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
January 6, 2011, 3:50 PM EST

On Thursday, the NPR Board of Directors announced it has concluded an internal review of the firing of senior analyst Juan Williams for comments on the Fox News Channel. In what a spokesman called “two distinct pieces of news,” the internal review came with the resignation of Ellen Weiss, NPR’s senior vice president for news, the one who fired Williams over the phone. Weiss, whose husband Rabbi David Saperstein is an adviser to President Obama’s faith-based initiative, told Williams he didn’t have enough remorse for his comments admitting fear of Muslims:

"She took the admission of my visceral fear of people dressed in Muslim garb at the airport as evidence that I am a bigot. She said there are people who wear Muslim garb to work at NPR and they are offended by my comments. She never suggested that I had discriminated against anyone. Instead she continued to ask me what did I mean and I told her I said what I meant. Then she said she did not sense remorse from me. I said I made an honest statement. She informed me that I had violated NPR's values for editorial commentary and she was terminating my contract as a news analyst."

Williams chose not to participate in the review (perhaps knowing his view of the firing was already quite public.) The idea that Weiss's departure is coincidental doesn't come across in the Board's findings:

January 6, 2011, 7:04 AM EST

Washington Post columnist David Ignatius (a foreign editor and business editor of the Post in the 1990s) asked a bizarre question on the badly-named 'PostPartisan" blog: "Is Darrell Issa the new Joe McCarthy?" Clearly, the Post knows that when a liberal blurs you with McCarthy, they mean you are a life-wrecking, fact-mangling monster fueled by demons like ambition and alcohol. The headline is designed for web traffic, since the normally calm Ignatius concluded: "Issa doesn't come across as a McCarthyite." But Issa calling Team Obama "corrupt" was deeply upsetting to the Posties. Wrote Ignatius:

It was scary, frankly, to hear Issa describe the executive branch under President Obama as "one of the most corrupt administrations." What on earth was he talking about? This is an administration that has often tied itself in knots with petty ethical rules. Issa's comment bordered on demagogy.

When you see the righteous gleam in Issa's eye, recall other zealous congressional investigators who claimed to be doing the public's business but ended up pursuing vendettas. I think of Robert F. Kennedy's ruthless pursuit of labor "racketeering" when he was chief counsel of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. And, more chilling, I think of Sen. Joseph McCarthy's use of that subcommittee to probe what he imagined was Communist Party subversion in America.

January 5, 2011, 8:47 AM EST

The top of the Washington Post website on Wednesday features this headline: "Dem: You shouldn't 'worship your Constitution.'" It links to an article on the top of the front page of the Style section emphasizing how Democrats worry the Tea Party and the Republicans have caused Democrats to "worry that the charter is being misconstrued as the immutable word of God" -- as if the Democrats' base believes in an immutable God. Reporter Jason Horowitz forwarded the panic of very liberal Rep. Jerrold Nadler of lower Manhattan (lifetime ACU score: 2.6 out of 100), presented as a "Talmudic" scholar of the text:

"They are reading it like a sacred text," said New York Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), the outgoing chairman of the House Judiciary subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, who has studied and memorized the Constitution with talmudic intensity.

Nadler called the "ritualistic reading" on the floor "total nonsense" and "propaganda" intended to claim the document for Republicans. "You read the Torah, you read the Bible, you build a worship service around it," said Nadler, who argued that the Founders were not "demigods" and that the document's need for amendments to abolish slavery and other injustices showed it was "highly imperfect."

January 5, 2011, 7:51 AM EST

The December 31 edition of PBS's Washington Week tried to spin the year 2010 in the most favorable way for Obama. First, Washington Post reporter Karen Tumulty tried to suggest the massive Democratic losses in the House were somehow pretty conventional, yawn:

Well, I think it shook out as a pretty conventional midterm election. All year long, right up until Election Day, the Democrats kept telling us elections are really choices between two candidates and the Republicans kept saying no, this is going to be a referendum on the president. And that’s what midterms are for after presidential elections.They are often the American public kind of putting its foot on the brake just a bit.

A 63-seat loss for the Democrats? That's not so high a tidal wave. Then host Gwen Ifill suggested the electorate missed something. It was a better year for America and Obama than the voters thought:

January 4, 2011, 5:00 PM EST

The media’s coverage of the incoming GOP-controlled House of Representatives could be called the March of the Mean Words. When Democrats ascend to power, they pass “historic” and “landmark reforms.” When Republicans do the same, the media argot is colorful and violent, sending unsubtle meat-axe messages of conservative “assaults” and “attacks.” See an Associated Press dispatch on plans for an Obamacare-repeal vote. AP began:

The House's new Republican majority plans to vote to repeal Barack Obama's landmark health care overhaul before he even shows up in their chamber to give his State of the Union address....

