Tim Graham is Executive Editor of NewsBusters and is the Media Research Center’s Director of Media Analysis. His career at the MRC began in February 1989 as associate editor of MediaWatch, the monthly newsletter of the MRC before the Internet era.

Graham is co-author with MRC president Brent Bozell of the books Collusion: How the Media Stole the 2012 Election and How To Prevent It From Happening Again in 2016 (2013) and Whitewash: What The Media Won’t Tell You About Hillary Clinton, But Conservatives Will (2007). He is also the author of the book Pattern of Deception: The Media's Role in the Clinton Presidency (1996).

Graham is a regular talk-radio and television spokesman for the MRC and has made television appearances on MSNBC, CNBC, CNN, Fox News, and the Fox Business Channel. His articles have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Times, National Review, and other publications.

Graham left the MRC to serve in 2001and 2002 as White House Correspondent for World, a national weekly Christian news magazine. He returned in 2003. Before joining the MRC, Graham served as press secretary for the campaign of U.S. Rep. Jack Buechner (R-Mo.) in 1988, and in 1987, he served as editor of Organization Trends, a monthly newsletter on philanthropy and politics by the Washington-based Capital Research Center.

Graham is a native of Viroqua, Wisconsin and graduated from Bemidji State University in northern Minnesota. 

Latest from Tim Graham
February 7, 2011, 12:46 PM EST

ESPN host (and former longtime Washington Post sports columnist) Michael Wilbon had a thrill up his leg over being invited to the Super Bowl party at the White House with a couple of hundred Obama friends. In a column for ESPN, Wilbon boasted "Obama's capacity for, passion for, and range of knowledge" on sports is greater than any other recent president. He also said "tough spit" on any conservative talkers who'd try to find anything scandalous in the East Room event:

If you're looking for that TMZ moment, a revelation of Charlie Sheen getting drunk and turning the East Room into a piano bar or Tareq and Michaele Salahi slipping past security and sitting next to President and Mrs. Obama, stop reading right now. There wasn't even a confrontation between the Steelers and Packers fans, nothing salacious or awkward or anything worthy of YouTube. And if the conservative talking heads don't believe that when they take exception to whatever they think went on, as they inevitably will, tough spit.

February 7, 2011, 7:56 AM EST

The current liberal swooning over Al Jazeera English has naturally led to a full-page Washington Post ad today featuring the liberal swooning and the message 'WATCH AL JAZEERA ENGLISH NOW." The notoriously anti-American network is not on most cable systems, but they tout their YouTube channel and their mobile apps. These are the morning plugs (emphasis theirs):

"It Is Al Jazeera's Moment" -- The New York Times

"Thank You For What You're Doing" -- Sam Donaldson on ABC's This Week

February 6, 2011, 9:19 AM EST

The brewing controversy over Planned Parenthood officials being caught on video trying to help cover up potential sex crimes is being tamped down by one Stuart Schear, their vice president for communications. On CNN, he kept denouncing pro-lifers for being "very extreme" and opposing "health care" for women.

It may surprise no one, but Schear is a veteran of the liberal media, having spent five years as a producer for Jim Lehrer at the PBS NewsHour and a year at NBC News. He also spent a year on the Bill Clinton White House staff. From the Planned Parenthood press release last year:

February 6, 2011, 8:44 AM EST

While most media reports acknowledged at Reagan’s death the warmth and charisma of the man, and his powers as a “Great Communicator,” they did not note the strenuous attempts to rebut him by the array of powerful communicators known as the national media elite. The most notable omission in all the gracious obituaries and histories is the media’s own aggressive role in attempting to define the Reagan era down. Reporters, editors, and anchormen fought Reagan’s policies tooth and nail, built a scandal industry to taint Reagan with the “sleaze factor” (which they quickly dropped in the 1990s), and often dismissed him personally as a dangerously bellicose and ignorant man still lost in his old movie roles.

The hostility didn’t end when Reagan left office either. The media continued to paint the Reagan era as a horrific time of low ethics, class warfare on the poor, and crushing government debt. Even after he left office, Ronald Reagan’s legacy was still a juicy target for liberal journalists, who blamed his administration for everything from flammable pajamas to sexual harassment in public housing.

February 5, 2011, 1:02 PM EST

Washington Post TV critic Hank Stuever previewed three Reagan-at-100 documentaries, but he preferred the HBO version: "One of these is artfully nuanced and intellectually curious, which means it's on HBO." The pay-cable channel is known for going gushy over the Kennedys (and playing films by Kennedys), but Stuever hints that this film by Eugene Jarecki has lots of leftist gab in it:

Jarecki gets much more access to younger son Ron Reagan, now 52, who has just come out with a memoir ("My Father at 100"), and who, over the years, has evolved into generous yet frank authority on his father's personal and political complexities.

