Posts tagged media bias
Posts tagged media bias
Gun crime has plunged in the United States since its peak in the middle of the 1990s, including gun killings, assaults, robberies and other crimes, two new studies of government data show.
Looks like the media, fear-mongers and low forehead sycophants have done a good job of snowballing the average citizen, so far.
…and no it isn’t over white wimmin with big booties this time.
Instead, Crazy Al “Race Baiter” Sharpton is now claiming that the Benghazi investigation is nothing more than a vast right wing conspiracy in order to bring down Hillary Clinton before the 2016 Presidential election.
No wonder he’s stuck working at MSNBC, the only place who pays lying ass liars more than them is Mother Jones, Think Progress and Media Matters.
Stick to the race baiting, Al, at least you have some expertise in that.
Wow. That sounds almost as bad as if someone took advantage of a horrific attack…oh…let’s say…a school shooting… to exploit the tragedy in order to smear..oh…let’s just pull out something like…hmmmm…legal gun owners, members of Congress, the NRA and even the constitutional rights of Americans.
Yeah, you might want to make sure you don’t have crap on your own face before you go flinging it at other people, you hacks.
Media may matter to these chuckleheads and their even more idiotic readers but, obviously, the truth or being a gaggle of mouth-breathing hypocrites doesn’t.
“The NRA is also in the business of helping bombers get away with their crimes.”
MSNBC never lets facts get in the way of their fear-mongering.
And the fact that they’re so blatantly ridiculous in their lies speaks volumes about the intelligence of the people who actually watch them.
I began by asking the AP’s national social issues reporter why he hadn’t been tweeting to AP coverage of the Gosnell trial. I had to ask a few times and then … there it was … finally …. a tweet on the Gosnell trial. Then he told me that the AP was covering the trial (which I knew, as I’ve critiqued it here). I reminded him that I was wondering why he hadn’t been tweeting to coverage of Gosnell. I asked him to correct me if I was wrong about his lack of tweets. He didn’t.
Then I decided, since tmatt has me reading the Washington Post every day, to look at how the paper’s health policy reporter was covering Gosnell. I have critiqued many of her stories on the Susan G. Komen Foundation (she wrote quite a bit about that) and the Sandra Fluke controversy (she wrote quite a bit about that) and the Todd Akin controversy (you know where this is going). In fact, a site search for that reporter — who is named Sarah Kliff — and stories Akin and Fluke and Komen — yields more than 80 hits. Guess how many stories she’s done on this abortionist’s mass murder trial.
Did you guess zero? You’d be right.
So I asked her about it. Here’s her response:
Hi Molly – I cover policy for the Washington Post, not local crime, hence why I wrote about all the policy issues you mention.
Yes. She really, really, really said that. As Robert VerBruggen dryly responded:
Makes sense. Similarly, national gun-policy people do not cover local crime in places like Aurora or Newtown.
So when a private foundation privately decides to stop giving money to the country’s largest abortion provider, that is somehow a policy issue deserving of three dozen breathless hits. When a yahoo political candidate says something stupid about rape, that is a policy issue of such import that we got another three dozen hits about it from this reporter. It was so important that journalists found it fitting to ask every pro-lifer in their path to discuss it. And when someone says something mean to a birth control activist, that’s good for months of puffy profiles.
But gosh darn it, can you think of any policy implications to this, uh, “local crime” story? And that’s all it is. Just like a bunch of other local stories the Washington Post also refuses to cover — local crimes such as the killing of Trayvon Martin and the killing of Matthew Shepard and the killing of students at an elementary school in Connecticut. Did the Washington Post even think of covering those local crime stories? No! Oh wait, they did? Like, all the time? Hmm. That’s weird. But did they cover them in terms of policy implications? Asking politicians for their views and such? Oh they did that, too? Hmm. So weird. Oh, and Sarah Kliff herself wrote one of those stories? Well, gosh, I’m so confused.
And what policies could possibly be under discussion with this Gosnell trial? Other than, you know, abortion clinic hiring practices? And enforcement of sanitary conditions? And laws on abortion practices that extend to killing live infants by beheading them? And the killing of their mothers? And state or federal oversight of clinics with records of botched abortions? And pain medication practices? And how to handle the racist practices of some clinics? And how big of a problem this is (don’t tell anyone but another clinic nearby to Gosnell was shut down this week over similar sanitation concerns)? And disposal of babies’ bodies? And discussion of whether it’s cool to snip baby’s spines after they’re born? And how often are abortion clinics inspected anyway? What are the results of inspections? When emergency rooms take in victims of botched abortions, do they report that? How did this clinic go 17 years without an inspection? Gosh, I just can’t think of a single health policy angle here. Can you?
