In an August 24, 2005, article (reg. req'd), "Study Finds 29-Week Fetuses Probably Feel No Pain and Need No Abortion Anesthesia," the New York Times failed to inform its readers that the lead author of the reported study, Susan J. Lee, once worked for NARAL Pro-Choice America.

The Times article also failed to mention that the study's authors neglected to inform the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), the publisher of the study, of this blatant conflict of interest.

Were the authors hiding the former NARAL relationship from JAMA? In an informative article in the Philadelphia Inquirer, JAMA editor-in-chief Catherine D. DeAngelis was quoted as saying, "This is the first I've heard about it," she said. "We ask them to reveal any conflict of interest. I would have published [the disclosure if it had been made]."

By now, Americans with even the most modest of attention spans know of the United Kingdom's liberal version of CNN, the BBC.  An article written by the BBC's Washington reporter Matthew Davis stunningly highlights this.

Davis's article  fairly drips with smug and self-righteous twaddle; and offers up his opinions in regard to what the American zeitgeist is regarding the war in Iraq.  In his opening paragraph, Davis states unequivocally that  "The protest of one mother, Cindy Sheehan, at the gates of President Bush's ranch has galvanised the anti-war movement."

"As the 1960s protest song said, 'there's something happening here,'” NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams reminisced Thursday evening as he introduced an “In Depth” segment trumpeting the influence of Cindy Sheehan -- a story, when replayed on MSNBC's Countdown, fill-in host Amy Robach framed around how “there are those who wonder if attitudes toward the war could be reaching a tipping point and whether the Gold Star mom could be the driving force.” Reporter Carl Quintanilla allowed a couple of critics to denounce Sheehan, but his story was centered around touting her impact: “Sheehan, say some historians, may be evolving as an icon in the war's turning point, if this is one. For three weeks, she's dominated headlines, mobilized protesters” and made “it safe, her supporters say, to voice doubts about the war, just as Walter Cronkite did on the Evening News in 1968.” Viewers were then treated to 1968 video of Cronkite taking on the Vietnam war: “To say that we are mired in stalemate seems the only realistic, yet unsatisfactory, conclusion.”

In between soundbites from liberal historian Doris Kearns Goodwin, Quintanilla fretted about “a peace movement without a way home.” Goodwin rued: “That's the difficulty. We don't know what to do with the peace movement, what does it actually mean?” Quintanilla concluded by admiring Sheehan's influence, a pedestal the media provided: “Historians say we won't know Cindy Sheehan's place in the war until the war itself is history. And whether you agree with her or not, she sits waiting for one conversation, and has unleashed another.”
(Video: Windows Media Player or Real Media)

Full transcript, and Williams' plug on his blog for this story, follows.

Brent Bozell decries the Saturday night fireworks celebration of the pathetic suicidal end of gonzo writer Hunter Thompson's life, which was a big story in the Sunday papers. (As L.B.B. notes, Hunter was on A-3, Pope Benedict on A-20 of the WashPost). But so-called "objective" journalists were at the front of the line of his admirers, as he spewed hate at Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and two President Bushes through his crazed, glassy, drug-hazy eyes.

The New York Times story notes that CBS reporter Ed Bradley, a close Thompson buddy, spoke at the ceremony. He "described first learning of Mr. Thompson through his writings in 1972 and thinking of him as an 'off-the-wall madman'; eventually Mr. Thompson became one of his closest friends. Like others, he spoke of his grief at losing Mr. Thompson, saying he thought he had finished his crying until he started writing his tribute..."

I've meant to point out that in the middle of Tuesday afternoon's incessant Pat Robertson's Death Wishes coverage, CNN anchor Kyra Phillips was so excited to rifle through the jolly-atheist hit file of Robertson quotes, she messed up on her sourcing:

PHILLIPS: In 1992, at the GOP convention, Pat Robertson had this to say about feminism. He said, "Feminism encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians."

REV. TED HAGGARD: Yes. Yes, that's pretty exciting, huh?

