Tim Graham's Imaginary J-School Topic: Media Research Center
Tim Graham is the director of media analysis at the Media Research Center. Here's some of that "media analysis," as described in a July 28 Newsmax article:
Journalists are trained to distrust the United States, and that distrust has trickled down to Israel, says Tim Graham, executive editor of NewsBusters and director of media analysis at the Media Research Center.
"They feel that in most foreign conflicts, they are trained as journalists to always suspect that the United States is doing something immoral,'' Graham said Monday on "The Steve Malzberg Show" on Newsmax TV.
"In this conflict, Israel is seen as the United States, so Israel must be doing something wrong, especially when the prime minister's not shaking hands with whoever the Palestinian leader of the moment is.
"In this particular case, Israel is the stand-in for the United States. Therefore, Israel is the aggressor and somehow the Palestinians are the victims.''
Seriously? Journalists are trained to distrust the United States? What planet is Graham from?
Graham claims to have had some journalism training in college (well, a mass communications minor), and we're pretty sure that nobody at Bemidji State University ever attempted to train him to "distrust the United States." Meanwhile, I have both bachelor's and master's degrees in journalism, and say unequivocally that learning to distrust the United States was not part of my training.
It seems that Graham's "media analysis" has nothing to do with how journalists actually work and everything to do with perpetuating a right-wing caricature of it. It may be divorced from reality, but hey, it apparently keeps the donations rolling in to the MRC.
Depiction-Equals-Approval Fallacy Watch Topic: Media Research Center
You'd think that after 25 years of attacking the media, the Media Research Center would have developed a clue about how news works. Apparently not.
A July 30 MRC item by Kyle Drennen carries the headline "NBC Touts Palestinian Teen Praising 'Justified' Hamas Terror Attacks on Israe." Drennen complains that NBC "highlighted a Palestinian teenager celebrating the terror group's attacks: 'In Gaza, many see these attacks as justified. 16-year-old Farah Bakkar has developed a following online after live tweeting as [Israeli] bombs fell....Farah never supported Hamas before, but does now.' A sound bite ran of Bakkar proclaiming: 'When I see the [Hamas] rockets getting to Israel, I start loving them more and more and I pray for them.'" Drennen presents this as NBC endorsing the teen's remarks.
This is the Depiction-Equals-Approval Fallacy run amok. It's simply absurd to claim, as Drennen is trying to do, that the inclusion of a point of view in a news report means the news outlet agrees with that viewpoint.
After all these years, this is what passes for "media research" at the MRC.
Tim Graham's Week-Long Transgender Freakout Topic: Media Research Center
Media Research Center director of media analysis Tim Graham has had an extended transgender freakout over the past week:
In a July 18 NewsBusters post, Graham fretted that a “trans woman” who "worked for the John Kerry for President campaign in Florida in 2004" was running a a Republican to become Nevada's "first gender-confused state legislator."
The same day, Graham huffed that "National Public Radio’s Diane Rehm Show devoted a unanimous hour on Monday to the transgender 'struggle for civil rights.'" He further huffed: "See how the media agenda and the transgender agenda are exaclty the same: build maximum 'visibility' toward a 'tipping point,' and exclude any and all opponents unless they neatly fit a convenient narrative of hate and bullying."
And that's different from how right-wingers create Obama "scandals" ... how?
But Graham wasn't done venting about the existence of transgenders. On July 23, he targeted NPR once again, grousing that "NPR’s nationally distributed Fresh Air talk show devoted 43 minutes to 'the growing number of people who identify as transgender.'" He added, "Naturally, religion and the idea of nature and natural law only came up as something triumphantly overcome."
MRC Censors Mark Levin's Bizarre Religious Attack on Jon Stewart Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center haslongpromoted the musings of right-wing radio host Mark Levin without disclosing that it pays Levin to promote the MRC on his radio show. Now, the MRC is going into full protection mode for Levin.
An anonymous July 23 NewsBusters post (attributed only to "NB Staff" -- why the secrecy, guys?) touts how, in a Fox News appearance, "talk-radio star and author Mark Levin attacked Jon Stewart for trashing Israel -- and then mocking critics by insisting he should be allowed to have nuance. The weird part of this post is that that it's essentially stenography: it simply transcribes Levin, who did not identify any specific statement that Stewart made supposedly "trashing Israel," and the posts adds no detail to substantiate Levin's attack.
This was joined by a July 23 CNSNews.com article by Michael Chapman also transcribing Levin and also not providing any specific examples of Stewart's supposedly offensive remarks; Chapman vaguely states only that Stewart has made "acerbic jokes and comments concerning Hamas's ongoing missile attacks against Israel" and "has joked about the situation in Israel and Gaza."
Not only do these MRC promotions for Levin fail to disclose the MRC's business relationship with Levin -- which makes its promotion of him look for all the world like a quid pro quo -- they had an offensive attack by Levin on Stewart.
