NBC Performs Media Malpractice On ‘Media Malpractice’
by John ZieglerNext week I plan to write more extensively on Big Hollywood about the many bizarre behind the scenes occurrences and things learned during the initial media promotion tour for my new film “Media Malpractice… How Obama Got Elected and Palin Was Targeted.” However, one episode was so strange and important, that I need to briefly touch on it today.
This dealt with the set-up segment to my appearance on the “Today Show” (video below) yesterday. The “Today Show” was given exclusive access to the unreleased portions of my Sarah Palin interview and NBC reporter Norah O’Donnell was given these clips and chosen to do the story on the Palin interview that would air just before and lead into my interview with Matt Lauer.
–
What O’Donnell chose to air was striking for two reasons. First, it so badly missed all the best Palin sound bites I can only conclude (despite any logic to this theory) that NBC did so on purpose. No one could be so incompetent as to take 43 minutes of great stuff and literally use the very first answer in the interview (which was hardly noteworthy) and none of the best clips. Second, O’Donnell’s editorial choices went out of their way to diminish and ignore Governor Palin’s very credible objections to very specific episodes of media malpractice. But the news media, especially NBC, trying to make Palin look bad is hardly new.
That NBC allowed Norah O’Donnell to do the piece to begin with is interesting. Last month when snippets of the Palin interview were released, she and I had a memorable on-air confrontation that did not go as planned.
–
Even more extraordinary than this conflict of interest is that just after our confrontation, O’Donnell said on-air that that Palin had called Barack Obama a “terrorist.”
Now in a media world that was remotely sane, O’Donnell would have been fired for making such a false statement. Instead, she ends up dictating which Palin clips will be seen on the “Today Show,” the largest audience likely to ever see them. And while I was tempted to address this during my interview with Lauer, I refrained (a split-second decision I may end up regretting), and instead chose to confront O’Donnell directly when she interviewed me later in the day on MSNBC.
The video speaks for itself:
–
To me, this tells you everything you need to know about why I had to make this film.
Related:
Exclusive: Big Hollywood first look at “Media Malpractice”
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
306 Comments
What did anyone expect from NBC? They are totally in the tank for the Messiah. They have absolutely no credibility left.
"a media world that was remotely sane"
and here we have the answer as to why someone needed to do this movie in the first place.
I look forward to it! But please stick it to the uber-liberals by sticking to the facts; be the anti-Michael Moore in more ways than one
The color scheme for the graphics on MSNBC are Classic Obama Realism: light blue, dark blue, red and white. I think that's all we need to know about where they are coming from.
Boy, you could put O'Donnel's feet to the fire and she's not going to take ownership of her comment claiming that Palin called Obama a "terrorist" at all. Good for you for trying though. We need more people like you trying to hold these people accountable.
Equal opportunity toward Democrats and Republicans my a**.
I want to add that you absolutely destroyed Nora O'Donnell in those clips but I don't think you did very well with Matt Lauer for some reason.
Zielger's kinda right–Palin only *implied* Obama was a terrorist with the phrase "pallin' around with terrorists," or at the least a terrorist sympathizer. Either way, it was slimy.
Seems to me, the media frenzy feed aims at whomever is a the top because that's what gets the ratings. So for awhile they could write nothing nice about Hillary Clinton. Then, when Obama picked up momentum, they focused on him and Wright. So then it was Palin's turn. Unfortunately, Palin, her aides, and the McCain campaign gave them plenty of fodder.
Still, I have a hard time feeling sympathetic for a political candidate who tried to play the press and pulled her family in the midst of the circus, and then whines that it didn't work and her family should've been out of bounds.
I think SNL is a more credible news source than MSNBC, hell, Sesame Street is a more credible news source….
It sickens me that people like Norah O'Donnell can look you in the face and deny they weren't in the Bash-Sarah-Palin business, and do it with a smile, what is wrong with these people???
And why the hell AREN'T there any skits on SNL breaking Obama's balls?? Have you seen that guy without a teleprompter?? My God!! There is a month's worth of skits right there!!
Boom. Roasted.
Are you serious? For all that time, Obama was on top. All those others were just temporary threats to him. Do you realize all the stories the MSM could have explored but didn't? How about just one– Where are your academic records, Senator Obama? Is there something in them you don't want to share? -Just one of 100 stories the media completely ignored.
The real story here is the media's complete failure to explore Barack Obama with anything remotely akin to criticism. That's why they are making this story, of Ziegler's documentary, about Sarah Palin. Because yes, they were unfair to her, but she has legitimate weaknesses, so they look kind of okay. John, I think you should make the story about Obama, not Palin.
John, either Nora is a gluton for punishment, or she has the hots for you… I suspect the latter, otherwise she's seriously disturbed.
