vector art

Clinton Media Group Has Panties in a Bunch

Media Matters' David Brock recently testified
(in the MM newsletter) about the scurvy journalism
practiced at MSNBC against MM beneficiary, Hillary Clinton.

"As a journalist, I cherish Oscar Wilde's opinion of sincerity: He called it "the highest form of acting." Few of my subjects have told the whole truth, though many were honest. That's why the best reporters multi-source their stories. But there's no way to check out David Brock's account of his illustrious career as a professional liar."
--Richard Goldstein

Media Matters, the Hillary Clinton-sponsored front group--which tries to pass itself off as an impartial "press watchdog"--has issued its weekly newsletter.

If you're looking for a source of unintended laughter, you could do worse than get on its mailing list--we did.

It rarely disappoints.

Last fall, Media Matters was busy attacking popular conservative commentators over their philosophical disagreements with liberal/progressive issues.

With Hillary Clinton locked in a nomination dog-fight, Media Matters has dropped its pretenses of looking out for all liberals and focused on those it feels are biting the hand that feeds MM.

This week's Media[About Hillary]Matters' target is foaming-at-the-mouth liberal network, MSNBC.

What did the network of Kountdown Keith Olbermann and Chris Mathews do that has upset the "media about Hillary watchdog"?

Well, they've made the same remarks about the former first lady usually reserved for conservatives. MM mouthpiece, David Brock, is obviously concerned that some regular viewers may become confused and think Clinton is running on the Republican ticket.

During the past year, three MSNBC commentators have been suspended, reprimanded, fired, or forced to apologize for their sexist and/or racist comments. Rather than address these problems by proactively moving to make certain they do not happen in the first place, MSNBC has instead decided to use these controversies as part of an advertising campaign to promote its political coverage.

That's right -- MSNBC has turned the recent mea culpa by Hardball host Chris Matthews for his sexist comments into an advertising campaign, using clips of his statement to push MSNBC programming. Left on the cutting room floor, of course, are the portions in which Matthews acknowledged having been "callous," "nasty," and "dismissive" toward Sen. Hillary Clinton.

Thank God for the Imus affair, or the MM newsletter would have had to been declared a Clinton contribution under campaign finance law.

Reaction was swift when Media Matters first called itself
an impartial "press watchdog", with no links to Hillary Clinton.

Brock goes onto to lament the coverage of another MSNBC newsperson who deviated from the lapdog position.

The latest example of the systemic problem of sexism and misogyny on MSNBC's airwaves came last week from correspondent David Shuster when he stated, while talking about Chelsea Clinton's campaign activities on behalf of her mother, "doesn't it seem like Chelsea's sort of being pimped out in some weird sort of way" by Sen. Clinton's presidential campaign. Following criticism from many who found Shuster's comments indefensible and demeaning, MSNBC suspended Shuster indefinitely and aired an apology from him that evening.

Of course, MSNBC wouldn't suspend one of its newscasters for remarks made about either President Bush or conservatives--Olbermann alone has labeled Bush as "stupid" and "facist". But it did after a wayward comment about Chelsea Clinton.

But for this "press watchdog", suspension is not enough: they want the reader to take action!

The newsletters says "news organizations like NBC News and MSNBC have a sacred duty to be good stewards of accurate, balanced, and responsible political discourse."

It may be a first for Media Matters: using the word "sacred" in a sentence without the accompanying words: "dumbass", "conservative" or "Christians".

"Media Matters is a "press watchdog"?
"Impartial"?? Stop it! You're killing me!!"

The newsletter ended on a call to "take action today - contact MSNBC president, Steve Capus".

We just might.

Soon as we quit laughing.

by Mondoreb
images:
* thewideawakes
* israel125yroldmanlaughing
* bluebuddies
Sources:
* The Primal Lie
* Meida Matters newsletter "A Mess at MSNBC"



Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

Responding to the news that Rosie O'Donnell may be added to the nightly line-up at MSNBC, a spokeman uttered words sure make Pinocchio proud. Commenting on the network and the four guys who watch it nightly, MSNBC denied any attempt to lure left-thinking viewers.

The Quote Mostly Likely to Cause Nose Growth from New York Times:

“It happened naturally. There isn’t a dogma we’re putting through. There is a ‘Go for it.’”
--” Phil Griffin, a senior vice president of NBC News who is the executive in charge of MSNBC, said Friday, referring specifically to the channel’s tilting to the Left from 7 to 10 p.m.

More breathless reporting on the phenomenon that is MSNBC from the NY Times:

Riding a ratings wave from “Countdown With Keith Olbermann,” a program that takes strong issue with the Bush administration, MSNBC is increasingly seeking to showcase its nighttime lineup as a welcome haven for viewers of a similar mind.

Lest there be any doubt that the cable channel believes there is ratings gold in shows that criticize the administration with the same vigor with which Fox News’s hosts often champion it, two NBC executives acknowledged yesterday that they were talking to Rosie O’Donnell about a prime-time show on MSNBC.

During the nine months she spent on “The View” before departing abruptly last spring, Ms. O’Donnell raised viewership notably. She did so while lamenting the unabated casualties of the Iraq war and advocating the right to gay marriage, among other positions.

Rosie famously is remembered for her scientific knowledge during discussions on whether 9/11 was a conspiracy. "Fire doesn't melt steel" defines O'Donnell's style and substance.

And it looks like she'll soon be back on the airwaves. MSNBC is a perfect match for O'Donnell. She'll be among a like-thinking people. It might be a match made in Haeaven.

No one knows if there is TV in Heaven. Except for media reporters, bloggers and Internet news junkies, she was largely ignored in the morning.

Now she'll soon be ignored nightly on MSNBC.

By Mondoreb
[image:themoderatevoice]



Back to Front Page.

[image:bbc]
by Mondoreb

Hard to believe one's eyes reading MSNBC's First Read:

Over the past 10 months, the national media have reported on almost every angle possible in this presidential race, especially as it relates to Hillary Clinton. But few -- outside of the books by Sally Bedell Smith and Carl Bernstein, and a May 2006 New York Times piece -- have examined the Clintons’ marriage.

First Read can be excused if the American Specatator isn't on its preferred reading list over there. AmSpec has published countless observations, views and remarks about the Clinton's marriage, or "marriage" as it's often referred to over at the center of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.

Not in the last 10 months, but certainly a look at the Clinton's marriage occurred in Christopher's Buckley's novel, "No Way to Treat a First Lady", for those who were looking. Way back in '04, Powers That Be was talking about how "No Way to Treat a First Lady", and how it was a thinly-disguised take on the Clinton marriage:

Chris Buckley's novel, which was a parody of the Clinton marriage, "No way to treat a first lady", has won the James Thurber Prize for humor. Since the Clinton marriage is already a parody, Buckley's accomplishment is monumental indeed. A parody of a parody is tough to pull off, but this book has done just that.

Whether the Clintons have a marriage or a "marriage" is sure to get more attention the closer the election cycle draws to its climax. Why all this talk about Hillary calling her husband "romantic"?

Isn't that how a "marriage" should be?



Back to Front Page.