Overt Operations

Maybe it was once-and-current executive editor Scott Hogenson's spending much of 2004 working for the Republican National Committee -- an interesting job to have given the disdain his compadres down the hall at the Media Research Center have had for news executive Rick Kaplan's (formerly of CNN and ABC, currently at MSNBC) ties to Democrats. You'd think that after (to cite just one example) the MRC's Brent Baker complained in August 2000 that "Kaplan has a history of liberal activism and Clinton friendship which have impacted his news judgment," the MRC would be more bothered that the head of its very own "news" organization has the kind of close ties to a political party that could impact his news judgment.

But it appears that the MRC, as evidenced by the return of Hogenson, wants its news product to be tainted with political bias. And it appears to be working out beautifully because that's exactly what Hogenson seems to be supplying.

CNS was conspicuously absent from the debate over Alberto Gonzales' nomination as attorney general and his connection as White House counsel to memos that appear to advocate ways to get around the Geneva Conventions regarding the use of torture on detainees. The last mention of the issue in relation to Gonzales was on Jan. 6, in a mix of balanced and biased stories. A mostly balanced overview of the issue is accompanied by an article devoted to Gonzales' testimony denying that he approves of torture and the text of Republican Texas Sen. John Cornyn's praise-laden introduction of Gonzales at the confirmation hearing, in which he insisted that "Judge Gonzales is being attacked for a memo he didn't write." (CNS did run a Jan. 5 story devoted to the concerns of a "liberal group" about Gonzales and the torture memos.)

Related article on ConWebWatch: Pros and Cons

Having done their duty by mentioning it, the torture issue never came up again before the Senate's vote on Gonzales' nomination. Two CNS stories, on Feb. 1 and 2 respectively, are dedicated to complaints -- by a Latino coalition and Republican officials, respectively -- that Democrats were obstructing Gonzales' nomination process. Neither of them mentioned the issue of the torture memos; the story on the Republicans paraphrases Cornyn as saying that "Gonzales' opponents will excoriate and abuse him for the sake of partisan politics." CNS, of course, is using biased stories to excoriate Democrats, also for the sake of partisan politics.

CNS' longstanding bias-in-labeling problem also continues. A Feb. 2 story describes the Oliver North-created group Freedom Alliance not as a conservative group, as one would expect given North's association and CNS' eagerness to label "liberal" groups as such, but merely notes that the group "describes its mission as promoting freedom, defending U.S. sovereignty, and maintaining a strong national defense."

Similarly, while another Feb. 2 story, about CBS News, describes its MRC parent as a group that "monitors liberal bias in the mainstream media," the group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting is described as a "liberal media watchdog." To be fair, MRC should have been described as "conservative," or FAIR should have been described as a group that "monitors conservative bias in the mainstream media."

CNS has also returned to its old ways in slanting stories on abortion. In a very long Feb. 7 story by Randy Hall about the idea that abortion is a "black genocide," the first time someone is quoted challenging the idea is in paragraph 32 of the 59-paragraph story. Additionally, the challeger's contentions are always rebutted, while many of the allegations made supporters of the idea stand without challenge.

All in all, what we've come to expect from CNS. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.