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
May 19, 2010, 12:18 PM EDT

It’s getting wacky in the air of liberal talk radio about the BP oil spill. On the Randi Rhodes show on Monday, a female caller from Kentucky told Rhodes: “The only people who could basically benefit from all this death, and the cesspool-making down there are the oil companies. So I think they’re doing it deliberately, killing everything so that the only thing that will be worth anything down there is oil.”

Rhodes replied: “You know? That’s not bad.” She talked about a shopping mall going up in the Amazon rainforest, and added “That’s not so far off base, what you’re saying.” She then turned around and suggested Brit Hume was a “moron” for downplaying the aftermath of the oil spill on Fox News Sunday: 

Brit Hume is a moron; I mean, if you -- if you ever suspected that he was a pompous ass, and it was backed up by some wild intellect that he had, you know, I spent the weekend with lots of pompous ass -- assi [plural, like octopi] – right, and they do have the intellect to back it up. So that when you see somebody who's just a pompous ass for no apparent reason, it sort of sticks out now as somebody who's just a pompous ass for no good reason with nothing to back it up.

May 19, 2010, 6:27 AM EDT

With the loss of party-switching Sen. Arlen Specter Tuesday night, AP political writer Charles Babington was assigned the obligatory story "Obama endorsements don't seem to help Democrats." It's a fairly routine analysis until Babington had an Andrea Mitchell moment when he called Scott Brown's Senate win "excruciating." (In 1990, Mitchell told NBC viewers after a Jesse Helms victory that "This has been a really heartbreaking race.")

In previous months, Obama's endorsements and campaign appearances weren't enough to save then-Gov. Jon Corzine's re-election bid in New Jersey, Creigh Deeds' run for governor in Virginia or Martha Coakley's campaign in Massachusetts to keep the late Edward M. Kennedy's Senate seat in Democratic hands.

In fairness, Deeds was an underdog from the start, and Corzine brought many problems on himself. But the Coakley loss to Republican Scott Brown was excruciating. She once was considered a shoo-in, and her defeat restored the Republicans' ability to block Democratic bills with Senate filibusters.

If Babington had said it was "excruciating for Democrats," it would have been unremarkable. Instead it sounded like "it was excruciating for me."

May 18, 2010, 3:12 PM EDT

Following up on Brian Williams offering a Bush-bashing commencement address at Notre Dame, the liberal all-female Smith College naturally invited MSNBC host Rachel Maddow for her own Bush-bashing graduation speech on Sunday.

Maddow, whose every profile seems to boast of her bartending talents, began her address by expressing horror at Carry Nation, the bar-smashing temperance activist of the early 1900s, which spurred Prohibition, which spurred Maddow to bash Bush:  

With the massive surge of profits flowing through that criminal underworld, this country reached whole new levels of government corruption that puts anything we've got today to shame -- except for maybe the Interior Department of the Bush administration.

May 18, 2010, 8:11 AM EDT

Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd looked at his polls and decided to retire, so Democrats were buoyed by the hope of replacing him with the state's Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal. Credit should go to The New York Times and Raymond Hernandez for digging up something embarrassing. Blumenthal's not a Vietnam combat veteran, as he has implied:

“We have learned something important since the days that I served in Vietnam,” Mr. Blumenthal said to the group gathered in Norwalk in March 2008. “And you exemplify it. Whatever we think about the war, whatever we call it — Afghanistan or Iraq — we owe our military men and women unconditional support.”

There was one problem: Mr. Blumenthal, a Democrat now running for the United States Senate, never served in Vietnam. He obtained at least five military deferments from 1965 to 1970 and took repeated steps that enabled him to avoid going to war, according to records.

Five deferments -- just like the liberals forever reminded people about Dick Cheney. (The Times website offers a clip of Blumenthal's speech on video.) Will the rest of the national media notice?

May 18, 2010, 6:39 AM EDT

As the conservatives in the Tea Party movement gained strength, the liberal media often predicted they would cause harm to the Republican Party and drive out all the moderates. Wouldn't the conservatives look too extreme to win over voters? (See Rich Noyes for more.)

Now that the MoveOn.org leftists are poised to remove an incumbent Senator or two, they might spread the idea that there is also a strong ideological base in the Democratic party -- on the left. But the media rarely mourn that they're driving all out the moderate Democrats in their quest for ideological perfection, and they rarely even whisper that the leftist base will make the Democrats look too extreme to the electorate. Notice the tone of Chuck Todd's piece for Monday's Today, and let's throw in that the graphic on screen only said the trend was "anti-Washington anger." The words "liberal" or "on the left" are not spoken:

May 17, 2010, 2:25 PM EDT

NBC anchor Brian Williams succeeded Barack Obama as the commencement speaker at Notre Dame on Sunday. Williams sounded like Obama and other Democrats by mentioning the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, and somehow working that tragedy backwards to rerun NBC's atrociously biased coverage of Hurricane Katrina. Williams repeated himself on Sunday by calling it "benign neglect turned fatal." (It's here on YouTube, at minute 10.)