I think your mistake is not challenging them right from the beginning with their graphic claiming this is all about Sarah Palin… it's not, it's about their worship of Barack Obama, to the point they would lie about his opponents, even Hilary was thrown under the bus so that they could glorify this puppet of Rahm Emanuels.
Sarah Palin is a ridiculous, stupid woman. Whiner. Bad mother. Etc. Politicians needs backbone, not flapping lips.
POOR BABY!
what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I've ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response was there anything that could even be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul!
Then, when Obama picked up momentum, they focused on him and Wright.
I seem to recall the media never pressing Obama on how he told Newsweek he was at church every Sunday at 11 and then claimed never to hear any of Wright's rants. Usually they claimed (Alan Colmes was the best at this) that it was ridiculous to say Obama feels the same way Wright does and you can't blame Obama for everything his supporters say. The Wright videos were aired by Hannity a year before they exploded and the media only noticed when they had to.
Still, I have a hard time feeling sympathetic for a political candidate who tried to play the press and pulled her family in the midst of the circus, and then whines that it didn't work and her family should've been out of bounds.
I seem to recall a lot of pictures of the Obama children during the campaign and the networks never complained about that.
I will agree that the McCain camp was totally delinquent defending Palin and never did vigorously rebut the stupid things (banning books, charging for rape kits) that were used against her.
Im confused. Are you saying that media companies such as NBC or Fox News or Clear Channel actually promote their own agendas? Really? How old are you again? And let me get this straight, had America learned of the "real Palin" Obama would not have been elected? I didn't even know Palin was running for President. When did that happen? Finally let me ask you this, if NBC had been forthright and balanced in its reporting, then you wouldnt have had a movie to make–am I correct? In other words, you need NBC to be biased in order to create your own relvance. Its in your own interest that they be biased or you'd have no movie. Im going to do you a favor Big Hollywood readers and let you know something you obvioulsy havent figured out–rightly or wrongly, 60% of America can't stand Sara Palin and if conservatives continue to make her your poster girl you're gonna be pissing and moaning on Big Hollywood for years to come. Move on–the country has!
According to the polls, McCain was ahead right after the convention. I think the other thing y'all are missing is that Sarah Palin was new to the scene, and hadn't been "investigated" by the media yet. The risk McCain took was that Palin could energize the conservative core and hopefully bring in women and younger voters with her energy, and in some ways it backfired.
Scarlett, Your argument is well thought out – full of facts and crystal clear logic. Oh – you forgot to say Palin is a pooh pooh head.
NBC, at the top, has apparently made a business decision to appeal to the left. They make hardly an effort to seem balanced. The talking heads are simply saying what is given to them but Matt Lauer actually makes an unconsious effort to undermine anything close to a conservative thought – this is how his brain is wired and there is no changing it. All we can do is point out the glaring bias's and quit watching those shows. The Ozombies will continue to watch – that's were someone like Scarlett derives her power of reasoning.
You forgot to mention that her Today setup piece repeated the out of context video of Palin saying the troops were on a mission from God. PLEASE USE THAT IN YOUR FOLLOWUP! People don't understand how vulnerable civilizations are — we can lose it all. The Stasi is coming, then comes Sharia.
Wow, what a well-reasoned, thought-out position. You've completely changed my mind.
OMG Big Hollywood has been invaded by Obots!
This documentary is really threatening them! It must be good.
I love the ironic spectacle of liberals defending corporate media!
Lodo, this is mostly silly stuff. It's illogical to state that Palin wasn't running for President and then claim that America rejected HER in the election. Second, if NBC wasn't biased then John Ziegler would have made a different documentary. He doesn't need media bias, he simply chose it as the topic of this work.
Third, this "move on" crap is really tiresome – lefties only "move on" after they finally win something; when they lose they kick and scream and smash things until they can get their way again. Then they demand that everyone else act like the adults they are unwilling to ever become.
If they showed the first bit of the interview with Sarah Palin I'd put money on that it was because they didn't watch the rest. Are they going to have someone sit and watch 43 minutes of anything?
The one thing that the Nora O'donnells of the world will do to John Ziegler is make the conversation all about Tina Fey. This way they can write Ziegler off as saying SNL is "parody" and they've always lampooned politicians.
When it comes to bias, Tina Fey and SNL can be taken off the table.
The bias was when Brian Williams reads aloud Joe Klein's blog on the air after Palin's RNC speech.
Williams is supposed to be mainstream news anchor, but chooses to read a blog full of lies and distortions from a very partisan individual.
What did Brian Williams do after Obama's DNC speech (beside clean the drool coming out of his mouth)?
Norah is a Democratic shill. If she were Republican should would have been fired a long time ago just as Mr. Ziegler suggests. I like how she pretty much dismissed his accusation out of hand. She knows what she did and she got away with it, and continues to do so.
