On the Fox Business Network (FBN) early Tuesday evening, the Media Research Center’s Rich Noyes blasted the media over their latest outburst of “indignation” on the heels of Noyes’s latest study with Mike Ciandella that showed the networks devoted 107 minutes between Saturday and Tuesday to President Trump’s wiretapping accusations.
Speaking on Risk and Reward with fill-in host Liz McDonald, Noyes explained that the top stories on a network newscast usually receive a couple of minutes, but this latest Trump fiasco “is one of the bigger sort of explosions of media indignation over these tweets.”
McDonald noted that Trump personally has not offered definitive proof of being wiretapped by former President Obama, but she found it worth pointing out that January 19's New York Times “reported as fact that's U.S. intelligence was look at, quote, ‘intercepted communications between Trump associates and Russian officials.’”
<<< Please support MRC's NewsBusters team with a tax-deductible contribution today. >>>
After McDonald noted that the story revealed that “wiretap communications have been provided to the White House,” Noyes responded by holding up a physical copy of the paper in question:
I mean, it’s on the front page, it says “wiretap” right in the headline and yet, this didn’t — I mean, this got a little bit of coverage about the investigation. But the idea that there was this wiretapping of Trump officials or Trump associates on the eve of the inauguration got 13 seconds on the CBS Evening News. Otherwise, it was passed over.
“If it's so controversial...well how come the leaks about the same wiretapping back when Obama was on his way out the door, how come that didn’t get more than a few seconds? It's because the media didn't think it was a big deal. They thought it was proper oversight for Obama and didn’t wonder, is this overstepping? Is this too much? Which is a question the might have wanted to ask,” Noyes added.
McDonald concluded by giving a shout-out to another Ciandella and Noyes study about the overwhelmingly negative Trump coverage from ABC, CBS, and NBC over Trump’s first 30 days in office to the tune of 88 percent.
Noyes replied that such behavior was nearly identical to their negative coverage of the GOP nominee in the campaign and, therefore, the media have been “really earning the moniker opposition party in the way they cover this administration.”
Here’s the transcript of Noyes’s appearance on FBN’s Risk and Reward from March 7:
FBN’s Risk and Reward
March 7, 2017
5:37 p.m. EasternCHUCK TODD: It was jarring. The President Trump accusing President Obama.
BRIAN ROSS: This still no proof tonight, none, to back up President Trump's Twitter claims.
SCOTT PELLEY: The wiretaps claims seem to cross a line. Democrats and Republicans called on in Mr. Trump to provide evidence.
ELIZABETH MCDONALD: President Trump still under fire for accusing Obama of wiretapping Trump phones — still not showing proof of that. At the same time, media outlets still focus on a narrative that Trump collude with Russia to rig the election. Even after former chief Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, said there was no evidence of such collusion. A new MRC study shows that, since Saturday, networks like ABC, CBS, and NBC, they devoted 107 minutes to refuting the President's claim that Trump Tower was wiretapped. Look who’s here! He’s the director of the center, he’s Rich Noyes. He’s joins me now. How much time of does the story usually get, Rich?
RICH NOYES: Oh, a couple of minutes per network per night. I mean, this is — this is a big story. I mean, we’ve had a lot of these since Donald Trump began his political career. This is one of the bigger sort of explosions of media indignation over these tweets. I'm not sure if it's over yet, but it’s — you know, it is definitely on the large side.
MCDONALD: You know, the President has not offered proof yet. He’s not put forward proof. He's asking House and Senate Intelligence Committees to look into it. You know, as to the wiretap allegations, it’s interesting that, as we were just talking about before, the January 19 edition of The New York Times reported as fact that's U.S. intelligence was look at, quote, “intercepted communications between Trump associates and Russian officials.” Here’s another quote from the story: “One official said intelligence reports based on the wiretap communications have been provided to the White House.” President Obama was still in office then. What are your thoughts?
NOYES: Yeah, I mean, I have the paper here. I mean, it’s on the front page, it says “wiretap” right in the headline and yet, this didn’t — I mean, this got a little bit of coverage about the investigation. But the idea that there was this wiretapping of Trump officials or Trump associates on the eve of the inauguration got 13 seconds on the CBS Evening News. Otherwise, it was passed over. If it's so controversial, worth 107 minutes for the President to say that there’s been wiretapping, well how come the leaks about the same wiretapping back when Obama was on his way out the door, how come that didn’t get more than a few seconds? It's because the media didn't think it was a big deal. They thought it was proper oversight for Obama and didn’t wonder, is this overstepping? Is this too much? Which is a question the might have wanted to ask.
MCDONALD: Yeah, that’s an important point because, back in October, The New York Times reported that there was surveillance — surveillance from law enforcement, — intelligence authorities here on the computers in Trump Tower, possibly talking to computers in Russia. Who knows if it involved financial transactions, but there was surveillance and, Rich, you know, you point out too that most new presidents enjoy a honeymoon when elected into office. But it doesn't looks like President Trump has had that. I think your study showed that ABC, CBS, NBC that 88 percent of the time of their coverage — it’s been negative. What do you think?
NOYES: Yeah, it is almost as negative as it was during the campaign. This is just the first 30 days of the administration, just the evening news, it’s just an enormous amount of coverage. This, you know, this is a new storyline that is also very negative in the way the networks are covering it. It's amazing the way the networks really earning the moniker opposition party in the way they cover this administration.
MCDONALD: You know, Rich, thank you so much for your time. I really appreciate it coming on.
NOYES: Thanks, Liz.
