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 25, 2010, 12:44 PM EST

Robert Siegel, an anchor of NPR’s evening newscast All Things Considered, had an emotional response on Wednesday night as Pew pollster Andrew Kohut described how young adults voted heavily for Obama and call themselves liberals, are less "militaristic" and less religious: "Who raised these terrific kids, Andy?" The men laughed.

The Pew Research Center studied the "millennials," those aged 18 to 29 who did much growing up in the first decade of the new century. Here’s how the discussion unfolded:

SIEGEL: Give us a thumbnail sketch of the millennials.

KOHUT: They're Democratic. They voted very heavily for Barack Obama. They're a little less supportive of Obama today, but still - compared to other generations - they are more supportive of the Democratic Party. They're more supportive of Barack Obama.

They call themselves liberals. Yes, they use the L-word. Twenty-nine percent of them say they're liberals. Less than 20 percent of all of the other generations say that. They're very tolerant of gays and race...

February 25, 2010, 7:33 AM EST

Ezra Klein is the utility infielder of the Washington Post, popping up all over the paper offering his liberal opinions. Today, it's a viewer's guide to the health care summit. He's also a regular Olbermann and Maddow guest, as you can tell from this Keith-copying kissup Twitter belch:

Rush Limbaugh is really a loathsome racist.

Klein linked to Hendrik Hertzberg of The New Yorker attacking Limbaugh, but what's most amusing is how Hertzberg thinks Joe Biden's "clean and articulate" comments are awkward but fine -- until Rush utters them:

February 24, 2010, 5:17 PM EST

On Tuesday night, the PBS Newshour discussed the debate over gays in the military, but that didn’t mean there was a debate on the show. Instead, PBS booked three gay-promoting liberal academics and pollster Andrew Kohut to talk about "American attitudes evolving." The liberal hope and dream of suppressing religious speech against homosexuality was blatantly expressed by Georgetown history professor Michael Kazin:

KAZIN: You know, one of the things that -- when laws change, that helps to change consciousness. When the civil rights law was passed, when the Voting Rights Act was passed in the 1960s, then people's attitudes began to change.

Even if they didn't necessarily -- white people didn't like African-Americans any more, but they felt that, well, it wasn't OK anymore to voice their dislike of African-Americans. Racism began to be something that was marginal, that you had to talk about in private. And that I think could begin to happen also with views about gay rights...

February 23, 2010, 6:03 PM EST

It wasn’t so long ago that the Washington Post was touting massive popular support for a socialist “public option” in the health care plan. Now that the hopes for liberals are so bleak that the Post on Tuesday published a pie graph at top of page one asking respondents “how you would feel if Congress decides to stop work on health-care reform and does not pass a law this year?”

The Post put what it perceived to be the liberal answers in red: “Angry” (20 percent) and “Disappointed” (38 percent).  In gray were “Relieved” (24 percent) and “Happy” (14 percent). The poll wasn’t done by the Post, but by the liberal “reform” advocates at the Kaiser Family Foundation.

This liberal group’s survey also asked “do you generally support or generally oppose the health care proposals being discussed before Congress?” That answer was 43 to 43, with a larger group of “strongly oppose” (32 percent) than “strongly favor” (24 percent). That poll wasn’t used.

February 23, 2010, 8:29 AM EST

Since the Gaffe Police aren't exactly working overtime on the Democrats, it should be noted when a reporter finds one. Michael O'Brien of The Hill newspaper noted Sen. Harry Reid was talking up their "jobs bill" by saying unemployed men tend to beat people up:

"Women don't have jobs either, but women aren’t abusive, most of the time," he said.

"Men, when they're out of work, tend to become abusive," the majority leader added. "Our domestic crisis shelters in Nevada are jammed.”

February 22, 2010, 5:46 PM EST

The New York Times is pro-voodoo, or perhaps they are just an informal Voodoo Anti-Defamation League. On Saturday, religion writer Samuel G. Freedman wrote a story headlined "Voodoo, a Source of Comfort in Haiti, Remains Misunderstood." For political junkies, this passage was the most indulgent:

In American political rhetoric, "voodoo" functions as a synonym for "fraudulent," going back to George Bush’s description of supply-side economics. Would any public figure dare use "Baptist" or "Hindu" or "Hasidic" in the same way?

Freedman also lamented this religion’s mistreatment at the hands of Hollywood movie executives (not a normal complaint from the Times if the movies are raucously caricaturing Christianity). The intolerance emerged from a 1929 book titled Magic Island:

February 22, 2010, 1:54 PM EST

On Friday, we noticed Katie Couric expressing sympathy for Tiger Woods on her Twitter page, that he was at the "epicenter of humiliation" and public judgment "must be very painful." ABC’s Jake Tapper replied that he hoped the "painful" referred to the pain of Tiger’s wife and children. On Saturday, Couric responded to Tapper and our blog on Twitter:

For the record...I think what tiger did was disgusting and reprehensible...but still have some compassion for him and his family!