Where are your academic records, Senator Obama?
Thats right! President Obama just faked his way to a Harvard J.D. magna cum laude with a lot of help from affrimative action and Bill Ayers all the while never having his credentials examined by the Illinois State Bar, The State Department, the FBI or the NSA. A candidate like Palin who needed 6 colleges in 6 years was the one who got railroaded by the MSM!
John,
If it helps any, yesterday I went to your site and bought 2 copies of your Video.
1 for me, and the other for any of the MSM/Liberal deniers I will come across in my every day travels.
It’ll be worth it.
Not Over.
Ziegler's posting here now? AWESOME. Every time he does, I'll just link to this:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200504/wallace
Mourn ya till we join ya DFW
I think over at MSDNC, they all have to start their day by watching Obama's 42 minute convention speech.
At this point, Oliberalmann and Matthews have "repainted" the walls with their "enthusiam"
"I seem to recall a lot of pictures of the Obama children during the campaign and the networks never complained about that."
No, but Obama did.
What's more, you have to admit that Palin's family was more controversial: a pregnant teen daughter, a downs syndrome baby…
I'm not defending everything the press covered about Palin, but I do think O'donnell's claims, and the idea that McCain would've won if not for the press, are overblown.
On " ‘MEDIA MALPRACTICE’ FILMMAKER BLASTS MSNBC ANCHOR FOR FALSE PALIN ACCUSATION"
Wow. Where do you start? First there was the way she laughed (a hearty ha-ha-ha) at your initial criticism (she ducked later criticism also). How is SNL showing media bias, she asks unknowingly. How can you respond to this?Is she saying SNL is not media? DId she actually say under her breath (about SNL), "it's cartoons…"? Glad you were able to use the time to get some plugs in for your site, she may not have done it for you.
Sorry, but I have to say the 'people are stupid' line made me wince a little.
'Good to see ya, buddy'. I think she was trying her hand at sketch-comedy acting with that statement. The blurring of the line continues.
Sojourner and scarlett- was not aware axelrod was still paying for astroturfers. You get benefits too?
sojourner said:
"Palin only *implied* Obama was a terrorist with the phrase "pallin' around with terrorists," or at the least a terrorist sympathizer. Either way, it was slimy."
Ayers was and is a terrorist. So by your estimation, telling the truth is slimy? Or to put it in terms you might understand, it's "double plus ungood"? Interesting.
"I think the other thing y'all are missing is that Sarah Palin was new to the scene, and hadn't been "investigated" by the media yet."
And the thing you are missing is that obama has still not been "investigated" by the media yet. Double standards much, hypocrite?
lodo said:
"let you know something you obvioulsy havent figured out–rightly or wrongly, 60% of America can't stand Sara Palin"
According to what, a poll taken by Unicorns Monthly magazine? Rightly or wrongly, 95% of Big Hollywood's readership consider you an empty skulled dolt.
Ah, me…. the more jugears the stupid screws the pooch, the more the astroturfing obots flock to boards like this to spin the fables about Palin's unsuitability. Tsk tsk- not even two months in, and the moron horde is hearing footsteps.
Hope and change, my achin' arse.
FRAUD. FAILURE.
Davey, you completely lost the argument because you misspelled poo-poo.
Pooh (with the H) is a bear, poo (minus the H) is … well what the bear does in the woods.
So it doesn't matter what else you ever say … ever… you lose because you misspelled one minor word. Obviously anyone that misspells poo-poo can't have a valid opinion on anything and is obviously a shill for the GOP.
(there, do I have the liberal "debate" style down pat yet?)
No need to. Just ask the Scaife-funded lemming how he feels about Nate Silver. Now there's some decorum.
John, I was a huge fan when you were at KFI. Since you left, I find KFI nearly un-listenable. I am really proud and happy for your success with this documentary, and you aquit yourself so very well in these ridiculous interviews.
I'm looking forward to your future endeavors, and thanks for all you have done for conservatives, and Sarah Palin in particular!
Ahhh, so you are going to be annoying. Typical liberal!
Considering the outcome of last year's election, the MSM's stupid agenda is a disservice to society. It would be nice to get the news without someone's opinion getting in the way. Either that, or the least they could do is be upfront about it.
What's so tragic is that people like you think it's okay for these powerful institutions to have an agenda, an agenda that can (and has) shaped the outcome of our elections. If they were in the tank for the Republicans, people like you would be shrieking about a conspiracy and such nonsense. But because they're for your guy, it's okay for them to have an agenda and be biased. No problem.
As for moving on, maybe you should tell that to all the Palin haters who keep harping on and on about how stupid she is. I've seen plenty of them who still haven't been able to move on. Maybe you should take your own advice.
