‘‘The problem is that you’re not angry enough about this.’’

Stacy McCain deconstructs the Los Angeles Times’ Obamacare coverage:

One of the tricks of media bias is to confuse readers and viewers about who is the subject of the sentence and responsible for action.

A public that is half-educated — or, as is often sadly the case, miseducated — does not have the skills of rhetoric and logic necessary to analyze the ways in which they are deliberately misled by the media, but some of the tricks are so simple anyone can spot them.
...
[About Obamacare] Obama lied, and Republicans told the truth, accurately predicting that the implementation of ObamaCare would result in the cancellation of millions of private insurance policies.

You might think that, with truth so clearly on one side and falsehood starkly exposed on the other, no one could possibly be confused.

Ah, but you’re not a liberal newspaper editor determined to prevent the blame from being properly allotted to the Democrats.

Go read the whole thing... and then contemplate what else we’re not being told.

Posted by: Old Grouch in The Press at 18:23:48 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 176 words, total size 2 kb.

Another story missed...

Iowahawk

I don’t want an apology from Obama.  I want an apology from every shit-for-brains reporter who blindly bought his fantasies.

That’s assuming they ‘‘blindly bought’’ them...

Previously:  Propagandists First

Posted by: Old Grouch in The Press at 17:16:36 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 35 words, total size 1 kb.

Propagandists First

If everyone in Wonkland knew that ‘‘you can keep your own medical plan’’ wasn’t true, why didn’t ‘‘anyone in Wonkland’’ challenge it?

Goldberg:

...What does it say about the liberal wonks that they either never said so when the legislation was being debated or said so very quietly under their breaths?

Maybe that they’re a pack of partisan liars?

Related:
MORE (131031, 17:32): *Now* They Tell Us  Dept

Posted by: Old Grouch in The Press at 21:51:39 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 122 words, total size 3 kb.

‘‘Two-stories’’ at CNN

How CNN/Money headlined the jobs story:

August jobs report: Hiring continues as unemployment falls

O.K.

But scroll down (past the graphic) to the subhead, and you’ll find...

Hiring continued at a slow pace in August, and the unemployment rate fell as more Americans dropped out of the labor force.

No, no difference at all.


(I’ve got a screenshot, right here!)

Posted by: Old Grouch in The Press at 17:11:35 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 63 words, total size 1 kb.

Oh no? Just watch!

Investors Business Daily:

Media Can’t Ignore New Developments In IRS Scandal

LATER: ‘‘Chuba’’ comments at Instapundit:

Sure they can.  This morning, while I was getting ready to head off to work, the TV was on to the local morning news... around the time that subjects of national interest came up... There was something about Trayvon, that NSA guy at some hacker’s gathering in Las Vegas, and something about ambulance-chasers illegally soliciting Asiana crash victims.

But the IRS?  Zippo.

Q.E.D.

Posted by: Old Grouch in The Press at 18:13:35 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 80 words, total size 2 kb.

Not reporters. They’re the palace guard.

stevewhitemd, commenting at Le•gal In•sur•rec•tion:

When I was young (yes, that long ago), reporters (not journalists) were for the most part fairly liberal.  But they’d sell their mothers to get a story, because it was all about the story, the scoop, the right question, and getting it into print.  It didn’t matter if the target was someone they otherwise might defend and admire, if the story was there they’d go with it.

Particularly since they knew that if they sat on a story their competition across town might run it in tomorrow’s headline.

Now thanks to J-schools we have journalists, and thanks to their education we have narrative and not stories, and thanks to their shameless self-promotion we have important journalists, and thanks to JOURNOLIST all these important journalists coordinate their narrative to the demands of those to whom they owe their allegiance so as to be relieved of the fear that they might get scooped.

Too bad the 16 year old kid didn’t know the rules, eh?

Posted by: Old Grouch in The Press at 00:12:47 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 173 words, total size 2 kb.

All in the game?