Couric also tried to show sympathy for Tiger’s wife in her Friday "Katie Couric’s Notebook" commentary, even as she suggested Tiger was "contrite" and "vulnerable," which is not how many viewers found it:

February 22, 2010, 8:04 AM EST

On Monday, Newsweek’s website featured a strange headline. "Poll: Most Favor Health Care." It would be interesting to find out who opposes health care. (It's like a headline that says "Most Favor Food.") The headline wasn’t just strange, it was misleading: it suggested the Democrats’ proposals were favored by most. That’s not what they found.

Newsweek took an Obama-defending poll. Here was the headline once you clicked on the link: "The Polling Contradiction: In the latest NEWSWEEK Poll, the majority of Americans are opposed to President Obama's health-care reform plan -- until they learn the details."

That’s called a "push poll." It’s just like Newsweek calling up people and insisting they should really support ObamaCare, because it embraces abstract liberal principles like requiring insurance companies to insure everyone. After they pushed, Newsweek touted how they yanked voters into Obama’s column:

February 21, 2010, 5:34 PM EST

In his weekly interview on Weekend Edition Saturday, National Public Radio "senior news analyst" (read: unrebutted liberal commentator) Daniel Schorr saw something "menacing" in Capitol Hill’s failure to pass a big ultraliberal agenda. It’s "more menacing than simply whether one or another winds a couple of seats in the Congress."

That’s an easy thing for a 93-year-old government-paid commentator with no term limits to say. Schorr was circulating the same liberal "wisdom" of the week that Sen. Evan Bayh has identified that Washington is somehow "dysfunctional" or "broken" when ultraliberal bills that are not popular in the polls aren’t rammed through boldly and persistently:

February 21, 2010, 9:28 AM EST

It’s getting tiresome that the liberal media will use the ramblings of any extremist on Twitter and try and associate them with the conservative movement. CBSNews.com [on their 48 Hours Mystery page] blogged the AP and the New York Daily News reporting that Austin suicide pilot Joe Stack has fan pages on the Internet:

"Finally an American man took a stand against our tyrannical government that no longer follows the Constitution," wrote Emily Walters of Louisville, Ky. "Joe Stack, you are a true American Hero and we need more of you to make a stand," tweeted Greg Lenihan of San Diego, according to the paper.

...If they think that’s not a sop to the left, the Daily Kos rejoiced at the story:

February 20, 2010, 11:03 PM EST

Arianna Huffington just keeps slamming our Olbermann floor mats. Plugging her own appearance on the public-radio show Left, Right, and Center (based at Santa Monica NPR station KCRW), the Huffington Post blurb writer suggested CPAC was based in Texas: "Taking the temperature of the conservative GOP: To judge from their conference in Austin, they're quite cheery, yelling Run Dick Run to Dick Cheney and stomping with glee on floor mats that bare Keith Olbermann's." [?]

About 21 minutes into the podcast, Arianna dragged out the same line, but this time Tony Blankley wasn’t having it at all:

HUFFINGTON: Also the undertones of violence, there were -- 

BLANKLEY: There were no undertones of violence.

HUFFINGTON: Oh, come on. There was even a punching bag for John McCain. There were pinatas with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid’s on it, and in order to get the candy, you had to break them apart. There were mats with Keith Olbermann’s and Chris Matthews’ faces on them. And there’s today, on Friday, um, you had the sort of recommendation that get a big 9-iron and hit the window out of government, like what is that? Isn’t that violence?

February 20, 2010, 4:22 PM EST

Felix Gillette of the New York Observer favorably profiled George Stephanopoulos, but the weirdest part came when he tried to suggest that somehow destroying the credibility of any woman claiming an affair with Bill Clinton made him priest-like. Since when does a priest say "forget that sixth commandment, just look away"?

His father was a priest in the Greek Orthodox Church. So too his grandfather. And even years after eschewing the priesthood for politics and media, a sense of emotional reserve befitting a man of the cloth still hangs about him.Early in his career, that sensibility served him well. In his early 30s, as the communications director for Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential run, Mr. Stephanopoulos regularly fought to keep the skeletons in Mr. Clinton’s closet from derailing everything.
February 19, 2010, 11:14 PM EST

On Tuesday’s edition of his radio show, leftist talker Ed Schultz besmirched the insurance industry as butchers. They’re "absolutely butchering" people, like a bad horror movie. Schultz got a little carried away discussing socialist health care with socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders:

You can't have it both ways and hold credibility with the people who are getting gouged. How can Evan Bayh sit there as an honest player for health care reform when his wife works for an industry that is just absolutely butchering the American people, raising rates 100 percent on some people, and Anthem Blue Cross is a subsidiary of WellPoint.

To socialists like Schultz, the economics of private health insurance are immoral. Schultz spent months pushing for the "public option" but only if it was a stepping stone to full-blown Canada-style abolish-the-insurance-companies socialism. He’s still on that line:

February 19, 2010, 5:54 PM EST

On Thursday night's Countdown, Arianna Huffington suggested to Keith Olbermann that the MRC's playful Stomp Out the Liberal Media floor mats are "displays of violence," as is a Pelosi pinata.