Got to agree Suzie… up until you hit the "people are stupid" line, John, you had her on the defensive time, John. She was avoiding answers you gave , and trying to twist your comments (and failing). You hit that '…stupid' line, and her eyes lit up saying "See , we got your soundbite now… you're dead meat".
Got to agree Suzie… up until you hit the "people are stupid" line, John, you had her on the defensive time,.. She was avoiding answers you gave , and trying to twist your comments (and failing). You hit that '…stupid' line, and her eyes lit up saying "See , we got your soundbite now… you're dead meat".
I was watching CNN or MSNBC at the Gym I work out at. Actually, I wasn't "watching" it, but it was on while I was working out. There was no sound but I was struck by the graphic that said "reaction to The President's Speech" and it occurred to me that during the Bush years, we would have never seen a graphic that said that. It would have read: "Reaction to Bush's speech" or something similar. It crossed my mind that Bias is so pervasive, so absolutely entrenched that even small things like that are done without any thought at all. Liberals are happy about Bias because it reinforces "their" point of view, but they don't realize that "their point of view" 99% of the time is only "their point of view" because of the continual barrage of leftist ideology that they have received at the hands of the media, educational, and entertainment Establishment. Most Liberals will never realize that fact.
We are in a very dangerous time, we are at the precipice of fomenting our own destruction. When the Government controls what we see and what we do, we are all lost. The founders never conceived that their establishment of a "Free press" could ever be bypassed not by government control, but instead hijacked by radicals who have infested all the institutions and THEN infiltrated the halls of government, then worked hand in hand with the "Free press" to achieve their ends.
On principle, Liberals SHOULD have a problem with Bias, but we see the lie of Liberalism as a totalitarian ideology cloaked in the rhetoric of humanitarian progressivism. We are sowing the seeds of our own destruction, and doing it in the name of "hope" and "change." Our poor children..
I seem to recall the whole Obama family on the cover of People magazine. But I guess that doesn't count as pulling the family into the media circus because it's the messiah.
Remember ~ Jesus saves, Obama spends.
Nah, just pointing and laughing. Palin will always have die-hard fans with deep fantasies of a woman that never existed.
Reporters will never give good press to any conservative. Conservatives must take a page from Reagan and simply talk over and around the press. Palin is the real deal and it scares the hell out of the left, and all lovers of government both side of the aisle. Our problem is Washington, all of these idiots love government the only difference is by degree. Good luck with your documentary, I look forward to watching it.
[...] follow-up post at Big Hollywood. Posted by Dan Collins @ 12:37 pm | Trackback SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: “John Ziegler Nukes [...]
The very best thing about this election season just past is that only the actively deluded – those with their fingers in their ears going, "La, la, la, la, la; I can't hear you!" – have even a shadow of a doubt left that the MSM are absolutely biased, in-the-tank leftards now. It's a great litmus test, it really is. If you encounter anyone who listens to the paleo-media anymore, you can be 100% certain that they are stark, raving mad. It's as good as a tattoo on a woman: When I see that tattoo, it tells me EVERYTHING I NEED TO KNOW about that chick, so I don't have to, you know, waste any time on her. Likewise with anyone who listens to the lame-stream media anymore: They are exposed as irretrievably lost anyway, so I can just blow them off.
I like things that make my life easier, so keep getting those tats, girls!
Nora a DNC shill? On MSNBC? That's "breaking news!" John, I saw you on Oreilly last night. Good job, however lately, Bill O seems a tad more snarky about everything. Nevertheless, you're a lone wolf, going into the belly of the beast with a reasonable argument. They can only try to discredit you, since their talking points are usually myopic and lame. How dare you give video proof! To quote "A Few Good Men" – "they can't handle the truth." Good luck and I look forward to seeing the video.
John
I saw you with this newsreader yet again yesterday. Well Done! Why is it she never answered your question about saying that Gov. Palin had called Obama a terrorist. Thing that make you go Hummmmm…
The same could be said for Kerry. He never published his military records either. Bush was not running on his military record, but Kerry was.
I am personally shocked that NBC and it's evil spawn, MSNBC would in any way slice and dice your film John. Oh ya,that's right, I'm not shocked.
Sew trew, sew trew. U r sew rite.
Let's connect the dots. Ayers, domestic terrorist. Obama, acquintance of Ayers. Ayers, pal of Obama. Obama there for is "paling around with terrorists". The plural is legitimate, Mrs.Terrorist is Bernadette Dorn, right? Do I have her name correct?
No, telling the truth is not slimy. Exaggerating the relationship between Obama and a man who a terrorist forty years ago is slimy.
