The February issue of the rich-folks magazine Town & Country promises a special issue on "Wonder Women" – not just "Super Cindy Crawford," but "Amazing Arianna Huffington." Liberal magazine writer Leslie Bennetts spread the praise on thick on Arianna’s savvy and appeal.
After a fourteen-hour flight from Tel Aviv, there’s this: "Although she slept only on the plane, she is alert and articulate, not to mention impeccably coiffed – an important attribute for someone with such a prominent public profile. A sought-after pundit, she will rise early in the morning to appear live on ABC’s [The] View, which is among the innumerable television and radio shows that clamor incessantly to book her."
She’s sold as a "formidable critic of the Republican conservatives she used to court so assiduously, Huffington was ranked by Forbes as number twelve on its first-ever ‘Most Influential Women in Media’ list...her latest act has confirmed her Hall of Fame status as the ultimate poster girl for change."
Glenn Beck on Tuesday addressed recent attacks by liberal publisher Arianna Huffington and in so doing thoroughly demolished the proprietor of the Huffington Post on national television.
Beck did such a good job that even the left-leaning website Mediaite took his side.
As NewsBusters reported Sunday, Huffington went on ABC's "This Week" and accused Beck of "inciting the American people" to commit violence against Obama by talking about "people being slaughtered."
The Fox News host, after calling her "Media Matters after a few drinks," walked viewers through specifically what he said on the "Glenn Beck" installment in question, and exactly how wrong Huffington was (video embedded below the fold with transcript):
If someone's going to play speech police, one might think it would be wise to make sure her own house was in order prior to hurling charges. But, for Arianna Huffington, editor of The Huffington Post, there are two sets of rules.
"Yes, well, first of all, there's a big distinction between who your anchors are, who are your employees and what they are saying and what your bloggers are saying," Huffington said. "And in our case, of course, what he said, what our blogger he was quoting said, was started by Roger, because he never called him a tumor. He said Fox was a tumor, on American society, which is a legitimate view that many people hold."
Fox News's Glenn Beck claimed Monday that liberal publisher Arianna Huffington asked him to write for her when they met at last year's Time 100 Most Influential People in the World dinner.
This revelation should come as quite a shock to readers of the Huffington Post who are regularly treated to the most vile depictions of Beck by Huffington and her contributors.
Potentially more shocking is this news surfacing roughly 24 hours after Huffington went on ABC's "This Week" to confront Fox News chairman Roger Ailes about why he allows Beck on his cable news channel.
Beck addressed the matter on his radio program Monday (video embedded below the fold with partial transcript, h/t The Right Scoop):
It was a metaphysical certitude the classic battle between Fox News's Roger Ailes and liberal publisher Arianna Huffington on Sunday's "This Week" would send many in the mainstream media over the top, and comedian Joy Behar didn't disappoint.
As "View" co-host Whoopi Goldberg gave the audience the background of the matter Monday -- "Fox News president Roger Ailes pointed out that on the Huffington Post he's been called quote a malignant tumor with a face like a fist" -- Behar interrupted, "It's not true."
Moments later, the opinionated comedian demonstrated her astounding lack of knowledge saying, "According to what I've read, first of all, the guy who wrote this tumor thing was not talking about him. He was talking about Fox."
She erroneously continued (video embedded below the fold, h/t NB reader Carla Brehm):
There was a marvelous fireworks display on Sunday's "This Week" when Fox News chairman Roger Ailes squared off against liberal media powerhouses Arianna Huffington, Paul Krugman, and substitute host Barbara Walters.
The one standing at the end likely didn't vote for Barack Obama.
In the second half of the Roundtable segment, Walters began by asking her conservative guest about the White House's much-publicized battle with his network.
Almost as if scripted, this teed up Huffington and Krugman to voice their displeasure with Fox.
Fortunately, Ailes was up to the challenge making for a very entertaining segment (video embedded below the fold with partial transcript and commentary):
In it, he clearly delineates the difference between "the news" as establishment media outlets want it dispensed and the "market for information" that technology has created. Its only shortcoming is that he gives Arianna Huffington a pass for "coming to the table as an honest broker." I'll point out glaring examples that will disprove that notion later.
First, though, behold the beauty of Breitbart's treatment of the issue of "objectivity" and his clear statement relating to the two types of information choices we have:
The launch of the Daily Caller is a necessary step toward creating ideological parity in the all-too-clearly biased mainstream media. It is a good thing that you, Tucker, are admitting that you come to the table with certain ideological baggage, and my new site Big Journalism will be there to watch your back when the well-funded, organized left’s knives come out to try to discredit and attempt to destroy you. Believe me, they will.