I mean, God forbid we go big and actually discuss abortion policy in general — something Kliff is usually quite keen to do. (Here’s her 2010 piece for Newsweek headlined Remember Roe!)
MSNBC resident idiot, Melissa Harris-Perry, does it again….
This nimrod just doesn’t seem to recognize that when you’re in the Idiot Hole, it may be a good idea to stop digging.
First she tasted her over-priced high heeled shoe by making a comment that children don’t belong to their parents but, instead, belong to the ‘community’.
When that blew up in her face, she attempted to justify it by commenting on how certain groups were taken away from their parents by the “community’ she previously championed and were ‘re-educated’.
Obviously, someone hit her in the face with the Stupid Shovel so she was too dazed and confused to recognize that she was contradicting herself.
After shoveling so much runny crap into her pie hole, you’d think even someone with less than the combined intelligence of Lloyd Christmas and Harry Dunne would have the foresight to take a break from making themselves look like a complete boob for a while.
But, then again, we are talking about MSNBC.
Par for the course, Missy once again opened her “Ever Full Bag Of Dumb” and whipped out this sterling gem today:
Americans will always want some level of inequality, because it’s a representation of meritocracy. People who work hard and sacrifice and save their money and make major contributions — we think that they should earn a little more. They should have more resources, and that’s fine. But we also, however, have to have a floor under which nobody falls. And if you’re below that — especially if you’re a child and you’re below that — we are not going to accept that. You do have the the right to health care, and to education, and to decent housing and to quality food at all times.
No, Melly. There is not a floor that no one falls under. Unfortunately for some, they are going to fall. They are going to fail. And guess what? That will be their fault.
America provides everyone with the opportunity to succeed-to make something more of themselves than the position they were born into. However, to rise above that mythical floor you cry about, that takes hard-damn hard work. It takes perseverance and a whole lot of sweat, tears, blood and elbow grease. It’s not just going to be handed to you unless you were fortunate enough to be born into a wealthy family.
If people fail, it’s because of their own lack of determination and desire. Not everyone can be a college graduate. Not everyone can be a movie or sports star. Not everyone can be a technological genius. But everyone can be a success in their own way….if they really want it.
By patting people on the head and feeding them crumbs so you can feel better about yourself and can brag to your friends about how you “helped the helpless” you are doing nothing but making the people you supposedly want to help less-determined and more dependent on handouts…which is a sure-fire way to stuff them under that floor you claim you don’t want them falling under.
I know this is hard to accept, Miss, but some people are just losers and will always will be. All you do by pretending to support them and feeding them handouts paid by others is prolonging their misery.
Also, dingy, people do not have a right to healthcare, education, housing or food.
If you want those things then, like everyone else, you need to work for them and provide them for yourself.
Fortunately, public education (for what it’s worth) is provided by tax payer dollars so people can take advantage of that but, again, guess what? You can send every kid and young adult to the best Ivy League school in the nation but if they don’t want to do the work (there’s that pesky word again!) they won’t succeed. You know…just like in life.
It’s one thing if someone who is willing to work and provide for their family falls on hard times. Then by all means, lend a hand and help them out….for a short amount of time.
But when people make the decision to give up, drop out, and just be useless leeches on the belly of society, it’s time they learn to either sink or swim.
Either way they go, society will be better for it.
Anyway, Melissa, I think it’s time you took a vacation from Dumbass Land.
Liberal political commentator, Kirsten Powers
Too bad more liberals didn’t believe in being as forthright as Kirsten.
What do you know! Not only is MSNBC’s resident race whore, Toure’, a chuckle headed monkey humper, but he’s also a 9/11 Truther fruitcake.
..got all bent out of shape when Breitbart reported on B-Rock’s daughters going on a fun-filled, taxpayer paid vacation in the Bahamas.
According to Joan, “Reporters don’t write about minor first children except when they’re attending ‘official or semi-official events.’
She also claimed that, unless they want to ‘appear racist”, (I know…*groan*…the race card being played…again), reporters needed to “Try treating his daughters with respect.”
Of course, those supposed rules and advice do not apply to her. (When do rules of etiquette and proper behavior ever apply to leftists?).
Apparently, in 2001, Joan wrote a smear piece for Salon on George Bush titled “The First Family’s Alcohol Troubles.”
The article uses reports of the first daughters partying and drinking as a pretext to attack their father’s drinking history and uses a picture of Jenna Bush laughing in order to give the indication that she is an out of control drunkard.
