Huffington Post Refuses to Address Maher's Contributor Status After Vulgar Attacks on Palin
Following its controversial decision to ban Andrew Breitbart from publishing articles at its front page, the Huffington Post has found itself in quite a pickle now that one of its regular contributors, comedian Bill Maher, made disgustingly vulgar references to former Alaska governor Sarah Palin.
As NewsBusters previously reported, Breitbart made some comments about President Obama's former green czar Van Jones that precipitated the following hypocritical statement from HuffPo spokesman Mario Ruiz last Thursday (readers are warned of vulgar content in full article):
The Huffington Post is committed to fostering a lively and often provocative debate about the issues of the day and encourages a wide range of voices from all perspectives to participate. Andrew Brietbart’s [sic] false ad hominem attack on Van Jones in The Daily Caller violates the tenets of debate and civil discourse we have strived for since the day we launched. As a result, we will no longer feature his posts on the front page.
He is welcome to continue publishing his work on HuffPost provided it adheres to our editorial guidelines, as the two posts he published on HuffPost did -- guidelines that include a strict prohibition on ad hominem attacks. Our decision today recognizes that placing posts on the front page is an editorial call that elevates some posts over others, and is an indication of how seriously we take these judgment calls.
Just what were Breitbart's supposedly offensive comments?
Van Jones is a commie punk. He was exposed to a great extent because of the hard journalism that was done at my website, that exposed him as a guy who was an unvetted liability to the Obama administration. He was forced to step down because of my journalistic work. [...]
I believe that Van Jones, and Color of Change, and ACORN poison the black community with propaganda that divides this country. Van Jones is a human toxin, ACORN was a human toxin. These are poisonous, venomous forces within the American experience. I will expose them like the cockroaches that they are.
By contrast, Maher on March 18 called Palin a "twat" and on March 27 called her a "cunt."
Which is worse: calling a man a "commie punk" or a woman a "cunt"? One would certainly think the latter, yet HuffPo has yet to comment.
With this in mind, I sent co-founder Arianna Huffington and editor Roy Sekoff the following email message Tuesday:
Ms. Huffington and Mr. Sekoff:
Noel Sheppard here from NewsBusters. I'm wondering if Bill Maher calling former Alaska governor Sarah Palin a "twat" and a "cunt" violates the Huffington Post's "tenets of debate and civil discourse" that Mario Ruiz noted in his statement concerning Andrew Breitbart's banning from your front page.
One would think such vulgar slurs are far worse than anything Breitbart said to the Daily Caller concerning Van Jones.
Is Maher going to be banned from your front page? When are you planning on notifying your readers of this decision, and if not, why not?
Noel Sheppard/NewsBusters.org
After a number of hours went by without a response, I sent another one to Huffington and Sekoff but separately this time:
Ms. Huffington,
This is Noel Sheppard, the Associate Editor of NewsBusters trying for the second time to get a comment from you regarding Bill Maher being a front page contributor to the Huffington Post. As you know, in the past twelve days, Maher has called former Alaska governor Sarah Palin a “twat” and a “cunt.”
Your Mario Ruiz in his statement concerning Andrew Breitbart’s banning from the Post’s front page said Breitbart’s comments in the Daily Caller about Van Jones had violated the “tenets of debate and civil discourse.” We at NewsBusters would like an explanation as to why Maher’s attacks on Palin aren’t at least as bad as Breitbart’s comments regarding Jones. As we see Maher’s offense as far worse, given the Post’s rules, we would like to know either why you disagree or when Maher is going to be banned from your front page.
We would like a response concerning this matter at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
Noel Sheppard/NewsBusters.org
Having still not received a response, on Wednesday morning I sent a roughly similar version of the following to HuffPo reporters Jason Linkins, Sam Stein, and the spokesman that issued the Breitbart statement, Mario Ruiz:
Mr. Ruiz,
This is Noel Sheppard, the Associate Editor of NewsBusters trying to get a comment from you regarding Bill Maher being a front page contributor to the Huffington Post.
