to objectify its coverage in the days and months to come? On bias, it’s like the Post marketers say, “If you don’t get it, then you don’t get it.”

When Is News Not News? When It’s Wrong

I’ve been blogging since 1996. Back then we just called it regular updates. Anyway, as a member of the informal media, it’s pretty disparaging to find stories like this wear apparently reputable news organizations completely screw the pooch.

WOWK-TV in Huntington… consider your reputation soiled.

Burt Brady Welcomes Soldiers Home

I’m sure a lot of you have already seen this clip. It’s because of things like this that I’m glad I have a blog to spread the good word. Burt Brady is a hero to me.

I also want to thank ABC for broadcasting the story. If we bash them for all the negative stories, we need to praise them for the positive ones.

Straight From the Soldiers Mouth, aka Reporting As It Should Be

Great stuff! Congrats to Richard Engle of NBC for having the stones to report. Spread the word bloggers! [via Brutally Honest]

Accountability Essential for Quality

As anyone who’s visited a message board or the comments section of a blog, you’ll understand that anonymity breeds extremism. It brings out the basest of human attributes.

What made me want to post on this topic? Well, after reading To delete Wikipedia entry or not to delete?, it’s clear to me that the Wiki phenomenon needs to make some changes, or be considered second-rate journalism, at best.

Anyone with a bone to pick can sign up and start posting “information” about any topic they want. It’s my opinion that a majority of the information on the Wikipedia is solid, but as more and more agenda minded, less-than-scrupulous individuals start participating, the quality of that Wiki product is going to drop.

At some point, the managers of these Wikis will need to figure out a way to classify the reliability of authors. Maybe they should adopt a star model like eBay uses? I just think that a poster needs to be held accountable for their writings. I can see it now, “Mr. Johnson, your misleading Wiki post is now going on your permanent record.”

Media Cheating on Couric Photos

Now we’ve got another example of the Media lying to us with pictures—this time with Katie Couric. You’d think that after they’ve been caught many times, they’d quit. But no, they’re a persistent lot.

If you’re as upset with the injustic as I am, you might want to contribute to the Media Research Center.

Media Kowtows to Muslim Terrorists

As usual the FRC gets it right concerning the recent release of the two Fox network journalists:

I must take issue with the headline in today’s Washington Times, however. The Capital’s conservative paper shows the freed journalist smiling and labels them: “FREE AND UNHARMED.” You are not unharmed when you are held at gunpoint for nearly two weeks. You are not unharmed when restrained in very painful positions–something called “torture” when Americans were accused of doing it to prisoners. You are not unharmed when you are forced to change your name on worldwide television. And you are certainly not unharmed when you are forced to convert to Islam at the point of a gun. Is this a “religion of peace,” or a “religion of the piece?”

Cuban’s Shareslueth

I’m a big fan of Cuban. Probably because he’s a bright guy who says what he means and if you can’t handle it, tough. Because his net worth is so astronomically high, he doesn’t have a problem getting fined $500,000 for post-game comments about the sorry state of affairs with the NBA referee system.

His latest endeavor is Shareslueth.com. It’s an intriguing idea that’s got the status quo crowd up in arms. (Many because they didn’t think of it first.) The idea is that they research companies who are dirty, then short their stock and publish the results. What’s wrong with that? Nothing but people like this guy have an axe to grind.

Cuban’s desire to openly reveal the results of this experiment should calm most people, but there will always be those jealous people who will always look at those with more as somehow evil.

Global Warming: Truth, Junk Science or a Media Heyday

Another great blurb from the good folks at the FRC:

Today’s Washington Post provides us a textbook case of the politicization of science and the bias of reporting. “More Frequent Heat Waves Linked to Global Warming,” blares the scary headline splashed across page A3, the day after D.C. temperatures peaked at 101. Sounds menacing. Pay no attention to those little kids pictured frolicking in the famed Trocadero Fountains in front of the Eiffel Tower. They just don’t realize how grim their future is going to be. But those merry munchkins shouldn’t even be alive! They were supposed to have been killed off in the worldwide famine and food riots confidently predicted by Dr. Paul Ehrlich back in the 1970s. Ehrlich wrote The Population Bomb and other scary books cleverly disguised as scientific works. Contrast the drastic warming warning with this: On page A6, in a little three column-inch squib, today’s Post tells us that there may be fewer hurricanes this year. The reason? Scientists say that surface ocean temperatures are cooler in the Atlantic this year. Thus, they’ve reduced from nine to seven their expected number of hurricanes and from five to three their predictions for intense storms – but no mention of global climate issues. We sympathize with The Post’s spooked editors. After all, it’s hard to think clearly when it’s 101 . But is it too much to ask that they read their own newspaper and avoid the constant drumbeat of doom-saying?