Jarecki's film is exceptionally organized and pretty fair - though something tells me it won't delight more conservative viewers, especially when left-leaning authors such as Will Bunch ("Tear Down This Myth") and Thomas Frank ("What's the Matter with Kansas?") surgically diagnose the ways in which the sunshine message of Reaganomics seduced the working middle class, to its own detriment. The film also manages to scintillate the basics of the Iran-contra affair in a way that makes it feel freshly scandalous.

February 5, 2011, 7:00 AM EST

The potentially democratic developments in Egypt inspired geopolitical musings from Rosie O'Donnell on her Sirius/XM radio show on Thursday. Predictably, what most offends Rosie in the current environment is her usual emphasis: America should never lecture about democracy and so on, because we aren't better than anyone else:

When we only judge other nations about their human-rights violations and don't really look at our own, when we don't spend the time on the news talking about the problems in American culture and what the results of them have been on our children, on our society...Things like the homeless rate, the divorce rate...corporate corruption...what we are guilty of here. We only look at someone else and say, 'Look at what's wrong with their culture'...I think it puts us in a really ethnocentric blind spot.

Rosie O'Donnell is now listing divorce and homelessness in the category of "human rights violations" -- defining "rights" down to get over our "really ethnocentric blind spot." (Would this make Rosie's "divorce" from Kelly Carpenter a human-rights violation?)

February 4, 2011, 5:09 PM EST

One common media-elite attack on Reagan’s domestic policy was the notion that Reagan was waging a “war on the poor,” which was often a shorthand way of suggesting a war on black Americans. Using their definition of “civil rights”—anything which adds government-mandated advantages for racial minorities is “civil rights” progress – liberal journalists suggested to less sophisticated readers and viewers that somehow Ronald Reagan was against liberty for minorities.  But it often grew worse, with inaccurate psychoanalysis which suggested Reagan was somehow gunning for blacks, encouraging bitter white supremacists by speaking of color-blindness.

Perhaps because they take all their race cues from liberal activist groups, the media ignored how blacks actually prospered in the Reagan years.  Even the liberal Joint Center for Political Studies estimated the black middle class grew by one-third from 1980 to 1988, from 3.6 million to 4.8 million. In addition, black employment from 1982 to 1987 grew twice as fast (up 24.9 percent) as white employment. Real black median family income rose 12.7 percent from 1981 to 1987, 46 percent faster than whites.  But reporters evaluated Reagan based on the evaluations of liberal friends, not hard data.

February 4, 2011, 8:59 AM EST

It's hardly surprising that The Washington Post would run an op-ed on Friday that argues about maintainting taxpayer-funded broadcasting in its current liberal-pleasing status quo. But it is surprising that the writers, Laura Walker and Jaclyn Sallee, would be so feckless in denying the bias of PBS and NPR. As usual they use a liberal poll instead of a content analysis:

Some will argue that public broadcasting should not be funded by the government it needs to hold accountable. But CPB's role as a buffer has worked remarkably well. The Pew study found that 72 percent of Americans feel that "most news sources are biased in their coverage." But they don't feel that way about public broadcasting - among the most trusted news sources anywhere.  

These public-radio lobbyists are citing a poll by Public Policy Polling, a Democratic firm that works with the leftist website the Daily Kos. This year's poll found PBS was the "most trusted" news outlet -- but PBS was just added this year. Is someone trying to defend their taxpayer subsidies? They found 50 percent said they trusted PBS, and 30 percent did not. They surveyed 632 Americans in January, but did NOT ask: do you actually watch PBS? Could you name a PBS news anchor?  

February 4, 2011, 7:06 AM EST

 The New York Times is not known for delicate restraint in its treatment of the Catholic Church. Executive editor Bill Keller (despite somehow marrying his second wife in the Church) trashed Pope John Paul the Great in 2002: "One paradox of the Polish pope is that while he is rightly revered for helping bring down the godless Communists, he has replicated something very like the old Communist Party in his church." 

The memory of that fusillade was rekindled in a New York Times story on Thursday about  the sex scandals of prime minister Silvio Berlusconi and how they're outraging women in Italy. Times reporters Elisabetta Povoledo and Rachel Donadio include this loaded sentence: "By some lights, Italian women have come far in a country whose most entrenched power structures — the Roman Catholic Church and organized crime — remain male and secretive." 

This is a little like saying the NAACP and the Ku Klux Klan are both fraternal organizations based on race. But that wasn't the only example on this day. Kathryn Lopez of National Review found the Catholic Church was also compared to the terrorism-endorsing Muslim Brotherhood by reporter Scott Shane:

February 3, 2011, 5:43 PM EST

Ronald Reagan may have won the Cold War by forcing the Soviet Union to realize that it could not compete financially or technologically with a revitalized United States. But to the American media, the Reagan defense buildup seemed like a plot designed to deny government aid to poor and hungry people. It was seemingly the only spending that caused the budget deficit, even bankrupted the country. Cranking up spending on supposedly unworkable new ideas like a national missile defense system was “absolute nonsense,” as ABC’s Ted Koppel told Phil Donahue in 1987.