As you know, in the past twelve days, Maher has called former Alaska governor Sarah Palin a “twat” and a “cunt.” In your statement concerning Andrew Breitbart’s banning from the Post’s front page, you said Breitbart’s comments about Van Jones in the Daily Caller violated the “tenets of debate and civil discourse.”
We at NewsBusters would like an explanation as to why Maher’s attacks on Palin aren’t at least as bad as Breitbart’s comments regarding Jones. As we see Maher’s offense as far worse, given the Post’s rules, we would like to know either why you disagree or when Maher is going to be banned from your front page.
We would like a response concerning this matter at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
Noel Sheppard/NewsBusters.org
Later in the day Wednesday, having only received a response from Linkins who advised me to contact Ruiz, I sent the following to the entire group:
Arianna Huffington et al,
I have been trying for several days to get an answer concerning the Huffington Post’s position on Bill Maher as a contributor given his recent vulgar attacks on Sarah Palin and your decision to ban Andrew Breitbart from your front page due to comments he made regarding Van Jones. To date, no one has responded.
NewsBusters is going to be running a piece concerning this matter Thursday and would like an opinion about it from someone within your organization. If I don’t hear back, we have no choice but to run the piece without your input while advising our readers of your silence.
Sincerely,
Noel Sheppard/NewsBusters.org
Sadly, as of 11:00 AM, I still have no response, not even from HuffPo spokesman Ruiz. Is this the kind of transparency we can expect from AOL/Huffington Post in the future?
Of course, I realize Arianna et al are in a very tough spot. They made what was clearly an absurd statement about "tenets of debate and civil discourse we have strived for since the day we launched" when everyone in the industry knows their website is filled with hateful rhetoric and ad hominem attacks against conservatives on almost a daily basis.
The laughter at Ruiz's statement throughout the blogosphere on both sides of the aisle was deafening.
Complicating matters further was one of their popular contributors the day after Breitbart was canned making a vulgar slur at Palin and another one nine days later.
As most people know, Huffington has been friends with Maher for years. She was a regular guest on his Comedy Central program "Politically Incorrect" appearing in an ongoing gag with Al Franken called "Politics Makes Strange Bedfellows."
Maybe more importantly, Maher is a darling of the Left. Would Huffington dare do anything to him like she did to Breitbart?
Unfortunately, not doing so totally invalidates the reason given by Ruiz for Breitbart's demotion.
No wonder I didn't get any replies to my email messages as I'm sure these folks hope this matter is going to just go away as quickly as possible - but they shouldn't count on it.
Maher's vitriolic attacks have been in the sights of writers on both sides of the aisle for years. The folks at HuffPo should know that any time one of his comments crosses the "tenets of debate and civil discourse" line they have set for their contributors, the blogosphere will be asking why he's still a front page contributor at their website.
More importantly, their continued silence regarding this glaring hypocrisy will act to reduce whatever journalistic integrity and credibility they claim to strive for potentially leading AOL and its shareholders to seriously question their investment.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
FIRST TO SAY
Submitted by OldJarhead77 on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 11:12am.
HYPOCRITES!!!! ALL OF THEM!
HuffPo Hypocrisy
Submitted by RightRealDeal on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 11:18am.
Noel: Please continue to call these hypocrits out as you have been. I'm sure you, as I do, read their site and the comments over there from "the faithful". It is disturbing to see how people drink their KoolAid and swallow whatever the HuffPo puts out there.
This is great calling them out, please do not relent.
Yes agree! Thank you for
Submitted by MaximusBraveheart on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 3:00pm.
Yes agree! Thank you for your efforts and keep it up!!!! The RNC should take this up w/the HUFFY & put a news release out w/ his words stated directly as you did. Do not hide it!
The RNC can have stuff fall in their lap and they do nothing with it. Here you have the perfect absolute PROOF of unacceptable bias and EXTREME false statements, and again crickets. You can't make up such good opportunities, and then they don't run with it. Pathetic PR!
