Report: Iraq Coverage Wasn't Biased

NEW YORK - A study of news coverage of the war in Iraq (news - web sites) fails to support a conclusion that events were portrayed either negatively or positively most of the time.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050313/ap_en_tv/news_study

quite obviously biased.

it was propagana to the nth power.

The study was funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts.
http://www.pewtrusts.com/about/dir_bios.cfm

Pew Charitable Trusts Directors' Profiles
Rebecca W. Rimel
President & Chief Executive Officer

During Ms. Rimel's tenure, the Trusts' work has concentrated on results-oriented, strategic philanthropy. The Trusts, under her leadership, have augmented their national programs while maintaining a significant presence in their home city. Through the work of their grantee partners, The Pew Charitable Trusts have earned a reputation as a fact-based, non-partisan broker of innovative ideas and solutions promoting the public's best interest.

Ms. Rimel began her tenure at The Pew Charitable Trusts in 1983 as health program manager. She became executive director in 1988 and accepted her current position as president and CEO in 1994.

In addition to her work at the Trusts, Ms. Rimel serves on several boards including Deutsche Banc Scudder Funds and is vice chair of Monticello-The Thomas Jefferson Foundation. She has been appointed to President Bush's Council on Service and Civic Participation and is a member of the Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce Executive Committee and the American Philosophical Society, as well as a fellow of the College of Physicians of Philadelphia.

###

The study is BUSH PROPAGANDA!

divided. Reports on the torture and killing of detainees were half favorable and half critical. Reports about the rape of children were split. Good for the press - they clearly have no sense of right and wrong.

Fuck them all.

It's the range of debate that's at issue- or which stories are deemed to be news and which are not.

If you have 50 stories on the "UN oil for food" scandal, and 3 on Bremmer's missing $9 billion... there is an obvious and extreme pro-Bush Administration bias. It doesn't matter if you find that half the Oil for Food scandal stories are positive/half negative.

They must think their audience is composed of retarded monkeys.

It's more propaganda. They also claimed that Kerry only had 12% negative press while Bush had around 36%! LMAO!!! Guess they didn't count the Swift Boat Liar ads that ran ad naseum.

they believed in WMD. Those who didn't have their mouths shut were either embedded or talking to Chalabi. What is not to love? Plus they were not allowed to report on propaganda.

The question isn't was the media biased but was it legal for Bush & co to use propaganda in the USA. Which they are still using.

Carry on :)

Oil: the strongman & the USA was the model for a while. Suddenly the neocons realized the danger of this being the legacy.. so they had to go in quick and change the legacy from strongman & USA getting oil profits... to democracies. Cut out the strongman and nobody is left to fund terrorists. Because nobody is rich if the profits get spread around like they should be.

Yes - we were always at war with the Middle East. And all of Europe and the West too. And now - when a number of smaller Democratic countries is in the best interest of larger corporations.. BAM! Peace breaks out.

A new American Legacy for the middle east.

...Most news stories coming out of Iarq have been totally suppressed!