PHILLIPS: Yes. I don't know if it's exciting or it's pretty scary, when you hear something like that.

HAGGARD: Yes.

PHILLIPS: I mean, quite honestly, when I read the Bible I don't really remember taking feminism in this respect...

ABC made time Wednesday night for Martha Raddatz to read from a letter the Gold Star Moms for Peace sent to President Bush in which they charged that "you put our troops in harm's way based on a lie. We are military families who demand an end to the lies, and call for you to bring our troops home now." But, after weeks of hyping Cindy Sheehan, neither Raddatz nor anyone else on World News Tonight mentioned how Bush spent nearly three hours meeting with family members of those killed in Iraq. Neither did the CBS Evening News which held its coverage of Bush's speech in Idaho to the National Guard to a soundbite of Bush quoting a mother with four sons in Iraq. NBC anchor Brian Williams touted how Sheehan's group "said today its members will follow President Bush around the country protesting the war," but at least Kelly O'Donnell noted that Bush "met privately with 68 family members who grieve for sons and husbands lost in war."

Full CyberAlert article follows. For today's MRC CyberAlert with five more items.

A front-page story in today’s Washington Post suggests that Bush administration amendments to a 29-page draft agreement prepared by the United Nations for its upcoming world summit on poverty and U.N. reform have “thrown the proceedings in turmoil”:

Less than a month before world leaders arrive in New York for a world summit on poverty and U.N. reform, the Bush administration has thrown the proceedings in turmoil with a call for drastic renegotiation of a draft agreement to be signed by presidents and prime ministers attending the event.

Unfortunately, nowhere in this article does its author, Colum Lynch, support such an assertion.  In fact, there is not one quote from any U.N. representatives or officials stating that the U.S. amendments have in any way interfered with these proceedings.

Quite the contrary, the article cites officials who state support for the amendments:

Former CBS reporter Bernard Goldberg went on WashingtonPost.com's Live Online and answered questions emailed to him by readers. Goldberg was there to discuss his latest book, "100 People Who are Screwing Up America."

Someone asked if he would "add Cindy Sheehan as number 101 this week?"

"I'm with you. Our hearts go out to her for her loss, but she is wearing thin. It is perfectly reasonable to disagree with President Bush on Iraq. But the over-the-top nonsense she's spouting is doing her and her cause more harm than she understands."

Another reader asked what he thought of Dan Rather.

"Dan got pushed out mainly because of low ratings, though Memogate was not irrelevant. However, if Dan had been #1 in the evening news horse race, the scandal would not have been enough to get him kicked upstairs. Dan has spent over 40 years at CBS News and has covered every major story of our time. He brought this on himself -- by circling the wagons and pointing fingers at his accusers -- but still it's a little sad to see the guy get "beaten up" by his own colleagues who have said less than flattering things about him (in the New Yorker, for example). Dan's flaw is that he's not very introspective. He lashes out at critics, instead of looking inward. And yes -- because of Memogate, and only because of Memograte -- he is on The List."

Would any reporters like to take a moment away from tearing up Pat Robertson on their front page to mention how heinous it was when former presidential advisor George Stephanopoulos suggested we assassinate Saddam Hussein? Probably not.

New York Times reporter Elisabeth Bumiller today tried her best to write an article without mentioning anti-war heroine Cindy Sheehan, as well as without impugning the president.  Unfortunately, she failed.

In an article about the president’s speech to thousands of National Guard members and their families in Nampa, Idaho, it only took two paragraphs before the story turned from Mr. Bush’s vision of Iraq and his appreciation for the sacrifice these families and their relatives are making into another in a long litany of Cindyfests:

Defending his administration's military stance for the third day in a row, he presented another tough, if implicit, rebuttal to war critics like Cindy Sheehan, the mother of an American soldier killed in Iraq who has generated a monthlong protest outside his Texas ranch. Mr. Bush said, "As long as I'm the president, we will stay, we will fight and we will win the war on terror."

The president said withdrawing troops now - as Ms. Sheehan advocates - would "only embolden the terrorists and create a staging ground to launch more attacks against America and free nations."