Full repeal of the health care law is still a long shot. The House vote would be just the first, easiest step. But House Republicans vow they will follow up with dozens of attempts to hack away at what they derisively call "Obamacare."

January 4, 2011, 1:53 PM EST

The Hollywood Reporter was putty in the hands of left-wing "comedian" Kathy Griffin as she vowed to spend the new year attacking Sarah Palin's daughter in high school:

The comic set a resolution for 2011 -- taking on a new Palin in the new year. "I've already gone for Sarah, Todd and Bristol obviously," Griffin tells The Hollywood Reporter. "But I think it's Willow's year to go down."

"In 2011 I want to offend a new Palin," she vows.

January 4, 2011, 8:44 AM EST

One way the national media demonstrate their ardor for Obama is a string of stories suggesting Vice President Joe Biden is not an embarrassment. His gaffes are forever being recast as misunderstood wisdom and honesty. The latest in this string came from the Chicago Tribune's Peter Nicholas in a story headlined "Biden is a linchpin of Obama's presidency," like that's a positive. He may be an old war horse instead of Hope and Change, but he's an asset:

Yet with a new political order in Washington, the success of Obama's presidency hinges more and more on the negotiating skills and political instincts of his No. 2.

Facing a revived Republican Party, the White House is expected to increasingly deploy Biden as a presidential surrogate to find compromises and coax reluctant lawmakers into crossing party lines. Even Biden's penchant for veering off message is being re-evaluated inside the White House as a bridge to ordinary voters who appreciate blunt talk.

January 4, 2011, 7:36 AM EST

Despite the fact that liberals believe that Fox News Channel is a relentlessly conserative channel, when it comes to homosexuality, opponents are actually  mocked and told they're “out of touch.” The gay blog Truth Wins Out rejoiced that the December 30 edition of the FNC overnight show Red Eye was mocking “anti-gay wingnuts.” Host Greg Gutfeld generally tries to mix humor into his commentary, but this was clearly Whack the Religious Right Night for him:

They're here, they're queer, and the Family Research Council refuses to get used to it. Nor would the Concerned Women for America, love them. [Laughter] As a result, both groups are refusing to attend the DC-based Conservative Political Action Conference this February, due to the fact the righty group GOProud has been invited, because they're evil sodomites...

Meanwhile, like-minded gay-haters applaud the move. Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality – you know their meetings are shirtless – said 'Shame on CPAC for defending the absurd proposition that one can be 'conservative' while embracing moral surrender.” Oddly, he said that while shaving his chest. Yes.

January 4, 2011, 6:48 AM EST

Via TV Newser and Mediaite, (update: original audio via J$P) we've learned that when David Shuster subbed in as an overnight radio host on the national Jim Bohannon show, Shuster claimed “MSNBC will never be as liberal as Fox is conservative,” and insisted "MSNBC, CNN, dedicated to a much more sort of basic set of journalistic principles than most of Fox News." He claimed he shouldn't talk about Fox, but then let them have it: 

A very wise man once told me: I should never talk about Fox after having worked there. Just because, no good could come out of saying what I really feel. But let's put it this way. There was a poll that was done recently that found that viewers of Fox News Channel tend to be far more misinformed and have a greater chance misunderstanding basic facts about our society and politics that viewers of any other cable channel.

January 3, 2011, 3:11 PM EST

Via Patrick Gavin at Politico, we learn longtime Chicago Sun-Times film critic Roger Ebert is slamming Sarah Palin on Twitter again. But Ebert, famously known as the rotund partner of slimmer Gene Siskel, actually mocks Palin for "sticking up for little fatsos" when she slammed Michelle Obama's remarks on school nutrition.

Palin showin' her vote-gettin' genius by stickin' up for the little fatsos. Patriots have a right to pig out.

January 3, 2011, 11:30 AM EST

If you thought perhaps the networks would focus in on how President Obama avoided blizzards by staying on vacation in Hawaii, or that anyone would ask how much his vacation might cost the taxpayer, think again. No one's interested in questioning Obama -- as London's Daily Mail did: "The 7,000-square foot home where the president is vacationing has five bedrooms, a media room and a secluded lagoon-style pool with tropical waterfalls and a spa." On her radio show Monday morning, Laura Ingraham played some audio of how CNN's Ed Henry kept it very light and food-focused on last Monday's Newsroom:

DEBORAH FEYERICK, anchor: Next, "The Stakeout." We're going to check in with Senior White House Correspondent Ed Henry. That is, if he's not busy, let's say, surfing...Well, the weather has been terrible in Washington, D.C., but that's no problem for our senior White house correspondent, Ed Henry. Why? Well, listen to the music. He's hanging out with the president in Hawaii. It is a tough job. We know you're running out of sunscreen. Ed, I hope at least they're feeding you.

