FAIR is the national progressive media watchdog group, challenging corporate media bias, spin and misinformation.
The Senate report revealed shocking, even sickening treatment of the CIA’s captives. But ABC’s focus wasn’t on the US government abuses detailed in the report, but “the fear that its release could threaten American lives.”
“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.
The Keystone XL pipeline is back in the news. But some of the coverage is as bad as ever—if not worse.
ABC This Week mangles an easy fact check, after a Republican politician claims that ISIS fighters have been caught at the Texas border.
Generals, former generals and not much more: Corporate media are covering war the only way they know how.
Discussions of what the Obama White House should do in Iraq and Syria are dominated by hawks, military officials and former national security insiders.
ABC’s This Week: Edward Snowden sparked a “raging debate”–so here are two guests who don’t like what he did.
The documentary Mitt is causing many journalists to wonder why the Mitt Romney in the film wasn’t the one who ran for president. It’s a bit like asking why drinking a particular brand of beer doesn’t make you as popular with attractive strangers as the beer ads promised.
It’s not unheard of for journalists to express strong opinions about how the United States should conduct its wars. But sometimes reporters express their opinions by attributing them to others.
Tom Friedman of the New York Times opened up his November 13 column with this: It goes without saying that the only near-term deal with Iran worth partially lifting sanctions for would be a deal that freezes all the key components of Iran’s nuclear weapons development program It goes without saying that this is deeply […]
Media reports emphasize the number John Kerry gives for the number of Syrians killed in the apparent chemical attack. But where does that number come from–and why is substantially higher than other estimates?
After intelligence reports about a possible Al-Qaeda attack , the Sunday chat shows were packed with politicians claiming that this meant that the NSA had been vindicated.
“We shouldn’t even be wasting our time talking about Anthony Weiner,” the pundits say– and then they continue to talk about him anyway.
NBC’s David Gregory’s “Hey I’m just asking but are you a criminal?” question on Sunday’s Meet the Press has been getting a lot of attention, but the Sunday morning discussion of Edward Snowden on ABC’s This Week also deserves a look.
The New York Times treats Iran’s right to enrich uranium as a “claim,” to be challenged by anonymous U.S. officials.
To hear U.S. corporate media tell it, there are “exercises” right next door, conducted by the world’s most powerful military, which possesses thousands of nuclear weapons–and then there’s menacing “saber-rattling.”
This week on FAIR TV, we look at the bubble that Joe Scarborough and David Gregory live in– where the government must make “big” spending cuts, and Paul Krugman doesn’t know economic. Also, does ABC’s Martha Raddatz understand what the government is telling her about Syria? And Reuters grants a U.S. government official anonymity to complain about Iran meddling in other countries.
The implication of Martha Raddatz’s quotation of Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is that Syria has loaded chemical weapons at the ready, and that it would take a matter of hours for the Assad government to use them. But that’s not what Panetta told…well, Raddatz herself.
At the end of ABC‘s This Week (11/18/12), Martha Raddatz presented a brief viewer-mail segment: And finally, “Your Voice This Week.” Today’s question comes from Cheryl Robinson, who writes, “What happened in Benghazi was terribly tragic, and now we’re hearing of another Middle Eastern war on the brick. Let us and you, the media, not […]