There were lots of articles about Obama and his background in the past two years. Sure, they didn't tell the story you wanted to hear ("Obama was born in Kenya, raised in a madrassa, helped Ayers roll dynamite sticks which killed thousands, falisified his academic records which show he was sponsored by Gorbachev, Ayers wrote Obama's memoirs, and Obama spends his spare time plotting with Wright, Ayers, and CAIR on how he's going to turn the U.S. into a communist paradise"), but to pretend that the Press and the public gave Obama a complete pass while conspiring to destroy Palin shows the blinders you're wearing.
Well said! Obamabots love their messiah and their government and will hit their knee’s at the sound of his soothing voice. To a leftist to grovel is honor, to beg is divine. Why work if one can plunder, if a parasitic life your ultimate goal. A remarkable, self made, individualist like Sarah Palin is counterintuitive to their victims pride, and must be destroyed at all cost. Always remember the leftist creed, what’s in it for me?
And Barack's refusing to have any of those grand accomplishments examined by an objective eye is yet another example of his grand humility. In fact, I wish to personally thank Barack for only leaving enough written records of his life that could fill the inside of a matchbook cover. It is just a few less things to interupt my worship of him.
John, I was at my gym and saw your interview with Norah O'Donnell. Could she have been any more defensive? Why on earth do you waste your time with these insipid shows? The people who are going to watch your documentary don't intentionally watch MSNBC or the Today Show, not without plenty of alcohol beforehand.
http://the100mostannoyingthings.blogspot.com/
I don't remember ANYONE saying McCain would have won if it weren't for the tingly orgasmic press coverage that Obama enjoyed for 2 years. What they are saying is that the press was and IS still in the tank for this guy. They would have crucified Bush for half the gaffes of Biden or Obama. Obama got free campaign coverage. I don't remember him being asked one tough question. Or at least to the extent of the "gotcha" interrogations that Palin received – and she was the VP candidate. Not the main guy. The argument here isn't whether McCain would have won – he was a bad candidate and I'm glad his attempts at the WH are done – but that they are so blatantly biased to the Democratic Party that Helen Keller could see it. But they still, as Norah said, view themselves as objective when the anchors on their network have to go pull a bone because of the tingles they're getting in His presence.
Hey, his own bio here brags about being the subject of that piece, it's only fair people should read it.
"Zielger's kinda right–Palin only *implied* Obama was a terrorist with the phrase "pallin' around with terrorists," or at the least a terrorist sympathizer. Either way, it was slimy."
How is the truth "slimy"?
Get 'em, John. Wish half our guys had cojones your size!
The organized campaign against Palin was the other side of the coin. It's impossible to make the story without her. But I agree, it's the side that offers an easier foothold for those who wish to dispute it.
Except that Fox is, you know, a real news organization.
Unlike PMSNBC.
How do you know she was a bad mother? Do you have a crystal ball? If so, can you tell me who's going to win the series between the Rockets and the Trail Blazers this week? I'm desperate to make SOME money in this crappy economy.
It was the press who dragged Sarah Palin's family into the spotlight.
Nice try on the strawman, sojourner.
I did not and never have said any of the nonsense you attributed falsely to me, but congratulations nonetheless on decisively defeating these never stated allegations. Perhaps there is a windmill or two in your future that you could defeat in a superb display of jousting?
What I wanted to see was in depth coverage of Obama's mismanagement of annenburg challenge funds, how hud monies under his control resulted in a notable degradation of the projects he was tasked to improve, his nonexistent voting record in the Illinois state senate, the large amounts of money he took from fanny/freddy and various investment banks, his complete lack of introducing and passing ANY legislation while spending those momentous 120 odd days in the US Senate, his affiliation with Acorn including the probono legal work he performed for them, his uh- interesting real estate discounts that happened here in Chicago and so on.
But I understand how the breathless and near round the clock coverage of Palin's PTA meetings, her firing of a drunk state trooper, her amniotic fluid, out of context footage of her quoting from a Lincoln speech, incorrect charges of her "banning" books, and how much her campaign trail clothes cost was of far more importance to the average voter. She was, after all, running as Vice President.
To try to pretend that the press did anything near a proper investigation of the empty suit infesting our white house shows one of two things- you are still getting paid by Axelrod to spew such demented babble, or you are delusional to the point of needing to be institutionalized.
I say again…. FRAUD. FAILURE.
Ummm, pulling their family into the campaign? How many magazine covers were Sasha, Michelle and Malia on during the campaign? I can think of three right off…
And it was Obama first, before Palin entered the race that whined and said families should be left out of it. I think it was right after Michelle was taken to task for saying that this was the first time she was proud of her country.
Not a complete pass, but a 90% discount on all routine election cycle scrutiny that is due a presidential candidate. Trust me, if the guy wasn't young, suave, black, and liberal, the media consensus would have been, "Wait, a 40 something with no executive experience for the highest executive position in the land? Maybe we should have a national dialogue about this!" Instead, he appeared on (literally) ten covers of Time magazine.
