Last year's most bizarre and famously icky sex scandal was, of course, Senator Larry Craig's airport bathroom incident, in which the Idaho Republican was alleged to have been soliciting homosexual sex from an undercover cop. Suffice it to say no one who came across the story could walk away without knowing Craig's party affiliation, and in some cases his record as a conservative with some libertarian-friendly stances.
So how did the Associated Press's Bill Poovey treat a former Democratic Tennessee judge with an arguably nastier, kinkier, more disturbing sexual predilection? Not one mention of John B. Hagler's Democratic Party affiliation in Poovey's 23-paragraph January 2 story, even though the judge's sex fantasy recording sure spooked at least one veteran police officer (emphasis mine, h/t NB reader Chris Mario):
CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. - A Tennessee judge resigned last month after making a recording of fantasies so lurid that when the tape fell into the hands of the police and FBI, they thought they were listening to a torture session and believed it might be linked to a murder case.
[...]
The tape was briefly examined by Chattanooga police and the FBI in late 2005 after a secretary who had just been fired by Hagler turned it over, authorities said. She told them she found the recording of the judge's voice on a tape that also contained legal dictation.
"It sounded like someone being tortured," Chattanooga police Sgt. Alan Franks testified Wednesday, offering the first details of what is on the tape.
Franks said the recording was investigated in relation to a still-unsolved 1997 murder. He gave no other details on the murder case.
"The content was so shocking. I have been a police officer for 24 years," Franks said before his testimony was cut off by an objection.
Investigators ultimately concluded the recording consisted only of fantasies.
Hagler's party affiliation is hardly a state secret, however. "Judge Hagler, a Democrat, first was elected in 1990 and was serving his third term," noted reporter Ryan Harris in a December 13 Chattanooga Times Free Press story.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
hey Ken you forgot to
January 3, 2008 - 11:09 ET by TruthMongerhey Ken you forgot to fullly capitalize and bold Craig's REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN-REPUBLICAN status...
Otherwise I think I speak for all libs when I don't exactly see the bias in this story...
Don't see a bias???
January 3, 2008 - 11:22 ET by WildBillWell if you don't see a bias, then you're,
a) not paying attention
b) just arrived from Pluto
c) lying to protect the other liars
d) just enjoy typing Republican in our Republic
"Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled, or hanged." -Abraham Lincoln
Helllooooo??? If you read
January 3, 2008 - 13:19 ET by motherbeltHelllooooo??? If you read the headline "Perverted Ex-Judge's Party Affiliation Ignored by AP"...that's the bias. The fact that when a politician caught in a scandal is a Republican, AP prominently features that fact. When it's a Democrat it's ignored.
I don't keep a log, but I'm sure Ken or someone else could provide you with several recent examples.
Thanks for screwing up the
January 3, 2008 - 11:25 ET by TinianThanks for screwing up the post, clown.
here you go folks - free of
January 3, 2008 - 11:30 ET by TruthMongerhere you go folks - free of charge this time...
http://www.edonn.com/archives/2003/12/dry/
welcome to the big (humor) leagues...
careful, it's a jungle out here...
Truth
January 3, 2008 - 12:04 ET by well99Gee is that what that was...lol
time to change the kool aid people
January 3, 2008 - 14:15 ET by TruthMongerguess i should have just said "i agree, Ken" and went on my merry way...
IT WAS A DRY-HUMOR JOKE PEOPLE:)
Relax, put down the sharp instruments, listen to the soothing music, look at the pretty colors...
(hands up, slowly backing away from PC now)
Truth
January 3, 2008 - 16:25 ET by well99Actually it is repeat after me....ohm...ohm...ohm.
Just shows that
January 3, 2008 - 11:12 ET by c5thenIt can be what isn't reported that shows bias just as much (if not more so) as what is reported.
The AP is so biased that they probably don't see a problem with reporting the party affiliation of scandals only when they deal with republicans.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
Bias by omission is at
January 3, 2008 - 11:29 ET by mattmBias by omission is at least half of the issue, probably more.
There is outright slant, or spin, portrayed as straight news. There is also quantitative and qualitative bias - i.e. story frequency and location (i.e. frontpage vs. page D-19 etc.). And there's bias by omission. It's either omission of pertinent facts, or omission of a story or an issue.
This is why the idiots who claim the internet is bad for journalism are so extremely wrong. It's only the propagandists posing as journalists who have anything to worry about from 'alternate' media.
I disagree...
January 3, 2008 - 11:20 ET by sarcasmoFlorida's Brevard County gets most-bizarre of 2007 hands-down for giving us BJ-Bob Allen, IMO. Something in that public mensroom triggered the little-known "fight or flight or offer-$20-to-blow-a-dude" response in this politician. I find it hilarious, even before but especially after the Daily Show's treatment.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
Ron Paul--CAIR & STORMFRONT Endorsement
January 3, 2008 - 16:03 ET by TinianCAIR and STORMFRONT love yer buddy Herr Doktor Paul.