If you think that isn’t directed squarely at George W. Bush, you didn’t see the Williams interviews of the "clueless patrician" president and his radical-left black accuser in 2005. (Williams somehow never took the initiative to grill Democratic Gov. Kathleen Blanco or Democratic Mayor Ray Nagin about whether they were clueless.) Williams told the graduates:

The ultimate cruelty, the ultimate perversion is where it’s happening -- one of the most beautiful places on Earth, it’s populated by some of the best people on Earth. Katrina was an act of God; but this one is on us. And the people of the state of Louisiana, and especially the Gulf, do not deserve this. They didn’t deserve the benign neglect that turned fatal five years ago, that split apart families and almost took that city down for good. As those of you from that area know, they came back....

May 17, 2010, 8:20 AM EDT

NBC Meet the Press host David Gregory used an obvious double standard in his interviews with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Sen. Charles Schumer on the Elena Kagan Supreme Court nomination on Sunday. McConnell was grilled for hypocrisy in comparison to President Bush's clumsy Harriet Miers nomination in 2005 -- but Schumer was not. McConnell was accused of engaging in games that the people would protest as "This is the kind of politics I hate" -- but Schumer was not. Here's how the hardball was thrown, and thrown back: 

GREGORY:  But don't you think a lot of people look at Washington and say, "This is the kind of politics that I hate." Here you were, you stood up for Harriet Miers despite the fact that she was a friend of the president.  You stood up for her despite the fact she didn't have judicial experience, but when it comes to a Democratic nominee you say, "Oh wait a minute, these are real problems here that have to be explored."

May 16, 2010, 10:02 PM EDT

Deacon Greg Kandra was an interesting presence on the CBS staff in the Katie Couric era. He edited her blog Couric & Co. as he was ordained a Catholic deacon in 2007. At his Beliefnet blog The Deacon's Bench, he responded to the blog Creative Minority Report claiming Couric is a modern Margaret Sanger, the controversial eugenics-endorsing founder of Planned Parenthood. (The label came from Couric's recent subsidize-the-contraceptives commentary.)  I expected Kandra might offer some defense to the CBS star. Instead, Kandra wrote:

CMR calls Katie a "modern Margaret Sanger."

I know what CMR is talking about. And boy, do they have Katie nailed.

True story. A few years ago, when Katie first came to CBS News, I worked as the editor of her blog "Couric & Co." One afternoon, I had a meeting with her in her office overlooking the CBS newsroom. Her suite of offices is gorgeous: white-on-white, with a marble desk and gorgeous black-and-white prints on the walls.

May 16, 2010, 5:00 PM EDT

On HBO's Real Time Friday, Bill Maher fought with conservative atheist S.E. Cupp and claimed the news magazines weren't hostile to religion, but were overflowing with religion coverage. His exaggerations were wild, more than just for comic effect:   

Are you kidding? Jesus or Mary is on the cover of Newsweek or Time like every other week. If Jesus had an office on Sunset Boulevard, and you walked down the corridor, he'd have his magazine covers on every wall. We did a mockup! There! This is the last few years.

If Maher or his underlings at HBO were really careful about facts about "the last few years," they'd know how far off this is: use the cover search on Time's website for "Jesus" and see how many Jesus covers since the 1900s ended: I count four. That's hardly "every other week."

There's "The Opus Dei Code" (April 24, 2006, not included on Maher's screen, since it might seem less than devout, slinging Da Vinci Code myths), "Secrets of the Nativity" (December 13, 2004), "Why Did Jesus Have to Die?" (April 12, 2004), and "What Jesus Saw" (April 16, 2001).

May 16, 2010, 9:21 AM EDT
On Friday night's Real Time, HBO talk-host Bill Maher berated conservative (and fellow atheist) S.E. Cupp for her new book Losing Our Religion: The Liberal Media's Attack on Christianity. “Liberals are not atheists any more than conservatives are. Michael Moore is religious! Chris Matthews is religious! Al Sharpton is religious!” Maher went so far as to insist the liberal media has “never” attacked religion:

MAHER: But this is your premise, that the liberal media is attacking religion.

CUPP: They are.

MAHER: Where?

CUPP: Every day.

MAHER: Never. Never.

CUPP: Never?

MAHER: Never.

CUPP: Do you watch TV?

MAHER: I do. Do you?