Regarding your parade of straw men and dynamite sticks: It is documented fact that Bill Ayers participated in domestic terrorism, he was a very good friend of the Obamas, and that is a problem because that is a voluntary relationship that most people in this country — liberal or conservative — would never engage in, much less an American statesman.
So where are they? Why not show us President Brilliant's Occidental College records, for example? Why not release the tape of Obama with Khalidi? You miss the point. It's not because of bad grades. It's because his past reveals his radicalism. And the American people might get confused and think he's a Communist or something. They don't understand academia like you and I. So let's just give them a simple thing to contemplate: "Where hope finally made a comeback." And the media happily went along with this.
Not a complete pass, but a 90% discount on all routine election cycle scrutiny that is due a presidential candidate. Trust me, if the guy wasn't young, suave, black, and liberal, the media consensus would have been, "Wait, a 40 something with no executive experience for the highest executive position in the land? Maybe we should have a national dialogue about this!" Instead, he appeared on (literally) ten covers of Time magazine.
Regarding your parade of straw men and dynamite sticks: It is documented fact that Bill Ayers participated in domestic terrorism, he was a very good friend of the Obamas, and that is a problem because that is a voluntary relationship that most people in this country — liberal or conservative — would never engage in, much less an American statesman.
[...] Ziegler has more on Big Hollywood. [...]
Yea, and it's a classic political tactic. You escape a scandal by focusing on something irrelevant or some less consequential aspect of the scandal. It's the media's job to call politicians out on this. Instead, most of the media directly engaged in this activity on behalf of their favored political candidate.
So, instead of talking about Ayers/Wright/etc., they would raise the question: "How does the McCain campaign bringing up Ayers/Wright reflect on his candidacy?" or some such derivative, self-referential, irrelevant nonsense. They ask "Does this help or hurt John McCain?" which obviously implies that it hurts him. Well, why does it hurt him? Because this is the way they talk about it: without addressing the question.
The same was true of Joe the Plumber. It wasn't, "What did he ask, how did Obama respond, and what does this mean about Obama?" They could have been talking about those things without Joe already. Him bringing up this question was unwelcome. But since it was obviously a news event, they had to cover it. How did they choose to cover it? Through irrelevant distractions: who is Joe the Plumber?
Wow, I can tell you're from Chicago. I could have written the same email. People who've seen Obama up close for at least 15 years (and still remember him saying there was "no difference" between him and Bobby Rush) know all to well the sleazy people he's worked with (without a single complaint) his entire career. Whether politicians or people who've made their living by hanging at the fringes of politics, this guy was only to happy to take money and favors (then later return them) from ANYONE, regardless of their reputations and tactics.
He got elected through backdoor methods (every time), never supported reform, chose Blagojevich over Vallas (and we all know how honest Blago is), and generally did nothing during his time here, other than set himself up for higher office. People from other areas of the country have a completely false impression of him, and it's maddening.
Wow, I can tell you're from Chicago. I could have written the same post. People who've seen Obama up close for at least 15 years (and still remember him saying there was "no difference" between him and Bobby Rush) know all to well the sleazy people he's worked with (without a single complaint) his entire career. Whether politicians or people who've made their living by hanging at the fringes of politics, this guy was only to happy to take money and favors (then later return them) from ANYONE, regardless of their reputations and tactics.
He got elected through backdoor methods (every time), never supported reform, chose Blagojevich over Vallas (and we all know how honest Blago is), and generally did nothing during his time here, other than set himself up for higher office. People from other areas of the country have a completely false impression of him, and it's maddening.
Norah O'Donnell = Leftist Tool Fool
John,
I ordered a copy of 'Media Malpractice' on Saturday and look forward to viewing it. I wish you all the best in the work you're doing. It's fun watching you go toe to toe with these journalistic giants as you're out there promoting your film.
Continued success.
I see. And you learned all of this by yourself, did you? Wasn't covered by the media at all? 'sfunny, because I know what "scandals" you are talking about, so somebody must have reported them.
Oh, and let's be honest about something else–Palin overshadowed McCain in the campaign. Many, many conservatives said they were voting for Palin, not McCain (Check the Free Republic archives if you doubt me.)
But again, while I don't think the charges of media bias against Palin are completely unfounded, they were overblown.
I forgot to make this point: Yes, the attack on Palin is the other side of the coin. But it's the more defensible side. Dragging an unorthodox VP candidate through the mud is far more defensible than completely failing to examine the favorite to be POTUS.
That's why MSNBC, for example, framed their Ziegler interview with Palin clips, put Palin blurbs on the bottom of the screen, and asked him questions entirely about Sarah Palin.