-- Maximusbraveheart -- Is TRUTH knowable? Moral Relativism is the abandonment of Truth. Truth is knowable. Truth conforms to Reality. Reality is observable by evidence & witness in this day & from history. Relativism is Sesame Street play land.
Really!!?? The HuffPo is hypocritical??!!!
Submitted by c5then on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 11:20am.
I am shocked! SHOCKED!!!!!
Here is my shocked face:
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/galleries/2009/news/0901/gallery.super_bo...
\sarc
Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
Yeah, shocked...
Submitted by almostacowboy on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 1:42pm.
...and stunned... :-|
If it weren't for double standards
Submitted by theduck6 on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 11:28am.
liberal maggots would have no standards at all.
PS: Maher was mildly funny 20 years ago. He's a miserable dispicable waste of protoplasm these days. I guess it's easier to be an a&& h)le than funny.
Why would they ban him....?
Submitted by NeoKong on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 11:43am.
They agree with him whole heartedly so in their view it is not ad hominem but merely a fact. The real truth is that the left has evolved from being biased about the truth to now just making it up as they go along. If they like their lie better than the truth than that's what they will go with and they could care less about what people think.
I'm guessing
Submitted by HockeyKid on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 11:46am.
no one at AOL had ever read HuffPo when they made the buy. Now they get to be known as Approving Obscene Liberals.
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
Is it any different than if
Submitted by WarEagle66 on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 11:45am.
Is it any different than if someone had called Obama a Ni@@er?
Seriously? It is time that question is asked.....
Noel.. on removing Bill Maher
Submitted by Gary Hall on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 11:52am.
Yes Yes Yes.
We can only hope that you receive a favorable response, and hence, some positive action.
Yesterday, I sent a similar note (albeit a bit more graphic) to a department at the LAT's over their recent softball interview of Bill Maher: 'I just think I'm too controversial' ,
Additionally, as the LAT's has on occasion published as and op-ed on the opinion pages of the paper, his political views, letters to the national editor, editorial board and others are in the works.
Likewise, since Howard Kurtz is failing miserably in his CNN hosted position of acting like he plays a role in keeping the media in check, I'd suggest that it be demanded that CNN would drop all future appearances of Bill Maher from their cable news shows.
It's a free country and Bill Maher can spew what ever slime and hate he wants in his private life and with his buddies at drink time, but certainly our national media outlets should not allow their medium to act as a conduit for this man's message.
(;~> gary
Noel, you said it yourself...
Submitted by PrairieSky on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 11:54am.
"...the Huffington Post has found itself in quite a pickle..."
As a result of their hypocritical handling of the Breitbart and Maher situations, they are fit to be tied right now, and are likely furiously trying to figure their way out of the self made box that they find themselves in...I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for a response to any of your messages, because I don't think one's coming any time soon.
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
You sauced Arianna's goose rather nicely, NS
Submitted by Blonde on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 12:01pm.
Deliciously, in fact.
So what's for dessert?
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Pass on that!
Submitted by jon_torlin on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 12:07pm.
That's a meal entry that I'm definitely passing on, nevermind dessert. ;-)
Double-standards are the rule with these libs, so this came as no surprise. If anything, I would have been surprised if action had been taken.
True to form.
-Jon
Agreed...Excellent job Noel...
Submitted by PrairieSky on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 12:14pm.
Very well said...You gave them ample opportunity to state their case, but they have thus far apparently decided to pass. If a response is ever forthcoming, I can't wait to hear how they will attempt to spin this one.
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
Huff Po and ad hominems
Submitted by Proof on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 12:05pm.
Is Max Blumenthal still a darling over at Huff Po? (I wouldn't know. I seldom visit.) He attacked Democrat Toby Keith for advocating the lynching of blacks (accompanied by a hotlinked picture of blacks being lynched) because of the lyrics in Keith's song "Beer for my horses", which spoke about something else entirely.
