ConWebBlog: The Weblog of ConWebWatch

your New Media watchdog

ConWebWatch: home | archive/search | about | primer | shop

Friday, January 30, 2015
MRC Promotes Mark Levin's New Contract, Ignore His Racist Comment
Topic: Media Research Center

The Media Research Center loves Mark Levin -- so much so, in fact, that it will hide his most disturbing and inflammatory remarks from the MRC's readers.

Thus, you will not hear a thing about Levin's racist attack on CNN host Fareed Zakaria, mocking his "broken English."

You will, however, read at both NewsBusters and CNSNews.com all about Levin re-upping his radio show with syndicator Westwood One. At CNS, Barbara Hollingsworth serves up the gushy detail that "The news was hailed by leading conservatives, including fellow talk show host Sean Hannity, who called Levin 'a national treasure'." NewsBusters couldn't be bothered to put a byline on its Levin-fluffing, instead proclaiming that the contract extension is "Good news for Mark Levin fans."

Of course, neither post from the MRC subsidiaries informed readers that Levin is in business with the MRC -- Levin does live-reads for the MRC on his radio show, and the MRC runs ads touting Levin's endorsement of various MRC operations.

Reality, in the form of Levin's offensive words, can't be allowed to intrude on this little lovefest.


Posted by Terry K. at 7:27 PM EST
Tuesday, January 27, 2015
MRC Still Can't Talk Honestly About Rape Provision In Anti-Abortion Bill
Topic: Media Research Center

The Media Research Center still doesn't want to talk about rape exceptions, or lack thereof, in right-wing proposals to ban abortion.

The latest MRC writer to whiff on the subject is Kristine Marsh, who offers up this alternative version of reality regarding a recently tabled anti-abortion bill in a Jan. 23 MRC item:

The focus of the March for Life is celebrating life and pro-life legal victories, however the media chose to celebrate a GOP fallout over a pro-life bill instead. The Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act was dropped before it could make it to a House vote the night before the March for Life. The bill would’ve banned abortions after 20 weeks but was dropped for voting after North Carolina GOP Rep. Renee Ellmers allegedly led a resistance against the bill because it did not cover exceptions for cases of rape. Luckily another pro-life bill was passed in it’s place, forbidding federal funds from going towards abortion and disabling tax credits for insurance plans which pay for abortions.

Marsh gets the issue completely wrong. The problem Ellmers and other female Republicanhouse members had with the bill is not that it didn't create a rape exception, it's that the exception in the bill was granted only if the woman had reported the rape to law enforcement.

Marsh then huffed that one media outlet "cloaked the pro-life bills in ominous language saying the GOP was 'forbidding' access to abortions." Forbidding access to abortion is exactly what the bills are designed to do. Why does Marsh think it's "ominous" to report accurately on the bill's intent?


Posted by Terry K. at 10:42 PM EST
Tuesday, January 20, 2015
MRC Thinks Joy Behar Is A 'Journalist'
Topic: Media Research Center

In a Jan. 19 Media Research Center item headlined "Journalists Thrilled By All of Obama’s State of the Union Speeches," Rich Noyes makes no effort to discern between commentators allowed to express opinions and regular journalists, and he plucks the words of those journalists out of context to hide the fact that many of them simply appear to be making objective observations about Obama's speeches instead of the endorsements Noyes claims they are.

And then there's this section:

That's right -- Noyes is portraying Joy Behar, a former co-host of the decidedly not-journalism show "The View," as a "journalist."

Mind you, Noyes is the MRC's research director. But it's "research" like this that keeps the MRC from being taken seriously as a legitimate research organization -- it's too enslaved to its right-wing agenda for that.

Posted by Terry K. at 12:45 PM EST
Monday, January 19, 2015
MRC Unhappy Climate Deniers Are Accurately Labeled
Topic: Media Research Center

Mike Ciandella complains in a Jan. 14 Media Research Center item:

A group of climate change alarmists has demanded that the media stop being so nice to those with different viewpoints on climate. The Committee for Skeptical Inquiry petitioned the media to drop the term “skeptic” in favor of “denier,” when referring to anyone who questions their views on climate change.

The petition ignored more than 400 scientists who have publicly questioned the extent of mankind’s influence when it comes to climate change.