As Ms. Sheehan advocates?  Has Ms. Sheehan now been promoted to the title of "advocate"?

Yet, most abhorrent is this:

If any more proof was needed that former NBC reporter and now NYT columnist Bob Herbert was a reliable liberal, Herbert's Thursday's column shows he firmly believes in recycling.

In "Truth-Telling on Race? Not in Bush's Fantasyland," Herbert recycles a column he wrote back on May 20, 1999. Of the 16 paragraphs of Herbert's "new" column, the middle part (nine graphs) are lifted almost verbatim from 1999.

Using a front-page story from Wednesday as a hook, Herbert opens today's piece: "The Bush administration has punished a Justice Department official who dared to tell even a mild truth about racial profiling by law enforcement officers in this country. In 2001 President Bush selected Lawrence Greenfeld to head the Bureau of Justice Statistics, which tracks crime patterns and police tactics, among other things. But as Eric Lichtblau of The Times reported in a front-page article yesterday, Mr. Greenfeld is being demoted because he complained that senior political officials were seeking to play down newly compiled data about the aggressive treatment of black and Hispanic drivers by police officers. My first thought when I read the story was that burying the messenger who tells uncomfortable truths has always been a favorite tactic of this administration, which seems to exist largely in a world of fantasy. (Grown-ups don't do well in the Bush playtime environment. Remember Gen. Eric Shinseki? And former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill?)"

The Washington Post is so committed to liberal bias that it can't even keep it out of the Sports section. The back page of Thursday's Sports is topped by an article on former EPA administrator Christie Todd Whitman, ostensibly about golf, but really about conservative Republican-bashing:

"The Republican Party has never been this narrow, litmus-test type party," claimed Whitman, who plays to a 14.8 handicap index. "We can disagree on an issue like choice or stem cell research and not be an enemy or a bad person. We need to get away from this approach that we see more and more today, that you can't be a good Republican if you don't believe certain things in a certain way." In her book, "It's My Party Too," which came out earlier this year, she was critical of the Bush administration for how it disengaged from the Kyoto accord on global warming. At the same time, Whitman, who served as administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency until June 2003, praised President Bush for his efforts in other environmental areas...

That's the title you will see on the mainpage of AOL News section if you are one of AOL's 21+ million subscribers. AOL, a Time Warner Company (which notably also runs CNN), suggests that Bush is on nothing more than a vacation, even opting out on using the more popular "working vacation" title. Rick Moore previously pointed out the highly suspect questions asked of AOL subscribers.

AOL Headline: "Should He be on Vacation?"

Body: "President Bush's vacation is a polarizing issue. Some complain it's too long. Others say he shouldn't take time off during a war. Still others say he deserves a break. As this debate continues -- along with Bush's vacation -- see what others say and give us your take."

Also highlighted are four quotes from "experts" of different fields, and apparantly of presidential vacations.

Gaggle is a daily comic strip about the White House press corps and Larry the press secretary. Larry deals with the shenanigans of reporters who couldn't imagine anyone voting for a Republican.

There will be a new Gaggle strip, fully colored, every weekday. Stay tuned for a list of characters.

Click here for previous strips.

If you're an AOL user and signed on today, the top news item was a photo of President Bush at the wheel of his pick-up truck, and the headline "Should He Be On Vacation, Long Break Stirs Controversy".  Of course, they had the obligatory unscientific "polls" where the AOL users get to express the views.

The poll questions were as loaded as the headline:

1.  Should Bush be on vacation during a war?   Yes/No

2.  How hard does it seem like Bush is working on his vacation?  Very/Somewhat/Not at All

3.  Do you think Bush's vacations make him more effective in the long run?  Yes/No

4.  How would you describe the amount of vacation Bush takes?  Too Much/Just Right/Not Enough

This is at least the second time AOL has run a news item and poll like this since Bush went on vacation.  Given that this info appears under "AOL News", the assumption is that AOL considers this the top news story in the country (this is the same spot where important breaking news appears).