In the article, Joanie wrote:
First came the tale of Secret Service agents ferrying home Jenna’s boyfriend after he was arrested for public drunkenness. Then there were randy National Enquirer photos of Jenna, a University of Texas freshman, and a beer-drinking pal, and a story about her alleged marijuana use. Yale freshman Barbara, supposedly the studious twin, had a false I.D. confiscated at a New Haven, Conn., bar. In April, the Enquirer featured a lurid tale of Barbara’s drunken spring-break binge in Mexico, and by the end of the month all major newspapers were carrying a story about Jenna being cited by police at an Austin bar for underage drinking, while Secret Service agents waited outside.
But reporting that the Obama girls are on vacation is not only unprofessional and disrespectful but racist as well.
Hypocritical asshats living in glass houses and all that, Joan.
In November 2001, just two months after the horrific terror attack of 9/11, the Washington Post posted a video profile of a local imam who complained about the “association of Islam and terrorism.” The Post followed with a question-and-answer session with the imam on its website.
That imam was Anwar al-Awlaki, a man considered so dangerous that just a few years later President Barack Obama ordered him shot on sight. Al-Awlaki was killed by U.S. forces using a drone-fired Hellfire missile in September 2011. His 16-year-old son Abdulrahman was killed in a separate drone attack two weeks later.
Al-Awlaki is the perfect metaphor for media coverage of Islam in the United States. American journalists bend over backward to treat Muslims in a positive way, even to ludicrous extremes. As a result, terrorists are often called “militants”—even when they are on U.S. government terror watch lists. And any open criticism of radical Islam has typically been treated as “Islamophobia.”
Frank Gaffney, the founder and president of the Center for Security Policy, said the problem with journalists’ coverage of radical Islam is that “mostly they don’t” cover the issues. And when they do cover them, they spin the result. “It’s a fictitious depiction of the narrative that is served up primarily by Islamists who are actively engaged in disinforming and subverting us from within.”
Erick Erickson, editor-in-chief of RedState.com, blamed the standard media worldview as the leading culprit in the poor coverage. Journalists have “one narrative over all others. It is victim versus victimizer, and the media like Christians as victimizers.” But it’s not just an anti-Christian bias that’s to blame, he explained, the literal danger posed by radical Muslims plays a major role in reporter reluctance to cover the downsides of Islam: “They are scared to death of Islam. First Amendment be damned, they want to live.”
Journalists using their status to push an agenda is nothing new. But they do more than that today. The media have been depicting Islam as a modern David facing off against the Christian Goliath. David, predictably, gets good press no matter how often radical Islamists get arrested for terror plots or riot around the world over cartoons or a YouTube video.
Christians and conservatives, on the other hand, get the exact opposite treatment. They have become the stock villains for both
news and entertainment media. Every critic of Christianity—especially those in the gay community—gets treated like a hero. The institutions themselves get derided as “dictatorial” or worse for not bowing to a liberal agenda. And the faithful are forever the butt of jokes and derision—all without uproar and threats of violence from the victims of the abuse.
The Center for Security Policy’s Gaffney warned that the coverage could get worse in reaction to pushback from Islamic groups. The recent documentary “Silent Conquest” cautioned that there is an “ominous pattern” of not being able to offend Islam. Muslim nations have been working with the United Nations to institute laws against “blasphemy.”
In September, President Obama argued for just that result. “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam,” he told the United Nations.
…if you’re opposed to a Nanny State and don’t just shiver with anticipation at the idea of the government telling you what you can and can’t enjoy as a snack or a thirst quenching beverage then you must be antisemitic.
But then, of course, the bowlful of stupid did come out of race pimp, Al Sharpton’s mouth and, well, you know Al.
According to his way of thinking, if you’re afraid of the dark it’s because the sky at night is black and you’re a racist cracker.
Ol’ MSNBC. Just another channel of clowns in the pretend journalism clown college.
When people talk about our country becoming “desensitized” to violence, most of the time that’s a discussion about films and video games. But when we shrug our shoulders and accept as the new normal the equivalent of a school shooting per month in one of our largest (and most beautiful) cities, there’s no question that’s another drop in the “desensitized” bucket.
Don’t misunderstand, I’m not in any way making an equivalence argument comparing the murder rate in Chicago with what happened at Sandy Hook Elementary last Friday morning. There’s no question that horrific event and the age of the victims is something that stands alone, even when compared to other mass shootings of this kind.
But I am talking about a tragic loss of human life happening at an alarming rate in the Windy City, and the media’s unwillingness to declare 41 murders a month worthy of a national discussion, much less a national crisis.
My guess is that the media’s lack of interest in Chicago’s ongoing murder spree has a lot to do with the lack of political upside in reporting on the story. Because what’s happening in Chicago can’t in any way be blamed on Republicans, conservative ideas, or a lack of left-wing ideas, the media would prefer to pretend the murders aren’t happening.