It goes without saying that what America's struggling banking industry doesn't need is for all of its depositers to withdraw their funds.
Regardless of this seemingly obvious truth, the folks at ABC and "World News with Diane Sawyer" actually did a report Friday profiling a campaign started by the far-left website the Huffington Post to get people to pull their money from the larger national banks and deposit their savings into "smaller, community-oriented financial institutions."
Although ABC's David Muir pointed out to Arianna Huffington how "a lot of people are going to look at this and say you are encouraging a run on the bank," the network along with the show's producers hypocritically ignored how they were doing precisely that by airing this report (video embedded below the fold with transcript):
On This Week with George Stephanopoulos on Sunday, December 13, during the show’s Roundtable segment, liberal blogger Arianna Huffington argued that the war in Afghanistan is "the gold standard of a dumb war, immoral and unnecessary," during a discussion of President Obama’s recent speech at West Point announcing that he would send more troops to Afghanistan, and his speech in Oslo accepting the Nobel Peace Prize.
Huffington also criticized fellow liberal panel member John Podesta -- a former Clinton administration member who is now president of the Center for American Progress -- charging that, "You now sound like George Bush," after Podesta explained President Obama’s rationale for sending more troops into Afghanistan.
Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the December 13 This Week on ABC:
As President Obama's approval rating dips below 50 percent, his devoted followers in the media also appear to be losing that loving feeling.
Over the weekend it was Chris "Tingles Up My Leg" Matthews calling the former object of his affection "Carteresque."
On Tuesday it was Arianna Huffington -- who has spent the entire year pushing for government-run healthcare as well as cap and trade! -- asking an astoundingly dangerous question for such an unashamed minion:
"Will The Unemployment Disaster Be Obama's Katrina?"
Yep. In her recent HuffPost column, Arianna used the K-word (h/t Hot Air):
Want to know how the left really feels about free speech? Look no further than Huffington Post editor and co-founder Arianna Huffington.
Huffington appeared on MSNBC's Nov. 19 "Countdown" to discuss a report by the Anti-Defamation League that alleges Fox News host Glenn Beck is "the most important mainstream media figure who has repeatedly helped to stoke fires of anti-government anger" and therefore endangering society.
"It would be nice to think of Glenn Beck just as a joke, as fodder for this show and the "Daily Show" and others that point out how stupid some of this stuff is," "Countdown" host Keith Olbermann said. "But this report, you know, suggests something else, this is - fear-monger-in-chief term is frightening."
Amazon has announced its 2009 best selling books, and Mark Levin's "Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto" and Glenn Beck's "Common Sense: The Case Against an Out-of-Control Government" are number two and three respectively.
This will certainly ruin Chris Matthews' day, as the MSNBCer back in September agonized over there being "so much right-wing crap on the best seller list these days."
And who can forget Arianna Huffington last Monday wondering if "The New York Times [should] create a separate bestseller list for conservative blockbusters?"
With this in mind, we at NewsBusters hope the following announcement by Amazon brings tears to liberal media members' eyes from sea to shining sea:
According to The Huffington Post, Michelle Malkin, Mark Levin, Glenn Beck and other right-of-center stars that regularly dominate the New York Times Hardcover Non-Fiction Bestsellers List are - or should be - in a league of their own.
No, that isn't Arianna Huffington's blog heaping praise on conservative authors. It's a literal suggestion. With right-leaning books and authors holding so many spots on the list, and more to come - former Sarah Palin, former Dick Cheney and President George W. Bush all have books due out -Huffington Post suggests conservatives should have their own category to differentiate from other works of non-fiction.
In a Nov. 9 entry on The Huffington Post that laments Fox News host Glenn Beck pulling a feat not done before - holding the number one spot on The New York Times' four lists: hardcover fiction, hardcover non-fiction, paperback non-fiction and children's - they suggest a separate category altogether, not for political non-fiction, but conservative non-fiction.
Would you ever in your wildest dreams have imagined a year after Barack Obama's historic victory a new website created by former MSNBC GM Dan Abrams and crawling with ex-Huffington Posters would declare in a headline, "If The Election Were Held Today Obama Would Lose?"
Granted, the article written by ex-HuffPoster Glynnis MacNicol took its cue from a recently released Rasmussen poll, and discounted its findings.