In a rant against Stewart last week on his radio show, Levin bizarrely declares, "I don't trust Jews who change their names."
You know who else obsesses over Jewish entertainers who changed their names (and there have been a lot of them over the years, which means Levin also doesn't trust much of the mainstream of entertainment for, oh, the past century)? The neo-Nazis at Stormfront.
(Yes, we know Levin is Jewish, which makes his weird obsession with Stewart's name all the more disturbing.)
The MRC might want to take a break from its mutual back-scratching with Levin to explain to its readers why Levin and Stormfront share a hobby.
UPDATE: A July 25 CNS article by Susan Jones documents a lawsuit filed against the Environmental Protection Agency by Levin's legal foundation, which also fails to disclose the MRC's business relationship with Levin.
MRC's Graham Ignores Maureen Dowd's Professional Jealousy Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center loved New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd when she bashed the Clintons during the 1990s, but when she followed that by going after the Bush administration, they dismissed her as just another East Coast liberal -- Brent Bozell dismissed her as a "liberal windbag."
But now that Dowd has returned to Clinton-bashing, she's back in the MRC's good graces.
MRC director of media analysis Tim Graham devotes a July 14 NewsBusters post to praising Dowd for having "the audacity to knock Chelsea Clinton for giving speeches for $75,000 a pop, even if it went to the Clinton Foundation, which is designed for the further aggrandizement of the Clinton reputation."
But Graham ignores the idea that there may be a little professional jealousy behind Dowd's sniping. Media Matters notes that Dowd makes less than half of what Chelsea Clinton makes for her speeches, adding that "Dowd did not respond to a request for comment seeking to determine whether she donates her speaking fees to charity."
But then, Dowd was spouting the MRC party line, which earns her temporary immunity from having her motives questioned.
The American Conservative has a review of a new book about L. Brent Bozell Jr., an early conservative movement leader and the father of Media Research Center chief Brent Bozell III. In it, we learned some of the some of the father's behaviors that have shaped his son -- his "militant Catholicism" which at one point led him to move his entire family to Spain where he became an even more fervent Catholic; his early obsession with "life issues," and his evangelizing zeal"; and "Bozell’s manic depression, the embarrassing early incidents, the alcoholism, the inevitable personal injuries, and the intervention of police and, in one instance, embassy officials."
It's from this environment that Bozell III spring. Explains a lot, doesn't it?
MRC's Double Standard on Disclosure Topic: Media Research Center
Sean Long rants in a July 9 Media Research Center item:
The liberal media love to hate the Koch Brothers but are far less enthusiastic about connecting George Soros’ billions to liberal policies.
On July 6, Coral Davenport of The New York Times revealed that the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) new regulations on power plant emissions were largely inspired by the work of environmental activists at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). The broadcast networks have not mentioned the NRDC connection to the new regulations, and even the Times ignored that liberal mega-donor Soros has bankrolled the NRDC.
The Times called the EPA regulations “a remarkable victory for the National Resources Defense Council” for developing the “novel” framework that the EPA would adopt, but they also failed to mention the more than $1.7 million in Soros-funding the group received since 2004 ($1,771,893).
This is from the same MRC that defended Richard Mellon Scaife without disclosing that he donated more than $3 million to the MRC.
Apparently, the MRC's disclosure requirement applies to everyone else but the MRC.
MRC Defends Scaife, Doesn't Disclose He Was An MRC Donor Topic: Media Research Center
A July 4 NewsBusters post, attributed only to "NB Staff," complains that a New York Times obituary for Richard Mellon Scaife, "a longtime supporter of conservative causes," contains "nasty personal swipes."
Not only does "NB Staff" not dispute the accuracy of the information -- choosing instead to reprint a 1998 column by Brent Bozell defending Scaife -- it also fails to include a very important disclosure: Scaife-controlled foundations were major donors to NewsBusters' parent organization, the Media Research Center.
The Sarah Scaife Foundation has donated more than $3 million to the MRC since 1998, and the Scaife-controlled Carthage Foundation donated $10,000 in 1997.
Interestingly, Bozell's 1998 Scaife-defending column also fails to disclose his Scaife funding, which surely he must have been aware of at the time he wrote it.
MRC's Bozell & Graham Upset Obama's Horning In On Their Media-Bashing Topic: Media Research Center
Tim Graham and Brent Bozell write in their July 2 column:
President Barack Obama treats the press like a spoiled child treats his parents. Despite the pampering, he just keeps complaining about them until he gets his way. As America tires of his inflated sense of self-importance while the economy limps and his foreign policy crumbles, Obama travels around the country complaining that the mean old media aren't complimentary enough.
[...]
He's trying to intimidate the press — especially those who are now elbowing their colleagues to hold him accountable for his growing list of fiascoes. How far the spoiled child has fallen.
