By Curtis Houck | September 22, 2015 | 11:50 PM EDT

The “big three” of ABC, CBS, and NBC all failed to cover on Tuesday night a new chapter in the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal concerning the reason she turned over her work-related e-mails while CBS also neglected to tell their viewers that Clinton finally came out against the Keystone XL oil pipeline after pressure from liberals and environmentalists.

By Tom Blumer | September 19, 2015 | 10:02 AM EDT

The business press is trying to convince readers, listeners, and viewers that Janet Yellen's Federal Reserve kept interest rates at zero not because of U.S. economic conditions, which supposedly "look good" with "steady economic growth." No-no. She stayed the course because of the troubled tglobal economy.

Thursday evening, Reuters wrote that the Fed failed to move "in a bow to worries about the global economy, financial market volatility and sluggish inflation at home." Bloomberg directly blamed "China growth concerns." The Associated Press's Martin Crutsinger cited "a weak global economy, persistently low inflation and unstable financial markets." None of the three noted the deteriorating situation in the U.S., and the only item I could find which cited the Fed's full set of pathetic annual U.S. growth projections was a Wall Street Journal editorial.

By Mark Finkelstein | August 14, 2015 | 6:26 PM EDT

This blog brought to you by Orville Redenbacher . . . One short segment on today's With All Due Respect packed plenty of explosive commentary.  There was John Heilemann saying that Al Gore "hates" Hillary and that if he gets in the race would be a "huge" problem for her. Lending credence to Heilemann's "hates" claim is the fact that he mentioned having "spent a lot of time" with Gore in 2006.  Translation: I was with him on those long nights when Al let his beard down and spoke straight from his globally-warmed heart.  

A second noteworthy comment came from Mark Halperin, who opined that "everyone" in the Dem party doesn't "trust" going into the race with Hillary as the only establishment choice and that the vacuum "is going to be" be filled by someone. Hmm.

By Sarah Stites | and By Julia A. Seymour | August 4, 2015 | 12:59 PM EDT

Gracing the cover of August’s Bloomberg Businessweek was a smiling, daisy-garlanded head of a billionaire tycoon that suggested he is a “feminist icon.”

That tycoon was the “Oracle of Omaha” and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway himself: Warren Buffett, a huge donor to birth control, and the abortion industry through his Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation.

The magazine devoted a four-page spread to the story of “how the billionaire’s family secretly funded a revolution in birth control.” But that isn’t all he has funded. Buffett has given more than $1 billion to abortion providers, including Planned Parenthood which is currently embroiled in scandal due to a series of shocking undercover videos. Bloomberg Businessweek complete ignored that scandal and barely touched on the extent of Buffett’s support for the group.

By Tom Blumer | July 30, 2015 | 5:45 PM EDT

The bar-lowering in the business press continues.

In the wake of today's disappointing news from the government on U.S. economic growth, an email from failed to properly describe reported second-quarter growth, and falsely characterized today's results as "solid":

By Tom Blumer | July 29, 2015 | 3:46 PM EDT

Yet another important economic statistic confidently predicted to rise has fallen — hard.

This time it was June's pending sales of existing homes. Just in time for summer, they were predicted to increase by a seasonally adjusted 1.0 percent to 1.5 percent. Instead they fell by 1.8 percent, the steepest drop since December 2013. Additionally, May's original 0.9 percent increase was revised down to 0.6 percent. This brought out yet another appearance of the dreaded "U-Word" ("unexpectedly") — accompanied, as usual, by excuses delivered by Victoria Stilwell at Bloomberg News (bolds are mine):

By Tom Blumer | July 28, 2015 | 6:08 PM EDT

The Conference Board's July Consumer Confidence report released earlier today threw a heavy dose of cold water on the idea that the economy might finally achieve a broad-based, genuine recovery this year.

Despite month after month of "all is well" reporting — and excuse-making when all hasn't been well — from the U.S. business press, the American public has apparently finally figured out that all is far from well. July's overall reading of 90.9 was 8.9 points lower than June's 99.8, the biggest single-month drop in almost four years — something Reuters and Bloomberg News noted, but which, as would be expected, the Associated Press, the nation's de facto news gatekeeper, failed to report.

By Tom Blumer | July 24, 2015 | 6:48 PM EDT

Thanks to year-over-year declines in manufacturing orders, manufacturing shipments, and wholesale sales, along with bloated inventories, apologists for the current condition of the U.S. economy are down to three defenses supposedly demonstrating that all is still really well after yet another rough first quarter (once again excused away as due to supposedly historically awful winter weather).

One of the three is that the housing market, particularly for new homes, is in a genuine recovery. Effective today, we can scratch at least the new-home element of that claim. The Census Bureau told us today that seasonally adjusted new-home sales fell by 7 percent in June, after May's originally strong figure was also revised down by 5 percent. The raw data showed that the number of new homes sold in June — supposedly peak season for new home purchases — was the same as the number sold in February.

By Tom Blumer | July 21, 2015 | 11:16 AM EDT

In June, Democratic presidential candidate Martin O'Malley unveiled a "climate change plan." The press loved it. Glowing articles appeared in many place, including the Washington Post, USA Today, The Hill and the Huffington Post, whose Kate Sheppard wrote that the former Maryland Governor had "Just Set An Extremely High Bar ... For 2016 Democratic Contenders."

Well, if they're so wired into climate change, why are they ignoring O'Malley's claim yesterday, in an interview with Bloomberg News, that climate change, aka the sanitized term for global warming, is largely responsibe for the rise of ISIS? Answer: Embarrassing comments by leftists are ignored until a Republican or conservative criticizes them. Then the story can be admitted into the news as a "so-and-so attacks" item.

By Scott Whitlock | July 16, 2015 | 4:54 PM EDT

Has it come this? Conservatives need to rely on the liberal Mark Halperin to "follow up" on CNN's softball interviews with Hillary Clinton? Halperin grilled top Clinton adviser Jennifer Palmieri on a question the 2016 candidate ignored when she was on CNN. In early July, Brianna Keilar asked Clinton a question about deleting 30,000 e-mails. The Democrat didn't answer. On Wednesday, Halperin zeroed in: "We're going to play the role, real quick, of CNN follow-up reporter. Hillary Clinton did an interview with CNN. She answered a lot of the questions. There were at least a couple she didn't answer. So, we wanted to play one of those for you and have you answer it." 

By Tom Blumer | July 16, 2015 | 11:41 AM EDT

Nicholas Confessore and Maggie Haberman at the New York Times studiously avoided talking about Hillary Clinton's campaign spending in their front-page print edition story Thursday ("Hillary Clinton Lags in Engaging Grass-Roots Donors").

Mrs. Clinton hauled in $48.7 million, but she spent a stunning $18.7 million. As seen in a table accompanying the Times story, that's more than triple that of any other candidate in the race from either party — for someone with no worries about name recognition.

By Tom Blumer | July 15, 2015 | 11:44 PM EDT

The serious sales slumps combined with inventory buildups in manufacturing and wholesale industries, documented in previous NewsBusters posts, continues. So does the establishment press's determination to ignore them.

At the Associated Press today, Christopher Rugaber was tasked to cover the Federal Reserve's June release on Industrial Production. The good news is that the Fed report showed an overall increase (+0.3 percent) for the first time in three months. The bad news is that none of it came in manufacturing, which was flat as a pancake for the second straight month. The net sum of the monthly manufacturing declines so far this year is -0.3 percent. While Rugaber concentrated his attention where it belonged, i.e., on manufacturing, since it makes up 75 percent of all industrial activity, he still managed to come up with all kinds of explanations for the lack of progress — except the two most obvious (bold is mine):