Latest Posts

By Mark Finkelstein | June 21, 2011 | 7:51 AM EDT

On Fox News this weekend, Jon Stewart famously denied that the New York Times pushes a liberal agenda. Perhaps the man from Comedy Central sees the paper as "moderate." After all, the Times itself apparently doesn't believe there are any liberals on the Supreme Court.  In an editorial today, the paper described Ruth Bader-Ginsburg and every other member of her wing of the Court, as "moderate."

The Times' mind-boggling notion of what constitutes a "moderate" came in its editorial blasting the Supreme Court's decision of yesterday throwing out a huge class-action sex-discrimination case against Wal-Mart.

Here's the relevant excerpt from the editorial [emphasis added]:

By Noel Sheppard | June 21, 2011 | 12:59 AM EDT

Unless you've been hibernating somewhere, you know that conservative author Ann Coulter has a new book out called "Demonic: How the Liberal Mob Is Endangering America."

In an email interview with NewsBusters, Coulter talked about her book, liberals, and other subjects including how the "MSM is both part of the mob and inciters of the mob. That’s with the exception of Ed Schultz, whom I’m pretty sure is an extraterrestrial":

By Noel Sheppard | June 20, 2011 | 11:31 PM EDT

Monday appeared to be the day that MSNBC commentators bashed the ratings of Sunday political talk shows other than NBC's "Meet the Press."

After Chris Matthews ridiculed ABC's "This Week" despite it having more than three times his audience, Lawrence O'Donnell went after Chris Wallace and "Fox News Sunday" (video follows with transcript and commentary):

By Tom Blumer | June 20, 2011 | 10:54 PM EDT

To be fair to the Associated Press's Charles Babington, he may not have written the headline applied to his early analysis ("Obama wants big 2012 campaign map, GOP wants small") of how the presidential electoral map looks. But what he wrote essentially fits the headline, but didn't provide any evidence that the Republican Party is only focusing on winning back the states lost by John McCain in 2008 which George W. Bush won in 2004 to get past the 270 electoral votes needed to retake the presidency.

Here are several paragraphs from Babington's coverage (numbered tags are mine):

By Tom Blumer | June 20, 2011 | 10:01 PM EDT

In a late Monday morning report, the Associated Press's Erica Werner wondered why "the White House has yet to take any new steps on gun violence" he supposedly promised in the wake of the January shooting of Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.

Either Werner or the headline writers at AP are getting extraordinarily impatient, as seen in the headline which follows the jump:

By Noel Sheppard | June 20, 2011 | 9:50 PM EDT

Fareed Zakaria on the CNN show bearing his name Sunday actually recommended we use social media to create "a set of amendments to modernize the Constitution for the 21st Century."

On his radio program Monday, conservative talk show host Mark Levin gave Zakaria a much-needed lesson about this document the liberal commentator so badly wants to change (video follows with partial transcript and commentary):

By D. S. Hube | June 20, 2011 | 9:38 PM EDT

Via USA Today comes word of the splashy comics company Image putting out a 9/11 Truther comicbook titled "The Big Lie" (h/t to Four Color Media Monitor):

In The Big Lie, the heroine is a woman named Sandra, who lost her husband, Carl, during the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City. A particle physicist working at the Large Hadron Collider, she figures out a practical way to travel back in time, so she ventures from present day to Manhattan an hour before the first plane hits the towers on Sept. 11, 2001. She rushes to his office at a risk-management consulting agency, but since she has aged 10 years, Carl can't quite accept that it's her. And even though she brings evidence on her iPad, neither her spouse nor his co-workers believe her warnings. "The meat of the story is her trying to convince these 'experts' that the terrorist attack is about to happen," Veitch says. "So it's essentially a taut emotional drama with the facts and questions surrounding 9/11 sewed into it."

 

By Jack Coleman | June 20, 2011 | 9:10 PM EDT

Even better, the source of this information is you, Ed. You of the pronounced selective memory.

On his radio show Friday, Schultz claimed he voluntarily discontinued the all-too-aptly named "Psycho Talk" segment of his MSNBC television show in January after the Tucson massacre. The segment returned to "The Ed Show" in recent weeks with little fanfare.

Here's Schultz describing his alleged decision to put the nightly two-minute hate on ice last winter (audio here) --

By Dave Pierre | June 20, 2011 | 8:24 PM EDT

The New York Times' Maureen Dowd's most recent anti-Catholic hit piece (Sun., 5/19/11) contains a number of falsehoods. However, her article's biggest eye-opener is her apparent claim that homosexuality is a direct cause of child sex abuse.

By Noel Sheppard | June 20, 2011 | 8:14 PM EDT

There are certainly going to be a lot of very disappointed Jon Stewart fans when they hear the fact-checking folks over at PolitiFact found their hero to have been false when he accused Fox News watchers of being "the most consistently misinformed media viewers."

Before we get there, here's what NewsBusters' Rich Noyes wrote on this subject just hours ago:

By Noel Sheppard | June 20, 2011 | 7:29 PM EDT

There's been a lot of talk lately that MSNBC's Chris Matthews is beginning to lose it.

As further evidence that the "Hardball" host seems a bit detached from reality, consider that on Monday's program, he referred to ABC's "This Week" as a show "not many people see...It doesn’t get many viewers" (video follows with transcript and commentary):

By Scott Whitlock | June 20, 2011 | 6:21 PM EDT

Chris Matthews on Monday could barely contain his glee as he recounted a contentious Fox News debate between liberal comic Jon Stewart and Chris Wallace. Regarding Stewart's appearance on Fox News Sunday, Matthews excoriated, "Coming up, we got a real prize fight here and it's somewhat imbalanced. Jon Stewart smashing his way through Chris Wallace's face to make a point."

Matthews' panel to discuss the segment included David Corn of the leftist Nation magazine and Alex Wagner of Huffington Post. Corn had a bizarre comparison to the heated discussion.

By Alex Fitzsimmons | June 20, 2011 | 5:58 PM EDT

With Jon Huntsman's presidential announcement on June 21, the former Utah governor joins a crowded field vying for the Republican nomination. But while MSNBC has put most GOP hopefuls through the ringer, Huntsman has been heralded by the network as Mr. Civility in an otherwise nutty Republican field.

By Matt Hadro | June 20, 2011 | 5:22 PM EDT

Is this CNN's idea of objectivity? To discuss a gay marriage bill in the New York state senate, openly-gay CNN anchor Don Lemon hosted a Democratic strategist and a pro-gay marriage conservative Sunday. Given the probability that all three would support the legislation, one can only wonder how an honest debate could have transpired during Sunday's 6 p.m. EDT edition of Newsroom.

National Review's Will Cain has made frequent appearances on CNN recently, including one week earlier on Sunday night's Newsroom to discuss the validity of socially-conservative positions with mainstream America. Cain is a self-described "pro-gay marriage supporter," and presumably was brought on Sunday to represent the "conservative" point of view across from Democratic strategist Jamal Simmons.

By Lachlan Markay | June 20, 2011 | 4:36 PM EDT

I've written a number of times that objectivity in political reporting is unattainable. I think that the American people realize that fact as well. The growing mistrust of the news media stems from the recognition that only the very rare reporter is a truly neutral arbiter. Those who have opinions will invariably give their reporting a point of view.

But despite this seemingly self-evident fact, most major news outlets still claim to be truly objective observers. The New York Times, being as it is an institution of old school journalism, is usually right out front making these claims. But in a letter published in the paper Sunday, its editors made explicit what has been an ongoing trend at the Times for a while: the paper is not really a fan of the supposedly inviolable line between news and opinion content.