Bozell and Graham seem upset that Obama's horning in on their territory. After all, intimidating the press and complaining that the mean old media aren't complimentary enough to their agenda is the raison d'etre for the Media Research Center.
Apparently, only conservatives are allowed to criticize "the media."
MRC Complains That Media Isn't Repeating Its False Attack On Obama Topic: Media Research Center
A July 1 Media Research Center item by Geoffrey Dickens carries the headline "89 Percent of Network Stories Omit Obama's Role in Causing Border Crisis." Dickens apparently hasn't considered the fact that this is because Obama didn't.
Dickens asserts that "the President’s own failure to enforce immigration laws" is "a cause for thousands of immigrants illegally crossing the U.S.-Mexican border." But in the very next paragraph he backs off, writing that it is only a "possible cause." That suggests that even Dickens knows he's making a claim not supported by fact.
Dickens then claimed that Obama "extending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)" is allegedly one of "the ways the Obama administration has encouraged the flow of illegal immigrants." But DACA would not apply to any of the current refugees; to be eligible, an undocumented immigrant must have "continuously resided in the United States since June 15, 2007, up to the present time."Therefore, DACA cannot possibly be attracting these immigrants.
Curiously, Dickens is silent about the actual root cause of the current border crisis: drug violence in Central America. Even MRC subsidiary CNSNews.com has acknowledged that drug violence is to blame.
The only evidence Dickens provides to back up his attack on Obama is a generic link to MRC Latino's Facebook page and a link to an earlier MRC piece he wrote that simply quotes a Univision commentator blaming Obama (and also failing to mention the drug violence).
If you're ignoring basic, documented facts the way Dickens does, there's no way to take his "media research" seriously.
Tim Graham Anti-Gay Freakout Watch Topic: Media Research Center
If Media Research Center director of media analysis Tim Graham didn't have regularanti-gayfreakouts, he probably wouldn't be able to keep his job. (That, and serving as Brent Bozell's ghostwriter for years.) So when NPR interviewed a gay person, it was freakout time again:
On NPR’s Morning Edition, anchor Steve Inskeep announced “It's Friday morning, which is when we hear from StoryCorps, which is marking the anniversary of a pivotal moment for gay rights -- the 1969 Stonewall riots – 45 years ago tomorrow, gay protesters clashed with police in New York. Now StoryCorps is launching an initiative to preserve the stories of LGBT people, which is called OutLoud.”
Inskeep turned to the testimony of a seventy-year old homosexual named Patrick Haggerty, who told a story about how he went to high school in rural Washington state with glitter on his face, and his father came to school in dirty farmer clothes. The father was hailed by the son: “I had the patron saint of dads for sissies.”
[...]
Inskeep came back to announce: “The interview is recorded in Seattle for OutLoud. That's StoryCorps initiative to collect LGBT stories. It will be archived at the Library of Congress and you can hear more about Stonewall on the podcast. Get it on iTunes and at npr.org.”
The whole "OutLoud" LGBT-celebrating enterprise is taxpayer-funded through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
Graham is just as outraged that taxpayer money may have been used to talk to gay people as he is at NPR broadcasting it. Of course, Graham won't look at it as offsetting the tax-free money Graham and the MRC use to demonize gays.
MRC Unhappy Media Acknowledges Anti-Abortion Protesters Can Be Violent Topic: Media Research Center
Kyle Drennen complains in a June 27 Media Research Center item:
Despite Thursday's unanimous Supreme Court ruling that so-called "buffer zones" banning pro-life protests near abortion clinics was a violation of the First Amendment, all three network evening newscasts hyped assertions by abortion advocates that such unconstitutional measures "prevent violence at clinic entrances."
Drennen offered no evidence that the networks' reporting that anti-abortion protesters can be violent, beyond dismissing the idea as "NARAL spin."
Of course, people like George Tiller and Barnett Slepian would dispute that anti-abortion violence is "spin." If they could, that is.
MRC Upset Anti-Gay Protesters Identified As Anti-Gay Topic: Media Research Center
The headline on Katie Yoder's June 20 NewsBusters post reads "Surprise! Liberal Media Bash ‘March for Marriage’." Apparently, Yoder considers accurately identifying the marchers as opposing gay marriage to be "bashing":
Of course, the liberal media had a field day covering the march, painting it as anti-gay. The Washington Post’s headline read “Thousands Rally at U.S. Capitol Against Gay Marriage” (not, you know, “Thousands rally to support traditional marriage.”) RawStory also noted the “Opponents of same-sex marriage” along with San Francisco Chronicle’s SFGate describing “thousands against gay marriage.”
But Yoder doesn't explain why supporting "traditional marriage" does not equal opposing gay marriage.
The MRC has a bit of a complex about the media accurately labeling things.