Be proud of the company you keep.
Meet the real friends of Dr. Ron Paul.
See sigfile
January 3, 2008 - 16:17 ET by sarcasmoOr this link for the company, as I am very proud of the ones I've met so-far, and not-impressed with the "honesty" of those who peddle these lies extrapolated from a tiny minority of supporters. I guess it's easier than actually-debating media bias issues, though, when you try to make a BS accusation function as "proof." Hasn't worked for you yet though.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
Iowa Shuns Ron Paul
January 3, 2008 - 22:18 ET by TinianHow's your racist, isolationist fearless leader doing in Iowa?
He's what is commonly referred to as a "blip".
Don't feel bad too bad -- if you pee your bed tonight you can still go to sleep feeling warm and comfy.
A blip for the Blimp Man
January 3, 2008 - 22:49 ET by PawpawNYep, looks like Sarc's man was just a blip on his Blimp!!
}}---> Ron Paul
January 3, 2008 - 22:54 ET by Cool Arrow10% is more than a blip. And certainly it's too small to trivialize and alienate.
The time will come when we'll feel a need to court these voters.
I ♣ My Seal
In fairness to RP,
January 3, 2008 - 22:56 ET by Free StinkerIn fairness to RP, Thompson's 3rd place was with 14%, and he got more votes that Rudy.
Newsbusters. Log on and find out What the heck is so yummy over here!
How much monies spent?
January 3, 2008 - 22:58 ET by PawpawNHow much monies spent by Repubs in Iowa? Check the returns....
}}---> Money spent
January 3, 2008 - 23:03 ET by Cool ArrowWell, the only estimate I heard was that Romney will have spent over $10,000 per vote in his second place effort.
I ♣ My Seal
Simple explanation. Every
January 3, 2008 - 11:22 ET by DaBirdSimple explanation. Every AP keyboard that all AP writers use simply do not have the capability to type a capital "R". Just a glitch I'm sure.
Soooo....it's the
January 3, 2008 - 11:33 ET by JasonCSoooo....it's the Republicans whose affiliations are being protected every time there's a scandal?
Am I at the right site?
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
Ooooops! My bad. It was
January 3, 2008 - 11:42 ET by DaBirdOoooops! My bad. It was supposed to be a capital "D". Thats what I get for trying to work and post at the same time.
Oh good, so this is
January 3, 2008 - 11:54 ET by JasonCOh good, so this is Newsbusters.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
the excitement of posting
January 3, 2008 - 12:00 ET by TruthMongerthe excitement of posting on this awe-inspiring site tends to cause tyyyypos:)...!!!
According to the article he
January 3, 2008 - 11:33 ET by dscottAccording to the article he was a circuit court judge, what kind of cases did he regularly preside over? Any civil cases? All civil cases whether they be divorce, domestic abuse or accident injury claims are based on the judge's world view which determines what is "probable" and what is "relevant" in terms of evidence and testimony to the facts of the case. A person like this would tend to "project" their guilt on any male thus impute opinions as facts allowed before the jury or in deciding a bench trial.
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.
what an incredible conflict
January 3, 2008 - 12:04 ET by TruthMongerwhat an incredible conflict of interest! if he were a Repub he'd be going down...
just imagine if he had posted the 10 commandments in his courthouse or something - at least he's not fantasizing about shocking things like Heaven, miraculous healing, sacrificial service to others, saving unborn children, etc...
Why it is quite obvious. It
January 3, 2008 - 11:33 ET by Ruths husband BenWhy it is quite obvious. It is newsworthy when a Republican is a pervert. It would be newsworthy if they could find a Democrat who isn't. ;)
Those who beat their swords into plowshares usually end up plowing for those who didn't. - Ben Franklin
Ben, the AP says (as
January 3, 2008 - 13:24 ET by motherbeltBen, the AP says (as reported here previously) their policy is that when party affiliation is relevant to the story, they report it; if not, they don't.
From my observation, it appears that the criterion is this: if the politician in a scandal is a Republican, party affiliation is "relevant." If he's a Democrat, it's not "relevant," therefore omitted.
Yes MB
January 3, 2008 - 16:30 ET by well99I believe that pretty well sums it up.Those wascally wabbit Wepublicans.AP and Reuters are just shills for the Dems anyways.
Ho-hum...more evidence of
January 3, 2008 - 16:55 ET by JerHo-hum...more evidence of nothing [except the furtherance of the most overhyped non-issue since I first began regularly visiting NewsBusters].
In light of your reference to Craig, how about an example of a United States Senator--and Democrat--whose party affiliation was undisclosed in connnection with scandal allegations.
Jer
Jer
January 3, 2008 - 23:06 ET by well99Everyone has to have a hobby okay.Besides it is funny how those with R always have that pointed out by the MSM.Now the ones with "I" dont have to worry because we dont make missteaks.