According to the Orwellian-sounding Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, “Public discussion of scientific topics such as global warming is confused by misuse of the term ‘skeptic.’” The Committee’s petition called for journalists to only use the term “denier,” and never “skeptic,” when referring to anyone not convinced that humans are responsible for climate change. CSI is a project of the Center for Inquiry, a group which, among other things, campaigns to prevent religious groups from being allowed to own hospitals.

CSI also relies heavily on the word of “experts” like Bill Nye (whose career depends on people not realizing that “science guy” doesn’t mean “scientist”) and Neil deGrasse Tyson (who has been criticized for fabricating quotes to make a point). Despite this, The Washington Post hyped this petition, and even used Nye’s name in the headline for credibility.

At no point does Ciandella dispute the accuracy of the label. While he tries to blur the issue by claiming that deniers merely have "different viewpoints on climate," he merely bashes those who support its (accurate) use.

Ciandella's complaining that Nye isn't a real scientist is rather rich considering that many of the leading lights on the denier side are even less qualified. For instance, Marc Morano, who leads the denier site Climate Depot, has a bachelor's degree in political science and spent much of his pre-denier career in media working for both Rush Limbaugh and the MRC-owned CNSNews.com.

Similarly, "Lord" Christopher Monckton also has no formal training in science; his degrees are in journalism and the classics. But Ciandella doesn't mention their purported lack of training in the subject in which they speak publicly on the most.

And it's quite rich of Ciandella to complain about the word "denier" when he uses the word "alarmist" to describe anyone who agrees with the demonstrated science of global warming.


Posted by Terry K. at 6:29 PM EST
Friday, January 16, 2015
MRC: Fox News Dispute With Dish Network Is A Democratic Conspiracy
Topic: Media Research Center

The last time we saw Media Research Center videographer Dan Joseph, he was embarrassing himself by pathetically pretending to be transgender to mock the idea that transgendered people have rights. Now he's on the conspiracy bandwagon in a Jan. 13 blog post (boldface his):

Dish Network dropped Fox News and its sister network Fox Business Channel at the end of last year and the network still remains blacked out for Dish’s 14 million subscribers. Dish Network claims that they dropped the nation’s number one cable news network because of a contract dispute. 

However in recent days Fox News has begun to suggest that Dish Network is engaged in an effort to censor the network's content.

While it’s not entirely clear who’s in the right in this matter, digging into the background of Dish Network’s  founder and chairman Charles Ergen may help to illuminate why animosity between Dish and FNC has reached such epic proportions.

As it turns out, Charles Ergen is a big-time donor to the Democratic Party.  According to Open Secrets, Ergen donated a total of $64,000 to the Democratic Senatorial campaign Committee in 2014. 

The whole censorship conspiracy Joseph is pushing had one big hole in it: as a substitute for Fox News, Dish Network made available another right-wing "news" channel, The Blaze, to its subscribers. Joseph didn't mention that.

Joseph then tries to back down, claiming that such a donation "does not necessarily mean that he is targeting Fox News due to a disagreement with the network’s content." Then he negates it by bringing out the boldface again: 

But, Ergen may have a history of abusing his position of power to promote his political preferences.

In 2012, a federal complaint was filed against Ergen in which several company executives alleged that he had intimidated them into making contributions to specific candidates, the majority of which were Democrats.

The claim was filed by an unnamed company insider who accused Ergen of "forcing" Dish Network’s Chief Operating Officer Bernard Han to donate to a Democratic Party candidate in the 2009/2010 election cycle.

The complaint also claimed that Han was “encouraged" to attend Democratic functions and fundraisers and that other Dish employees were strong-armed by Ergen in a similar way.

Curiously, a couple days later when noting that Fox and Dish Network had reached an agreement to return the channels to the service, Joseph mentioned nothing about his big Democrat censorship conspiracy.


Posted by Terry K. at 3:51 PM EST
Wednesday, January 14, 2015
MRC Defends The Honor of France's Far-Right National Front
Topic: Media Research Center

It's nice to know that the Media Research Center is running to the defense of the National Front, the far-right French political group.

In a Jan. 7 item, Scott Whitlock took offense at the "false equivalence" of right-wing extremists in Europe like the National Front being likened to extremist Muslims, making sure to tell us: "Militant non-Muslims are not beheading and shooting Muslims in Europe. In general, they are calling for changes in immigration laws."

