ConWebBlog: The Weblog of ConWebWatch

your New Media watchdog

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

Tuesday, February 28, 2023
WND Calls On Another Medical Misinformer To Help It Spread COVID Vaccine Misinfo
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Along with Peter McCullough, another of WorldNetDaily's favorite COVID misinformers is Robert Malone.  Bob Unruh help Malone spread more misinformation -- and spread misinjjformation about him in a Jan. 24 article:

Dr. Robert Malone, who invented the mRNA technology that was used for most of the COVID-19 shots, says he cannot support President Donald Trump for re-election as long as Trump defends the experimental shots.

Stop right there. Malone did not invent mRNA vaccines -- he merely did some research 30 years ago that helped contribute to their development. Unruh continued by quoting Trump both taking credit for the vaccines and raising questions about their safety:

The vaccinations were developed on a fast-track under Trump, after COVID-19 was unleashed in China and circled the globe, killing millions.

It was during an interview with "Real America's Voice" recently that Trump was asked about the COVID shots.

He said, "I was able to get something approved that, you know, that has proven to have saved a lot of lives. Some people say that I saved 100 million lives worldwide."

He also said there are concerns with the safety.

"You have to understand. There are the pros and cons…I never demanded anybody use it. I never had a mandate. And I think that's very important to know."

Unruh then moved toward ratcheting up the fearmongering and enlisting Malone in that effort:

Actually, the complications from the COVID shots still are being reported, and tens of thousands of deaths are being attributed to the shots.

Malone said he agreed with those who would not support someone backing the COVID shots.

"I shot a film segment designed to help DJT see the truth. No impact. As I said, it is with regret that I have to agree with Brian. This is different from Mikki’s point. This is DJT’s decision. I disagree," he said.

Weirdly, Unruh's article ends there -- no evidence is provided by either him or Malone that the vaccines are unsafe. This is a severely underbaked article published seemingly because it's easy stenography and can somewhat plausibly pass for an actual "news" piece.

By contrast, an article the same day by Peter LaBarbera stayed in the oven somewhat longer while treading the same fearmongering territory:

The FDA is now recommending Americans take annual COVID booster vaccines much like the flu shots that are made available every year, but selling that plan to a skeptical public will be increasingly difficult as doubts about the booster shots grow.

One prominent doctor said outside of people with multiple extreme health issues like obesity and diabetes, "nobody ... should take" the booster shots, and even those high-risk patients should "weigh the pros and cons" before getting injected.

LaBarbera oddly failed to identify that "prominent doctor" despite purporting to directly quote him. Instead, he cited more COVID misinformers:

The government's plan comes amidst widespread reports of unexplained, heart-related "sudden deaths" and serious cardiac incidents of young, mostly male Americans, including athletes — which prominent dissenters like Dr. Peter McCullough assert are most likely linked to the vaccines' myocarditis and blood-clot side effects.

In a video interview with Just the News, former Yale epidemiologist Dr. Harvey Risch, another high-profile critic of the government's "safe and effective" COVID vaccine narrative, said outside of people with "who have multiple, chronic" health issues, "I would say there's nobody who should take" the boosters.

"For people, say, over age 65 or 70, who have multiple, chronic conditions, maybe they're obese, they have diabetes, chronic heart disease, kidney disease, maybe they've had cancer — things like that — [for] those people, I think it's uncertain. The vaccines can do damage to those people, too, but the vaccines may actually provide some benefit, at least for some months, in reducing the risks of a more serious illness if they contract COVID. So I don't think the data are particularly clear as to the risk versus benefit, in a quantitative way, in those kind of people," he told Just the News' John Solomon and Real America's Voice in the interview posted today.

"For everybody else, there's no benefit of taking the booster. The booster has lost its efficacy for the new [COVID} substrains that are circulating now. ...So it's already uncalibrated for what's circulating, and that means its efficacy as a booster is less," he said. "But still the original component of it and the generic value of it as a booster ... provides benefit for some shortish period of time that might not be outweighed by the risks of the booster itself in high-risk people in the first place."

LaBarbera quoted no people who hwere not fringe anti-vaxxers to rebut McCullough or Risch. Instead, he cheered that "Americans are increasingly skeptical of the vaccines."

Posted by Terry K. at 5:32 PM EST
Updated: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 5:35 PM EST
Newsmax DirecTV Victimhood Watch: Slowing Down The Pace
Topic: Newsmax

Going into its fifth week of victimhood over getting dropped by DirecTV, Newsmax surprisingly slowed down the pace of proclaiming itself to be a victim. It published no attack articles at all on Feb. 22, andonly these on the following two days:

That's just eight articles in a three-day span -- a drastic slowdown from its pace of more than 50 articles a week in the first four weeks after it was dropped. With these articles, Newsmax has published at least 213 articles complaining about DirecTV's decision since it was dropped on Jan. 25.

Newsmax also continued to have columnists help make its case. Dishonest Catholic Bill Donohue had a very lazy rah-rah piece on Feb. 21, right down to directly and uncritically quoting its talking points:

On Jan. 25, the same day Newsmax announced it had been unjustly sacked by the AT&T-owned DirecTV, this writer called on Catholics to rally to its side.

Subsequently, this writer was followed by a host of prominent Americans who registered their criticism of DirecTV, many of whom called for a boycott.

Politicians, corporate leaders, TV personalities, sports figures, actors, lawyers, religious leaders — a Who's Who of American public figures — lambasted DirecTV, calling on them to carry Newsmax again.

Also contact your representatives in Congress.

That's it. No, really.

Ralph Benko put in more effort in his Feb. 23 column, but he slavishly stuck to the corporate line:

Yes, as a weekly Newsmax contributor, I’m loyal to Newsmax. That said, "By the pricking of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes," to quote William Shakespeare and Agatha Christie. 

Per Newsmax:

"DirecTV pays cable license fees to all top 75 cable channels and to all 22 liberal news and information channels it carries.

"Almost all of these channels are paid hefty license fees significantly more than Newsmax was seeking — and despite the fact that most of the channels have much lower ratings than Newsmax.

"This is a blatant act of political discrimination and censorship against Newsmax," Christopher Ruddy, founder and CEO of Newsmax said.

The ejection of Newsmax by DirecTV carries a certain aroma of microaggression.

Benko censored the fact that DirecTV replaced Newsmax with another right-wing channel, The First, meaning that there is no viewpoint censorship. That didn't stop him from whining on his publisher'sbehalf, or from endorsing government interference into a private business decision:

ATT, of course, has the right to choose what to carry. That said, Mr. Market, so much more ruthless than federal regulators, will have the last word.

And, despite my devotion, as an ordoliberal, to free markets, those members of Congress who have raised vociferous objections to DirecTV’s exile of Newsmax have a legal and constitutional hook well worth exploring.


ATT, DirecTV’s mothership, enjoys billions of dollars of contracts with the federal government. If, following congressional investigation, ATT’s subsidiary’s exile of Newsmax turns out based on credal discrimination, smells like a violation of the spirit, at least, of federal anti-discrimination rules.

A congressional finding of credal discrimination should invite immediate remedial action by DirecTV… rather than inviting Uncle Sam to deliver a message, good and hard, by canceling a few billion dollars of ATT’s opulent government contracts.

We thought conservatives hated government interference in private busineess decision. Not if they can use them to advance an agenda, apparently.

Posted by Terry K. at 1:26 PM EST
CNS Keeps Up Lazy 'Meathead' Insults of Rob Reiner

Like its Media Research Center parent, has a penchant for lazily trying to dismiss anything Rob Reiner has to say by callling him "Meathead" -- a role he hasn't played in more than four decades, never mind that he has since had an acclaimed career as a film director. It has continued to do so over the past year.

A February 2022 article (anonymously written, of course) grumbled that Reiner, "the actor who played 'Meathead' on 'All in the Family,' sent out a tweet on Wednesday claiming that former President Donald Trump 'has committed the single worst crime in presidential history'" by triyng to overthrow the government. An Aug. 29 article by Craig Bannister -- which highlighted how TV host Bill Maher "sparred with radical liberal activist and Hollywood mogul Rob Reiner" -- was the only one of these to carry a byline and the only one to refrain from calling Reiner "Meathead."