May 16, 2010, 6:46 AM EDT

Jaws dropped when a New York Times blogger compared the jihadist figure that connects Fort Hood, the Christmas Day airplane bomb and Times Square -- Anwar al-Awlaki -- to Jesus Christ. How can liberals, who pride themselves on being so much more shades-of-gray nuanced, not distinguish between figures of violence and non-violence? On the Opinionator blog, Robert Wright complained about Barack Obama authorizing the assassination of al-Awlaki:

Even leaving aside the constitutional questions (al-Awlaki is an American citizen), doesn’t Obama see what a gift the killing of this imam would be to his cause? Just ask the Romans how their anti-Jesus-movement strategy worked out. (And Jesus’s followers didn’t have their leader’s sermons saved in ready-to-go video and audio files; al-Awlaki’s resurrection would be vivid indeed.)

Wright began his blog post by mocking neocon Daniel Pipes as hardly "drowning in conceptual complexity." Wright's larger point was that "war on terror" folks find "jihadi intent" or religious extremism in terror incidents in Times Square, while Wright finds every terrorist is motivated by American militarism and terror-fighting excess. Wright just can't believe Obama is going down the "disastrous" Bush-Cheney path:

May 15, 2010, 11:03 PM EDT

The recent parade of praise for The Pill wasn't unanimous. Surprisingly, Raquel Welch, one of the hottest sex symbols of the 1970s, confessed in a commentary on CNN.com that she's been married four times, but she believes that too many women are too willing to "hook up" casually, since contraceptives make it "safe" to play the field:  

One significant, and enduring, effect of The Pill on female sexual attitudes during the 60's, was: "Now we can have sex anytime we want, without the consequences. Hallelujah, let's party!"

It remains this way. These days, nobody seems able to "keep it in their pants" or honor a commitment! Raising the question: Is marriage still a viable option? I'm ashamed to admit that I myself have been married four times, and yet I still feel that it is the cornerstone of civilization, an essential institution that stabilizes society, provides a sanctuary for children and saves us from anarchy.

May 15, 2010, 6:34 PM EDT

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air asks a good media question: why doesn't anyone care about the Soviet archives? He refers to a Claire Berlinski article in City Journal. But for media watchers, the strongest possible revision would come in the reputation of one Mikhail Gorbachev, Time's Man of the Decade, the one they called the "commissar liberator," the "communist pope and the Soviet Martin Luther," and on and on. Some files suggest he was ruthless and cavalier about human life. What a shock:

The narrative among popular academics and media is that the Soviet Union collapsed out of a too-generous sense of glasnost and perestroika, with Mikhail Gorbachev as the benevolent national leader whose love of freedom inadvertently ended the Soviet empire.  The documentation of the Kremlin’s activities and transcripts of Gorbachev’s own conversations put an end to that mythology. For instance, Berlinski quotes this passage from Politburo minutes of a discussion of the Tiananmen Massacre in 1989:

Lukyanov reports that the real number of casualties on Tiananmen Square was 3,000.

Gorbachev: We must be realists. They, like us, have to defend themselves. Three thousands...So what?

May 15, 2010, 9:16 AM EDT

CNN likes to paint itself as the "objective" middle ground in cable news between Fox News and MSNBC. But you don't find the middle with a one-hour June special titled "Gary and Tony Have a Baby." A duo of "gay marriage" activists are the stars "on their quest to have a biological child of their own" -- using an egg donor and a surrogate mother. The trailer is here, championing "the support, the drama" behind "the new American family." The pro-gay blog AfterElton.com noted CNN's own explanation of the Soledad O'Brien documentary:

Unable to legally marry in the U.S., [Gary and Tony] travel to Canada, get married, and spend thousands on an arduous journey toward parenthood via surrogacy and in vitro fertilization. ... Though Gary and Tony had hoped for a happy extended family, they discover instead ambivalence about same-sex marriage. With court battles, and struggles against their hometown community – can these men achieve a life as mainstream as their parents?

CNN is not the "mainstream" media. Like the other liberal networks, they are the "mainstreaming" media, the idealistic leftists who want to take every sexual orientation straight into the center of respectability. "Transgenders" were honored with the two-hour special "Her Name Was Steven" in March. Soledad O'Brien talked to Michael Jensen at AfterElton, and explained this project was never meant to be two-sided:

May 15, 2010, 6:46 AM EDT

On his PBS show, Charlie Rose usually begins with a snappy soundbite of the long interview to come. With New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman on Thursday night, there was this stunning clip at the show's top:

You know, Charlie, for 60 years you could say being a political leader was on balance about giving things away to people. That's what you did most of your time.  I think we're entering an era -- how long it will last I dare not predict -- where being in politics is going to be more than anything else about taking things away from people. And that shift from leaders giving things away to leaders taking things away, I don't think we know what that looks like over time.