Whitlock doesn't mention that those "changes in immigration laws" he presents as so benign actually involve a complete moratorium on immigration, or that National Front leader Marine Le Pen has likened Muslims in France to a Nazi occupation.

Two days later, Curtis Houck took offense at a pundit on MSNBC claiming that the National Front has "no business" taking part in Parliament, disdainfully noting how the pundit "drew a moral equivalency between the murdering Islamic jihadists who committed the attacks and caused so much angst since Wednesday and a French political party."

And a Jan. 8 NewsBusters post by Tom Blumer sneer at the New York Times highlighting the anti-immigrant sentiments of far-right nationalists like the National Front, snarkily adding: "Yeah, those are Europe's biggest problems, not Islamic terrorism."

We'd say something about strange bedfellows, but the right-wing MRC defending other right-wingers is not strange at all.


Posted by Terry K. at 8:51 PM EST
Updated: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 8:53 PM EST
Tuesday, January 13, 2015
The MRC's 'No True Scotsman' Theory of Christian Violence
Topic: Media Research Center

"No true Scotsman" is the informal name of a logical fallacy that seeks to exclude a person from a group for certain behavior by claiming that through engaging in that behavior, they aren't a "real" member of that group.

Or, as the Media Rsearch Center interprets it: If a Christian committed an act of violence or terror, he or she is not a Christian. The point, of course, is to  drive home the point that Muslims who commit terroristic acts, i.e. the Charlie Hebdo attack, are acting in accordance with their group.

In a Jan. 7 MRC item, Kristine Marsh took offense when someone brought up an incident of a Christian who beheaded someone last year. Marsh insisted that the perpetrator was "heavily drugged man with fanatical 'Christian' beliefs," then huffed: "While this man was rightly described as a “religious zealot,” if there’s a beheading revival sweeping Christian denominations, we’re unaware of it. It takes an awful lot of magical thinking to seriously compare one random psychotic event to a the near-weekly decapitations by ISIS – not to mention al Qaeda’s fondness for sawing off infidels’ heads on video – and other common atrocities committed explicitly in the name of Islam."

When another person on TV pointed out that Anders Breivik, who massacred dozens in Norway, was a Christian, Matthew Balan denied it in a Jan. 12 item, claiming that Breivik "considered himself to be a 'cultural Christian,' and condemned then-Pope Benedict XVI, as well as Protestant churches. So, just as in the case of the Lord's Resistance Army, Breivik isn't a serious Christian."

Yet all Muslims are somehow responsible when someone claims to kill in the name of Islam. Interesting.


Posted by Terry K. at 7:29 PM EST
Monday, January 12, 2015
MRC, Alveda King Try to Exploit Nicki Minaj's Pain
Topic: Media Research Center

You knew that Nicki Minaj's admission that she is "haunted" by an abortion she had as a teenager would be catnip to anti-abortion activists. And true to form, the Media Research Center pounces and exploits her pain.

Katie Yoder writes in a Jan. 9 MRC item:

Despite the media’s narrative, the loss of a little baby through abortion is not easily forgotten, according to pro-life leaders.

Dr. Alveda C. King, pro-life activist and niece of Martin Luther King, Jr., and others spoke at a Washington, D.C. press conference Jan. 8 to launch “Healing the Shockwaves of Abortion,” a year-long initiative of the Silent No More Awareness Campaign to reach out to those impacted by abortion. At the event, Dr. King told MRC Culture that abortion will change even singer Nicki Minaj – and that Minaj will “reach that conclusion” that abortion “was bad for me” and “bad for my baby.”

At the event, MRC Culture asked King, the Priests for Life Pastoral Associate and African American Outreach Director, how she responds to women like Nicki Minaj, who recently admitted that while abortion “haunted” her, she defines herself as pro-choice.

King acknowledged, “I was pro-choice early on.” Referencing herself and Georgette Forney, a Silent No More Awareness co-founder who once had an abortion, she said, “We were protesting because we did not understand.”

“Nicki basically said, ‘Well I guess I must still say I’m pro-choice, or I would sound hypocritical because I had an abortion,’” she explained. 

Yoder falsely privileges King with the "Dr." honorific even though her doctorate is honorary.

Yoder goes on to claim that the "Shockwaves" project "seeks to expose and heal the secrecy and silence surrounding the emotional and physical pain of abortion." If the movement's treatment of Nicki Minaj is any indication, the actual goal is to exploit other people's pain for their own political ends by claiming that some women's regret of abortion means that nobody should be allowed to have one.