An anonymously written Nov. 16 article referring to "‘Meathead’ Rob Reiner" in the headline groused:

Actor Rob Reiner, who played Michael “Meathead” Stivic on “All in the Family” has sent out a series of tweets over the last three days calling for Attorney General Merrick Garland to indict former President Donald Trump.

“Hey, remember when Donald Trump stole highly classified documents?” said a tweet that Reiner re-tweeted on Nov. 13.

Reiner followed-up that re-tweet with a tweet said: “After the Dec. 6 runoff, there is absolutely no reason for Merrick Garland not to Indict Trump for Stealing Top Secret Classified Government Documents. To strengthen Democracy, it must be done."

CNS kicked off 2023 with a couple more lazy hits on Reiner. An anonymously written Jan. 25 article referred to "Rob ‘Meathead’ Reiner" in the headline:

Rob Reiner, who played Archie Bunker’s son-in-law Meathead on “All in the Family,” sent out a tweet earlier this month declaring his opinion that “Donald Trump is a pathologically lying criminal.”

This was only one in a series of tweets in which Reiner attacked Republicans generally and Trump specifically.

And there was anonymously written "Rob ‘Meathead’ Reiner" article on Feb. 16:

Rob Reiner, the actor who played Archie Bunker’s son-in-law “Meathead” on “All in the Family,” sent out a tweet on Tuesday obscenely expressing his view of former Vice President Mike Pence.

“So Pence is fighting the DOJ subpoena to testify about the Jan. 6 insurrection,” said Reiner. “Guess he feels more comfortable flying up Trump’s a** than helping to save democracy.”

In a preceding tweet that he also sent out on Tuesday, Reiner went after Trump.

“On January 6, 2021, Donald Trump led a violent attack on the United States Capitol in an attempt to overthrow the Government,” said Reinter. “If he is not indicted for that, he will have succeeded.”

In fact, Trump did not go to the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Trump did not need to go to thte Capitol when his speech beforehand sufficiently incited the crowd.

That was the only pushback on Reiner in any of these articles. There was also no explanation of why CNS (not to mention the MRC)  specifically attacks tweets from Reiner when ignoring him might be a more prudent path -- unless, of course, it thinks Reiner is easy clickbait, which makes CNS even lazier than we thought.

Posted by Terry K. at 12:16 AM EST
Updated: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 12:31 AM EST
Monday, February 27, 2023
MRC Lashed Out At Anyone Who Praised Biden's State of the Union Address
Topic: Media Research Center

Before President Biden's Stateof the Union address, the Media Research Center was in prebuttal mode, as exemplified in a Feb. 7 post by Nicholas Fondacaro:

Hours ahead of President Biden’s Tuesday State of the Union address, the ladies of ABC’s The View shared their demands for what they wanted him to talk about. But their shrieking was willed with disinformation, misinformation, and lies about what was going on in the country, and smears against Republicans. So, NewsBusters thought it was pertinent to address and debunk the poison they were pumping into the public discourse.

Racist Whoopi Goldberg kicked off the segment by boasting that Biden would give the address with “historically low unemployment, more jobs with higher wages, lower gas prices, and less inflation than the previous months.”

FACT CHECK: Misleading. Workforce participation was still below pre-pandemic levels, gas prices had been going up again as well the fact they’re far above what they were when Biden took office, and inflation (which was way up since Biden took office) was still hurting Americans and would continue to hurt for some time.

Focusing on workforce participation instead of unemployment rates to make Biden look bad? That's a trick Fondacaro picked up from his employer's "news" division, He's also following in the narratives of his employer by blaming Biden for higher gas prices despite naming no policy that could be directly tied to them.

After the address, Kevin Tober tried desperately to set up an anti-Biden narrative by insisting that he was "bitterly partisan and divisive":

In the immediate aftermath of President Joe Biden’s bitterly partisan and divisive State of the Union address, MSNBC host Alex Wagner went after House Speaker Kevin McCarthy for not showing enough allegiance to the left’s latest obsessions like the war in Ukraine and “democracy” at home and abroad. Wagner was outraged that McCarthy didn’t stand up when he clapped for Biden’s applause lines and went after his House members as being against democracy and wanting to “subvert the will of the people.”

Of course, the actual partisan and divisive people at the address were the right-wing Republicans who petulantly heckled Biden. Fondacaro tried to play cleanup by playing whataboutism:

Immediately following the conclusion of President Biden’s State of the Union address, the commentary cast of CBS News attempted to clutch their pearls into diamonds as they decried heckling of Republicans in the chamber. Ignoring how Democrats routinely used former President Trump’s address to protest, heckle make statements, and tear up his speech, the Biden-friendly network declared Republicans “chaos entrepreneur[s].”

“Speaker Kevin McCarthy is trying to present a new image, standing on many occasions but there were a lot of disruptions from the crowd,” huffed CBS Evening News anchor Norah O’Donnell.

Chief White House correspondent Nancy Cordes framed the heckling as something only Republicans do at these addresses:

Kevin Tober lashed out at a person who committed the offense of saying something nice about Biden:

During the midnight hour of MSNBC’s State of the Union address coverage, pseudo-historian Michael Beschloss made a fool of himself during his analysis of Biden’s speech. After being asked by MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle what he thought of Biden’s speech, Beschloss declared Biden to be “Mr. Smooth.” Biden is many things, but everyone can agree that smooth isn’t one of the adjectives most Americans would use to describe him. 

“That was a wonderful speech. Didn't you think he was sort of Mr. Smooth? This guy’s been in national politics for 50 years. You don't always see the result of that, but you sure saw it tonight,” Beschloss proclaimed. 

“He was elegant, he was civilized, he was conciliatory, he was reasonable, and maybe most of all, he sounded like a centrist, which is exactly where he wants to be,” Beschloss added. 

It's unclear what speech he was watching but it’s safe to assume that he wasn’t watching Biden’s State of the Union address. Since Biden’s speech was extremely divisive and partisan, and at times incoherent.

Tober clearly knew he had to woprk in that "bitter and partisan" narrative, though he cited the highly biased and partisan Daily Caller to back up the claim.

Alex Christy further whined at another non-right-wing outlet that wasn't following the right-wing media narrative:

Amid plenty of laughter from the panel, MSNBC Morning Joe co-host Joe Scarborough’s Wednesday reaction to the State of the Union was more cathartic group therapy than serious analysis as he wasted no time in calling Republicans “stupid” and “the dumbest political party that’s ever existed” while labeling them “jackasses” for daring to object to President Biden’s lie about them cutting Social Security and Medicare.

Morning Joe kicked off the program with a highly and selectively edited montage of Biden’s speech as well as Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders’s response. The quick edits made it look like Biden was an uplifting unifier while Sanders was a bitter divider.

Of course, Sanders’s whole job was to provide a rebuttal to Biden’s self-congratulatory speech and five second clips can be deceiving, but facts were in short supply as co-host Mika Brzezinski led off, “Very different tones last night between President Biden’s mostly optimistic looking State of the Union—”

An overly theatrical Scarborough then interrupted, “Wait, wait, wait! Can't anybody play this game! Why is my former party so stupid?”

Brzezinski then tried to claim that Biden plaid Republicans like a fiddle, “he fed it to them and they – boop.”

Curits Houck served up the same tone about another non-right-wing show:

ABC’s Good Morning America pitched a torrent of slobber Wednesday over President Biden’s 2023 State of the Union address, gushing over Biden as “fired up and fiery” offering “a message of hope” in “one of the best speeches” ever with the White House “riding high” against raucous” Republicans who were bitter”, childish, and “rude” in “jeering” Dear Leader.