Regardless, the headline and opening paragraphs by themselves indicate just how much the bloom has come off the Barose (h/t Matt Lewis):
It's not too often where both a prominent conservative and a prominent liberal would deviate from their ideological consensus on a particular issue.
However, the news of the day - Chicago being beaten out by Rio de Janeiro for the 2016 Summer Olympic Games is one such instance. MSNBC "Morning Joe" host Joe Scarborough, who identifies himself as a conservative, said he was glad President Barack Obama gave it shot in an Oct. 2 post on the Huffington Post.
Ironically, the editor of the Huffington Post, Arianna Huffington, who is identified as a progressive, said on NBC's Oct. 2 "The Jay Leno Show" that Obama shouldn't have gone to Copenhagen - but not for the reason a lot of critics are suggesting.
It turns out that Jones was Huffington's grassroots political director when she ran for governor in the 2003 recall election. In fact, Jones, a self-described "communist," thought Huffington was so wonderful he was part of the effort to draft her to run for office.
A San Francisco Chronicle article from Sept. 5, 2003 described Jones as Huffington's "grassroots director."
The announcement of Sen. Ted Kennedy's death came at 2 a.m. Eastern on Aug. 26 and a little over 15 hours later, two prominent liberal voices were scheming as to how the president and other Democratic leaders could use his passing to advance a political agenda.
Huffington Post editor Arianna Huffington appeared on MSNBC host Ed Schultz's Aug. 26 program and was asked by Schultz if it somehow could be used to push "real reform" for health care.
"The passing of Ted Kennedy - could this be a rallying cry for progressives to carry this fight through and to see real reform and health care in this country?" Schultz said. "Because, of course, I think everybody on the left knows that this was his passion, this was his cause."
According to Huffington Post editor and co-founder Arianna Huffington and MSNBC host Keith Olbermann, nobody could possibly oppose health care/health insurance reform on the merits of the legislation or for ideological or philosophical reasons. There must be something nefarious occurring.
At a town hall meeting on Aug. 12, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, voiced his opposition to H.R. 3200 and other forms of legislation that would dramatically change health care, which he felt would be for the worse. This was too much for Huffington, who called Grassley a liar.
When in doubt blame conservatism, even when it comes to the struggles of a media outlet - and ignore the possibility that liberalism might be to blame.
Ever since Nielsen came out with the July numbers for CNBC that showed the network had suffered a 28 percent ratings decline over a year ago, some of the financial media intelligentsia have been eager to point to what they perceive are the right-leaning political shortcomings of the network as a possible reason.
According to Daniel Gross, the Moneybox columnist for Slate.com and a columnist for Newsweek (and a known proprietor of "teabag" double entendres), there's been a decline in interest in financial news since the markets haven't been as volatile. But Gross is also convinced there's a component of the network's "rightward, anti-Obama tilt," despite its efforts to placate the left.
Democrats worried that too many of their liberal allies in the media are being gobbled up by the Obama administration should fret not, as the White House has a plan: replace the departed journalists with new left-leaning cadre.
Take for example Tuesday's revelation that Ethan Axelrod, the son of Obama senior adviser David Axelrod, is going to work for the Huffington Post.
As Big Hollywood's Jason Killian Meath reported Sunday, this is a liberal match made in heaven:
In How The Huffington Post Can Pay Its Bloggers, HuffPo blogger Michelle Haimoff seems to have gotten a tad miffed at how Arianna Huffington is making millions on the backs of her bloggers without “paying it forward,” as it were. Consequently, Haimoff has developed a prototype scheme on how Arianna can pay her long toiling bloggers to help fulfill her “responsibility” to journalism.
I think that Haimoff, however, misses the point of the Huffington Post. It isn’t now and never was about “journalism.” It’s about left-wing advocacy and advertising sales. Journalists need not apply. As we discussed early in July, journalism isn’t what HuffPo does.
In this report we get a nice one-two punch. Not only are we seeing Democrats once again refusing even a tiny compromise with Republicans on Obama's takeover of nearly 20% of our economy with his healthcare plans, but we also get to see another example of why Huffington Post is not journalism. I like a nice one-two punch for a Wednesday.
For one thing, the HuffPo article hilariously calls Democrat pitbull Rahm Emanuel a “conservative Democrat.” But let's start with the more important political point and deal with the HuffPo chicanery second.