‘‘One thing we have learned from the IRS scandal is that sports journalists are morally superior to political journalists.  Whereas the former understand that cheating is an assault on the basic integrity of the sport, the latter all too often treat it as if it were just part of the game.’’ - James Taranto

...and in sports journalism, the ‘‘homers’’ usually aren’t allowed to pretend they’re objective.

Posted by: Old Grouch in The Press at 14:38:42 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 71 words, total size 1 kb.

Of course we don’t hear *anything* about this over here...

Nile Gardiner, blogging at The Telegraph:

It is simply astonishing that the leader of the free world would agree to speak against a backdrop of a murderous terrorist with American and Israeli blood on his hands...

(Well, not so much this leader, but, pray, continue...)

It projects a clear signal that Washington is weak in the face of terrorism, and it is an insult to the memory of those who died at the hands of Arafat’s terror network.

(Yes, it does. That’s probably why he did it...)

While the Obama White House prides itself on having an extremely slick campaign operation, its ineptness and insensitivity in government, not least on the world stage, can be staggering. President Obama, for example, could not even pronounce the name of Burmese freedom fighter Aung San Suu Kyi on his recent visit to Rangoon... He also famously called the Falkland Islands ‘‘the Maldives’’, and succeeded in offending the whole of Poland when he referred to a ‘‘Polish death camp’’ in World War Two... President Obama’s first term was littered with embarrassing gaffes abroad...

Any one of which would have been a nine days’ wonder among our progressive chattering classes, provided (of course!) the president involved was Republican.  As is, silence.

...and it looks like his second term will be more of the same.

This is in many respects an amateurish presidency, headed by a president who is frequently out of his depth on the world stage, and all too willing to appease America’s adversaries.

Oh well, all must be forgiven, then!


Elsewhere:

Posted by: Old Grouch in The Press at 18:44:58 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 279 words, total size 4 kb.

Biased by omission

Ira Stoll:

Sometimes the bias in Times news articles isn’t in what they say, but in what they leave out.

Mark Tapscott:

1,130 - Number of results for search term ‘‘Koch Brothers’’ on The New York Times web site.

64 - Number of results for search term ‘‘The Tides Foundation’’ on The New York Times web site.

It’s called protecting friends and punishing enemies.  And speaking of ‘‘friends,’’ recall that the Times holds that Pulitzer Prize for not reporting Stalin’s genocides.

LATER (130312 02:00):
Ace:

The media and supposedly ‘‘non-partisan’’ groups like Common Cause (actually bought-and-paid-for liberal front operations to give a ‘‘nonpartisan’’ veneer to liberal politicking) say that Big Money in Politics is bad.

Well, that sounds neutral, doesn’t it?  They’re not favoring a particular party in claiming that; there’s Big Money on the left as well as on the right.  Presumably they’re against all of it; that’s what makes this neutral.  Right?

...Given that Tides Foundation, a leftwing group founded by radicals, is donating five times as much [to political causes] as the Koch Brothers, we’d expect at least as many mentions of Tides, right?

But of course not.  Tides is permitted to operate in secret, with scarcely a mention; the Koch Brothers have the Scare Campaign ginned up against them.

The ‘‘Neutral’’ goal here is a lie.  The agitation is not to drive Big Money out of politics.

It’s about stopping money from supporting conservative initiatives and candidates only.  Soros & Ilk are to be exempted...  After all, Soros and Tides aren’t really even funding ‘‘politics’’ -- they’re just funding Common Sense Practical Solutions^(TM).

Yep.

Posted by: Old Grouch in The Press at 16:16:02 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 262 words, total size 4 kb.

Memory hole-ing at the NYTimes?

Instapundit:

Hmm.  I thought it was an ethical violation to threaten criminal action to bring about a civil settlement.  ‘‘During settlement negotiations, the Justice Department held out the threat of a criminal case against S.&P., the people said.’’

UPDATE:  Now this is interesting.  The part about criminal threats is now missing from the NY Times story, though the phrase still shows up in a search.^[1]  I wonder why it was removed?

Silly Glenn, ethics only apply to Republicans, not Democrats or their enablers!

------

Posted by: Old Grouch in The Press at 16:59:50 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 102 words, total size 2 kb.