A 1985 Los Angeles Times survey of reporters found out how McGovernite liberalism dominated the press: 84 percent of reporters and editors supported a so-called “nuclear freeze” to ban all future nuclear missile deployment; 80 percent were opposed to increased defense spending; and 76 percent objected to aid to the Contra rebels fighting for democracy in Nicaragua. One side of this debate had an eye on permanent “peaceful coexistence.” The other side had an eye on victory.

February 3, 2011, 7:58 AM EST

At the Daily Kos blog on Wednesday came a rant by the blogger WinSmith against "rampant anti-Semitic paranoia" being central to the conservative movement, as allegedly demonstrated by "know-nothing reactionary racists and clueless buffoons like Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin" riling up the ignorant masses:

This rampant anti-Semitic paranoia was that Jews were "redistributing wealth" to take down the true heroic Ayn Rand titans of industry, which were, of course, the Rockefellers, the Vanderbilts, the Henry Fords, etc.

February 3, 2011, 7:25 AM EST

The Washington Post devoted an entire page and more in Thursday's Style section to the GOP protest presidential candidacy of gay activist Fred Karger. Post reporter Dan Zak proclaimed: "He can see himself as the moderate voice in a debate crowded with hard-liners."

But late in the story, Zak writes how Karger embraced "the notion of transpartisanship, which allows a politician to revere the Clintons (Fred was a maxed-out Hillary donor in 2008), espouse the word "progressive," vote for Ralph Nader in 2004 (to protest George W. Bush) and 2008 (to protest Obama), and still call himself a Republican. "

Fact-checkers in The Washington Post should throw a red flag at the idea that a someone who's a maxed-out Hillary Clinton donor and a two-time Ralph Nader voter is a "centrist." But even after announcing these facts, Zak declares "The country keeps time by its pendulous centrists."

February 2, 2011, 11:37 PM EST

This week's Newsweek reproduces today's preferred method of journalism on homosexuals: first-person gay narratives, hermetically sealed from any troublesome opposition. In a long piece entitled "Meet My Real Modern Family," author Andrew Solomon reports on how he and his lover have each fathered two children, although only one of them lives with them. Solomon unsurprisingly expresses pride and demands respect: "We have earned the familial relationships into which others stumble, and there is a veteran’s peace in our mutual devotion." Religious people only surface briefly in their typical role, as villains:

John and I sent out birth announcements that included a picture of us with George. One of John’s cousins returned it with a note that said, “Your lifestyle is against our Christian values. We wish to have no further contact.” Some people scorn the idea of calling five adults and four children in three states a family, or believe that the existence of our family undermines theirs. I do not accept competitive models of love, only additive ones. I espouse reproductive libertarianism, and would propose that when everyone has the broadest choice, love itself expands. I would never want to be smug about the affection we all found in one another. It is not a better love than others, but it is another love, and just as species diversity is crucial to sustain the planet, this diversity strengthens the ecosphere of kindness.

February 2, 2011, 5:28 PM EST

Few now remember that 1979 and 1980 were the nation’s worst economic years since the Great Depression. Reagan saved America from Jimmy Carter economics: he brought inflation down from 13.5 to 4.1 percent; unemployment, from 9.5 to 5.2 percent; the federal discount rate, from 14 to 6.5 percent. Under Reagan, the number of jobs increased by almost 20 million; median family income rose every year from 1982 to 1989. It was the greatest peacetime expansion in American history. Charitable giving more than doubled, to more than $100 billion in 1988.

But the media elite’s first drafts of history ignored the good news and highlighted the bad news. In a study of almost 14,000 network stories on the economy during three one-year time periods – July 1 to June 30 in 1982-83, 1984-85, and 1986-87—Virginia Commonwealth University professor Ted J. Smith III found that as the economy improved, the amount of network TV coverage shrunk and grew more negative in tone. The ratio of negative to positive stories aggressively increased even as economic indicators improved, from 4.9 to 1 in 1982-83 to 7.0 to 1 in 1986-87.

February 2, 2011, 2:38 PM EST

Time magazine shamelessly flip-flopped this week in touting "Why Obama Loves Reagan," and headlining its cover story: "The Role Model: Barack Obama realized long ago that Ronald Reagan was a transformational president who reshaped the nation and its politics. Now Obama is fashioning his own president to follow the Gipper's playbook." But just two years ago, history had an entirely different flavor. Time pictured Obama as Franklin Roosevelt promising a “New New Deal.”