Posted by Terry K. at 5:01 PM EST
Friday, January 9, 2015
MRC Touts Bill Donohue's Censorship Push, Omits His Link to Bozell
Topic: Media Research Center

In a Jan. 9 CNSNews.com article, Susan Jones promotes Catholic League chief Bill Donohue's call for censorship of religious criticism, in which he blames the victim by suggesting that the staffers of Charlie Hebdo massacred by Islamist extremist had it coming because they were "pornographers disguised as satirists" suffering from "narcissism." Donohue also asserted there is no "moral right" to make fun of religion and the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists have no right to "do whatever they want."

Jones fails to report, however, that her boss, Media Research Center chief Brent Bozell, is on the board of advisers for the Catholic League. The MRC frequently fails to disclose Bozell's links to right-wing Catholic activists it promotes.

All of this raises an interesting question: Does Bozell endorse Donohue's call for censorship? After all, the MRC loves to call out any instance of religious criticism in the media no matter how deserved, as demonstrated by Dave Pierre's desperate attempts to dismiss concerns over the Catholic Church's history of sexual abuse.

We'd ask Bozell ourselves, but he's blocked us from following him on Twitter, apparently too thin-skinned to handle criticism.

UPDATE: Conservatives Hugh Hewitt and Noah Rothman have denounced Donohue's call for censorship and victim-blaming. By contrast, Jones offered no counterpoint to Donohue's view.


Posted by Terry K. at 4:52 PM EST
Updated: Friday, January 9, 2015 7:23 PM EST
Friday, January 2, 2015
MRC Takes Another Cheap Shot At Sandra Fluke
Topic: Media Research Center

You might recall that the Media Research Center was one of the most vociferous defenders of Rush Limbaugh following his three-day misogynistic tirade against Sandra Fluke, with MRC chief Brent Bozell refusing to offer any meaningful criticism and launching an "I Stand With Rush" website and his MRC underlings enthusiastically endorsing Rush's misogyny.

Fluke's loss in her race to be elected to a California state senate seat gave the MRC an opportunity to another cheap shot at Fluke. In their Dec. 27 column, Bozell and Tim Graham sneer: "Even that paragon of permissiveness Sandra Fluke couldn’t exploit her Limbaugh-victim aura to win a state Senate seat in libertine California."

How does advocating for birth control make one a "paragon of permissiveness"? Bozell and Graham don't explain, perhaps because the exact opposite is true: Fluke is demonstrating her responsibility.

Apparently Bozell and Graham think every woman who takes birth control is a slut or a prostitute, just like Limbaugh said.

Even that paragon of permissiveness Sandra Fluke couldn’t exploit her Limbaugh-victim aura to win a state Senate seat in libertine California. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2014/12/26/bozell-graham-column-cultural-winners-and-losers-2014#sthash.f0FvhpK5.dpuf
Even that paragon of permissiveness Sandra Fluke couldn’t exploit her Limbaugh-victim aura to win a state Senate seat in libertine California. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2014/12/26/bozell-graham-column-cultural-winners-and-losers-2014#sthash.f0FvhpK5.dpuf
Even that paragon of permissiveness Sandra Fluke couldn’t exploit her Limbaugh-victim aura to win a state Senate seat in libertine California. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2014/12/26/bozell-graham-column-cultural-winners-and-losers-2014#sthash.f0FvhpK5.dpuf

Posted by Terry K. at 6:24 PM EST
Updated: Friday, January 2, 2015 6:24 PM EST
Sunday, December 28, 2014
MRC Denied Pro-Life Link To Tiller Murder, Blames Sharpton for NYC Police Deaths
Topic: Media Research Center

Whenever anyone in the media sought to link the murder of abortion doctor George Tiller to the anti-abortion movement -- a link that's not unreasonble to make, given killer Scott Roeder's ties to mainstream anti-abortion activist group Operation Rescue -- the Media Research Center howled about it:

  • A report bashing public broadcasting cited a PBS segment in which abortion doctors called the Tiller murder terrorism as a reason public broadcasting should no longer receive federal funding.
  • Clay Waters complained that a New YorkTimes columnist linked Tiller's death to right-wing radio hosts Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.
  • The MRC declared that an NBC segment highlighting Fox News host Bill O'Reilly's anti-Tiller rhetoric was "fresh evidence" that NBC is biased.
  • MRC chief Brent Bozell called Roeder an "unhinged vigilante," insisting, "In the very heart of the pro-life community, there is nothing they wanted less than another shooting of an abortionist." Bozell also denied that "the mere act of denouncing Tiller as a killer of babies – as if he were instead removing tumors – is an invitation to terrorism and murder."