I believe this little bit of ad hominem attack was prompted by Keith's apparent patriotism and support for the troops in the GWOT, which liberal Max could not stomach.
http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/2008/08/huff-po-hackery-part-ii....
The HuffPo has standards only
Submitted by rbosque on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 12:09pm.
The HuffPo has standards only a DNC operative would be proud of. Despite "...encourag(ing) a wide range of voices from all perspectives to participate...". There's clearly only one opinion they are interested in.
.
Interesting to see if Huff et
Submitted by Beukeboom on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 12:13pm.
Interesting to see if Huff et al will ever address this issue directly or indirectly. Perhaps some gutsy reporter would ask her this when she appears on someone's show. But considering the fact that she appears mostly on MSNBC and other supportive outlets the odds of someone asking her about it are slim and none.
WOW, WHAT A SHOCK!
Submitted by brutony1 on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 12:16pm.
They stick to their own,,(doo-doo) birds of a feather, fall together!
When will liberals WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE! -Me
Raise your hand if you have expectations of journalistic
Submitted by Rush Fan on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 12:33pm.
integrity from liberals. Raise your hand if you have expectations of integrity and truthfulness from liberal politicians.
If you raised your hand, then you must be either new here at NewsBusters and the Media Research Center, or you have the optimism of a child or you are a liberal or troll just visiting. Don't expect more from liberals than they are able to give.
If you still have doubts, than listen to someone who knows a thing or two about liberals and liberalism, Rush Limbaugh:
What Sarah Palin said about President Obama, could also be applied to liberal journalist, and liberals in general: "Hows That Hope-y, Change-y Thing Working Out for You?"
Lastly, I commend Noel for doing his job. But I believe he realizes the level of expectation he will achieve from a liberal website.
Good job Noel*
Submitted by cajun2 on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 12:37pm.
And there has been an unexpected but joyful consequence to your exposure of another example of liberal hypocrisy. Notice the absence of trolls on this thread? ;-)
Shhhh...Don't say "troll"...
Submitted by PrairieSky on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 12:50pm.
You realize of course that now that you've observed a lack of trolls hereabouts, they will no doubt come crawling out of the woodwork...LOL!
Seriously though, like HuffPo, all those charming little trolls are undoubtedly in full spin mode right now...When they do finally appear here at NB, it should be fun to hear how they'll try to explain and defend this one.
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
Trolls?
Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 12:57pm.
I am wondering why Jer isnt here with the obligatory "they do it to" argument?
Come-on Jer, your slacking.
Nah.
Submitted by HockeyKid on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 1:13pm.
Cut Jer some slack. He often has arguments other than "both sides do it". The7Sticks, on the other hand, is the one-trick pony of which you might be thinking.
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
Nope, I got the right guy
Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 7:50pm.
Jer is the biggest Hufpo apologist we got.
Hypocrisy?
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 12:41pm.
Maybe Arianna sees no disrespect towards women when those words are used. She's living in a Whoopi Goldberg (It wasn't "rape" rape) world.
Zsa Zsa
Submitted by HockeyKid on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 1:15pm.
doesn't speak English as her first language. She'll probably say she thought Maher was saying "twit" and "runt".
Or some similar load of bullshot.
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
Reminds me of the Today show.
Submitted by MaximusBraveheart on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 3:16pm.
Reminds me of the Today show. They were talking about Twitter and Meridith says, well if a woman does it is it called "twa-" and then she shut herself down just in time. It recall they all laughed, but I cannot find a youtube of it!!
I found this one & is pretty good too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4EoN4nr5FQ Meridith & Colbert tw-ttering. "I've done it too."
Unrelated slip up: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOAv5MPQOLs&feature=related
-- Maximusbraveheart -- Is TRUTH knowable? Moral Relativism is the abandonment of Truth. Truth is knowable. Truth conforms to Reality. Reality is observable by evidence & witness in this day & from history. Relativism is Sesame Street play land.