[Correspondent Mary] Bruce framed Biden as the statesmen and not the taunter, saying he started “with a hand extended across the aisle” even though Republicans replied with “outbursts.” In response, she bragged that Biden “seiz[ed] the moment to turn the tables on Republicans trying to get them to commit” to protect entitlements.

Houck similarly attacked another morning show a couple hours later for not adhering to right-wing narratives:

While ABC’s Good Morning America was swooning over a “fired up and fiery” President Biden’s “message of hope” in his State of the Union address, NBC’s Today was similarly at a fever pitch of enthusiasm Wednesday as they proclaimed the “[made] an appeal for...unity” to an “unserious” Republican Party that created a “spicy” atmosphere inside the House chamber.

Co-host Savannah Guthrie came off like a state-run news reader, boasting in the opening tease that “Biden deliver[ed] his message to Congress and the American people” and “urg[ed] the parties to come together to finish the job in a boisterous House chamber.”

Again: The MRC's rage is solely partisan, becaue it can't handle anyone in tihe media saying anything nice about a Democrat and because it believes that all news should have the same right-wing bias as Fox News. Speaking of which, MRC chief Brent Bozell ran to Fox Business to push that anti-Biden narrative because he knows he will never be challenged on it:

Media Research Center Founder and President Brent Bozell joined the Wednesday edition of the Fox Business Network’s Varney & Co. to analyze the media’s over-the-top praise of President Joe Biden’s State of the Union Address. 

Substitute host Ashley Webster aired highlights of journalists hailing Biden’s performance with the likes of CNN’s Jake Tapper claiming Biden seemed “invigorated from the address.” 

Webster turned to Bozell and inquired: “Well into his eighties. I think he’s already there. Isn’t he? Brent Bozell joins me now. Brent? Did that speech invigorate you?”

Bozell had fun mocking the media’s feeble attempts to prop-up Biden: “Invigorated is code word for not senile....He’s into his eighties. He’s invigorated. Which means….the defibrillator worked, he’s alive.”

Bozell then offered what the media’s take should have been, if they weren’t so in the tank for this administration:

Apparently Bozell does not consider Fox News to be part of "the media," because he offered no critique of its biased coverage. Further, Bozell's interviewer was so in the tank for Bozell that he served up a softball that allowed Bozell to rehash the MRC's conspiracy theory about the election being stolen from Donald Trump because not enough people purportedly knew about Hunter Biden's laptop: "National surveys show had they known 9.4 percent would not have voted for him, Donald Trump would have won 317 electoral votes, would have won an absolute landslide. This is dynamite! This is kryptonite for the Democrats and for Joe Biden." That conspiracy theory is based on polls it bought from Trump's 2020 election pollster and the polling firm founded by Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway, so it is not remotely credible.

Posted by Terry K. at 9:49 PM EST
WND Helps McCullough Spread More COVID Misinformation
Topic: WorldNetDaily

One of WorldNetDaily's favorite misinformers about COVID and its vaccines is Peter McCullough, and it's still calling on him to help spread more misinformation. Peter LaBarbera wrote in a Jan. 21 article:

A world-renowned heart doctor and epidemiologist who has led the way in countering the government's "safe and effective" COVID-19 vaccine narrative says COVID shots and boosters are responsible for the "explosion" in sudden deaths of young people.

Dr. Peter McCullough of The Wellness Company studied the "sudden deaths" of young athletes over time and said there is no sensible explanation other than the often-mandated COVID vaccines for what he says is a tenfold increase in such tragedies since 2020. That is when the experimental mRNA (messenger RNA) vaccinations were launched.

The very accessible McCullough is the most visible among a band of dissenting doctors who have steadfastly resisted governments' and corporations' rigid COVID policies. For that, he has been heralded by conservatives the world over, with one Australian online broadcaster, Maria Zeee, calling him "the shining light in the darkness." In a typical interview, McCullough will cite a half-dozen scientific studies from memory. 

But McCullough is best known for misleading about the results of those studies, so maybe he shouldn't be trying to recall them from memory.

LaBarbera quickly moved toward complaining that McCullough's penchant for spreading misinmformation, which then moved toward reciting his resume -- both of which tells you that he's desperate to helpt the guy instead of reporting accurately on his history of spreading misinformation:

For this McCullough is despised by many on the left and routinely accused of spreading "misinformation," even by once widely-respected news operations like AP that seemingly have moved from holding government agencies accountable to joining forces with the state to squelch dissent.

But perhaps what McCullough's critics resent most is his uncanny ability through media to reach huge audiences and cite scientific studies to deconstruct the left's spin on COVID, as he most famously did in his December 2021 interview with podcaster Joe Rogan. McCullough writes on his Substack, "Courageous Discourse": "The total number of people impacted by the interview was in the many tens of millions or even more."

A short bio of Dr. McCullough on his personal website states, "He is an internist, cardiologist, epidemiologist, and the Chief Scientific Officer of The Wellness Company. ... Dr. McCullough is one of the most published cardiologists ever in America, with over 1,000 publications and 660 citations in the National Library of Medicine and is a recipient of the Simon Dack Award from the American College of Cardiology and the International Vicenza Award in Critical Care Nephrology for his scholarship and research."

The esteemed cardiologist has paid a heavy price for refusing to self-censor or tout the establishment line on COVID.

Again, LaBarbera is here to propagandize, not to report, so he switched back stenography mode again:

Fox News talk show host Laura Ingraham interviewed McCullough Jan. 12. Citing the cases of Jordan Tyler Brister, Hunter Brown, and Blaze Jacobs, she asked him a question that has been on a lot of people's minds: "Why does it appear like an inordinate number of young, healthy Americans are dropping dead?"

McCullough responded citing his and others' analyses of cardiac arrest incidents among players in European soccer leagues, both pro and semi-pro. He said that before COVID-19 vaccines, an average of 29 active players died from cardiac arrests per year. But "since the vaccines have been released, that number, now annualized from a universe of publicly reported deaths we reviewed, is now 283, nearly a tenfold increase. And we've also demonstrated a rising mortality in those under age 15."

He said there is a "straight line" correlation between the vaccines and the "explosion of death of young people."

Actually, there isn't. An autopsy of Brister, a Las Vegas high school student, found that he died of bacterial pneumonia with a secondary infection of tracheitis, exacerbated by asthma. The death of Brown, an Air Force cadet and football player, was the result of a blood clot caused by a leg injury from playing football.The death of Jacobs, also a high school student, was likely caused in part by a pre-existing heart condition.

LaBarbera followed with misinformation from McCullough: "Regarding the on-field collapse of Buffalo Bills Damar Hamlin, which has gripped the nation, he told Ingraham: 'Unless there's some emergence of [another] clear-cut cause, as a cardiologist, my conclusion would be that it's COVID-19 subclinical myocarditis until proven otherwise.'" There's no legitimate evidence that COVID vaccines caused any of this, but WND is fearmongering about it anyway.

Posted by Terry K. at 6:04 PM EST
MRC's Double Standard On Officials' Kids Getting Arrested
Topic: Media Research Center

The Media Research Center's Bill D'Agostino complained in a Jan. 24 post:

Broadcast networks ABC, CBS, and NBC have been silent about the arrest of Jared Dowell, the adult child of Congresswoman Katherine Clark (D-MA), for allegedly assaulting a police officer during a riot. Since the arrest late on Saturday, January 21, none have spent even a second of airtime on the incident, despite Clark being the second-highest ranking Democrat in the House of Representatives.

MRC analysts examined the flagship morning and evening newscasts between January 22 and January 24 on all three broadcast networks (excluding evening newscasts on January 24; which this piece will be updated to include when they occur). During that time, neither Clark nor her child was mentioned at any point.

As far as liberal cable networks go, MSNBC was also silent on the incident. Meanwhile, CNN acknowledged the arrest twice on Monday, for a total of two minutes and 12 seconds of coverage.

Note that D'Agostino made sure not to mention how Fox News covered Dowell's arrest, presumably because it would demonstrate just how biased Fox News is.