I think the more honorable media professionals are a little ashamed at how they softballed Obama, but they are all very proud of their treatment of Palin.
Bush's military record shows that as a pilot he inherently had a much greater chance of serving in Vietnam as other National Guardsmen. Plus flying military jets is dangerous…duh. There was also a story that Bush did volunteer for a duty that would've taken him to Vietnam.
But what about Obama's military record…that's what I want to know!
Yeah, you just happened to have that around.
What a coincidence.
We know how this works. The paid trollbots attack the messenger because they can't debate the issue.
Almost all of those "straw men" were reported as fact by leading conservative news sources (although I made up the bit about Obama rolling dynamite sticks). I'd provide citations, but I don't have the time. The "Madrassa" bit was reported by FOX news, just as an example. I'm not sure if it was ever retracted
I'm not sure I'd agree with you about the shunning of Dick Ayers. As Oliver North once said, "the best you can do in the judicial system is 'Not Guilty.'" And I think 40 years of nonviolence and community participation makes up for his acts as a 20-year-old. It was, at least in my opinion, a non-issue that attempted to slime Obama by association, rather than talk about issues people care about.
Well, I'm guessing you're not getting an invite back on Norah's show any time soon. I'll be honest and say that I didn't like your interview with Lauer. I thought you came off defensive and unfocused. You should have a list of offenses handy that involve interviewers or someone on their station you can use to point out specific incidents. The thing about the media forwarding the, "Palin is an idiot" mantra doesn't work because it's unprovable (although I agree). You're better off citing examples that can't be disputed, like Brian Williams reading an untrue accusation from a blogger on his news show (or Norah's comment about Palin). Personally, I'd always mention the NY Times piece talking about how sexy Obama's pecs are without his shirt on.
I'm sure the folks who already agree with you won't mind anything you do to attack the MSM, but if you want to reach the ones whose minds could be changed, you need to tighten up your message. Confrontation might make give the interview great sound bites, but it doesn't portray you as an impartial journalist with a story to tell.
Thats just outright oxygen theivery on the part of both of you.
Did it ever occur that if Barry Hussein X is the dangerous radical / stealth muslim / academic cheatin'-neegruh you make him out to be that maybe some of the agencies of the federal government I cited might raise some concern, given that they have more access to his background than some dead-end bloggers?
Of course not.
Because reality (and lack thereof) is no obstacle to your thinking. In fact, it just makes you double down. If anything, there will soon be an argument here that 'proves' there is an ever widening conspiracy that includes planet Earth, Them and Obama.
The media bias is so bad that if Obama was sacrificing babies in the fire to worship Baal, the headline would read, "Obama makes sure that underpriviliged kids keep warm this winter".
Alright…you had 8 years of time in which liberals were shut down at every turn and zealot hacks like Ann Coulter were given prominent airspace. So as for "equal opportunity" – don't complain. How about their accountability? Being touted for books that are direct attacks ("If Democrats Had Brains They'd Be Republicans" – how is that at all objective literature?)? I'll hold my party accountable when there are problems, will you? Or do you prefer the pitchfork the enemy approach?
No, but Obama did.
Obama took his family to Montana for his daughter's 10th birthday during the July 4th holiday and to use them in campaign commercials and People magazine. To paraphrase David Shuster, it seemed he was very capable of pimping out his family.
I'm not sure if the Palin family was 'controversial' as much as normal for a family with teenagers. If having a DS child is controversial we have really sunk pretty low.
Okay, I re-read the "straw men" post. I exaggerated a lot there, mostly to make the point that there were plenty of negative Obama stories and mis-stories floating around and reported in the media. If I had the time, what I should've done was get some citations. Yeah, sarcasm doesn't get you too far around here.
And Brisco, there were many issues, in my opinion, that should've been up for a national dialogue, but McCain/Palin, in my opinion, took the low road and tried to impugn Obama's character instead of addressing the issues.
And the press in general loves a good mudfight, especially when they get to supply the water and the dirt.
Dawn:
You are so correct about Obama using his family.
Talk about passive/aggressive.
First, "Leave my family alone. I'm the one running for president."
Then, "I'm here in Montana with my family for the July 4th holiday. Hey, come interview me and take some heartwarming pictures of my family."
Hey…you say "potatoe" I say "potato"…
Gotta keep pointing this out and putting their hypocrisy out there for everyone to see. To tell you the truth, I have found few Obama supporters in my travels. I think the dissillusionment is sinking in now that he is showing his true colors. And the more we name names, the better off we are in the future. After all, if it wasn't for Charles @ LGF, Dan Rather would be a cult hero instead of the exposed Bush-hating buffoon that he proved himself to be.
Thats right, buddy. We're on orders to mock silly impotent little rightbloggers until the commenters shake their tiny fists and perpetuate backwater myths as if we give a sh*t what you "think" to be true.