Media Misleads about Stem Cell Research

From the Family Research Council:

The Kansas City Star should have its star taken away. The paper tells readers: “Opponents of early stem-cell research” are building a grassroots network to fight against Missouri’s ballot proposal that would permit cloning of human beings. The ballot proposal falsely claims to be a “ban” on human cloning but would in fact require cloned embryos to be killed at 14 days rather than implanted in a mother’s womb. On the related issue of experimentation on stem cells taken from human embryos, we oppose this as unethical. It is unethical because it kills a developing human being. The E in ESCR is for embryonic, folks, not “early.” This story falsely claims that pro-life groups–including FRC–oppose stem cell research. Untrue. We favor stem cell research. We are proud of our record in support of ethical research. Everyone favors stem cell research.

Another case of supposedly impartial news sources just giving us the news, right?

2006 Election Issues

When you look at the following two lists, what comes to mind?

• Iraq War
• gas prices
• immigration
• prescription drugs
• corruption in business

• defending marriage
• abortion
• safety from terrorism
• judicial tyranny
• freedom of religion

To me, one contains the most important issues of our time, the other contains what the media is telling us is the most important. Can you tell which is which?

Drawing the Line on Decency

It’s all a matter of degrees. Can they say “bitch” but not “bastard”? Of course the F-word is off-limits… or should it be? Implied sexual content? Partial nudity? What kind of violence is acceptable and what is not? Everything is debateble, right?

Well, the Jack Valenti doesn’t even agree with the premise. He wants no line at all. Valenti is the president of the Motion Picture Association of America and he’s putting together a $300 million ad campaign designed to put the parents in the hot seat.

“We want to tell American parents that they, and they alone, have total power to control every hour of television programming,” said Valenti.

So where does decency come in? If it’s up to Jack, Hollywood could produce anything they bloody well like. No matter if it’s being broadcast late night, primetime or even daytime. Parents already have an uphill battle protecting their developing children from unhealthy influences. Now Hollywood wants to turn on the sprinklers.

Journalists Mislead Americans Regarding ‘Roe’

Do most American’s really understand what Roe v. Wade was about? I’m not sure they do. In this AP story, the author writes:

A solid majority long have felt that Roe v. Wade should be upheld. Yet most support at least some restrictions on when abortions can be performed. Most think having an abortion should be a personal choice. But they also think it is murder.

It’s obvious something isn’t clear. How could you “support” something that you consider to be murder? What’s particularly troubling is that for each person who reads the entire story, there are 10 who merely scan the headline, tagline or photo caption. So when they read a caption like:

A solid majority of Americans feel that Roe v. Wade… should be upheld.

They’re getting an misleading picture of a confused poll group. Here’s what Roe really did.

Roe struck down the abortion laws of all 50 states.
Roe gave us unfettered abortion-on-demand.
Roe is responsible for partial-birth abortion.
Roe has brought an increase in minor girls who have been preyed upon by older men.

Roe was a single court case, where the judges cited zero precedents. Yet, poll after poll has shown that Americans favor parental notice, spousal consent, informed consent, an outright ban on partial-birth abortion, and other reforms as well. The American people should not have their voice silenced by a handful of activist judges.

We should all see the AP and others for what they really are—agenda-driven news. Take some time and read past the misleading titles and subtle language.

This is the best argument I’ve ever read for protecting children in the womb.

“We can see, then, that the unborn child differs from a newborn child in only four ways—size, level of development, environment, and degree of dependency—and none of those differences are good reasons for disqualifying it as fully human.”

Click here to read the entire discussion and please feel free to link to or copy it so more people can see what abortion truly is.