SEARCH

Media Matters

Mary Chastain

WARNING FOR MEN: This will be a discussion about personal women stuff. Blame it on Media Matters for America. This is a tweet from MMfA:

Morons. Complete and stupid morons. Did they ever bother to do some fact checking? The link leads to audio of Dana’s show last Friday. She explained how women can know when they ovulate. MMfA obviously doesn’t believe her.

Let me tell you something MMfA. I and millions of other women use our cycles as a way to not get pregnant. I also use it to get pregnant. It’s called Natural Family Planning. Here’s a little education for you: I wake up at the same time every day to take my temperature with a basal body temperature thermometer. Watching your temps allows you to know when you ovulate. A few spikes in temps followed by a huge spike tells you that you ovulated. There’s also these simple things called ovulation tests!

(more…)

John Nolte

If John Podesta isn’t paying his Politico-parrot Dylan Byers anything, he’s getting quite the sweet deal.

In today’s lip-lock with Media Matters, Byers writes up a piece about the Accuracy In Media award our own Dana Loesch and CBS News reporter Sharyl Attkisson are set to receive this week but, as he does quite frequently, Byers gives Media Matters the final say:

In response to the statement, the liberal watchdog group Media Matters today noted that AIM has “a long history of promoting anti-gay views and conspiracy theories” and called the organization “a cesspool of hate.”

Media Matters also noted that the award has traditionally gone to reporters from conservative or right-wing media outlets, including Big Journalism, Fox News, the Heritage Foundation, and The Daily Caller.

We’ve done research on the unspoken relationship between Politico and Media Matters, and do you want to know what we’ve never found? Politico or Byers quoting any right-of-center media watchdog’s opinion of Media Matters.

(more…)

John Nolte

You would think that a media “analyst,” like Politico’s Dylan Byers, would be one of America’s primary defenders of free speech, especially political speech. But rather than defend political speech and satire, Byers is nothing more than a left-wing book burner, a politically correct speech-enforcer who wants certain speech chilled and specific individuals silenced. His blacklisting attempts might be disguised as passive-aggressive concern and requests for comment from employers, but when the outcome desired is obvious — to get people fired and/or reprimanded for something they’ve said — it’s still blacklisting.

Lately, Byers has been on a rampage to get two conservative CNN contributors in hot water, our own Dana Loesch and Red State’s Erick Ericson. Today Byers joined forces with GLAAD — an organization notorious for its bullying, speech policing, and un-American use of “re-educationcamps – to target CNN’s Roland Martin:

Roland Martin has now become the third CNN political analyst to cause controversy this year.

Last month, Dana Loesch celebrated U.S. Marines who had urinated on Taliban corpses, announcing, “I’d drop trou and do it too.”

Last week, Erick Erickson celebrated the tasing of an Occupy D.C. protester, saying, “Watching a hippie protester get tased just makes my day.”

Now, the Gay Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation is calling for Martin’s removal from the network for a comment he made on Twitter about H&M’s Super Bowl ad featuring a near-naked David Beckham: “If a dude at your Super Bowl party is hyped about David Beckham’s H&M underwear ad, smack the ish out of him!”

In Dylan Byers’ world, the obvious political humor Loesch and Erickson used to make a point, and a silly joke tweeted by Martin, is a “CNN political contributor problem.”

(more…)

P.J. Salvatore

Earlier today on Twitter Media Matters’ readers targeted Dana Loesch for her suggestion that women be more responsible for their bodies as an alternative to abortion. How shocking! The Soros and SEIU-funded website, which endorsed the violent Occupy movement, and whose editor engaged in a bitterly misogynistic rant against Loesch a couple of weeks ago, is now seeing readers make troubling suggestions towards Loesch.

Image provided by Loesch of Twitter stream.

Is this a suggestion of rape? Failure of birth control? Noting MMFA’s past associations with violence and their refusal to condemn the multiple rapes reported at various Occupy encampments, it wouldn’t be at all surprising to see their readers take a cue from the propaganda site’s endorsement of a violent movement where such crimes occurred.

Is this a new part of their mission statement yet published?

(more…)

Dana Loesch

***UPDATE: Think Progress was named in lieu of Crooks and Liars in the drafting process. That’s been corrected. We wouldn’t want to insult the integrity of one far left propaganda site by inadvertently identifying it as another far left propaganda site.