Now where's my gold Cadillac and dividend check?
I wish I was surprised. Between your film and Bernie Goldberg's book, we have them dead to rights. But are the voters paying any attention? I fear not.
CAUTION: Astorturfer next 5 miles.
Well, the pregnant teenager bit becomes controversial when the candidate's party stand is to teach only abstinence (can't remember what Palin's view on that was), and that the assumed Republican line on single girls getting pregnant is "irresponsibility" and "where were her parents?"
Trig's birth wasn't controversial, but it isn't the norm, which is why it naturally provoked a lot of interest, (and I'll agree that much of the attention was inappropriate.)
8 years?! What planet have you been living on? Last time I checked Ann Coulter was among the conservatives shouted down on "The View," just like John McCain. And don't even get me started on how many times I've heard Ann referred to as "Man Coulter" over the last 8 years. The left does like their name calling– and the left invented the "pitchfork the enemy approach." Granted, "The View" isn't mainstream news, but their "Obama is sexy" approach definitely reflects the "thrill up the leg" mentality of the mainstream media.
Liberals shut down?! Give me a break. Your comment is so ridiculous it's insane. Clearly there are some conservatives who get a chance to speak and plenty who write books. This is not about that Ryan. It is about the media. It's the newspapers and the news anchors – almost all of which are so liberal they can't see staright. This would be fine if they didn't let it reflect on their profession. I'd lose my job if I let my political leanings dictate everything I do. The media reports every story unfairly, as it bests suits them. They have been doing this for a lot longer than the past eight years that you mentioned, but keeps getting stronger and stronger every day. Thank goodness for somebody like john Zeigler stepping up to he plate. He absolutely tore Norah and nbc news apart. It was fantastic. And he did it with the TRUTH!
Look, Ann Coulter is provocative, yes, but consider this
1. She is a book author, not mass media
2. She wasn´t feted by the GOP the way Michael Moore was at the 2004 convention. And Moore has harmed this country in many ways.
3. She wasn´t elected to the Senate like Al Franken, who wrote a book called "Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot" – during a time when libs were "shut down" according to you.
4. Liberals always bring up Coulter because they cannot find many other examples.
5. When exactly did Coulter make up quotes out of thin air?
6. When did Coulter pretend to be news media as opposed to (frequently humorous) commentary?
Hey Ryan, last I checked, Ann Coulter is a conservative author who makes her money writing inflamatory OPINION! She has never passed herself off as a news anchor. The job of which is to report the news in an unbiassed fashion. At that point the dumbed down viewer has the responsibillity to form an opinion. To answer your question, I think a pitchfork is about the only thing most clueless liberals understand.
It wasn´t as slimy as actually pallin´ around with terrorists. If Bill Ayers is a terrorist – and by every definition he is, albeit retired now – then that is an accurate description of what Obama was doing. They were undeniably "pals". Not an isolated case either. Obama had several relationships with anti-American radicals. You want that subject to be taboo, but it is what it is.
Shorter Paul D: The guy just wanted to be president. Asking questions about his past is RACIST.
"8 years of time in which liberals were shut down at every turn". Are you talking when the National Guard occupied the NY Times building after they printed nat'l security secrets? Or when the police arrested Cindy Sheehan and the Code Pinkers protesting at GWB's private residence? Nah, you must mean when the FCC recinded the broadcast licenses of CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN & MSNBC after they criticized the Bush girls, right? No? Then it's gotta be when the FBI confiscated every known copy of that film that ruminated on asassinating GWB! I figure it's gotta be one of them. And where is it written that all opinion journalism be objective? Ann Coulter sells books because a whole lot of people like a whole lot of what she writes about. That old supply and demand thing. I'm sure you've heard of it.
And in case you weren't paying attention, and judging your opening assertion I don't think you were, GWB got tons of criticism from the right for, among other things, Medicare expansion, No Child Left Behind, Harriet Myers, Comprehensive Immigation overhaul, TARP I, and on and on. So let's hear some of that "holding my party accountable" criticism on things like Messers Dodd and Frank playing footsie with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the attempt to undermine the Iraq troop surge, the nonsense about our Guantanamo "gulag", etc. Got the snerdley's for that?
Liberals definitely can´t get Palin out of their system. And they keep bringing up Joe the Plumber, as if he was some sort of criminal. And then they tell us to "get over it"? By all means! Let´s talk about corrupt Democrats. It´ll be a long night.
Ayers' group was planning the murder of innocent soldiers before they blew themselves up ( karma's a bitch).
Yes, a douche like Ayers should have been shunned.
And if your idea of community participation is helping to ruin Chicago's schools
then you need serious help…..or a better supervisor because your script is weak.
You must be logged in to post a comment.