But when a man killed two New York City policemen then himself, the MRC knew who to blame: Al Sharpton, President Obama and New York City Mayr Bill de Blasio. This despite the fact that none of them have never directly called for violence against anyone, let alone policemen.

The MRC's Tim Graham mocked Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson for denying that Sharpton, de Blasio and Obama are to blame, insisting that the killer, Ismaaiyl Brinsley, "clearly identified himself with police 'accountability' movements for Brown and Garner and in dramatic hostility to the police in general." So holding police accountable for their actions is akin to endorsing violence?

NewsBusters' Jack Coleman penned another slobbering tribute to right-wing radio host Mark Levin that the MRC has become famous for, touting how "force of nature" Levin declared that Sharpton, Obama and Eric Holder have "blood on their hands" over the deaths. Needless to say, Coleman didn't mention the fact that Levin is employed as a spokesman for the MRC. Coleman went on to sneer that "golf is more important"to Obama than going to the funerals of the slain officers.

A Dec. 27 NewsBusters post by Jeffrey Lord demands that MSNBC fire Sharpton as a host because he is "a man with 'blood on his hands' -- the blood of two policemen -- to be showcased five nights a week on their airtime."

Lord engages in a dubious metaphor likening Sharpton to D.W. Griffith, director of the infamous Ku Klux Klan-lionizing silent film "Birth of a Nation," and Obama to Woodrow Wilson, who "happily showcased the film at the White House." In fact, while "Birth of a Nation" was the first film ever screen at the White House, there is no official record of Wilson expressing any view of the film, and the one that is generally attributed to Wilson -- "It is like writing history with lightning" -- was likely made up in order to promote the film.

Lord also highlights how former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik  blamed Sharpton for "setting the tone" that resulted in the policemen's deaths. He doesn't mention that Kerik's credibilty is a little on the dubious side given that he recently spent time in prison on corruption charges.

Nevertheless, Lord insists that NBC "looks more and more every day like the home of the values portrayed in Birth of a Nation." Funny, we don't recall Lord ever saying that about the anti-abortion movement after Tiller's murder.


Posted by Terry K. at 8:49 PM EST
Updated: Sunday, December 28, 2014 9:10 PM EST
Friday, December 26, 2014
MRC's Graham Is Bitter About Colbert's Success
Topic: Media Research Center

Tom Johnson complains in a Dec. 19 NewsBusters post:

If you’re tired of the tributes and homages to Stephen Colbert’s faux-conservative character, take heart: they’re just about over with. Probably.

One of the gushiest goodbyes came from Leslie Savan, who blogs about media/political issues for The Nation. In a Thursday post, Savan noted that on The Colbert Report, Colbert didn’t attack conservatives head-on, but rather “inhabit[ed] their heads via a character,” which enabled him to “demonstrate…how right-wing psychology works.”

Colbert, opined Savan, “show[ed] that beneath his character’s assertion of omnipotence and certitude, there’s a fragility, one that’s also buried in most of the real-life blowhards and their dittoheads…If they stop clapping, Tinker Bell will die. If they stop nodding in agreement, or step off the reservation of Tax Cuts, Guns, and Built It Myself, they could get Other-ed.”

Johnson won't tell you this, but Othering people who stray off the right-wing reservation is exactly how his NewsBusters boss, Media Research Center official Tim Graham, operates. As we've documented, just last week Graham lashed out at anyone who committed the offense of criticizing Ted Cruz, including solidly conservative Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin.

Indeed, such Othering -- or, as we call it, Heathering -- is Graham's and the MRC's chief method of enforcing right-wing ideological rigidity. It seems that the writer Johnson was highlighting has it correct.

