FAIR is the national progressive media watchdog group, challenging corporate media bias, spin and misinformation.
When reporters give strategic advice, they tend to reveal what they consider preferable policy goals. A discussion of taxes and spending on Meet the Press revealed a lot about host David Gregory’s worldview.
The PBS Nova broadcast “Rise of the Drones” was sponsored by drone manufacturer Lockheed Martin–a clear violation of PBS’s underwriting guidelines.
In the latest edition of FAIR TV: Did Barack Obama’s inaugural address really signify a shift to the left? Plus the Washington Post gives the government a chance to make anonymous claims about how much Iranians are suffering due to their sanctions policy. And PBS takes a look at drones,with special funding from… drone manufacturer […]
USA Today’s point in covering this weekend’s anti-choice “March for Life” is is to note that, 40 years after the Roe v. Wade decision, the country is divided on abortion rights. That’s an odd way of describing a 24-point spread in public opinion
A Washington Post story today (1/24/13) leads with this: The success of President Obama’s starkly liberal second-term agenda will rest largely on the shoulders of Senate majority leader Harry M. Reid, who has been a rock-solid political ally and a valued legislative tactician for Obama during his first term. That characterization of Obama’s agenda–shared by […]
The media message about the Obama inauguration ceremony was that he was announcing a clear shift to the left. But coverage failed to provide much background on the president’s actual policies, which would have challenged that impression.
Since the consensus seems to be that Obama’s inaugural address was actually a statement of a bold, progressive vision for his second term, it’s not a surprise that some in the corporate media are upset. Obama’s words were seen as particularly injurious to Republicans, who presumably already feel bad enough as it is.
It’s hard to be surprised by the practice of granting anonymity to U.S. officials. But it was surprising to be reassured in the Washington Post that the U.S.-led sanctions on Iran aren’t really harming ordinary Iranians–based on the word of an anonymous U.S. official.
On the new FAIR TV: The Washington Post says France had better slash wages and benefits in order to be more like Spain. Why would they want to do that? The New York Times erases a headline referring to the occupation of the West Bank. And when the Wall Street Journal wanted to show what […]
For a variety of reasons, Arab citizens of Israel don’t seem all that excited about voting in next week’s elections. And, for some reason, this strike the New York Times’ Jodi Rudoren as “apathy.” But the Arab sentiments she reports sure don’t sound like apathy.
With an unemployment rate at just over 26 percent and regular street protests against government austerity policies, it’s hard to imagine anyone holding up Spain as a model. But Howard Schneider, writing in the Washington Post, does just that–warning France that it had better shape up and be more like Spain:
The headline of a recent article posted at the website of the Atlantic–“David Miscavige Leads Scientology to Milestone Year”–probably tipped readers that something was more than a little off. It wasn’t an article, really; above the headline, in a yellow box, was the phrase “Sponsor Content.” But is what the Atlantic did–and quickly apologized for–really unusual?
Republicans and various right-wing commentators have had a thing for talking about the supposedly “anti-business” tilt of the Obama administration. It’s never made much sense–and it doesn’t make any more sense now that pundits are reacting to news that Obama will tap his current chief of staff Jack Lew to be his next Treasury secretary.
Non-violent protesters came up with a novel way to protest Israeli plans to build more settlement colonies in the occupied West Bank: They occupied the land themselves. The New York Times reported the news on Saturday. But the most remarkable thing is what they did with the headline.
This week on FAIR TV: Can Chuck Hagel really be considered anti-war? Pundits are mad about the fiscal cliff tax deal–they wanted more Social Security and Medicare cuts. And Murdoch’s New York Post made another attempt to link Occupy Wall Street to crime–and other media outlets went along.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez might be excused for harboring some hard feelings towards a government that helped to try to overthrow him.
Wealthy pundits didn’t like the outcome of the “fiscal cliff” tax deal– mostly because it didn’t do more to cut Social Security and Medicare benefits.
Bill O’Reilly wants Congress to investigate Planned Parenthood for being an “abortion mill.” In the real world, very little of their work is related to abortion services. But why let facts get in the way?
It goes to show you how limited the debate over warmaking is when politicians whose records are mostly pro-war can be portrayed as war skeptics. That’s what is happening with Barack Obama’s new cabinet picks: Sen. John Kerry for secretary of State and former Sen. Chuck Hagel as Defense secretary.
The Obama administration has pursued an unprecedented campaign to prosecute whistleblowers. The fact that John Kirikaou is facing such punishment reinforces the sense that he should be viewed as such a whistleblower, someone who was trying to expose the CIA’s torture practices. But was that really his motivation?