Ariana Huff n Puff
Submitted by xtinct on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 12:43pm.
Huff n Puff built her blog by stealing content from others. Then she sold it to the Tos for bad language bullies at AOL. Why isn't AOL censoring Bill Mayer?
How could you
Submitted by John21 on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 12:49pm.
In what reality could you use the statement "journalistic integrity and credibility" and the Huffington Post in the same sentence?
The Huffer has never had any integrity or credibility, journalistic or otherwise. The Huffer is famous only for exonerations, falsehoods, and far leftist lies. The discourse on that sight often leaves the reader in need of a shower. I have come to believe that most of the commenter’s have only recently recovered from their voluntary Lobotomies
"In what reality could you
Submitted by MikeB on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 2:58pm.
"In what reality could you use the statement 'journalistic integrity and credibility' in the same sentence?" FIFY
The only organization that comes close to "journalistic integrity" is Fox News, and everybody "knows" that Faux News is an extreme rightwing mouthpiece for the Rethuglican Party. If you don't believe me, just peruse DU, KOS, Huffington, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, NPR, NYT, LAT, WaPo, etc., and they will confirm that statement.
Conservatives don't win these silly.................
Submitted by Tomorama on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 1:20pm.
Maybe we can nominate Noel for a Pulitzer of some kind.
I mean Marbles mouth Eugene Robinson got one before and Noel's opining is superior ESPECIALLY HERE,,,,,,,,,,,,
Seriously,
Submitted by almostacowboy on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 1:50pm.
I do not want Maher silenced. As a believer in the Constitution's First Amendment, I'm willing to let Maher and the rest spout all the hate-filled drivel they wish. If there's anything that makes the TEA Party and all conservatives look even better it's when the Left show themselves for what they really are and spout their true feelings.
I just wish they'd be honest enough to say, "We are not in favor of most of the freedoms you enjoy today. We, the self-appointed elite, will tell you what to eat and how much; what, where, and when to drive; how much light you can have and its source. Because you are so stupid and we are so smart, you can't be trusted to make the simplest decisions. WE know what's in YOUR best interest."
Because that's what they're thinking.
I dont want him silenced either
Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 7:54pm.
But I am a little surprised he gets paid millions to assassinate characters for the libtards
Wait
Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 7:56pm.
No I'm not surprised. Considering libtards have no idea what they want!
Color me surprised!
Submitted by sentforth5 on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 2:39pm.
Hi Noel...long time no see.....
Mr Sheppard
Submitted by ripper58 on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 3:10pm.
I'm sure their response will be that Maher did not say those things on the huffintonPuffington post...(i know it's semantics but hey they ARE liberal after all) if they reply at all
Awesome job Noel
Submitted by shawn. on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 3:12pm.
Bunch of left wing hypocrites.
Oops
Submitted by Dave. on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 3:40pm.
Wrong thread.
Vote for the American in November
Cain't Hep Theirselfs
Submitted by rammingspeed on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 3:33pm.
Huffington Post has further marginalized itself.
Let them speak, so we know them for the madmen that they are
Exactly, the bad will fall on
Submitted by MaximusBraveheart on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 3:47pm.
Exactly, the bad will fall on their own sword, and get stuck in their own trap. That is why I think Obama is going down. He seemed mighty nervous in his Libya speech & stumbled on words on a teleprompter. Someone is pulling his strings and it seems he got forced to do the Libya thing. Soros or whoever, may be through with him now may want to expose what they were holding over his head (to control him).
-- Maximusbraveheart -- Is TRUTH knowable? Moral Relativism is the abandonment of Truth. Truth is knowable. Truth conforms to Reality. Reality is observable by evidence & witness in this day & from history. Relativism is Sesame Street play land.
It is no longer Huffington Post.
Submitted by Ashrak on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 3:48pm.
It is AOL/Huffington Post.
Choices have consequences and this is one of the choices to sell out to AOL.