January 3, 2011, 7:20 AM EST

Parade magazine, the Sunday newspaper supplement, interviewed MSNBC host Joe Scarborough for its January 2 issue and praised him by reporting he has "happily confounded expectations. He's a die-hard conservative who has hosted the Morning Joe show on liberal-minded MSNBC for more than three years.  He's openly critical of both President Obama and his own party." They didn't explain Mr. Die-Hard Conservative complains about both from the left, which doesn't confound anyone's expectations about MSNBC. Scarborough shared his usual arrogant thoughts about how this is "the Republican Party's last chance," and how Palin stinks:

You wrote a blistering piece on Politico about Sarah Palin in November. Did you hear from her?
No. I will say I flinched when I wrote it, because I know the personal impact words can have on candidates’ kids and spouses. But I just know she’s not qualified to be president. By the way, I don’t think she’s going to run. I don’t think it was a coincidence that a lot of that presidential talk came when she was releasing her book. As Newt Gingrich said, “Tell people you’re going to run for president—it helps move books!”

January 2, 2011, 7:24 AM EST

On the night of New Year's Eve, CNN produced a clip show called "All the Best, All the Worst of 2010" with some CNN personalities, a few other journalists, and some comedians. With its quick cuts and splashy color, it may have looked more like VH-1 than CNN, but it produced the same conventional liberal "wisdom." This gave Kathleen Parker yet another opportunity to dismiss Sarah Palin as not a serious political figure: 

TOM FOREMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Best pounding of the pundits.

SARAH PALIN: Whoo, Nevada.

FOREMAN: Sarah Palin.

JULIA REED, NEWSWEEK: A borderline lunatic.

January 1, 2011, 11:06 PM EST

In the Washington Post on Saturday, Charles Krauthammer explored in his column how Team Obama is governing around Congress through regulatory agencies. Remember the controversy over Medicare "end-of-life counseling"? The New York Times reported it snuck back in.  A month ago, Medicare issued a regulation providing for end-of-life counseling during annual "wellness" visits. Somehow, the rest of the national media that sneered about "death panels" weren't spreading the news:

Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), author of Section 1233, was delighted. "Mr. Blumenauer's office celebrated 'a quiet victory,' but urged supporters not to crow about it," reports the New York Times. Deathly quiet. In early November, his office sent an e-mail plea to supporters: "We would ask that you not broadcast this accomplishment out to any of your lists...e-mails can too easily be forwarded." They had been lucky that "thus far, it seems that no press or blogs have discovered it....The longer this [regulation] goes unnoticed, the better our chances of keeping it."

So much for the Democrats' transparency - and for their repeated claim that the more people learn what is in the health-care law, the more they will like it. Turns out ignorance is the Democrats' best hope.

January 1, 2011, 3:13 PM EST

The Washington Post celebrated the first gay bar in populous Fairfax County with a splashy front-page article headlined "Rainbow flag aloft, nightclub is Fairfax County's first gay bar." Next to the headline was a color picture of the drag queen "La Countess Farrington." Reporter J. Freedom du Lac may want to celebrate, but it's a poor choice of metaphors to compare the hot homosexual night spots to the crucifixion of Jesus. The inept religious metaphor came in comparing Virginia to DC:

Historically, of course, the center of gay nightlife in the region has been the District, where bars such as Apex, Town and Ziegfeld's are like stations of the social cross.

At least when Post reporters like Bob Woodward referred to Hillary Clinton's "own stations of the cross in the Whitewater investigation," he was at least referring to suffering, and not partying. The Stations of the Cross are a primarily Catholic devotion during Lent recounting 14 events on the Via Dolorosa in Jerusalem, or Christ's carrying the cross to His death.

January 1, 2011, 7:58 AM EST

National Public Radio spent the last week of 2010 feeling the pain of minorities in America on their afternoon chat show Talk of the Nation. On Monday, NPR host Neal Conan discussed the mistreatment of Muslims with Moustafa Bayoumi of the City University of New York, author of How Does It Feel to Be a Problem? Being Young and Arab in America. When Conan briefly diverted from victimization of Muslim Americans to those radical Islamists "alleged to have been involved" in bombing plots, it was all the fault of the U.S. wars in Muslim countries:

CONAN: We have also, this year, seen more arrests of American Muslims who are alleged to have been involved in plans to target American - army bases, to recruitment centers, subways, Times Square?

Prof. BAYOUMI: Yeah. In fact, I think that's right. And I think that this is a problem. And I think it's a problem that has something to do also with the longevity of these wars. It seems to me that the longer that these wars go on the more opportunities there's going to be for this kind of attributive, you know, act. And that's why it's more important than ever to find some kind of conclusion to these wars.