Also worth noting -- since D'Agostino won't -- is that the MRC has completely censored any mention that L. Brent "Zeeker" Bozell IV, the son of leader Brent Bozell III, was arrested more than two years ago over his participation in the Capitol riot. That's right -- this legitimate news has been censored from the MRC's readers for two years.

Maybe D'Agostino could talk to his boss about why that story has been censored across all MRC platforms before he accuses others of being "silent" about something.

Posted by Terry K. at 1:45 PM EST
NEW ARTICLE: CNS Managing Editor's Gay-Bashing Beat
Michael W. Chapman has spent the past couple of years making sure hatred for LGBTQ people is a key part of CNS' "news" coverage. Read more >>

Posted by Terry K. at 1:04 AM EST
Sunday, February 26, 2023
MRC Tries To Control Language On Abortion To Preserve Anti-Abortion Bias
Topic: Media Research Center

The Media Research Center has spent the past couple of months fighting a nomenclature war over abortion. Tim Graham spent a Dec. 7 post complaining that the Associated Press is listening to actual doctors to more accurately define its terms:

The Associated Press sells itself to news clients with the motto "Advancing the Power of Facts." But the AP Stylebook -- which instructs reporters on which terms to use or not use -- has grown increasingly counter-factual. In July, the AP Stylebook commissars bowed to the transgender lobby: "A person’s sex and gender are usually assigned at birth by parents or attendants and can turn out to be inaccurate."Don't look at an actual human body. Feelings trump facts. 

On Tuesday, in a bow to the abortion industry, AP is suggesting that having an abortion late in pregnancy should not be described as a late-term abortion.


How on earth does a "late-term abortion" start at 41 weeks? Most would think of it as a third-trimester abortion, or as a post-viability abortion. 

Graham offered no evidence that anyone has ever had an abortion at 41 weeks. Instead, he cited a biased anti-abortion website (which he euphemistally called "pro-llife")to attack the organization of actual doctors on whose guidance the AP is basing its changes on, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists:

The pro-life website criticized AP for relying on an activist source. "ACOG is a pro-abortion group. As a supposedly unbiased news source you shouldn't rely on partisan groups to determine your terminology," it tweeted in reply. They added: "Thousands of doctors have left ACOG because it has become an abortion advocacy group. It lost its prestige years ago."

But AP lingo and Planned Parenthood's wishes seem linked. The AP Stylebook account also tweeted: "Instead, use the term 'abortion later in pregnancy' if a general term is needed, but be aware that there are varying definitions of the time period involved. Be specific when possible."

When NBC correspondent Andrea Mitchell pointed out that "pro-life" is not an accurate description of the anti-abortion movement -- given its almost exclusive focus on restricting and outlawing abortion -- Alex Christy lashed out in a Jan. 12 post:

MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell went full partisan activist on her Thursday show as she scolded Capitol Hill Correspondent Garrett Haake for using the term “pro-life” when discussing Rep. Nancy Mace because that is not an accurate description.” Additionally, throughout the segment, Mitchell would illustrate glaring hypocrisy and omitted key facts when denouncing Republicans on abortion.

Mitchell wasted no time in getting to dishonesty, “And the House's passage of two anti-abortion bills Wednesday, despite a majority of Americans saying abortion should be legal.”

Christy tried to defend those bill, insisting that "neither bill banned abortion," but didn't mention that incrementalism -- slowly ratcheting up abortion restrictions over time -- has been a key component of the anti-abortion movement. Christy the noted that Haake referenced an anti-abortion congresswoman as "pro-life":

It was at this point that Mitchell interrupted, “Garrett, let me—let me just interrupt and say that pro-life is a term that they -- an entire group wants to use, but that is not an accurate description.”

Haake defended himself by simply pointing out, “I'm using it because that's the term she used to describe herself, Andrea,” to which Mitchell responded, “I understand. I understand. Anyway, that was her explanation.”

Of course, “anti-abortion,” is also a label “an entire group wants to use” and Mitchell and much of the media sees no problem simply regurgitating that. Many pro-lifers would also take issue with the label “pro-choice,” arguing the label “pro-abortion” is more accurate. Why should only one side get to insist on journalists using their preferred language?

Again, anti-abortion activists are almost exclusively defined by their opposition to abortion, so "anti-abortion" is a perfectly accurate term. (Also note that Christy did not defend the accuracy of "pro-life"; and was just mad that it was criticized.) By contrast, pro-choice activists do not force anyone to have an abortion; they simply want that option to be available.

Clay Waters raged in a Jan. 24 post that PBS guest Nia-Malika Henderson referenced the "so-called pro-life movement":

When host Yamiche Alcindor later asked her about the March for Life and the “new sort of battlefield” around abortion, she responded with hostile labeling of the pro-life movement.

Henderson: ….In terms of politically I think you’re going to see in 2024, the so-called pro-life movement, they are going to try to put up a candidate that wants to have a federal abortion ban. In terms of I think the pro-choice movement, you saw I think a kind of renewed commitment to the pro-choice movement and the pro-choice situation in Roe v. Wade in a way that I think Democrats and liberals weren’t so fiercely proponents of abortion….

So the “so-called pro-life” movement is dubious, but the “pro-choice movement” is simply who they say they are?

Like Christy, Waters didn't bother to defend the accuracy of the "pro-life" term.

Tierin-Rose Mandelburg had her own AP Stylebook-related meltdown in a Feb. 6 post:

Yet again, the Associated Press style guide is pandering to the woke, leftist mob.

The Daily Signal noticed that AP changed its rulebook to get rid of the phrase “Crisis Pregnancy Centers” and instead use “Anti-Abortion Clinics.”

But rather than offer any sort of logical defense, she read propaganda straight from the anti-abortion playbook:

The guide describes centers that don’t provide abortions as places that are “set up to divert or discourage women from having abortions.” Coming from someone that volunteers at one every week, I can assure you, that’s far from true.

Most pregnancy resource centers provide pregnancy tests and educational resources on options for pregnant women. They often also provide things like baby clothes, diapers, car seats and even items for pregnant and new mothers themselves. These centers look to empower and assist women, and encourage them that encourage them that killing their child is not the only way to succeed. 

They don’t and never have claimed to offer abortions. That’s just not something they conduct at their facilities. They’re clear about that and are in no way “dissuading” or “diverting” people. They’re actually likely the only honest ones when it comes to pregnancy “clinics." Unlike abortion mills, they have no financial incentive.

Mandelburg dishonestly refused to admit that all of this is, in fact, in the servicee of diverting and discouraging women from having abortions -- which, yes, makes the AP's new terminology completely accurate.There's also ample evidence that these centers engage in manipulative and deceptive practices to discourage abortion, and there are often strings attached to the services they offer women, such as attempts at religious indoctrination.

Mandelburg won't tell you any of that, of course, because she's too busy being an anti-abortion propagandist -- as is the rest of the MRC.

Posted by Terry K. at 9:45 PM EST
Updated: Sunday, February 26, 2023 9:56 PM EST
CNS Cranks Out Attacks On Abortion Medication

We've noted how has promoted a right-wing effort to ban mifepristone abortion pills, and it has continued to launch attacks on them. After the Food and Drug Administration ruled that abortion pills could be obtained from pharmcists, a Jan. 4 article by managing editor Michael W. Chapman called on anti-abortion activists (which not honestly labeled as such) to fearmonger about them:

Abby Johnson, a former Planned Parenthood director who now advocates for life, said in a statement, "I've had two abortions and one of them was the abortion pill -- it was horrific. I was alone, in immense pain, and bleeding profusely."

"The thing is, it almost doesn't even matter that the FDA is allowing the abortion pill to be more widely available because the women aren't seeing a doctor either way," said Johnson.  "They aren't having ultrasounds and some aren't even verifying they are pregnant."

"While the abortion lobby will say this move is a huge step forward for women, it's only a step forward for them and for those who manufacture the abortion pills because it means more money for them while throwing women under the bus," added Johnson. 

Some of the potential side effects of Mifeprex include fatal infection and prolonged heavy bleeding, according to the product's label.