It should always be stated as AOLHuffington Post so that AOL can reap the "rewards" for paying all those millions.....
I don't see the controversy, opps, yes i do!
Submitted by CobraMan on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 4:26pm.
I don't see the controversy. Breitbart was banned from posting at the Huffington Post because of the comment he made in an Huffington Post article itself. The comments Maher made, while disgusting, were not made at the Huffington Post itself. Maher made those comments in two separate venues, both of which had nothing to do with the Huffington Post itself.
So, just where is the controversy? Are you claiming that it's controversial that Breitbart was banned because of what he posted at the Huffington Post and Maher isn't similarly banned for what he didn't post at the Huffington Post? That doesn't make any sense
On edit: Never mind, I see the source of my confusion: Breitbart made those comments in the Daily Caller interview and not at the Huffington Post itself. My Bad. In that case, yes, the Huffington Post is being very hypocritical.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Two wrongs does not make a right
Submitted by Henry Clay on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 4:20pm.
I commend Mr. Sheppard with doing his due diligence in writing the Huffington Post. I am seriously bothered though with his argument. I have nothing against Mr. Sheppard, but what you are calling for is censorship. So the Huffington Post made an error in regards to Breitbart, whom is somewhat of a shady character, but I will not get into that. So instead of championing free speech you call for the removal of a Liberal who is just as bad as Breitbart. Where does it end? If every news outlet fired a liberal and was forced to fire a conservative; (which, in this case was only the removal of Mr. Breitbart from the front page and not the firing) there would be no one left to voice an opinion. Tis a slippery slope friends. Tis a slippery slope.
Not much of man, are you, Little Flower?
Submitted by SickofLibs on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 4:51pm.
If someone called your mother, wife, daughter or sister a cunt to their face in your presence, you wouldn't make a peep, would you?
I'm sure you'd shush them and remind them it's all about "freedom of speech", so they should just turn the other cheek.
I feel sorry for the females in your life (if there are any) if you are their first line of defense.
A Philosophical Inquiry
Submitted by Henry Clay on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 4:58pm.
Violence is the first retort of the barbarian. So we have a sexist on the left hand and a race-baiter on the right hand. What hand shall we cut off?
Head shot.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 5:08pm.
.
It's called integrity, HC
Submitted by ckc1227 on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 4:57pm.
Something I'm not surprised you have a problem comprehending.
On Words
Submitted by Henry Clay on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 5:06pm.
Integrity: Comes from the Latin Integritas; meaning, an unimpaired state, moral soundness, honesty, and uprightness. From what I can gather committing an error twice for some perceived notion of a greater good is not what I would call Integrity, but would call oppressive.
Speaking of words
Submitted by Model850 on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 5:28pm.
Synonym Discussion of UPRIGHT
upright, honest, just, conscientious, scrupulous, honorable mean having or showing a strict regard for what is morally right.
AOLHuffington Post banished Breitbart from front page posting due to what it characterized as violations of certain of its policies. No one is asking the blog to ban (censor) Bill Maher, just adhere to a "strict regard for what is morally right" by meting out the same "punishment" to him it used against Breitbart, for similar violations of policy.
Both contributors would still enjoy posting privileges at AOLHuffington, but neither would be front page contributors.
No censorship being advocated by NS, NB, or anyone here. Just "fair is fair" treatment.
Go get 'em, NS!
Submitted by Uphill on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 5:10pm.
Go get 'em, NS!
The war of words.
Submitted by E.S.Blofeld on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 5:50pm.
The choice of reading opinions on whatever website is just that- choice. I have no problem reading differing opinions from different websites. Hypocrites? They are everywhere, left or right, it doesn't matter when it comes down to to it. If you can't have different opinions on your website than you will be biased towards one view. I give credit to HuffPost to actually having Andy as a contributor no matter where he is on their site. He can be found. This website "Exposing and Combating Liberal Media Bias" will not cater to a viewpoint counter to the mission statement. It's very doubtful that you would have Maddow or Moore or (insert any liberal enemy of the state) writing a contributing article. Just saying...