Bozell & Graham: Redskins Losing Trademark Is Obama's Fault, Somehow Topic: Media Research Center
Brent Bozell and Tim Graham use their June 20 column to rant about the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office withdrawing trademark protection for the Washington Redskins, naturally blaming "the left, which has removed every moral objection to traditional understandings of profanity, continues its own crusade to ban words that violate their sensitivities on race, gender and sexual preference."
Yet it's President Obama's fault somehow, too. Bozell andGraham write that "A quick review of the PTO's record shows this was an overtly political decision — surely aimed at or requested by the White House." But they offer no evidence that the Obama White House was ever involved in the process. Still they conclude:
But say the word "Redskins," and the left collectively faints. In the case of the "R-word," a majority of the community has never been offended. Even a majority of the Indians have never been offended. But the left's crusade, using Obama's PTO, continues.
By reflexively blaming Obama, Bozell and Graham ignore the fact that the dispute over the Redskins trademark has been going on for years. As Sports Illustrated points out, the PTO first cancelled the trademark in 1999, but the decision was overturned by a federal court on appeal in 2003. Both of these events occurred before Obama was elected U.S. senator, let alone president.
Perhaps if Bozell and Graham didn't engage in such absurdly reflexive Obama-bashing, the Media Research Center might be taken more seriously.
MRC Writer Defends Bashing Film She Didn't Watch Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center's Katie Yoder wrote twoarticles bashing the film "Obvious Child" for its abortion-related subject matter despite, as we noted, never having seen the film.
Yoder defends her deliberate ignorance in a June 18 MRC article and attacks the critics who called her out for bashing a film she hadn't seen as raising a "bogus" argument:
When “Obvious Child” hit theaters this month, conservatives were aghast the media glorified it – without irony – as an “abortion romantic comedy.” Liberals lashed back, claiming, like the movie’s Director Gillian Robespierre, that "[Conservatives bashing Obvious Child] haven't seen the movie; they're basing it on articles and trailers."
That defense is bogus. We are, after all, talking about the destruction of innocent human life – something nearly impossible to contextualize and utterly repulsive as a romantic comedy plot device.
Yoder's defensiveness is itself bogus. Simple journalistic honesty dictates that you first fully encounter something before you attack it. Apparently, the MRC doesn't teach its writers to do that.
Yoder's column is actually her account of finally bothering to go see the film -- not to behave responsibly, mind you, but to "play along" with her critics. But since Yoder has an agenda, she made sure to keep her mind closed, determined to find nothing whatsoever rewarding about the film:
After watching “Obvious Child” last week, I’m only more determined to continue my “bashing.” The difference is I sat through a lot of crude sex jokes. From comparing an abortion to a “drive-through” or a DMV visit to concocting a plot where every main female character aborted a baby at some point, the film sets out to normalize abortion as a part of everyday life. “Obvious Child” is in the end little more than slick pro-abortion agitprop.
[...]
Although adored by the “pro-choice” community and organizations like Planned Parenthood that lobbies we’re “not in her shoes” because abortion is “a deeply personal and often complex decision,” the movie surprisingly deemphasizes choice. With job loss, apartment loss, and a budding relationship, Donna’s “choice” appears limited – and never once does the camera hint at the process of her decision.
Yes, I empathized for Donna, felt her situation. But, at the same time, the movie forgets to voice women who choose life – AND women who choose abortion. The “comedy” makes a joke out of women who go through a difficult decision to abort and ignores regrets of women who do. They exist.
Of course, anything that doesn't slavishly follow the pro-life agenda is "pro-abortion agitprop" to Yoder, who appears to be mostly upset that the film won't demonize a character who has an abortion, as Yoder and her MRC colleagues strive to do in real life.
Since Yoder treated viewing the film as a chore to mollify critics instead of the open-minded fact-finding mission a real writer would have done, it's no surprise that she wasn't moved by it. She never had any intention of allowing that to happen.
Tim Graham is the director of media analysis at the Media Research Center. Here's some of that "media analysis," as described in a July 28 Newsmax article:
You'd think that after 25 years of attacking the media, the Media Research Center would have developed a clue about how news works. Apparently not.
Media Research Center director of media analysis Tim Graham has had an extended transgender freakout over the past week:
The Media Research Center 
The Media Research Center loved New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd when she bashed the Clintons during the 1990s, but when she followed that by going after the Bush administration, they dismissed her as just another East Coast liberal -- Brent Bozell 
Tim Graham and Brent Bozell write in their July 2 
The headline on Katie Yoder's June 20 NewsBusters 
Brent Bozell and Tim Graham use their June 20 column to rant about the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office withdrawing trademark protection for the Washington Redskins, naturally blaming "the left, which has removed every moral objection to traditional understandings of profanity, continues its own crusade to ban words that violate their sensitivities on race, gender and sexual preference."
The Media Research Center's Katie Yoder wrote 