A Jan. 18 article by Spencer J. Fairfield promoted how "Twenty-two U.S. attorneys general have sent a letter to the FDA regarding its new policy that allows the abortion pill, mifepristone, to be sold in pharmacies, stating this is an abandonment of 'commonsense restrictions,' and is 'illegal and dangerous.' In the past, the drug could only be obtained directly from a physician and had to be ingested in the doctor’s presence." Fairfield censored the fact that all of these attorneys gheneral are Republican. Fairfield followed up with a Jan. 23 article hyping an anti-abortion doctor fearmongering about the pill:

At the 50th Annual March for Life on Jan. 20, Dr. Ingrid Skop, a Texas OB/GYN who has delivered more than 5,000 babies, shared her knowledge about the dangers of chemical abortion drugs (mifepristone). Skop told CNSNews that the FDA’s decision to allow abortion pills to be sold in retail pharmacies is “clearly politically driven,” and that “the FDA is basing their decisions on studies that undercount complications.”

“It is clearly politically driven because every time the FDA has loosened restrictions on Mifepristone it’s been in a Democrat administration,” said Dr. Skop. “But the other thing that’s happening, the abortion industry publishes studies to promote their product.”

“They will usually say it’s 99 or 98 percent effective, but they are doing that based on flawed data,” said the doctor. “Because, again, they are only talking about the women they know of that had a complication. But if the women do not come back to them, if they come to me (or other OBGYNs) nobody knows about those complications. So, the FDA is basing their decisions on studies that undercount complications.”

Fairfield refused to interview anyone who contradicted Skop's biased view. In a Feb. 3 article, Fairfield exploited a woman's death to fearmonger about the pill:

It was reported this week that a 19-year-old Canadian woman died on July 4, 2022 apparently after using the abortion drug, Mifegymiso, the brand name for mifepristone. Pete Baklinski, director of communications at Campaign Life Coalition in Ottowa, said that Canada’s healthcare system should declare that medication abortion in general is “an imminent hazard to public health.”

“This human pesticide is not only deadly to the smallest members of the human family, but to pregnant mothers as well,” said Baklinski. “The abortion pill must be immediately pulled from the Canadian market. Health Canada must declare it an imminent hazard to public health.”

Fairfield quoted only anti-abortion activists bashing the pill and censored evidence of the pill's safety, particularly compared with pregnancy.

It wasn't until a Feb. 24 article by Melanie Arter that CNS gave significant space to arguments in favor of mifepristone:

Vice President Kamala Harris said Friday that pro-life efforts to prevent access to the abortion drug mifepristone amounts to “‘an attack on the very foundation of our public health system.”


“That medication is called mifepristone. It is a drug that is used to perform medication abortion,” the vice president said.

“It is FDA approved and was approved 20 years ago, after a strenuous peer-reviewed process of determining that it is safe and appropriate for its intended use, but there are now partisan and political attacks attempting to question the legitimacy of a group of scientists and doctors who have studied the significance of this drug,” Harris said.

"There is now an attempt by politicians to remove it from the ability of doctors to prescribe and the ability of people to receive,” she said.

Unlike with stories focused on anti-abortion activists, Arter made sure to note anti-abortion activists criticizing the pill.

CNS also published commentaries from anti-abortion activists that attacked mifepristone without balance or pushback, such as a Jan. 9 commentary by  Lynne Marie Kohm maliciously described it as "chemical abortion." Dishonest Catholic Bill Donohue spent a Jan. 18 column attacking New York City Mayor Eric Adams for making available for free at one clinic in the city:

More important is where Adams decided to open his freebies abortion clinic. The first of four such clinics opened today in the Morrisania section of the Bronx, more generally known as the South Bronx.

Guess who lives there? Almost 6 in 10 are Hispanic and 36 percent are black. The white population is 3.2 percent and the figure for Asians is 0.6 percent. The poverty rate in New York City is 16 percent, but in the Bronx, the figure is 26.4 percent. In Morrisania it is 40.3 percent. Its serious crime rate is double the city average.

Some things never change. Why is it that liberals always favor black and brown neighborhoods to set up their abortion clinics? 

Yes, Donohue is accusing a black man of being racist against black people. that gave Donohue license to repeat a dcouple false anti-abortion tropes:

Rev. Dean Nelson, a black minister who directs Human Coalition Action, notes that “nearly 80 percent of Planned Parenthood’s surgical abortion facilities [are] located within walking distance to Black neighborhoods.”

It is undeniably true that the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was a notorious racist. The KKK must have been proud of her efforts to help abort black babies.

As we've documented, Sanger was not a "notorious racist," and most abortion clinics are locatd in white neighborhoods.

Another anti-abortion activist, Patty Knap, raged against increased availability of mifepristone -- a name she refused to use, instead calling it "abortion pills" instead -- in a Jan. 30 commentary wildly accusing the "abortion industry" of profiteering:

A crucial aspect of allowing pharmacies to sell abortion pills that has not been talked about very much is the wholesale elimination in the process of possible life-affirming intervention by pregnancy help organizations prior to a woman procuring a chemical abortion.

For the profit-motivated abortion industry, bypassing the very people prepared to help women choose life is a big win.

The abortion lobby has been determined to cut out in-person doctor visits for a woman to obtain abortion drugs to get dangerous abortion pills into the hands of pregnant moms faster before anyone can offer her help with her pregnancy. Abortion pills are also more profitable than surgical abortions because there is no brick-and-mortar-building and associated costs, or actual hands-on procedure involved.

Now President Joe Biden has come through for abortionists and granted their wish, with the FDA recently announcing that abortion pills can be sold at your neighborhood pharmacy.

This means that these abortions require neither a visit to the doctor nor even a pregnancy test.

Knap didn't explain how reducing doctor visits equates to profiteering. Instead, she expressed her real fear, that anti-abortion "crisis pregnancy centers" can't interfere in the process:

Many pregnancy centers throughout the country are purposefully located near abortion centers. Likewise, the people who pray at those abortion facilities offer the truth and real help to young moms heading inside for an abortion by encouraging them to instead visit the pregnancy centers. The compassionate efforts of both result in babies being saved and moms being spared a lifetime of agony.

Without the need to go in person to a Planned Parenthood or other abortion center, there’s no chance a pregnant mom has of seeing her baby’s ultrasound, no chance of hearing about available help, or hearing about couples who ready and eager to adopt.


Conversely, the significance of the life-affirming work of the nearly 3,000 pregnancy centers across the country cannot be overestimated, as thousands of lives are saved each year through their life-affirming intervention.

These life-saving interactions will be impeded with abortion pills available via a mere run into a corner drug store.

That declining opportunity to interfere seems to be what Knap really fears.

Posted by Terry K. at 10:42 AM EST
Saturday, February 25, 2023
MRC Manufactures Poll To Attack CNN
Topic: Media Research Center

The Media Research Center is buzarrely obsessed with constantly attacking CNN for pretty much any reason -- so much so that it feels it must manufacture reasons to attack it. It even bought a poll to bash CNN, as detailed in an anonymously written Jan. 6 post:

A new poll from the Media Research Center, conducted by McLaughlin & Associates, finds a majority (54%) of CNN viewers say they are now watching the network less than they used to, and most of those people (61%) agree that “one of the reasons I find myself watching CNN less often is because of its liberal/left-wing bias.”

CNN’s ratings collapse is well known; this summer, for example, its audience slipped to levels not seen in 22 years. “CNN is in a bad place,” one media executive told The New York Post in September. “The ratings are down really dramatically year over year.”

The Media Research Center poll demonstrates that CNN’s biased political coverage is a likely reason many of these viewers have been driven away.


People who reported watching less were then asked to react to the following statement: “One of the reasons I find myself watching CNN less often is because of its liberal/left-wing bias.” A majority (61%) said they agreed, including a majority of self-identified moderates and liberals (52% for each group), and a whopping 80 percent of conservatives.