Speaking of which, Graham was extremely bitter about the praise given to Colbert upon the retirement of his character. He huffed in a Dec. 18 post:

Liberals are going into deep mourning over the television death of Stephen Colbert, Very Badly Disguised Liberal. They think this is an "unparalleled achievement." In Wednesday's paper, TV writer Bill Carter of The New York Times lined up all of Colbert’s competitors to call him a genius for disparaging conservatives with so much panache.

“For nine years, Stephen Colbert has relentlessly maintained his pompous, deeply ridiculous but consistently appealing conservative blowhard character he has left an indelible mark on late-night television comedy,” Carter wrote. “Consistently appealing?” To whom? Liberals presume “why, everybody enjoys mocking conservatives as opposed to reading.”

It’s these cheap, repetitive insults that don’t deserve a Hall of Fame induction, but liberals love hating conservatives so preciously that anything that helps them demean their opponents as God-fearing, America-loving morons is an instant classic.

Graham turned even more bitter in a Dec. 21 post, ranting that "Washington Post TV writer Hank Stuever didn’t refrain from the goo over the end of Stephen Colbert’s tenure at Comedy Central. His "Critic's Notebook" might have been too soaked with tears to be legible, but it made it into print." Graham grumbled that the idea of Colbert's audience being divided between those who got his schtick and those who didn't was really about "the people who loved the joke, and the people who were the joke."

Such bitterness toward the success of the likes of Colbert and Jon Stewart goes a long way toward explaining why the MRC's own "comedy" show, "NewsBusted," is such a painfully unfunny failure and how the MRC's fundraising effort to upgrade its production values overlooks the fact that it doesn't matter how slick the show looks if it still isn't funny.


Posted by Terry K. at 10:08 PM EST
Wednesday, December 24, 2014
MRC's Double Standard on Reporting Contents of Stolen Emails
Topic: Media Research Center

Brent Bozell and Tim Graham fret in their Dec. 19 column:

The widespread reporting on hacked emails from Sony Pictures — spurred by the upcoming release of an allegedly funny movie about assassinating North Korean despot Kim Jong Un — might encourage some gloating from people who would like to bring Hollywood down a peg. But hold the schadenfreude. The media's ethics — or seeming lack of ethics — are troubling.

Take CNN "Reliable Sources" host Brian Stelter in an interview with the program "Access Hollywood." His ethical position? Anything goes, as long as the journalists aren't the hackers.

[...]

In other words, journalists have every right to exploit whatever the hackers steal. So much for all those lectures about compassion or ethics. Ends justify means. Juicy "scoops" trump any question about how the information was obtained.

When hackers for an evil entity procure private information through illegal means, isn't there a reason for the media to restrain itself?

That's quite a change from five years ago, when Bozell was demanding that the media cover the contents of stolen emails. Of course, those involved the so-called scandal involving stolen emails from climate scientists. Bozell huffed in a December 2009 press release:

"The networks' silence on ClimateGate is deafening. Scandal, cover-ups and conspiracy are the bread and butter of the media. Yet they have selectively and deliberately decided not to report this bombshell - or any of the incriminating details surrounding the scandal - because it goes against their left-wing agenda.

"To pretend this story simply doesn't exist is damning to journalism. The so-called 'news' media are protecting scientists because it exposes their underbelly. That's not journalism. That's a cover-up. And we will continue to call them out for ignoring these allegations and the mounting, inconvenient evidence against them."

Bozell did not fret about media ethics or the procurement of private information through illegal means back then. There's no reason -- other than craven partisan politics -- why he and Graham should care now.


Posted by Terry K. at 2:09 AM EST
Sunday, December 21, 2014
For The MRC's Graham, Ted Cruz Is He Who Must Not Be Criticized
Topic: Media Research Center

As we saw with his attempt to whitewash Scott Walker's "Molotov" gaffe, Media Research Center director of media analysis Tim Graham is not afraid to play defense for conservatives he deems sufficiently conservative. That extends to trashing anyone who dares criticize his sainted conservatives.

Which explains the Heathering job Graham unleased on conservative Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin in a Dec. 15 NewsBusters post for committing the offense of criticizing right-wing darling Ted Cruz. Graham's headline sneered that Rubin is a "So-Called WashPost 'Conservative' Blogger," and it just went from there:

The most dishonest advertising in The Washington Post isn’t selling soap or shoes or automobiles. It doesn’t come phonier than this: “Jennifer Rubin writes the Right Turn blog for The Post, offering reported opinion from a conservative perspective.”

