The national media watch group
Updated: 5 hours 7 min ago
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?
On the show this week: On the day of his funeral, the New York Times declared that Michael Brown was "no angel." We look at that and other shoddy reporting from Ferguson. Plus Newsweek spreads farfetched fear about Ebola and African immigrants, and we look at how often union leaders appear on the Sunday chat shows. (Brace yourself.)
The Newspaper of Record wants you to know that you shouldn't trust Twitter's coverage of Ferguson. But their examples of inaccuracies aren't all that convincing
Newsweek's cover story is built around the idea that illegally imported "bushmeat"--what we would call "wild game" if it were being eaten in the United States--could carry the deadly Ebola virus. But is there any evidence that imported meat could actually carry Ebola? On that score, Newsweek comes up empty.
A new study has some outlets saying that social media inhibit debate. You want to compare Twitter's record to the corporate media on that score?
The paper's editorial page has a new focus on fighting climate change. But will it keep publishing climate nonsense?
Obama's foreign policy is invariably analyzed as being either foolishly pacifistic or prudently diplomatic. The reality that the Obama administration has used military force on a large scale in many countries is not acknowledged.
The New York Times makes some curious choices in its coverage of the victim in the Ferguson, Missouri, police shooting.
The message from the NY Times: Police officers who shoot unarmed civilians need to be be given the benefit of the doubt.
Israel's war on Gaza is still going on, with a round of airstrikes that killed dozens this week. And how was this reported in the New York Times? As Hamas breaking a cease-fire agreement.
Watching coverage of the unrest in Ferguson on CNN last night (8/18/14), I was struck at the actual journalism I was treated to by CNN's Jake Tapper. It's not every day corporate media is awestruck by the heavy-handedness of a militarized attack on civilians on US soil. But such was the case for Tapper, who was nearly hit by a tear gas canister fired by police. Things escalated to the point where Tapper began to legitimately question the police's actions. His assertion that the over-the-top show of force by Ferguson police " doesn't make any sense" was a reasonable assessment […]
FAIR's new Action Alert (8/18/14) calls out the New York Times for not covering a major Amnesty International report on US torture–shortly after the paper announced a new policy of calling torture by its right name. If you send a message to the Times, please leave a copy in the comments thread to this post. UPDATE: New York Times Responds on Torture (8/21/14)
Some good--and not so good--media reactions to the police killing of Michael Brown. Plus pundits wonder what took Obama so long to bomb Iraq, and two papers try to raise doubts about the death toll in Gaza.
It would be wonderful if more Republicans--and, for that matter, more Democrats--were speaking out about police abuses and related issues. But treating one lawmaker's op-ed as a sign of a fundamental shift on the right seems a bit of an overreach.
USA Today's original headline: "Police Seek Order as Ferguson Furor Builds."
The surprise has been the extent to which some media seem to be taking the outcry seriously, talking about the militarization of police--brought home by the rough treatment given to reporters--and the criminalization of black people.
Greenwald called the NPR report "a pure and indisputable case of journalistic malpractice and deceit." It's hard to say he doesn't have a point.
When it comes to the death toll in Gaza, the Washington Post and New York Times both work hard to muddy up the picture.
More US bombing is a message corporate media are eager to amplify.
Ten years later, the New York Times will call torture by its name. But does the paper's reasoning make any sense?