The MRC didn't disclose that McLaughlin was Donald Trump's 2020 pollster, meaning that its work is highly biased and its fairness is in question -- as demonstrated further by the biased framing of the question. You might recall that McLaughlin was one of the pollsters the MRC hired to push its conspiracy theory that the 2020 election was stolen from Trumnp.

Alex Christy spent a Jan. 17 post bashing CNN for considering adding a comedian to its late-night coverage:

CNN’s new boss, Chris Licht, is looking to counter the narrative that late night comedy is dying by bringing a comedian to the network’s primetime lineup, Semafor reports.

Max Tani reports that, “CNN executives have floated names including Bill Maher, Trevor Noah, Arsenio Hall, and Jon Stewart, and have looked at other comedic news-focused talk shows for inspiration.”

Tani writes that of these names, Maher is probably the most realistic hire as Noah recently stepped away from The Daily Show, Stewart remains under contract by Apple, and despite having previous late night experience, Hall is not a serious candidate. CNN has already been in talks with Maher to use his Overtime segments. Both CNN and HBO are owned by Warner Bros. Discovery.

Christy then touted how CNN is emulating Fox News while trying to avoid acknowledging the fact that Greg Gutfeld is, in fact, a comedian:

FNC’s Gutfeld! dominating the traditional late night hosts may be another reason why Licht may seek to bring a comedian on board, according to Tani. But hiring simply another liberal would not make CNN stand out against its competitors like Gutfeld does and whether Maher could be accepted by the more politically correct CNN is an open question.

Licht hiring another liberal also challenges Licht’s own stated desire to make the network less partisan because there is no reason to believe CNN’s comedian will be less liberal than ABC, NBC or CBS’s.

In portraying Maher as a "liberal," Christy is ignoring how his employer has repeatedly touted Maher's right-wing leanings.

Posted by Terry K. at 11:04 AM EST
Updated: Saturday, February 25, 2023 11:07 AM EST
WND Columnist Gives 'Gifts' To Boost Trump
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Larry Tomczak began his Jan. 3 WorldNetDaily column by linking the Bible to the selective "Twitter files" releases:

One of the most obscure verses in the Bible has prophetic significance for 2023. It focuses on a bird as a carrier of sensitive information previously hidden.

"Do not revile the king even in your thoughts or curse the rich in your bedroom, because a bird of the air may carry your words and a bird on the wing may report what you say" (Ecclesiastes 10:16-20).

The legendary Twitter bird is one of the most recognizable logos worldwide. It symbolizes how quickly information can travel to impact multitudes.

Are you paying attention to the "Twitter Files"? Elon Musk has released damning evidence exposing how corruption in the top levels of the FBI and social media (Google, Twitter, Facebook), along with the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN and MSNBC aligned in deceptive practices to trash Trump and back Biden before the 2020 election.

Tomczak then claimed that the "revelation" of the files "can help our former president regain traction for the next election":

Winston Churchill, Bill Clinton ("The Comeback Kid") and just recently Benjamin Netanyahu (reelected prime minister in Israel) all lost their political "mojo" but re-calibrated to regain their footing. So can Donald Trump!

Scores who remain loyal to our former president sympathize with the nonstop pummeling he endures and refuse to conveniently forget his outstanding record of achievements against all odds.

Some want him to let go of 2020 "fraudulent election" claims and be more circumspect in his conduct. Many believe God is neither done with him nor wants to waste the gift of governance He gave him. We're not putting our trust in politicians or particular institutions but praying for influencers in government to stand courageously for righteousness.

In the meantime, I believe patriotic and principled conservatives should consider three presents for our former president who did so much for all of us in our quest to honor God in America and advance the Gospel.

the first of those "gifts" is prayer. The second is "understanding," which apparently translates into embracing his discredited election fraud lies becuase he supposedly believes them:

At the core of his being, Donald Trump sincerely believes that: 1) his loss to Biden in the 2020 election was due to fraudulent activity (covered up but increasingly being revealed); and 2) this injustice must be rectified, otherwise we jeopardize our Constitution and fair elections in America.

He seeks understanding from fair-minded, patriotic and principled Americans who seek to curb our country's decline. His core conviction is: "Our great Founders did not want and would not condone false and fraudulent elections."

I grant Mr. Trump understanding of his position, knowing the only path to resolution is to present hard evidence before the Supreme Court to rule on this issue. Wouldn't you want the same if you were he?

The third is "encouragement," because trump is just like the leader of Ukraine:

Time magazine announced its Person of the Year for 2022 was Ukrainian President Zelensky. He courageously has persevered against Russia's bellicose attempt to capture his country, assassinate him and decapitate their government.

Likewise, Mr. Trump has persevered against relentless attacks. Countless millions refuse to bail in his hour of need.

Tomczak concluded with a "personal appeal" to Trump begging him to read his defense:

"President Trump, I hope this commentary reaches you.

"On June 15, 2016, you descended on an escalator trip that changed America and catapulted you into nonstop attacks that would have crushed the overwhelming majority of people on planet Earth. You were like lightning in a bottle, and I thank you for persevering to champion America as a world leader once again.

"Your accomplishments are among some of the greatest for a first-term president in U.S. history. In campaigning I respectfully appeal that you run on your record contrasted with the disastrous free-fall we've all suffered with Biden! Stay focused and fan the flames of America's greatness!

"Billy Graham called socialism the 'religion of Satan.' Masses of Americans are clueless as to what's happening. How bad will things have to get before we wake from the induced complacency to see a turnaround and desperately needed spiritual awakening? Lead the way!

"Humble yourself. Ask God for guidance. Be accountable to godly leaders who can help you. We offer you our prayers, understanding and gratitude."

Who says being a Trump dead-ender isn't a cult?

Posted by Terry K. at 10:20 AM EST
Friday, February 24, 2023
The MRC's Loud And Lame War On NewsGuard Continues
Topic: Media Research Center

For the past couple of years, the Media Research Center has repeatedly attacked website-ratings service NewsGuard for committing the sin of pointing out how unreliable right-wing media is, demanding that outlets like Newsmax and OAN -- which are currently being sued for defamation by voting-tech firms Dominion and Smartmatic after they made false claims of ballot manipulation and election fraud -- be rated higher than they are. Despite all that whining, the MRC has never presented any evidence to argue that those right-wing media outlets be ranked higher than they are.

Well, the MRC's loud and lame war on NewsGuard is contining. Joseph Vazquez ranted in a Jan. 6 post

Discredited leftist website ratings firm NewsGuard has had a year to prove that its ratings system isn’t prejudiced against conservative media, but it’s failing miserably. A new analysis shows that liberal media outlets were rated 25 points higher on average than right-leaning media outlets illustrates how NewsGuard’s self-projection as a credibility gatekeeper is a complete joke.

MRC Free Speech America analyzed the NewsGuard ratings of media outlets based on a list compiled by AllSides that classified their “bias” on a left-to-right scale. The average NewsGuard score for the “left” and “lean left” outlets — which included leftist outlets like USA Today — was a “green shield” rating of 91/100. USA Today was embroiled in a scandal after former reporter Gabriela Miranda was found to have fabricated sources. While the average rating for “right” and “lean right” outlets — which included Fox News, The Daily Wire and New York Post — was a low 66/100. 

That’s a 25-point disparity. 

As we've noted, USAToday dealt with the situation with that reporter in a forthright manner by identified the problem and corrected the situation while explaining to readers what happened. By contrast, the MRC still has yet to make any sort of public statement about the Brent Bozell ghostwriting scandal or how one of its bloggers used white nationalist links to flesh out his posts. Also, AllSides is hardly an objective observer; it's a right-leaning fact-checker that uses sloppy labeling, and the MRC has previously praised it for leaning into its "liberal bias" narratives.

Vazquez continued:

NewsGuard’s bias has barely budged in over 365 days of ever-changing nutrition labels either praising or demonizing the “credibility” of news outlets. But NewsGuard as an organization is in no place to virtue-signal about “credibility” given that its CEO Steven Brill tried to cast the now-verified Hunter Biden laptop scandal as a Russian “hoax” just prior to the 2020 presidential election. Even after the emails from the laptop were verified, NewsGuard maintained perfect scores for outlets like Politico, The Washington Post and USA Today, which all interfered in the 2020 election by trying to bury the Biden family scandal as some kind of disinformation operation. 

