Topic: Media Research Center
The MRC doesn't want Republicans to look bad. It declared the Mark Foley story over with sometime last week, and is absolutely irked that others don't feel the same way. Thus, it has declared that anyone who covers the Foley scandal from here on out is a biased liberal who wants the Republicans to lose in November:
And after the weather, what was Today's featured story of the half-hour? The growing nuclear threat with grave international implications? Come on. It was Foley Time! First a reporter, then Chris Matthews interviewed by Lauer and putting the worst possible spin on things for Republican prospects.
[...]
What could account for the short shrift NBC gave the North Korean nuke? You don't suppose it could have anything to do with the fact that when the focus is on national security, Americans tend to look to Republicans, whereas if Today can talk about a Republican sex scandal and highlight a lack of leadership . . .
-- Mark Finkelstein, Oct. 9 NewsBusters post
In case you thought the Foley story was wrapping up on Friday, be warned that both Time and Newsweek weren't buying that. They wanted a chance to build its place in history/Republican infamy.
-- Tim Graham, Oct. 9 NewsBusters post and CyberAlert item
Friday's CBS Evening News led again with the Foley/page scandal, even though the two stories aired offered virtually no fresh information, as anchor Katie Couric justified the news judgment by declaring the issue is “still the talk of the town,” “is not going away” and “is overshadowing every other election issue for the moment” -- all self-fulfilling assessments sustained by the decisions of Couric and her media colleagues.
-- Brent Baker, Oct. 6 NewsBusters post and Oct. 9 CyberAlert item