Ernst
"Isn't it pretty to think that way?"-EH
What is huffnpuff?
Submitted by Denny Crane on Fri, 04/01/2011 - 3:51am.
Huff n Puff touts itself as being "the internet newspaper"
They are saying they are a neutral source for news. Under that context they are hypocrites for applying different standards to different contributors. NB is a conservative site, it touts itself as conservative by stating it's mission is to combat "liberal bias"
99% of traffic goes to the front page, if it ain't there, it ain't going to be seen.
We Are The 53%
Denny...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 04/01/2011 - 4:34am.
I agree that the Maher/Breitbart matter reveals a double standard. But where or when has HuffPo claimed to be a neutral source for news? It has, from its inception, been a predominantly lib/progressive website--although it has also frequently provided a forum for conservative guest bloggers.
While HuffPo may have been interested in further increasing conservative and politically diverse input, I am not aware of any statement that it had now become--since the AOL acquisition--an ideologically neutral website. Have you read otherwise?
Jer
We all know that they are liberal
Submitted by Denny Crane on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 12:32am.
But if I was an uninformed University graduate that didn't pay much attention to politics, and all of a sudden I decided to start reading about politics, I would have found some articles about Politico and The Huffington post being some of the top internet political sites. I might then start reading them to get input, and all of a sudden I am getting liberal news, but I don't know it's liberal. The subtleties can shape opinions.
It touts itself as an internet newspaper.
I also can't find anything on it's site that says this is a liberal site.
We Are The 53%
A fair point, Denny....
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 1:31am.
but one that would also apply to right-leaning sites like foxnews.com and Drudge. I haven't checked on Breitbart and his BigGovernment sites.
Jer
I knew you were going to say that.
Submitted by Denny Crane on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 2:53am.
Foxnews.com is fair and balanced.
Breitbart.com and Drudgereport are newswire catch pages.
The Big sites are blogs, and don't bill themselves as newspapers.
We Are The 53%
Denny...you forgot
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 3:40am.
the ;-) thingy after the "fair and balanced" nonsense. Go to the website and take a look at the politics section and the type of stories which are published. Same for FoxNation.
What does Breitbart and Drudge being newswire catch pages have to do with the issue of unacknowledged bias?
Jer
IMO anything that covers the
Submitted by MaximusBraveheart on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 11:15pm.
IMO anything that covers the conservative side fairly is going to look very biased from the lefts POV. I guess we need to shut up and get in the back seat, lol.
-- Maximusbraveheart -- Is TRUTH knowable? Moral Relativism is the abandonment of Truth. Truth is knowable. Truth conforms to Reality. Reality is observable by evidence & witness in this day & from history. Relativism is Sesame Street play land.
Our opinions differ, Maximus....
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 11:27pm.
For example, I believed Crossfire covered both sides fairly and that The McLaughlin Group currently does. Do you agree?
Jer
I have not seen those in a
Submitted by MaximusBraveheart on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 4:43pm.
I have not seen those in a very long time, but that was my understanding as you suggest. They actually have guests from both sides vs. shades of gray from the same side. Have a good Sunday.
-- Maximusbraveheart -- Is TRUTH knowable? Moral Relativism is the abandonment of Truth. Truth is knowable. Truth conforms to Reality. Reality is observable by evidence & witness in this day & from history. Relativism is Sesame Street play land.
Thanks,. MaxBrave...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 5:00pm.
Hope your Sunday is a good one as well.
Jer
Go to Daily Caller, under
Submitted by AngryInOhio on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 6:02pm.
Go to Daily Caller, under opinions, Amy Suskind has a story regarding this along with an online petition you can fill out to get foul mouth Maher fired.
Dont hold your breath,,,
Submitted by brutony1 on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 6:05pm.
for an apology from a lib-being a liberal means never having to say youre sorry! Isnt it great to be one of them?
When will liberals WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE! -Me