In an attempt to discredit my Sunday morning remarks on Planned Parenthood and mammograms, a Crooks and Liars blogger promoted a debunked narrative on the Live Action investigation of Planned Parenthood and mammograms. This is what happens when you confuse knowledge with partisan agenda.


To what does Crooks and Liars link? The debunked Media Matters story. Behold:

Yeah, about that lack of mammography machines … turns out, the whole thing was a sham.

Actually, it wasn’t:

Every defense they have put up about their story has been thoroughly discredited:

Media Matters Still Has Trouble With the Word “Provider,” Owes Correction

Media Matters Proves Why Planned Parenthood Doesn’t Need Taxpayer Funding

Media Matters Refuses To Retract Factual Error

CORRECTION REQUEST STANDS: Media Matters Fudged Truth On Planned Parenthood Mammograms

We ask again for Media Matters to live up to the purpose described for the organization and correct their bad information. Stubbornly clinging to information proven unarguably false isn’t journalism, it’s devotion to propaganda over truth. Media Matters must choose: ideology or journalism.

It’s humorous how one Soros associated blog attempts to bail out another Soros blog using the first Soros blog’s bad and discredited information that they refuse to correct.

Komen didn’t retract funds because Planned Parenthood doesn’t offer mammograms. It never has. I’ve had a wellness check-up from Planned Parenthood (I was between jobs and didn’t have insurance for about a year) and it included a manual breast examination as well as instructions on the proper methods of self-examination (an important tool in early detection, which leads to higher survival rates). Had they detected anything or if I had belonged to any of the high risk groups, they would have referred me for a mammogram. That service could save potentially thousands of women’s lives.

And waste-of-intelligence hack pundits like Dana Loesch want to keep that from them.

I would advise that the next time “Nicole Belle” attempts to deconstruct my remarks, she does so while practicing listening comprehension. Planned Parenthood doesn’t do mammograms, as I clearly and explicitly stated, they provide the “most basic of screenings,” which scores of clinics (not to mention Medicaid) provide to low-income women. If  Crooks and Liars’ blogger needed a mammogram, she would have been referred to another clinic entirely by her Planned Parenthood clinic. Why? Because Planned Parenthood does not offer mammograms.

(more…)

P.J. Salvatore

Unless you missed it this week:

OUTSTANDING ITEMS

Media Matters has yet to correct these glaring mistakes:

(more…)

Dan  Riehl

It’s been over 25 years since radio shock jock Howard Stern went national and in his own way helped to define today’s AM radio. So, it’s amazing to see the liberal media now suddenly discover a mean puritanical streak in what looks to be an effort to silence voices on the Right. And I thought it was the Christian right that seeks to enforce some moral order on the population?

With cross-over media and careers being so much in vogue today, should it really be a surprise that what may work, or be fine in one medium, could be interpreted as inappropriate on another? And why is it that only conservative voices seem to suffer this guilt by association, generated by the Left, to try and get them kicked off the air? This despicable political tactic deserves to be called out for what it is, the modern day equivalent of book burning.

Call it a Vast Left-wing Conspiracy, or some interesting connections if you follow New Media. It seems that not long after former Politico staffer Ben Smith moved to Buzzfeed, Politico may now be linking up with Buzzfeed to put some distance between itself and ideologically-biased media outlet Media Matters.

The most aggressive would be book burner at Politico these days appears to be Dylan Byers. After going after Big Journalism editor, Dana Loesch, he’s now targeted Erick Erickson for comments made on his AM radio show.

(more…)

P.J. Salvatore

Media Matters continues to deflect from accusations of antisemitism and extreme bias by trumping up nontroversies on other conservatives. In addition to watching Fox, scouring Andrew Breitbart’s Twitter feed, and recording Erick Erickson and Dana Loesch’s shows, Media Matters for America is also facing questions as to how their organization can actively politick, which is against their own mission statement. Their latest lie? “Dana Loesch compared Al Gore to Leni Riefenstahl.”

(more…)

John Nolte

***UPDATE: Politico finally added a story about today’s Fast and Furious hearings to their front page. Only they buried it waaaaay below where my screenshot ends and waaaay below the days-old Obama crooning story. Media Matters must be thrilled. Good dog.

Well, you know how it is: jounOlisting journOlists gotta journOlist.

Could this be the result of Politico taking more marching orders from Media Matters?

—–

In the bottom left-hand corner of the front page screen-cap taken minutes ago, you’ll see that Politico is still helping Obama milk his songbird moment. the story is also featured much higher in the sidebar.

