FAIR is the national progressive media watchdog group, challenging corporate media bias, spin and misinformation.
This week: ABC World News prepared viewers for the Senate report on CIA torture…by warning that its publication could harm Americans. Plus TV news covers the torture report by giving a platform to torture advocates. And a pundit who was dead wrong about the Iraq War shares his thoughts about the need for Rolling Stone to […]
There are reporters at outlets like the Washington Post who raised real questions about Rolling Stone’s story about rape at the University of Virginia. And then are also those like National Review editor Rich Lowry,
“About 800 airstrikes so far against ISIS. Why isn’t this working?” What makes a seemingly innocuous question like that noteworthy is the assumption that airstrikes are supposed to “work” in the first place.
Zakaria has a different standard for ignorant citizens and ignorant politicians–not to mention ignorant media pundits.
Perhaps it is fitting that George W. Bush would say, “When you say something as president, you better mean it”–and then say something so demonstrably false.
On this week’s show: The ways corporate media cover war, a Fox News pundit wants to see more civilian deaths in Syria, and PBS uses its ad dollars to punish a magazine. All of that on this week’s show:
A Fox News military analyst is not afraid to talk about civilian deaths in Syria: He seems to want to see more of them.
Generals, former generals and not much more: Corporate media are covering war the only way they know how.
The People’s Climate March wasn’t fit for TV news, Obama is a “reluctant warrior,” and the US has a “longtime concern” for human rights in Egypt.
This week: Watch ABC drum up fears about a terror attack on the United States. Plus we’ll take a look at the state of the debate over war, and how big papers spun a study of how fracking leads to water contamination into a story about how we shouldn’t blame fracking. Take a look:
This week on CounterSpin: “We have no choice,” CBS’s Bob Schieffer told viewers, calling for US military attacks on the extremist group ISIS, because “this evil must be eradicated.” Though the shouts of warmongers may make them hard to hear, we do have choices – choices more likely to lead to longterm peace in Iraq and Syria than dropping bombs. We’ll hear from Raed Jarrar, policy impact coordinator for the American Friends Service Committee.
Also on the show: In response to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, there’s a grassroots movement to amend the Constitution to try to curtail the influence of big money in politics. But it’s not getting much sympathy from the press– the AP says it’s an election year stunt, and pundits like George Will call it an attack on free speech. Robert Weissman of Public Citizen will join us to talk about the Democracy for All amendment.
The voice from the left on PBS wants a serious debate over Obama’s war plan–but also makes it clear that airstrikes are great.
A key element in the shift in US public opinion toward attacking ISIS is the idea that the country could be attacked by the group. Where do people get this idea? TV news might be one place.
CBS host Bob Schieffer believes that ISIS poses a threat to the American “homeland” and tells viewers: “This evil must be eradicated. These forces must be destroyed.”
What does a “full range of views” look like to the New York Times? Powerful people who worked for Republicans and Democrats.
Are corporate media banging the war drums in 2014 just like they did in 2003? USA Today promotes a poll that they say shows the public wants a more ‘muscular’ foreign policy. But is that really the message the public is sending? Plus the New York Times remembers a Chris Christie foreign policy ‘gaffe’– saying something accurate about the occupation of the West Bank.
Discussions of what the Obama White House should do in Iraq and Syria are dominated by hawks, military officials and former national security insiders.
USA Today’s August 29 edition boasted the front-page headline “More Want US to Flex Muscle.” The evidence comes from a new Pew poll, so it’s worth noting how that data is transformed into a desire for US “muscle-flexing.”
The Washington Post stands firm against Russian aggression, since Putin has violated an “international norm” that is “uncontroversial.” Do those rules apply to the US, though?