But, what sort of "journalism" does Huffington Post represent? Is it the well researched sort with multiple links, named sources, or other such common journalistic practices? Most often no. In fact, those that write for Huffington Post rarely even bother with the normal journalistic practices of research, attribution, or the habit of having more than one source. Sadly, the largest bulk of what Huffington writers do is merely opine whether they have sourced information or not. And more often than not they do so from the extreme left-wing perspective.
Huffington Post is not "journalism." It's really just that simple.
Dumenco is flabbergasted that Huffington won this award even though she "thinks journalists should work for free," a charge he makes because the HuffPo does not for the most part pay its bloggers for content. But I am flabbergasted because the Huffington Post is the farthest thing from responsible journalism there is. It is a left-wing advocacy site that invites anyone that agrees with the party line to contribute, sure, but it is not a site interested in actual journalistic integrity.
Don't get me wrong, I am not against sites like HuffPo, nor against advocacy, left-wing or otherwise. It absolutely has its place in the scheme of things. But Arianna Huffington has never been and is not now a person interested n traditional journalism. In fact, she isn't even a reliable advocate because over the decades she's been on every side of every issue! So an award for journalism to this woman is a farce worthy of a Saturday morning cartoon show. (Does that date me? Do they even HAVE Saturday morning cartoon shows anymore?)
Time magazine is not wild about capitalism. In a "business roundtable" on the "future of capitalism," Time assembled several liberals to decry the idea: PBS host Tavis Smiley, blog founder Arianna Huffington, and soul singer John Legend all found the need for capitalism to have a large dose of government intervention.
Smiley was frankest: "I don't think that left to its own devices, capitalism moves along smoothly and everyone gets treated fairly in the process. Capitalism is like a child: if you want the child to grow up free and productive, somebody’s got to look over the shoulder of that child."
Time described its roundtable as a symposium on economic evolution: "With our economic world changing so rapidly, many writers and thinkers are looking at the roots of capitalism and how it must evolve. In the first of our series of Time 100 roundtables, we gathered a stellar cast of honorees to ponder the road ahead." None of them came to assert that economic liberty was a great value.
There is a charge starting to make the rounds of the science and medical blogs that the Huffington Post is allowing its bloggers to claim they are "doctors" when some really aren't qualified to claim the title. Still others ply their legitimately earned title to discuss as authorities issues in fields other than those in which they trained. Some of these same "doctors" are offering health advice and assessment of scientific news when they really aren't qualified to discuss them in any way other than as opinionists. So, the questions become these: is the Huffington Post misrepresenting its posters as trained, accredited experts when they aren't? Is there any attempt by the HuffyPost staff to substantiate the claims made by its posters?
Case in point is the Huffington Post's wellness editor, "Dr." Patricia Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald claims to have a doctorate in "Homeopathic Medicine," as well as a Master's Degree in "Traditional Chinese Medicine." But what, exactly, is a Doctorate in Homeopathic Medicine? And why does Fitzgerald not say on her bio page from where these degrees were earned? Why is she so intentionally vague?
She's been popping up in a lot of places lately to chime in on the economy.
This time Huffington Post editor-in-chief Arianna Huffington appeared on ABC's April 5 "This Week," where she voiced her disapproval of the March 30 decision by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) relaxing mark-to-market accounting rules.
"This week, we saw so many concessions to the banks," Huffington said. "We saw the suspension of mark-to-market, which is absolutely tragic. Japan, by not having mark-to-market, made it much harder for them to recover."
But as Brian Wesbury and Robert Stein of First Trust Portfolios recently wrote for Forbes magazine, mark-to-market accounting reinstitution was reinstated only in recent years. The last time it was in effect - during the Great Depression - it caused many bank failures.
Arianna Huffington, who appeared as a guest host on CNBC's March 31 "Squawk Box" has following of left-wing readers and bloggers, as the editor of the very popular Huffington Post blog. The two faced off on "Squawk Box" about how the housing crisis should be handled. Huffington asked Santelli what his thoughts were on more government assistance for underwater homeowners to prevent another round of foreclosures.
"Well, the whole country is underwater I guess," Santelli replied. "It's just a matter of where you want to point the bailout gun. I would certainly like to see some of those mortgage contracts gone through to find out where the erroneous and inaccurate and illegal contracts and separate those from the rest because I think that a lot of the information on the original mortgage contracts is not accurate and I don't think it would be very fair to put those in the same camp as other foreclosures."