And yet, not a word, not a peep, not a byte of space for the Congressional grilling Attorney General Eric Holder is currently facing after yet another Friday dump of Fast and Furious documents that don’t quite add up to what we’ve been told in the past. 

Politico provides no context, no background, no heads up – nothing on one of the biggest political stories of the day and a brewing scandal within the Obama administration. As far as Politico’s concerned, it’s just not happening today or news. Memory-holed by Obama’s Palace Guards.

(more…)

Joel B. Pollak

Yesterday, Juan Williams of Fox News doubled down on his accusation that Republican presidential candidates are using “racial code words.”

Today, Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic has followed suit with an article rehashing the tired allegation that Republicans are using so-called “dog whistle” tactics–“the use of coded, ambiguous language to appeal to the prejudices of certain subsets of voters”–i.e. white voters (Democrats’ use of race to appeal to the prejudices and fears of black voters is rarely subject to scrutiny.)

Jeffrey Goldberg (Photo: Bloomberg News)

Goldberg says that the Obama’s Republican opponents have alleged the following (original links, including one to Media Matters–itself the subject of serious charges of antisemitism–included):

Black people have lost the desire to perform a day’s work. Black people rely on food stamps provided to them by white taxpayers. Black people, including Barack and Michelle Obama, believe that the U.S. owes them something because they are black. Black children should work as janitors in their high schools as a way to keep them from becoming pimps. And the pathologies afflicting black Americans are caused partly by the Democratic Party, which has created in them a dependency on government not dissimilar to the forced dependency of slaves on their owners.

I’ll go even further, and admit that I personally heard a presidential candidate give a speech–in a church, no less–in which he blasted the black community, and black men in particular, for the phenomenon of single-parent households; who noted that black children with absent fathers have a greater chance of becoming criminals; who scolded black parents, “don’t just sit in the house and watch ‘Sports Center’ all weekend long”; and who told blacks to “read a book once in awhile.”

That candidate was Barack Obama.

(more…)

P.J. Salvatore

The protest endorsed by progressive media. From Huffington Post San Francisco:

Have you noticed that MSM started distancing itself from the occupy protests?

(more…)

Joel B. Pollak

Tablet magazine, the new online Jewish-themed publication that focuses on a broad range of current affairs topics, has taken Media Matters for America (MMfA) and the Center for American Progress (CAP) to task for using antisemitic language in criticizing Israel.

Illustration from Tablet: Daniel Hertzberg

In two separate articles, Tablet takes on the organizations that are the core of the Democrats’ media and policy strategy, joining a debate in which the defenders of MMfA and CAP have resorted to the worn-out fallacy that their critics are trying to silence debate on Israel.

One article by Spencer Ackerman–whose blog was once hosted by CAP–addresses “fellow progressives” and insists that while criticism of Israel is sometimes appropriate, those who use anti-Jewish tropes–like specious charges of dual loyalty and “Israel first”–undermine the case they are trying to make. He singles out Media Matters, CAP, and the radical pro-Palestinian lobby J Street, among others, for their rhetorical record of bigotry:

Some on the left have recently taken to using the term “Israel Firster” and similar rhetoric to suggest that some conservative American Jewish reporters, pundits, and policymakers are more concerned with the interests of the Jewish state than those of the United States….

“Israel Firster” has a nasty anti-Semitic pedigree, one that many Jews will intuitively understand without knowing its specific history. It turns out white supremacist Willis Carto was reportedly the first to use it, and David Duke popularized it through his propaganda network. And yet [Media Matters' M.J.] Rosenberg and others actually claim they’re using it to stimulate “debate,” rather than effectively mirroring the tactics of some of the people they criticize….

(more…)

Dana Loesch

Big Government reported earlier this morning on a Media Matters for America email on the Keystone Pipeline that exposes the true, partisan lobbying agenda behind everything the tax-exempt group does.

The email was sent, apparently in error, to key staff from the office of Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) in an attempt to provide talking points to “allies” (read: left-wing Democrats) in pushing back on the Keystone XL pipeline, which is supported by Republicans, some Democrats and the majority of Americans.

The key line in the email:

We are hoping for a big media splash, but – more importantly – we’re hoping that allies will be able to leverage it to gain favorable coverage.

(more…)

John Nolte

Whether they choose to acknowledge it or not, everyone in media understands what Media Matters for America (MMfA) is really about.

MMfA is an online group of modern-day book burners, a tax-exempt gang of bullies and propagandists dedicated to snuffing out conservative political opinion from the national discourse. To accomplish that goal, the George Soros-funded organization uses boycotts, intimidation, and the like.

