FAIR is the national progressive media watchdog group, challenging corporate media bias, spin and misinformation.
Just hours after news of an Afghan peace deal broke, corporate media jumped to sound the alarm, urging the US to maintain its occupation. The primary concern was over the Trump administration’s perceived “quick exit” or “speedy withdrawal,” a boogeyman notion that the New York Times has hyped up for years.
Shock and Awe delivers an effective valorization of aggressive, adversarial journalism that should inspire young reporters, and a powerful condemnation of one of the darkest moments in the history of journalism.
“What Next in Africa?” read a recent Washington Post headline. Among the possible answers not considered by the Post article: “Close US military bases,” “End US drone strikes” or “Stop US special forces raids.”
Media are cheering police “restraint” at the RNC because it controlled protesters in a way that didn’t look bad. While only 24 people were arrested and the most contentious event was a flag-burning, police suppressed free speech in a way that didn’t look like suppressing free speech.
Establishment media figures who have moderated the debates have thus far focused the discussion on a narrow range of topics, a FAIR analysis of debate questions finds.
Pundits who said Hillary Clinton won the first Democratic debate failed to mention that every online poll one could find that asked web visitors who won the debate cast Bernie Sanders as the winner.
When the New York Times pays attention to BDS, coverage doesn’t focus on the role of the movement in the struggle for Palestinian rights, but instead amplifies critics of BDS and focuses on charges that the movement is a form of antisemitism.
Corporate media coverage of Democratic support for the Iran deal is leaving out at least one crucial detail: the lack of evidence that Iran is trying to build a nuclear bomb.