Time obviously never anticipated Obama would be routed in the House, and have to reinvent himself (with a lot of slavish media assistance). Today it's surprising to encounter what Peter Beinart wrote for Time then: “The coalition that carried Obama to victory is every bit as sturdy as America’s last two dominant political coalitions: the ones that elected Franklin Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan. And the Obama majority is sturdy for one overriding reason: liberalism, which average Americans once associated with upheaval, now promises stability instead.”

The headline was "The New Liberal Order: The Obama presidency is just the beginning. Why shifting attitudes about government could make Democrats the ruling party for a generation."

February 2, 2011, 8:33 AM EST

Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank tries to suggest in Wednesday's paper that the White House press corps is in some sort of Cold War with President Obama and Robert Gibbs, and that the new spokesman, former Time Washington Bureau Chief Jay Carney, may "usher in an Obama glasnost." Most Obama critics would have a hard time remembering all the negative Robert Gibbs coverage offered by the press corps, but Milbank lays it on thick:

President Obama chose Carney in part as a peace offering to an aggrieved White House press corps that has spent two poisonous years with Robert Gibbs, to Obama's detriment. But if Carney and his bosses are not careful, the appointment could have the reverse of its intended effect....

Carney has the advantage of following Gibbs, surpassed only by [George W. Bush spokesman] Ari Fleischer as the most unpopular press secretary of recent decades. On the podium, Gibbs often appeared to be attempting a revival of Mad magazine's "Snappy Answers to Stupid Questions."  

February 1, 2011, 6:00 PM EST

The pro-life group Live Action has posted an expose that should be deeply embarrassing to Planned Parenthood. In a visit taped on January 11, an office manager at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Perth Amboy, New Jersey greets a man and woman posing as a pimp and a prostitute by carefully explaining they want "as little information as possible" as they offer their contraceptive and abortion services, even as this pimp described bringing in underage girls as illegal aliens to be his sex workers. At NPR's blog The Two-Way, reporter Eyder Peralta picked this up and promptly mangled the facts.

The headline was "Group Behind ACORN Undercover Videos Sets Up Planned Parenthood 'Sting.'" Yes, "sting" may be what you call it when liberal journalists take a hidden camera to expose malfeasance, but if the videographers are pro-life, the word goes into quotes. Peralta began: "The same group that went undercover at ACORN offices back in 2009 is now going after Planned Parenthood." Wrong.

NPR was forced to correct: "An earlier version of this post stated Live Action was associated with James O'Keefe. They are not, and O'Keefe was not a part of this undercover video."

February 1, 2011, 1:10 PM EST

Over the next few days, we'll be sharing on NewsBusters our compendium of the most memorably awful anti-Reagan bias from our new report Rewriting Ronald Reagan: How the Media Have Worked to Distort, Dismantle and Destroy His Legacy. First, we review the loathing of Reagan the man.

While most Americans appreciated Ronald Reagan’s love of country and common sense conservatism, the media elite scorned him as either a showman fooling his audience, or a dunce who was unfit for high office. As the media told the story, Reagan was an airhead living in a fantasy world, a mesmerizing Music Man fooling the public with a phony bill of goods, a man who was cruel or uncaring to poor people and a puppet for the greedy rich. Reporters often agonized over why the American public liked Reagan and could not see through the White House spell and share the media’s contemptuous view of him.


February 1, 2011, 6:41 AM EST

While it is quite clear that the officials of WikiLeaks are leftists, there are more conservative media outlets picking through its scraps. The Telegraph in the U.K. has found a scandal: that the British government  manipulated the Libyans into releasing a mass-murdering terrorist on his cancer diagnosis:

A Foreign Office minister sent Libyan officials detailed legal advice on how to use Abdelbaset al-Megrahi’s cancer diagnosis to ensure he was released from a Scottish prison on compassionate grounds.

The Duke of York [Prince Andrew]  is also said to have played a behind-the-scenes role in encouraging the terrorist’s release.

January 31, 2011, 11:10 PM EST

Brent Bozell's latest culture column reported on how Entertainment Weekly offered a very one-sided cover story cheering for gay teen characters on TV to "enlighten" the culture about the need for "tolerance" (defined as the notion that no one should ever tolerate the idea that homosexuality is a sin, like centuries-old religions with billions of adherents do.)

In a blog post, the cover story's writer, Jennifer Armstrong, kept pushing the notion that gay "visibility" advocates need to cross the "final complicated frontier" of TV shows watched by grade-schoolers on the Disney Channel and Nickelodeon:

On sitcoms like Hannah Montana and iCarly, characters develop occasional crushes, but a mere peck is cause for audience oohing and aahing. But, as AfterElton.com’s Michael Jensen pointed out in a recent post, “Obviously, Disney deals with the sexuality of its teen characters all the time as they have crushes, flirt, and go on dates.” Why not have a same-sex crush, flirtation, or date?