Rubin spent 2012 insisting that every conservative presidential contender was unelectable except Mitt Romney, who was neither conservative nor electable, as it turned out. Rubin’s still at it, as in her latest screed from Sunday, headlined “Senate passes spending, GOP still despises Ted Cruz: The cromnibus passes despite Ted Cruz's ego trip.”

Which part of the GOP? The wing of the party that endorsed Barack Obama in 2008? Notice how Rubin sounds very much like your standard-issue liberal Post reporter, suggesting the "far right" is going to ruin the Republican Party. Just like she saw sweet victory in Romney, she was wrong in thinking Ted Cruz's Obamacare filibuster would kill GOP hopes in 2014:

[...]

An actual conservative blogger would point out that it’s a little odd for Republicans to take over the Senate and add seats to the House as they opposed amnesty and Obamacare, and then betrayed both campaign stands in the first spending bill after the electon. Jen Rubin’s blog should be called “Establishment Turn,” spinning the news from a “liberal  Republican perspective.”

And that's not even the only defense of Cruz Graham mounted this past week. Graham and Brent Bozell's Dec. 17 column expressed dismay that anyone would dare criticize Cruz for traying to derail a Senate appropriations bill:

Sen. Ted Cruz and Sen. Elizabeth Warren are polar opposites, a Tea Party conservative and an Occupy Wall Street socialist. Then there are the similarities: Both were elected in 2012, both have Harvard on their resume and both are mentioned as presidential material. But the media's read of the two demonstrates an unquestionable slant.

Both senators have shaken up the Senate over heavy spending and regulation. When Warren does it, she's promoted as a profile in courage, standing up for fairness. When Cruz does it, he's a selfish brat causing meltdowns.

[...]

All this provides a precise GPS location for our liberal media. To them, Ted Cruz is a dangerous extremist, but Warren is their heroine — compassionate, professorial and politically and economically correct. Anyone who expects objectivity from the press is badly out of touch.

Graham and Bozell carefully omit the actual offenses that were caused: Warren merely gave a speech and didn't try to derail the bill-making process. Cruz, meanwhile, along with Sen. Mike Lee, did delay a vote on a massive appropriations bill, a delay Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid took advantage of by advancing dozens of Obama appointees that Senate Republicans had delayed for months. Even solid conservatives like Charles Krauthammer were apoplectic at the move.

But as far as Graham is concerned, Cruz can do no wrong, and woe to anyone who dares criticize him. How does playing defense for a politican qualify under the "education" mission the MRC is supposed to have under its nonprofit tax status?


Posted by Terry K. at 10:19 PM EST
Updated: Sunday, December 21, 2014 11:24 PM EST
Thursday, December 18, 2014
MRC's Graham Declares Walker 'Molotov' Gaffe To Be 'Tiny'
Topic: Media Research Center

When it was revealed that Republican Wisconsin Go. Scott Walker had wished "Molotov" instead of "mazel tov" to a Jewish constituent, the Media Research Center's Tim Graham knew he had to spring into damage-control mode to tamp the controversy.

Thus, Graham wrote a Dec. 14 NewsBusters post whining that " the liberal media will reliably leap on any tiny gaffe that liberals can locate." Graham also quoted a writer for the right-wing Watchdog.org (whose ideology Graham failed to identify) saying basically the same thing.

By contrast, the MRC worked hard to get another tiny gaffe some media traction.

During the 2008 campaign, Barack Obama said at one point that he had visited 57 states. Since then, the gaffe has been referenced dozens of times at NewsBusters alone, many of those complaining that the "liberal media" didn't report it, which obviously means the media was protecting Obama.

It seems that Graham has a double standard on gaffes. After all, it's unlikely that any MRC outlet would have reported on Walker's gaffe for any other reason than to dismiss it.


Posted by Terry K. at 10:35 AM EST

Newer | Latest | Older

Bookmark and Share

Get the WorldNetDaily Lies sticker!

Find more neat stuff at the ConWebWatch store!

Read my blog on Kindle

Support This Site

« January 2015 »
S M T W T F S
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Bloggers' Rights at EFF
Support Bloggers' Rights!

News Media Blog Network

Add to Technorati Favorites

Add to Google

Subscribe in Bloglines

Add to My AOL

Add ConWebBlog: The Weblog of ConWebWatch to Newsburst from CNET News.com