You see, the media can’t blame the murders on a lack of gun control, because Chicago has the toughest gun control laws in the country. The media can’t blame the murders on a lack of high taxes or big government, because Chicago is wholly owned by Democrats and their machine. This is also why the media can’t blame the GOP.
In fact, Chicago is a magical place where American leftists have seen every single one of their Utopian dreams realized, so the pointing out of these murders in paradise might upset a Media Narrative aggressively pushing for those Utopian dreams to be forced upon us nationwide.
So the media ignore the Chicago murders, just like they ignored the deaths of who knows how many innocent Mexican citizens at the hands of assault weapons run into that country by their precious Obama Administration.
But when gun murders take place in blue areas, we don’t hear a peep.
Today, the Chicago Tribune reported that shootings were up 49% this November over last November; there were 129 shootings in November 2011 in the city, and 192 in the city this November. Overall, shootings are up 11% in Chicago over 2011. This is a gun crime epidemic. And the leftist press says nothing about gun control, largely because Chicago has some of the tightest gun control regulations in the nation.
Or take Northridge, California just a few hours after the Belcher shooting, when a suspect shot four people, including two women in their 20s and two men to death outside an unlicensed boarding home. Any talk of gun control? Have you even heard about the story?
The truth is that there is no apparent difference between gun controlled states and non-gun controlled states when it comes to cities with high gun murder rates. For 2006-2007, here are the firearm homicide rates for America’s most dangerous cities, per 100,000 members of the population:
New Orleans, LA — 62.1, low gun control
Detroit, MI – 35.9, heavy gun control
Baltimore, MD – 29.7, heavy gun control
Oakland, CA – 26.6, heavy gun control
Newark, NJ — 25.4, heavy gun control
St. Louis, MO – 24.1, low gun control
Miami, FL – 23.7, low gun control
Richmond, VA – 23.1, low gun control
Philadelphia, PA – 20.0, heavy gun control
Washington, DC – 19.0, heavy gun control
We have other societal problems we can blame for high rates of gun homicide. But lack of gun control – the so-called “gun culture” – is not one of them. But don’t look for the media to tell the truth about the widespread incidents of gun homicide in blue areas. It undercuts their political agenda.
…to be an idealistic young person who is going to college to earn a journalism degree with the dream of becoming a reporter. Does that person dream about breaking the next huge story that will explode across the world? Does that person imagine investigating and turning over the rocks that will uncover the next Watergate-like scandal? Does that person imagine themselves as a pillar of truth? The last wall of integrity and honesty between the common man and a possibly tyrannical government?
If so….how does that person react when they get hired by one of the BIG networks, knowing that all that hard work and financial investment will be returned with their name becoming a big household topic and by receiving an even bigger paycheck, then learn they’re nothing more than the propaganda arm of the government their institution was supposed to be a watchdog of?
Or in layman’s terms, how do they react when they realize they’re nothing more than whores for The Man?
I guess it must not to be too shocking since so many “journalists” sell their souls and become cheap B-grade porn stars for their elitist pimps.
Within 24 hours of a coordinated assault that left four Americans dead, then-CIA Director David Petraeus was convinced the intelligence proved a local Libyan militia affiliated with al-Qaeda was responsible, and said so in his report.
Then the Petraeus report was edited (probably by Eric Holder’s Justice Department) to remove the terror angle and pile the blame on a spontaneous protest over a YouTube video. Over the course of two weeks, this blatantly false Narrative would only grow and sharpen, even though all knew it was a lie — and by “all,” I mean the White House, the terrorists, the media, and anyone with an IQ above room temperature.
In other words, what critics of the White House narrative knew to be true months ago, has now been verified. There’s no longer any dispute that for two weeks the White House knew Benghazi was an act of terror and that for two weeks everyone from President Obama to U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice to White House spokesman Jay Carney to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton repeatedly told us something the Administration knew wasn’t true.
And still, the media and Democrats don’t care, because….
…the administration refrained from saying it suspected that the perpetrators of the attack were Al Qaeda affiliates and sympathizers to avoid tipping off the groups. …
[N]ames of groups suspected in the attack — including Al Qaeda’s franchise in North Africa and a local Libyan group, Ansar al-Shariah — were removed from the public explanation of the attack immediately after the assault to avoiding alerting the militants that American intelligence and law enforcement agencies were tracking them[.]
That’s reporting from The New York Times — the same New York Times that during the Bush Administration published every piece of classified information leaked to them that might undermine the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
But now, apparently, blatantly lying in the name of national security — with a lie that just happens to be convenient to the president’s reelection bid — is okey-doke with The New York Times … and the Democratic Party … and almost all of the media.