FAIR is the national progressive media watchdog group, challenging corporate media bias, spin and misinformation.
In covering North Korea’s series of missile tests over the past few months, US media continue to portray Pyongyang’s actions as unwarranted provocations to obtain an advantage over the US in negotiations, while dismissing the North’s stated objectives for their missile tests.
On the 18th anniversary of the September 11 attacks, as the illegal US occupation of Afghanistan continues as the longest overseas war in American history, corporate media defended the “forever war” by concern-trolling over an “overly hasty” withdrawal.
Election Focus 2020: Corporate media uncritically transmitted the ad’s message as if it were merely a campaign strategy, instead of explaining what Biden, Sanders and Warren’s proposals actually are, and clarifying for voters whether Biden’s charges against his primary opponents are accurate.
Election Focus 2020: Corporate media are granting anonymity to sources in the Democratic establishment looking to run opposition talking points against progressive lawmakers and organizations.
It would be easy for even a diligent news consumer to not know that climate change is one of the central factors driving refugees to cross the border, since it’s usually not mentioned at all in most alarmist reports about the so-called “border crisis.”
The New York Times ascribes agency and responsibility to mysterious forces and inanimate missiles manipulating the US both in its headline—it’s the missiles that are “starting a new global arms race,” not the government—and in its claim that “the rush” to possess hypersonic missiles has “pushed the United States into an arms race with Russia and China.”
The New York Times report failed to inform readers on the remarkable injustice of cutting Social Security benefits, in view of where the funding gap came from.
Reading corporate media’s inversion of reality, it’s hard to escape the impression that while Iran betrays its international agreements, the US just leaves them behind.
The New York Times provided yet another example of a major news outlet covering the catastrophic effects of the ongoing climate crisis without ever mentioning that crisis.
A Wall Street Journal report (5/25/19) by Warren Strobel whitewashed CIA Director Gina Haspel’s career and put a positive spin on the CIA’s insulation from public accountability with its turn towards its greatest opacity “in decades.” While one might expect CIA officials to support greater secrecy around the organization, it’s odd that ostensibly independent […]
The New York Times report failed to inform readers on the remarkable injustice of cutting Social Security benefits, in view of where the funding gap came from.
Another day, another opportunity for our perpetually “behind” and “vulnerable” military/industrial/media complex to assert the need for yet another military upgrade–this time in outer space!
An Atlantic report on Trump’s Venezuela policy passed up a rich opportunity to expose the humanitarian pretexts for economic intervention, and instead exhibited the worst tendencies of corporate media coverage of US policy in Latin America.
If you keep up with all the various xenophobic “crises” and “threats” propagated by corporate media—depicting the United States as an overwhelmed nation, besieged by teeming swarms of scheming foreigners intent on stealing jobs and seizing scarce public benefits from across the southern border—you’ll recall that the United States has apparently been under “invasion” […]
The New York Times seriously misled readers on the status of Israel’s illegal settlements on the occupied territories of the West Bank and the Golan Heights.
When the headline of a story literally includes the phrase “Big Question: What Is Terrorism?” you might think it would offer at least one plausible definition proposed by any party or individual involved in these discussions. But not a single definition is suggested by anyone in the report.
Election Focus 2020: Are campaigns controlled by media consultants necessarily better than those controlled by the candidates themselves? Why should Bernie Sanders bending to “the wishes of his current advisers” be considered a good thing?
The opinions showcased during the recent government shutdown in three major US newspapers—the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal—showed a striking lack of concern for the fate of the Dreamers and many variations of the same take on the need for a “bipartisan compromise” for immigration reform.
A new FAIR study finds that Republicans dominated coverage of Donald Trump’s appointments, with GOP partisans making up 47 percent of total sources and outnumbering their Democratic counterparts by a 5-to-2 ratio.