Earth to Arianna: do we have to remind you again that your site published Alec Baldwin's Cheney-murdering fantasies and John Cusack's bluster about conservatives ("I piss down the throats of these Nazis")? Here's the exchange:

KEITH OLBERMANN: The Rubio explosion, which is for a guy who hasn‘t gotten a nomination yet, let alone a seat—he may very well wind up beating Governor Crist as the Florida Republican nominee for the senate, but in states and districts where the Rubio, to use a term, loses to the more establishment Republican, are we seeing more possible repeats of what happened in the New York 23rd, based on the substance and the tone of today?

February 19, 2010, 2:53 PM EST

MSNBC host Joe Scarborough has responded to Brent Bozell’s nationally syndicated column that took him to task for claiming Bozell and NewsBusters wrote "false articles" about him.

But here's the kicker: Townhall has blocked users from leaving a comment. It has zero comments listed. (Brent's column on TownHall has 63 replies at this time.) So much for a town hall.

Did Townhall make this decision, or did thin-skinned Scarborough demand it? I e-mailed the editors, but have yet to receive a reply.

UPDATE: Townhall deputy editor Kevin Glass denied any attempt or request to block commenters:

We certainly refrain from disabling comments on anything posted on Townhall and would refuse such a request from anyone.

I am honestly perplexed as to why there are no comments on Scarborough's article. I just went to our analytics numbers and Scarborough's piece has nearly exactly the same number of hits as Bozell's (29,000 to 30,000). I have no idea why there are no comments on Scarborough's piece.

February 19, 2010, 10:49 AM EST

Here's a pre-Tiger tidbit: CBS anchor Katie Couric posted on her Twitter account this morning:

Getting ready to cover tiger's statement. Being at the epicenter of such humiliation, and judgement must be very painful.

February 19, 2010, 7:25 AM EST

CPAC made the front page of Friday’s Washington Post, but reporter Philip Rucker wrongly insisted the convention was "once a venue for the right fringe" of the GOP, but now it hosts presidential aspirants. Below that, there was a promotional blurb in bold type for Dana Milbank’s column inside: "Rubio is the far right’s anti-Crist." Here’s Rucker’s sneering introduction:

Emboldened by a belief that their political fortunes are on the rise, conservative activists descended Thursday on the capital city they love to hate, seeking to stoke what they consider a grass-roots uprising against President Obama and Democrats in Congress.

The annual Conservative Political Action Conference was once a venue for the right fringe of the Republican Party, but in recent years it has drawn more mainstream party figures and now provides a stage for presidential aspirants to prove their conservative credentials.

When were the days of "right fringe"? Rucker later suggests it’s been fringy since Nixon, up until very recently.

February 18, 2010, 2:55 PM EST

Liberal Tina Brown’s website The Daily Beast as another Top 25 list of journalists today – The Left’s Top 25. (Noel Sheppard noted their top conservatives last week.) Tunku Varadajaran, formerly of the Wall Street Journal editorial page, listed Jon Stewart as the most impactful journalist on the left.

What stands out are the "mainstream" media figures on the list. There’s CNN host Christiane Amanpour, and a trio of Washington Post people, past and present. But the largest force in this Left list is five from The New York Times: columnist Paul Krugman (number 2), op-ed page editor David Shipley (4), economics writer David Leonhardt (8), Times magazine writer Deborah Solomon (22) and Times magazine contributor David Rieff (24).

What will shock readers is the MSNBC deficit: only Rachel Maddow (11), and no Matthews or Olbermann.

The largely positive blurbs that accompany this photo gallery hardly seem written by a conservative. Take the Paul Krugman encomium:

February 17, 2010, 3:38 PM EST

Many conservatives remember the myth of protesters yelling "Kill him!" at Obama during 2008 campaign rallies. The Secret Service couldn’t find any proof when a Pennsylvania reporter claimed to hear it. Well, last week on NPR’s Fresh Air with Terry Gross, former Wall Street Journal reporter Jane Mayer (now with The New Yorker) was claiming there were "Hang Eric Holder" screams at a December protest against holding a Khalid Sheikh Muhammad trial in Manhattan.

A Nexis scan of December 5 and 6 news accounts of the protest by AP, Reuters, Agence France-Presse, the New York Post, the Times of Trenton, and several North Jersey newspapers found no trace of a suggestion of such a nasty call. Even Daphne Eviatar of the left-leaning Washington Independent didn’t report it.

Here’s what Mayer claimed on the Gross show, as she explained how Scott Brown exploited fears of terrorism in his Senate race:

February 17, 2010, 1:07 PM EST

Newsweek’s latest issue features an article by managing editor Daniel Klaidman that blatantly associates Republican criticism of the Obama administration with terrorism. Its title in the table of contents is "Terror Begins at Home: The GOP’s Scare Tactics." Inside the magazine, the headline is "Terror Begins at Home: Fearmongering Politicians Are Scoring Cheap Political Points at the Expense of the American People."

In the magazine, the article is illustrated with a blurry drawing of male underwear. Online, its lead image is a finger-pointing photo of Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.).

Is there an article in Newsweek that isn’t an editorial? Klaidman was firing rhetorical salvos at Republicans and their "ritualistic hazing" of liberals from the very first sentence: