FAIR is the national progressive media watchdog group, challenging corporate media bias, spin and misinformation.
Over the past week, Bernie Sanders racked up six wins out of seven primary contests, winning 92 delegates more than his rival Hillary Clinton. You, however, would hardly have noticed had you been watching cable news the night of the Saturday primaries.
Why did CNN describe the mostly urban, not particularly white states that Bernie Sanders won as “largely white and rural”?
A Washington Post op-ed by John Bellamy Foster, editor of Monthly Review, cites FAIR’s critique of the Post’s anti-Bernie Sanders bias.
People who worry about a Trump presidency just don’t understand how Washington works, according to Newsweek’s Matthew Cooper. But it’s Cooper who doesn’t know how Washington works—or is pretending not to.
It might not seem extreme for Cokie Roberts, commentator emeritus at NPR, to say in a column that Trump’s nomination would be a “devastating blow” to the US’s reputation around the world. Nevertheless, Roberts’ column was too much for the public radio network that many insist leans left.
Bernie Sanders is still a viable candidate and is very much staying in the race. One wouldn’t know this, however, from watching last night’s cable news coverage,
A flurry of media “experts” have rushed to denounce Bernie Sanders’ proposal for socialized higher education as a concept. Oddly enough, they present their fight against free higher education as advocacy for the poor.
FAIR contributing analyst Adam Johnson was invited to write a piece for the New York Times’ “Room for Debate” feature–on the topic “Has Sanders Not Been Taken Seriously Enough?”
When peaceful protests are met with violence, showing up in numbers large enough so that they cannot be suppressed is the right thing to do for democracy.
Whenever the issue of socialism—or communism, its more fear-inducing cousin—comes up, the press must attempt to compel those who have previously expressed support or sympathy for red politics to “denounce” their prior statements.
The Washington Post responded to our criticism of a remarkable run of negative articles about Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders.
In what has to be some kind of record, the Washington Post ran 16 negative stories on Bernie Sanders in 16 hours—a window that includes the crucial Democratic debate in Flint, Michigan, and the next morning’s spin.
Media generally fail to take the body of ideas known as white supremacy seriously in a journalistic way, even when it’s connected to violence. How do we inform and change the conversation?
Almost none of the US coverage of Honduran activist Berta Carceres’ murder mentioned that the brutal regime that likely killed her came to power in a 2009 coup d’etat supported by the US, under President Barack Obama and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
“The media have a motivation to push this line that, ‘Oh, we were all fooled,’ because they did such a poor job in challenging the lies of the Bush administration in the lead-up to the war.”
When real politics are at stake, corporate media often go out of their way to make races seem as boring as possible—to declare them over long before most citizens have had a chance to vote.
A broadcaster cheers on the electoral “circus” (“bring it on, Donald, go ahead, keep going”) that he acknowledges “may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS,”
While the advocates of a policy certainly have the right to assign whatever name they like to the policy, it seems a bit extreme to criticize its opponents for using the term that advocates themselves had used in the recent past.
Did political reporters not know about Hillary Clinton’s “superpredator” quote? Or, more likely, did they know about it and decide that it wasn’t necessary to report, even though—or maybe because—the conventional wisdom was that the African-American vote would determine who the Democratic nominee for president would be?
In These Times’ Christopher Hass (2/25/16) cites FAIR on media manipulation of superdelegates.