December 31, 2010, 11:15 PM EST

Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas was upset on Thursday that Gary Bauer would claim that Muslims would fare much worse if they were treated like Christians are in Ameica. He shot back: "wait, what if Christians were treated like Muslims?"

Christians would be racially profiled at public places and transportation hubs. Christians wouldn't be allowed to build churches wherever they pleased. Christians wouldn't be allowed to wear their traditional garb without mocking and angry looks. Christians wouldn't be allowed to say the word "Jesus" without triggering alarm bells at the NSA. Christians wouldn't be allowed to go to church without having their property vandalized, and even being physically attacked. Christians would be the villain in every action thriller. Christians wouldn't be able to run for office without having bigots accuse them of being in league with terrorists.

The weirdest claim is that "Christians would be the villain in every action thriller." Every? How many action thrillers since 9/11 have had Muslim villains? Some film versions of books with Muslim villains were scrubbed clean when they became movies.

December 31, 2010, 10:14 AM EST

Has The Washington Post ever traveled to Iowa? Obviously, yes for presidential caucuses. But on Friday, Post reporter Sandhya Somashekhar accepted the bizarre premise of abortion advocates that abortions are "virtually impossible" in rural Iowa. No one owns a car? The story centered on a new pro-life cause, protesting the provision of RU-486 abortion cocktails over the Internet. Liberals can get upset about selling booze on the Internet, or the spreading of Obama slurs on the Internet, but the marketing of death pills online is a precious human right. The Post published this silly sentence:

Supporters say the program provides a vital service to women in the state's rural reaches, where abortions can be virtually impossible to obtain.

Just before that, they explained that thanks to Planned Parenthood, "women in the first nine weeks of pregnancy can obtain abortion pills at most of the organization's 19 centers, which are scattered across the state." How do those two sentences go together? Abortions impossible, at 19 locations? Planned Parenthood actually lists 26 clinics:

December 31, 2010, 8:40 AM EST

NPR's weekday afternoon talk show Talk of the Nation addressed the year 2010 in terms of how it went for Muslims, gays, blacks, and on Thursday, "The Year for White Americans." All four segments were interviews with guests on the left. While the minorities received a predictable NPR sympathy, the triumph of Tea Party candidates clearly suggested to NPR there's something wrong in white America. Host Neal Conan welcomed liberal historian Douglas Brinkley to suggest there's just too many whites who are racially anxious with a black president, that white people feel "perhaps we are losing something in America, the, you know, white male ascendancy. If you look at even a children's breakfast mat, you'll see it's all white presidents. And now, suddenly, there's Barack Obama."

The segment's first caller jumped in: " I disagree with the gentleman's premise. You know, I'm a white man. I'm an educated white man. And I have to tell you, I resent being called a racist because I don't necessarily support the programs of, you know, President Obama." NPR's Conan defended the liberal guest, claiming Brinkley "said that there's a racial aspect to it. He did not say that anybody who disagrees with Barack Obama is, per se, a racist." The caller refused to budge and said " I heard everything he said and I resent his position because I don't think it's true."

Brinkley did not say all Obama opponents were racist, but he clearly described white opposition to Obama with the vaguest of generality as anxious about white dominance, and even hailed literary archetypes of uptight white Protestants as evidence:

December 30, 2010, 9:07 PM EST

Newsweek's year-end Interview Issue included a brief interview with Lori Berenson -- but never provided the reader any context besides the title "Freed Peruvian Prisoner." That might give the wrong impression: Berenson is an American communist who traveled to Peru and allied herself with the Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement (MRTA), and rented a house in Lima they could use as a headquarters and used press credentials as a cover to scrutinize the halls of Congress and facilitate an eventual attack to hold the entire Peruvian congress hostage. She was imprisoned in 1995 and released in May. None of this context was included for the reader:

What’s it like being labeled a terrorist?

I don’t consider myself a terrorist. I think saying someone is a criminal is enough. It’s not helpful to look for ways of qualifying our enemies in drastic terms instead of trying to figure out exactly what we’re faced with.

What’s your take—are the things you did good or bad?

There are things I could have done differently, but that’s part of my history, and I have to assume the consequences. I don’t regret what I’ve done, because I don’t think my intentions were bad. My intentions were positive, whatever that’s worth.

Do Peruvians have the wrong impression of you?

Oh, I think most of them don’t know me at all, because they think I’m associated with bombs and horrendous attacks. I’ve never killed anyone, never harmed anyone, never done anything to cause physical damage to anyone. And I’m sorry that I am seen as a person who would do that.

What will you tell your son about your past?