How the NYT and US media LIE about Dems

This is a profound statement that we all need to be reminded of how the US media is not just biased to the right, but they will do ANYTHING to further the right.

There are many examples in this article of how the US media will lie, cheat, and steal to attack any Democrat who dares run for national office.

This article is long, so if you can't read it now, I would suggest you just read the snips then click the link and hit the 'print' button ... and later when you would normally sit down to read the lies in your local paper.. read this instead!

It's that good.

Trust me, read the whole article, you'll be much better for it,

Best!
Kelley

=============


http://makethemaccountable.com/podvin/media/031208_TheLiarOfRecord.htm


THE LIAR OF RECORD
By David Podvin

The most important site in journalism is the front
page of The New York Times. More than any other print
or electronic source, it is the place that sets the
agenda for the reporting of each day’s events at
America’s media outlets. As a result, The Times is
renowned as “The Newspaper Of Record”, the most
frequently referenced news organization in the world.


<snip>

Seelye constantly portrayed Gore as being dishonest.
She went so far as to alter Gore quotes, changing his
statement on Love Canal from "That was the one that
started it all" into "I was the one that started it
all.” She went even further and made things up, such
as her infamously false assertion that Gore claimed to
have invented the Internet.

<snip>

During the Elian Gonzalez controversy, Seelye pushed
the recurring theme that Gore was "seeming to
contradict himself”, a condemnation that was not
printed as opinion on the editorial page, but
presented as fact on the front page. From a factual
standpoint, Gore had not contradicted himself in any
way – his stance on the Gonzalez matter was entirely
consistent with his previously stated immigration
policy. The truth about what Gore was doing, however,
did not enhance the storyline that he was a liar, so
Seelye instead reported on what Gore seemed to be
doing. It is a conniving approach that gets a failing
grade in high school journalism classes across
America. At the holiest shrine in all of journalism,
it got Page One.

<snip>

Seelye consistently assumed the role of Bush’s
protector. When Gore criticized the former Texas
governor for inaccurately stating that Social Security
is not a federal program, there was an indignant front
page retort from the reporter who had spent the entire
campaign putting the worst possible interpretation on everything Gore said: “The vice president never allowed that Mr. Bush's comment might have been a mistake or a poorly worded thought, instead milking the idea that it was just plain dumb…” Seelye’s rebuke parroted the statement released by the Republican National Committee that harshly condemned Gore for failing to give Bush every benefit of the doubt.

<snip>

Seelye’s coverage of the Gore campaign was in the
vanguard of what GOP Chairman Marc Racicot later
called “our attempt to convince voters that something
about Gore was repulsive, even if they couldn’t quite
figure out what it was.” Republicans believed that
their losses to Bill Clinton were based on
personality, and they were determined to gain the
advantage on the issue of which candidate was more
likeable. The Times had once described Gore as
“charming”, but in 2000 readers were inculcated with
Seelye’s serial presentation of the vice president as
a contemptible geek, a man so repugnant that he makes
babies cry. The New York Times is read by every
decision maker in corporate journalism, and its
caustic caricature of Gore became common editorial
wisdom.


Full article available here:
http://makethemaccountable.com/podvin/media/031208_TheLiarOfRecord.htm


-----------


.

In general, would you like to see George W. Bush re-elected to another term as president, or not?

See the error?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4119644/

Every media source has proclaimed Bush "invincible" and "undefeatable" so on EVERY poll you see the same paradoxical phenomenon...


A majority of people DONT want to see Bush winning 2004

But a majority of people THINK he will win in 2004



Direct proof of media bias and brainwashing.

Wow those numbers sure don't add up. They obviously dropped the 4 off.

is the ultimate line of defense by representing us, The People. The Press is charged to keep the citizens informed with "facts" and the "truth" or a reasonable facsimile thereof.

The Press is designed to keep politicians "honest" and "accountable" to the citizens, not to be a third arm of a political machine.

Because of corporate interests, the noble intent of The Press has been subverted and used to manipulate the minds of readers who have no true alternative to distortions of numbers, facts, or opinion presented as fact. Not to mention there is no readily available forum in print media or broadcasting wherein contradictory information can be presented for people to choose fact from fiction.

When one considers a "coup d'etat", one imagines the proverbial radio stations being overwhelmed and controlled by guerillas, the junta army, etc. The last four years have been a silent and effect coup d'etat without a single bullet being discharged.

The ultimate question is how will a candidate with courage choose: will he hold the print and broadcasting media accountable with the prospect of losing even more votes consequently or will he "let it lie" (literally and figuratively)?

from TAP

he brought up John Tierney, a jackass of the highest order, who had a FRONT PAGE story on Kerry, which was, according to him, a piece of pure propaganda, at least as bad as Seelye's execrable hatchet jobs; something that NEVER, ever should have been anywhere other than on the oped pages (of the WSJ, for that matter)

Tierney is a real loooooonatic, with a POV straight from the caves of Alta Mira.

one of his most "famous" idiocies was his story about the uselessness of recycling! ===> "Recycling is Garbage," or something like that.

I would like to see that article on Kerry, do you have a link?

Thanks
Kelley

not that good at searching

BUT, the Kuttner interview will be up at this site eventually:

http://www.thisishell.com/archives.html

if you go there now, check the Dean Baker interview AND the one with Chris Toensing; that's what's up now

well worth listening to

Kuttner goes into a fair amount of detail WRT the Times' ridiculous treatment of news as oped, even on their front pages.

I was FUMING.

Thanks for the link, there is some really good stuff on there. Also checked the archives and its now bookmarked, great stuff!

I used to think restoring of the progressive tax system and universal health care were the most important things we need to do, but now I see that we cannot do those until we rein in CorpGovMedia. As far as I know, Clark and Dean are only two major candidates who have said they will make this breakup of the media conglomerates a priority.

Kerry's the frontrunner. Wonder what he'll do about it.

He's mentioned the problem, at least, right?

...What makes you think they'll tell the truth about anything else?

As long as we allow them to lie about the biggest issue this country faces, why would they ever do the right thing? Make no mistake: the hidden truth of what happened on 9/11 is the keystone which needs to be removed if we are too ever have a Free Press again.