Only in the right-wing bubble would refusal to report an unverified story be considered election interference. Note that Vazquez is blaming non-right-wing media for not parroting the story and not the New York Post -- a right-wing outlet that was in the tank for Trump's re-election in 2020 -- for failing to provide any sort of independent verification of the laptop story that would have elevated it above the October surprise-grade attack it clearly appeared to be. Vazquez clearly does not understand that it's good journalistic practice to not amplify an unverified story.

The worst thing Vazquez could apparenlty come up with regarding the Washingon Post's purported unreliablity is that it "was recently caught stealth-editing a report that falsely labeled journalists Matt Taibbi and Bari Weiss as “conservative.” The erroneous characterization came after both reporters’ separate coverage exposing the internal communications behind Twitter’s massive campaign to censor speech and ban former President Donald Trump." Vazquez offered no evidence to support his claim that Taibbi and Weiss are not conservative, and his description of them offering "separate coverage" of Twitter ignores the fact that both were hand-picked by Elon Musk to write about selective releases of internal Twitter documents to push a right-wing narrative of "censorship" under previous owners.

Vazquez again ranted that "BuzzFeed News continues to host the bogus January 2017 Steele dossier it published that made erroneous claims about alleged collusion between Trump and Russia. However, NewsGuard still gives the outlet a perfect 100/100 score" -- censoring the fact that BuzzFeed never claimed the dossier was accurate, told readers it was unverified and explicitly stated that it published the dossier "so that Americans can make up their own minds about allegations about the president-elect that have circulated at the highest levels of the US government."

Vazquez went on to attack USA Today again for an accurate fact-check on history:

In a so-called June 30, 2020, “fact-check”, the outlet tried deflecting from the historical fact that Democrats started the white supremacist Ku Klux Klan and were responsible for the Civil War by drawing a flimsy distinction between the Democratic Party and Democrats:

Historians agree that although factions of the Democratic Party did majorly contribute to the Civil War's start and KKK's founding, it is inaccurate to say the party is responsible for either.

The headline for the propagandistic fact-check was deceptive: “Fact check: Democratic Party did not found the KKK, did not start the Civil War.” The Democratic Party may not have officially started the Civil War, but the Confederacy was indisputably made up of strident Democrats, which USA Today arbitrarily glossed over to protect the left. In fact, one of the KKK’s founding members was Confederate veteran Nathaniel Bedford Forrest, a Democrat. But according to NewsGuard’s nutrition label, “[A]voids deceptive headlines” and “[g]athers and presents information responsibly.”

Note that Vazquez actually concedes that USA Today was correct by pointing out that the KKK was not "officially started" by the Democratic Party. He didn't explain how it was "propagandistic" to state something even he admits is accurate.

The results of MRC Free Speech America’s latest analysis are especially damning in light of NewsGuard’s latest expansion into rating TV shows. Variety reported Dec. 1 that NewsGuard’s ratings of “140 cable, streaming, and network television shows and networks will be available to advertising agencies, marketers, and others starting January 2, 2023.” NewsGuard’s TV show ratings are structured based on a 0-10 scale as opposed to the 0/100 scale used for websites. NewsGuard scored Fox News’s Tucker Carlson Tonight at rock bottom, giving the show a 0/10. NewsGuard claimed Carlson’s show “regularly advances false, misleading, and unsubstantiated claims on topics of importance such as COVID-19 and U.S. and international politics.”

By comparison, CNN’s Inside Politics received a NewsGuard rating of 9/10, because host John King supposedly provides “multiple viewpoints in his reports, mostly through his own summary of dissenting views on a story, and interviews with prominent Republican lawmakers, pollsters, and consultants.” But King is blatantly biased. For example, King and his panel recently used Trump’s dining with Ye (formerly known as “Kanye West”) and Ye’s guest, white supremacist Nick Fuentes, and the GOP’s quiet response to imply that Republicans are an anti-Semitic party that encourages hate crimes. King ignored the fact that Trump is transparently pro-Israel, while certain Democrats consistently spread anti-Israel rhetoric.

That's right -- just a few paragraphs after getting mad that USA Today wouldn't equate Democrats who founded the KKK with the entire Democratic Party, Vazquez got mad that the leader of the Republican Party hanging out with anti-Semites was elevated to reflect the entire Republican Party. Be consistent in your arguments, Joey! Also, one can criticize Israel without being anti-Semitic, and one can harbor anti-Semitic sentiments (Trump frequently invokes anti-Semitic tropes when talking about Jews) while also supporting Israel as part of a political agenda.

The MRC's anti-NewsGuard propagandagot repeated in a Feb. 6 podcast in which she declared that "I exposed NewsGuard and its checkered past of bias" by parroting her employer's earlier attacks. She even repeated one of the MRC's lamest attack lines: "NewsGuard also rated several Chinese Communist Party-controlled media outlets as more credible than independent American outlets such as One America News Network (OANN), Newsmax and LifeNews." Again, Newsmax and OAN are being sued for defamation, while anti-abortion proaganda operation LifeNews has reported numerous falsehoods.

Posted by Terry K. at 6:08 PM EST
Newsmax DirecTV Victimhood Watch
Topic: Newsmax

Newsmax is not going to stop playing victim over getting dropped by Newsmax, though the pace of self-victimization slowed a bit:

With these 14 articles, Newsmax has published at least 205 "news" articles attacking DirecTV for dropping it in the four weeks since it happened on Jan. 25. 

Newsmax's columnists similarly whined as well. Steve Levy complained in a Feb. 17 column:

But the best way the left believes it can defeat evil in the world is to shut down the few remaining safe spaces for open thought — one being Newsmax. So they pressured the corporate board rooms they now control to do their dirty work.

And spare me the nuance that this isn’t a First Amendment issue because DirecTV’s owner AT&T is a private company. While this isn’t a constitutional issue, the company’s actions are without question anathema to free expression as espoused by the aforementioned founders of western civilization.

Today's liberals supporting Newsmax’s canceling would be well served to look back at one of the most significant Supreme Court cases in America's history: National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie (1977).

Younger progressives may be surprised to learn that it was the ultra-liberal ACLU which led the fight< to allow a group of neo-Nazis to obtain a permit to march down Main Street.

They were wise enough to know that acquiescing to the banning of a group, even as vile as the neo-Nazis, could one day lead to the quelching of their own speech.

So today's liberals shouldn’t support Newsmax because they agree with its programming. They should support Newsmax because to do otherwise may one day make their own freedom of expression less viable.

You know, maybe portraying Newsmax as akin to persecuted neo-Nazis isn't the best analogy he could have used.

Jerry Newcombe similarly complained in a column the same day:

Free speech and a free press. It’s American as apple pie — or so it used to be.

In 1875, President Ulysses S. Grant, declared: “Let us all labor to add all needful guarantees for the security of free thought, free speech, a free press.”

But today the left seems to have free speech in America by the throat. We see this in the recent example of corporate giant AT&T cutting off the conservative network Newsmax from satellite distribution through DirecTV, about which I commented recently. This appears to the tip of the iceberg.

Both Newcombe and Levy failed to mention the fact that DirecTV replaced Newsmax with a different right-wing channel, The First, meaning that no viewpoint discrimination is going on here, or that Newsmax is readily available on streaming, meaning that its speech has not been abridged.

Posted by Terry K. at 3:31 PM EST
CNS Managing Editor Loves Putin For Hating LGBT People

Conventional wisdom says that if you share views with a murderous dictator who's currently waging war on a neighboring country causing the deaths of thousands, you should rethink those views. apparently is unaware that such conventional wisdom exists, because it's supporting Russian leader Vladimir Putin. It appeased Putin at the start of his war on Ukraine, and it continues to support him because he hates LGBT people at least as much as CNS does. Managing editor Michael W. Chapman, CNS' chief homophobe and longtime fan of Putin's anti-LGBT policies, uncritically gushed over Putin's latest crackdown a Dec. 12 article:

In an apparent attempt to strengthen the traditional Christian beliefs and practices of Russia, President Vladimir Putin signed into law on Dec. 5 legislation that will further ban pro-homosexual propaganda throughout the country. 