Another of Media Matters’ obvious goals is to affect the mainstream media’s political narrative using these same tactics. Any story that might damage the left is immediately targeted by MMfA, using outright lies and half-truths.

The bottom line is that Media Matters is not dedicated to correcting or clarifying or illuminating truth; they’re dedicated to a left-wing political agenda which they intend to achieve by any means necessary, including outright blacklists and censorship.

In this same vein, most of us who work in media know what Politico is really about. The online publication arrived in early 2007 and pulled one of the most effective cons in Internet history. By using all of 2007 to masquerade as a news outlet sincerely dedicated to honest and unbiased reporting, Politico was able to ingratiate itself with high-profile conservatives and conservative outlets.

It was all a lie, but we all fell for it, and through the Right’s generous links, praise, blog-rolls, and talk radio interviews, Politico rose in prestige and name recognition.  Its power and influence in hand, in 2008 Politico threw off the disguise and came at conservatives with both barrels blazing in order to see Barack Obama to the White House. In the three years since, Politico has never looked back.

What prompted me to look into the possibility of an unspoken relationship between Media Matters and Politico was this story. As biased as Politico is, to witness Politico media blogger Dylan Byers use tactics perfected by Media Matters to push for a conservative’s firing from CNN was a new evolution for Politico–and not in a good way.

(more…)

Joel B. Pollak

Give Ryan Grim of the Huffington Post credit: it takes courage to change one’s mind, and to admit an earlier mistake.

Grim has written that he was wrong to dismiss a November 2011 report by 60 Minutes (based on Breitbart editor Peter Schweitzer’s book, Throw Them All Out) on insider trading in Congress:

At the time, I wrongly reported that 60 Minutes’ poor choice of targets for its report, and its clumsy attempt to connect specific trading to specific legislative action, set momentum for the bill back. Instead, in fact, the report propelled the legislation forward.

Grim had initially reported that the 60 Minutes report “falls short.”

What has changed his view is not the merits of the argument against insider trading–which Grim acknowledged at the time as “a serious problem in Washington”–but the fate of the legislation, which President Barack Obama suddenly supported during his State of the Union address last night:


Much of the left and the left media–including the Huffington Post, Politico, and Media Matters for America–dismissed the issue of insider trading and tried to discredit both the allegations and their source. Now that Obama has taken up the legislation–with its sponsor, Senator Scott Brown (R-MA) obtaining Obama’s explicit commitment to make Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid move it through the Senate–the left is scrambling to catch up.

Grim’s (honest) change of heart is likely the beginning of a broader and less principled shift, in which the left will attempt, in Orwellian fashion, to rewrite the history of its opposition to the Schweizer book, the 60 Minutes report, and congressional legislation on insider trading.

Big Brother says insider trading in Congress is wrong; therefore it has always been wrong. (more…)

Dan  Riehl

With the publication of Peter Schweizer’s best-selling book Throw Them All Out, Media Matters for America embarked on a scorched-earth campaign in an attempt to undermine both Schweizer and his book, while dismissing the topic of insider trading in Congress.

Bet they’d like to have that one back.

Here’s just a taste of their relentless attack. Each headline represents another post, with even more vitriol at the link on MMfA’s website:

60 Minutes Questions Suggesting Pelosi “Conflict” Reportedly Based On Schweizer Book

Bush, Beck, Breitbart, Palin: Schweizer’s Deep Right-Wing Ties

Schweizer Previously Pushed Dishonest Smears Of Pelosi In Prior Book

Schweizer Wrote Falsehood-Laden Op-ed Accusing Al Gore Of “Hypocrisy”

Schweizer Authored Book Blaming “Big Government Liberals” For Financial Meltdown

For its part, Politico mostly followed the Media Matters line on the story, with much of its report relying on quotes from Nancy Pelosi’s office. They even included a shot at Schweizer: (more…)

Joel B. Pollak

Eric Boehlert of Media Matters for America was so enthusiastic about new accusations of infidelity by Newt Gingrich’s ex-wife that he boasted on Twitter: “noted: it’s been 16 yrs since Dems had to defend a WH candidate’s marraige/sex [sic] life. For GOP, its now become wkly thing;”.

Someone going by the Twitter handle “OH_Robb” responded soon thereafter by pointing out an obvious counter-example: “John Edwards ran in 2008.”