Put aside for a moment that governments (half-solvent ones, at least) take away as much as they give. Friedman and Rose were discussing the recent British election, where the candidates all talked about the "pain" of government living within its means. 

May 14, 2010, 10:58 PM EDT

On Friday night's edition of Inside Washington, NPR legal reporter Nina Totenberg twice used the term "spectacularly successful" to define Obama Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan. Host Gordon Peterson asked her what "we" know so far:

We know she was a spectacularly successful dean at Harvard Law School where she was the first female dean -- that she just moved the place, got it really moving again. Students loved her. She knocked heads on the faculty to get hires done. She was a spectacularly successful policy bureaucrat in the Clinton White House.
And what you see right now is a spectacular demonstration of hypocrisy where Republicans who loved the fact that Harriet Miers didn't have judicial experience, because that was kind of needed on the Supreme Court , now they say  it's a serious deficit. And Democrats, who used to want to know about someone's ideology, now say 'oh, it's improper to ask.'

May 14, 2010, 8:08 PM EDT

Headline News talk-show host Joy Behar was hailed in an interview on The Daily Beast site by Kevin Sessums, whose credit line explained was the author of a childhood memoir called Missisippi Sissy. Sessums endorsed the view that Behar is like legendary newscaster Edward R. Murrow for hounding John McCain on ABC's The View:

SESSUMS: But Frank Rich in his Sunday New York Times column called you the modern-day Edward R. Murrow for calling John McCain out on his lies during the presidential campaign when more mainstream journalists wouldn’t.

BEHAR: I know. That was a good one. I got rewarded for my big mouth. I’ll never forgive John McCain for foisting Sarah Palin on us. I took on Rod Blagojevich. I have taken on politicians from time to time. I feel that politicians are fair game whereas regular people in the business really aren’t. I’m not out to get them or to criticize them in public to make them look bad. Politicians are different. They work for me. Other people don’t work for me.

The talk shifted from Sarah Palin to Ann Coulter and Elisabeth Hasselbeck, and Behar proclaimed she is quite tired of lowering herself to arguing with Elisabeth:

May 14, 2010, 2:25 PM EDT

Friday's "Yeas and Nays" gossip column in The Washington Examiner reported that despite his suspension by MSNBC, anchor David Shuster is still playing on the "Original Peacocks" softball team of WRC (NBC's local affiliate). An anonymous player claimed:

"One funny thing is he has his own uniform, while the rest of the teams play in shorts and T-shirts," a player from an opposing team told Yeas & Nays. "What a dork," the player added.

1)  I don't wear a "uniform." I wear shorts and the WRC/NBC t-shirt just like everybody else. There is one player on our team who wears softball pants. But he plays left field. I play center. And I've never EVER worn softball pants. So, your claim about me wearing a uniform is false. 

May 14, 2010, 1:01 PM EDT

Liberal newspapers think alike. In Friday's Washington Post, film critic Michael O'Sullivan seconded the emotion of New York Times critic A.O. Scott that there were "tea party" elements in the new Russell Crowe version of "Robin Hood." O'Sullivan also lamented there was "precious little of the socialist stuff" that's usually associated with the Hood legend's rob-and-redistribute routine. O'Sullivan began:  

Dark and polemic, Ridley Scott's "Robin Hood" is less about a band of merry men than a whole country of really angry ones. At times, it feels like a political attack ad paid for by the tea party movement, circa 1199. Set in an England that has been bankrupted by years of war in the Middle East -- in this case, the Crusades -- it's the story of a people who are being taxed to death by a corrupt government, under an upstart ruler who's running the country into the ground. It asks: What's a man of principle to do?

If you said, "Steal from the rich, and give to the poor," you must be thinking of the old Robin Hood. The correct answer here is: "Don't retreat, reload." There are more arrows flying every which way than you've ever seen -- through the face, the neck, the chest, the back. It's a pincushion of a movie.
May 14, 2010, 8:40 AM EDT

On the Swampland blog, Time's Jay Newton-Small reports congressional Democrats are peeved at Newsweek pundit Jonathan Alter's Obama-polishing book on his first year, especially how he seems to give the president most of the credit for passing ObamaCare. Alter defended himself with more Barack-boosting:

Even though he did not draft the bill, it has come to be known as “Obamacare” and will be – for better or for worst – one of the crowning achievements that history will remember of Obama's first term. “On the idea of winning- it's always messy,” Alter tells me. “He has joined  [Franklin] Roosevelt and [Lyndon] Johnson as a President of great domestic accomplishment. He gets the credit, even though he may have screwed up here or there, but in the final analysis he won and if he'd lost nobody would've given him credit for good intentions.”