Skip to main content
  • CNSNews.com
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • TimesWatch
  • Take Action!

Join Us @:
Facebook
Twitter
Amazon Kindle

Tell the Truth campaign logo
NewsBusters.org logo

February 12, 2012
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Account
  • RSS
Home » Blogs » Noel Sheppard's blog
  • Santorum Nomination ‘Completely Terrifies’ Economist Magazine’s Economics Editor
  • Evan Thomas and Chris Matthews: Jackie and Serial Adulterer JFK Had a 'Good' and 'Full' Marriage
  • Bozell Column: Another Fleeting Failure for NBC
  • Martin Bashir Implies GOP Too Racist to Have Marco Rubio as VP Candidate
  • Barbara Walters, Shameless Hypocrite: Hits Kennedy Mistress for Greed, Tells Her She Should Have Stayed Quiet
  • NY Times Writers Rush to Obama's Defense Like It's Their Job
  • Rachel Maddow Trumpets Inane 'Amish Bus Driver' Analogy for Obama Contraception Rule
  • MRC's Bozell Scolds Media's Reluctance to Cover HHS Birth Control Mandate

Google Puts Laughing Bush by Headline ‘Children May Lose Out On Insurance’

By Noel Sheppard | August 22, 2007 | 09:22

Change font size:  A |  A
Noel Sheppard's picture

Whether an accident or intentional, the placing of a picture of President George W. Bush laughing next to the headline "Children May Lose On Insurance" is rather deplorable, especially since the picture was not from the article in question.

However, that's what occurred at Google News' Health section Wednesday morning when the featured article was the Boston Globe's piece by Alice Dembner discussing how "[t]housands of Massachusetts children from low-income families could be denied health insurance under new rules imposed by the Bush administration late last week."

Yet, for some reason, the picture above right, from an article published Tuesday at the website OverTheLimit, was placed next to the Globe's headline, and was actually about a story in the New York Times Monday (emphasis added, h/t reader Lloyd Hohn):

The Bush administration has adopted new standards that would make it much more difficult for states to extend health coverage to children in middle-income families, The New York Times reported on Monday.

Makes one wonder how this could have been accidental when the article with the picture in question actually was published a day before the featured piece, dontcha think?

Update (Ken Shepherd, 11:24): Below are the picture as captured from Google News and the teaser headline and blurb as Sheppard saw them earlier today. You'll also find some thoughts of mine I decided to fold into Sheppard's post in this update.

You'll notice the photo credit is for the Web site OverTheLimit.info. OverTheLimit's "about us" section describes the mission of the news site:

OverTheLimit is an idependent [sic] online news services covering with the latest news from the United States and around the world.

Unlike other news services, OverTheLimit only offers the news which for one reason-or-another seem to be “over the top.”

The majority of our news is provided by staff writers who are all experts in their respective fields. Our journalists range in age and experience, but all are dedicated to delivering interesting news pieces.

OverTheLimit's coverage of the SCHIP debate certainly skewed leftward. Here's an excerpt from OTL's August 21 article, "The Bush administration makes it difficult for states to extend health coverage to children" which makes it clear the editors feel the Bush administration's position on SCHIP is "over the top" (portions in bold are my emphasis):

The Bush administration has adopted new standards that would make it much more difficult for states to extend health coverage to children in middle-income families, The New York Times reported on Monday.

On Friday evening, with Congress out of town on its summer recess and Americans heading into a mid-August weekend, the Bush administration sent a message to the states: The federal government will make it tougher for a national children’s insurance program to cover the offspring of middle-income families.

Silly me. I thought the idea of the federal program was to cover children in low-income, not middle-class families. That being the case, means testing to keep the coverage limited to those children and save money might be worthwhile.

But what fun would it be to report THAT side of the story?

Share this

About the Author

Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Click here to follow Noel Sheppard on Twitter.
  • Budget
  • Health Care
  • George W. Bush
  • Online Media
  • Boston Globe
  • Google
  • Government & Press
  • Journalistic Issues
  • Noel Sheppard's blog
  • Login or register to post comments
  • Printer-friendly version
Donate to NewsBusters

Donate to NewsBusters Today!

This form needs Javascript to display, which your browser doesn't support. Sign up here instead

User Shortcuts

Log in

  • My account
  • My buddylist
  • Log in to check messages
  • RSS feed
  • About NB
  • Contact us
  • Jobs
  • Advertise on NB

 

 

 

  • Chuck Colson, cardinal, and rabbi oppose HHS mandate (WSJ)
  • Idea of the Democrats better than the reality (Wisc. State Journal)
  • The cynical and self-contradictory Gospel of Obama (Krauthammer)
  • Video: Protesters at CPAC admit they're being paid to protest (Daily Caller)
  • Does the drug 'ella' cause abortions? (Weekly Standard)
  • Does income inequality cause global warming? (Power Line)
  • Jay Carney gets snippy about Super PACs (Verum Serum)

RSS FeedAmazon KindleFacebookTwitter

Recent comments

  • She's jealous
    7 min 41 sec ago
  • Perfect!
    8 min 8 sec ago
  • So Tracye has
    10 min 38 sec ago
  • Hello, Blonde
    11 min 7 sec ago
  • the left always says they are
    11 min 41 sec ago
More >

Try a Sweater Vest, Mitt
more cartoons
  • Sarah Palin Totally Rocks Conservative Conference
  • Weekend General and Sports Open Thread
  • Mitt Romney's Full Address to CPAC
  • Daily Kos Week in Review: Confusing Ground for Religious Haters
  • Newt Gingrich's Full Address to CPAC
More >
NewsBusters

Executive Editor
Matthew Sheffield

Editor at Large
Brent Baker

Senior Editors
Tim Graham
Rich Noyes

Managing Editor
Ken Shepherd

Associate Editor
Noel Sheppard

Contributing Editors
Tom Blumer
Geoffrey Dickens
Dan Gainor
David Limbaugh
Lachlan Markay
Mithridate Ombud
Clay Waters
Scott Whitlock

Senior Contributor
Mark Finkelstein

Editorial Associate
Aubrey Vaughan

Contributing Writers
Matthew Balan
Michael M. Bates
Erin R. Brown
Jack Coleman
Kyle Drennen
Douglas Ernst
P. J. Gladnick
Stephen Gutowski
Matt Hadro
D. S. Hube
Kathleen McKinley
Dave Pierre
Amy Ridenour
Julia A. Seymour
Terry Trippany
Rusty Weiss
Brad Wilmouth

Publisher
Brent Bozell

Site Design
Dialog New Media

 

  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Account
  • rss
  • CNSNews
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • Take Action!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Amazon Kindle
  • Advertise
  • Jobs

Copyright © 2005-2012 NewsBusters. Terms of Use.