Instead of acknowledging the error, Boehlert doubled down: “Q’s abt. Edwards marriage arose after his 2008 run was over; was never part of the campaign dialogue.”

Not only was that claim untrue–the National Enquirer accused Edwards in October of 2007–but it also highlights the left-wing media bias that Media Matters is at great pains to deny. It was no accident that journalists failed to probe Edwards until after he had dropped out.

Media Matters declares that its purpose is to correct “conservative misinformation” in the American media. To that end, it also tries to dismiss conservative allegations of left-wing bias in the mainstream media, either by denying that such bias exists, or claiming that such bias, even if it does exist, has no effect on Americans’ views. On matters such as the Edwards scandal, Media Matters provides the cover-up for the media cover-up.

The goal for Media Matters is not to win a political debate but to prevent one–to shift the terms by eliminating the few conservative voices in the mainstream media. (more…)

P.J. Salvatore

From J. Christian Adams at Pajamas Media:

Dana Loesch is their latest target for a simple reason — thugs like Eric Boehlert at Media Matters only attack the most effective critics of the government, and particularly those who cannot be easily cowed.  They don’t waste energy smearing conservatives at some websites who ponder topics as scintillating as how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.  They don’t waste time on conservative news outlets that either don’t understand the modern Left, or have never effectively opposed it.

Loesch, on the other hand, lands blows in her defense of liberty.  Both on her syndicated radio show, and at BigJournalism, her appeal is her courage and her uncompromising message.  She is precisely what the Soros-funded drones are tasked with snuffing out.

(more…)

Joel B. Pollak

Eric Boehlert, serial propagandist and Senior Fellow at Media Matters for America, joined the Stephanie Miller show this morning to fling some more dirt at Big Journalism editor-in-chief Dana Loesch.

Boehlert, who has thus far given a pass to men such as Bill Maher and Brit Hume with regard to their comments supporting U.S. Marines who were videotaped urinating on Taliban corpses, joined his hosts in joking about Loesch’s “screeching.”

Miller’s co-host, Chris Lavoie, opened the interview with Boehlert by describing a debate with Loesch on Twitter: “She got really, really screechy and emotional in her responses, and I just kept it on the level.”

Boehlert agreed, affirming Lavoie’s choice of language: “Straight to the screech, straight to the attacks.” He also belittled Loesch, describing her as “an Andrew Breitbart creation.”


Prior to joining Andrew Breitbart’s Big Journalism in 2010, Loesch had been blogging for more than ten years, and had won an award in 2007 for her column in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, among other distinctions.

Boehlert also slammed Loesch for not apologizing for her remarks–an odd claim, given that Media Matters has yet to apologize for the blatant antisemitism of M.J. Rosenberg, or for the lies and distortions of Boehlert himself.

Piling on, Boehlert claimed that Loesch hosts “a radio show, you know, that nobody listens to in the 22nd largest market in the country.” In point of fact, the Dana Show is the number one talk radio show in St. Louis–and in Indianapolis–in its time slot and it was just announced that the show is expanding to three hours.

But if Loesch’s show were really “a radio show that nobody listens to,” why would Boehlert and the left have made such a big deal out of her comments, elevating them to a national level?

Miller provided the answer: (more…)

Lee Stranahan

When I check my morning inbox, there’s no shortage of advertising waiting for me.

The Gap is offering to sell me clothes. Radio Shack is offering to sell me electronics.  And Media Matters for America is offering to sell me a mainstream media landscape free of conservative voices.

Make no mistake; as much as it may appear that ideology is driving groups like Media Matters, MoveOn.org and Color of Change, they’re also pushing their agenda for marketing reasons, citing dubious “achievements” designed to get their liberal niche audience to click the Donate Now button.

You can see this in Media Matters’ latest public-relations assault on Dana Loesch. Media Matters states its mission as combating “conservative misinformation,” but in this case, there is very clearly no misinformation speak of.

Loesch — at worst — was delivering an outrageous opinion in a show of support for the troops, as part of her job trying have an interesting and entertaining radio show. That’s not misinformation, and MMfA knows it.

So why does Media Matters care, and why drag CNN into it? The answer is very simple. It’s how they raise money.

This is from a fundraising letter from Media Matters for America that I received on December 27, 2011. If you’d like to learn how to write fundraising emails, pay attention, because this one is pretty well done. Bang on a few hot button issues, make it seem like you made some real progress, toss in a few references to the idea that “we’re all in this together!”, and then go for the kill and ask people to dig deep to help support you with a donation: (more…)