The national media watch group
Updated: 43 min 40 sec ago
Activists call on the New York Times to correct a faulty report on Venezuela-- and they do.
Today's New York Times has a piece about whether the Obama administration is as committed to a policy of "democracy promotion" as the Bush administration had been. To anyone familiar with US history of inhibiting and undermining democracies, the whole concept must seem rather absurd.
While the only questions regarding Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman's prosecution appear to be where and when, things were different when it came to prosecuting the institution that supported what Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director John Morton called "the lifeblood" of the Sinoloa Cartel's operations.
Is the Heritage Foundation really drifting away from its scholarly roots--or has it always been more of a corporate-funded right-wing lobby?
New York Times media columnist David Carr (2/24/14) seems to think the relationship between CNN and Piers Morgan was doomed from the start: It's been an unhappy collision between a British television personality who refuses to assimilate–the only football he cares about is round and his lectures on guns were rife with contempt–and a CNN audience that is intrinsically provincial. After all, the people who tune into a cable news network are, by their nature, deeply interested in America. That's a peculiar way to define "provincial"; surely one can be deeply interested in the United States and deeply interested in […]
Media comments after the Obama administration backed off attempts to cut Social Security benefits exhibited a curious notion about where the "middle" is and what "majority support" means.
How trustworthy are reports that "state-sponsored paramilitaries" are "shooting at anyone who seemed like he might be protesting" against the government of Venezuela?
David Gregory seemed to say that the science on climate change was settled. So why did he have a debate about whether climate change is happening? Plus MSNBC's Morning Joe cheers on its corporate parent, while Bill O'Reilly gives us one more example of why Fox News is so special.
Time cheers Mexico's president for 'saving' the country. But why is it that most Mexicans don't seem to care for his brand of market 'reforms'?
It tells you a lot about our media and society that no one even expects O'Reilly to apologize for his slur of the left.
How did MSNBC cover the mega-merger between its parent company and Time Warner cable? Hardly at all--except for a segment glorifying their boss.
Face the Nation host Bob Schieffer had a classic example of anti-populist populism.
Think the days of climate change 'false balance' are over? Think again.
New York Times columnist Tom Friedman once declared that he doesn't really bother understanding international trade agreements. But that doesn't stop him from writing about them.
On the show this week: The national media missed then tens of thousands who marched for social justice in North Carolina last weekend. Plus USA Today shows us that bad campaign reporting starts really early, and journalist David Sirota is exposing a peculiar funding arrangement at PBS. Watch:
The New York Times had a great piece of reporting about how a phony think tank can turn dollars into political influence. Unfortunately, the piece also included the usual but-the-other-side-does-it-too routine.
Politicians go out of their way to denounce whistleblowers and "leakers" whose revelations of classified data, they claim, have harmed national security. But it's always worth pointing out that the outrage is selective.
Michael Sam may have just announced to the sports world that he's a gay man, but it seems that it's the NFL itself that may be forced to come out of its closet.
Are cuts in food stamp benefits really good news to those receiving them?
Because it is a mere 1,000 days until the election, USA Today's Susan Page tries to predict the 2016 presidential campaign.