In 2013, a law was passed to protect children from pro-LGBTQ materials. The new law expands those provisions to people age 18 and older.

The law prohibits the promotion of LGBTQ materials in advertising, the media, online, and in books, films and cinema, reported the Daily Mail

It also prohibits the promotion of LGBTQ relationships or expressions that seek to depict homosexual couplings as normal. And it bans materials promoting pedophilia and gender transition.

Further, the law can be used to prevent "gay pride" marches or LGBTQ demonstrations. The legislation was approved by both legislative chambers before Putin signed it.

Chapman went on to approvingly quote Putin's favorite orthodox bishop (whom it has occasionally criticized for supporting Putin), Putin's favorite pro-war "philosopher," and ... Jesus:

In a sermon on homosexual marriage, Patriarch Kirill, head of the Russian Orthodox Church, said the trend of legalizing “gay marriage” is “a very dangerous sign of the apocalypse.” It “means people are choosing a path of self-destruction,” reported Fr. John Peck, the pastor of All Saints of North America Orthodox Church.


Russian political philosopher Alexander Dugin, speaking in August, said there is a spiritual war going on. 

"[W]e are Holy Russia, as His Holiness the Patriarch says, and we are confronted by forces of absolute global historical evil," said Dugin. "Hence, more and more often we are talking about Armageddon, the end times, and the Apocalypse. This is all taking place before our eyes. We are taking part in the final (maybe the penultimate -- no one knows) and very important battle. Without a spiritual, ideological, intellectual dimension, we cannot win."

In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus Christ says, "And whoever welcomes a little child like this in My name welcomes Me. But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. Woe to the world for the causes of sin."

A anonymously written Jan. 23 article (though one must assume that Chapman had a hand in it) cheered Putin bashing "Western elites" in a speech given five months earlier while he touted his illegal annexations of parts of Ukraine:

Russian President Vladimir Putin ave a major address on Sept. 30, 2022 in which he attacked what he called “the dictatorship of the Western elites,” whom he accused of rejecting the traditional family and pushing transgenderism.

Putin gave the speech to mark Russia’s annexation of four regions of the Ukraine—Luhansk, Kherson, Donetsk and Zaporizhia.

“Now they have completely moved to a radical denial of moral norms, religion, and family,” Putin said in his attack on Western elites.

“Such a complete denial of man, the overthrow of faith and traditional values, the suppression of freedom acquiring the features of a “reverse religion” [the opposite of what the religion is] – outright Satanism,” said Putin. “In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus Christ, denouncing the false prophets, says: By their fruits you shall know them. And these poisonous fruits are already obvious to people – not only in our country, in all countries, including many people in the West itself.”

The anonymous author offered no criticism or response, even though there was more than enough time to locate one.

A Feb. 21 article by Chapman served up more uncritical praise of Putin for raging against Western culture in general and LGBT people in particular:

In his speech before the Federal Assembly in Moscow today, Russian President Vladimir Putin criticized the Western powers, particularly the United States, about their ongoing "destruction of the family," and added that Russia will protect its children "from degradation and degeneration." 

“Look what they are doing to their own people," President Putin told a large crowd assembled in Gostiny Dvor, Moscow. "It is all about the destruction of the family, of cultural and national identity, perversion and abuse of children, including pedophilia, all of which are declared normal in their life." (Gostiny Dvor is a large exhibition center.)

"They are forcing the priests to bless same-sex marriages," said Putin.  "Bless their hearts, let them do as they please. Here is what I would like to say in this regard. Adult people can do as they please. We in Russia have always seen it that way and always will: no one is going to intrude into other people’s private lives, and we are not going to do it, either."

Chapman failed to mention that Putin's anti-LGBT laws do, in fact, intrude into people's private lives. Inatead, he included pictures of LGBT pride parades and President Biden officiating at the marriage of a same-sex couple and called out a Christian denomination that failed to hate LGBT people to his liking to advance Putin's narrative:

The Anglican Church, the Church of England currently is considering using "gender-neutral terms to refer to God," reported the New York Times. The Church of England also recently voted to bestow church blessings on homosexuals married in a civil court. 

Putin further said, “Millions of people in the West realize that they are being led to a spiritual disaster. Frankly, the elite appear to have gone crazy, and it looks like there is no cure for that. But like I said, these are their problems, while we must protect our children, which we will do. We will protect our children from degradation and degeneration.”

Chapman then cited a pro-Russia professor to help Putin basgh the U.S. for helping Ukraine:

John Mearsheimer, the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor at the University of Chicago, and a leading scholar of realpolitik, said "the United States has tied its own reputation to the outcome of the conflict" in Ukraine.

"President Joe Biden has labelled Russia’s war in Ukraine a 'genocide' and accused Russian President Vladimir Putin of being a 'war criminal' who should face a 'war crimes trial,'" said Mearsheimer in Foreign Affairs. "Presidential proclamations such as these make it hard to imagine Washington backing down; if Russia prevailed in Ukraine, the United States’ position in the world would suffer a serious blow.

Despite previous criticism of Kirill at CNS, Chapman has also praised him. An Oct. 13 article touted how Kirill said of Putin, "God put you in power so that you could perform a service of special importance and of great responsibility for the fate of the country and the people entrusted to your care." Chapman uncritically wrote in a Nov. 2 article:

Patriarch Kirill of Moscow, head of the Russian Orthodox Church, said that Russian President Vladimir Putin is a "fighter of the Anti-Christ," a view that is not surprising given that Putin has said he and Mother Russia are fighting against the "outright Satanism" of the West. 

Patriarch Kirill made his remarks about Putin in a speech opening the 24th Congress of the World Russian People's Council in late October, reported the Washington Examiner.

In addition to describing Putin as a "fighter of the Anti-Christ," the patriarch said that Russia is battling against a "unipolar world," globalism, and "the essence of this phenomenon is the creation in the world of conditions for the emergence of a sole ruler, who will be the Antichrist."

And, yes, Chapman went on to approvingly quote Putin ranting abaout Western culture again:

The Russian president also denounced gender ideology and sex-change surgery as manifestations of Western moral decay.

"Do we really want, here, in our country, in Russia, instead of 'mum' and 'dad', to have 'parent No. 1', 'parent No. 2', 'No. 3'? Have they gone completely insane?" said Putin. 

He continued, "Do we really want ... it drilled into children in our schools ... that there are supposedly genders besides women and men, and [children to be] offered the chance to undergo sex -hange operations? ... We have a different future, our own future."

On Oct. 26, Newsweek reported that Alexsey Pavlov, assistant secretary of the security council of the Russian Federation, calling for the "de-Satanization" of Ukraine, which, he claims, has been overrun by "hundreds of sects."

Chapman offered no criticism of Kirill or Putin, which tells us he approves of their actions.

Posted by Terry K. at 1:26 PM EST
Updated: Sunday, February 26, 2023 10:41 PM EST
NEW ARTICLE -- The MRC Flips Over Elon Musk, Part 7: Twitter File Fails
Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center's hyping of Elon Musk's selectively released "Twitter files" (and annoyance that non-right-wing outlets weren't biting) was joined by cheering how he suspended the Twitter accounts of journalists who criticized him. Read more >>

Posted by Terry K. at 9:55 AM EST

Newer | Latest | Older

Bookmark and Share

Get the WorldNetDaily Lies sticker!

Find more neat stuff at the ConWebWatch store!

Buy through this Amazon link and support ConWebWatch!

Support This Site

« February 2023 »
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

Bloggers' Rights at EFF
Support Bloggers' Rights!

News Media Blog Network

Add to Google