- Branded Twitter pages are here! But only, apparently, if you’re a progressive news outlet. Seriously, Al Jazeera? What’s next, RT/ Russia Today / Komrade Kommuniqué? Rhetorical question.

- Real headline: Barack Obama controls media more than presidential predecessors.

President Obama grants many more media interviews than his predecessors, but holds far fewer impromptu question-and-answer sessions, according to data compiled by a professor who studies presidential interactions with the press.

By doing so, Mr. Obama and his administration have more control over who asks questions and where they are answered …

… However, Mr. Obama has comparatively avoided Q.&A.s with scrums of reporters, according to Ms. Kumar, answering questions at 94 photo opportunities and other such sessions in his first three years. Mr. Bush had spoken at 307 such sessions after three years in office, and Mr. Clinton, 493.

Of course. Interviewers submit questions to the President and his team, who then choose what they want to answer. If the questions go unvetted, they don’t get asked. This is why he avoids those impromptu Q and As — and interesting how his predecessors welcomed them.

- Compare the above to this from Newsbusters: Obama’s Been Skipping the White House Press Corps for Network and Social Media Softballs.

- Interesting: NYT reporter asks for readers’s help in identifying bomb.

(more…)

After President Obama was caught playing tarmac theatrics with Gov. Jan Brewer, everyone accused Brewer of being a racist. (Though, if we’re playing identify politics, I’m not sure how a man storming off a plane with a thunderous expression, stomping over to a woman only to read her the riot act as she stands there with a handwritten note welcoming him to her state isn’t viewed as sexist.) The media would like for you to believe that Obama never thrust his finger in another’s face.

Remember when Obama wagged his finger in Gov. Bobby Jindal’s face? Neither does the media.

Apparently, the Brewer incident wasn’t the first time Obama attempted to create “Tarmac Theater” for the benefit of the watchful press corps. Jindal said the President’s outburst, pictured above, was “staged.”

(more…)

Apparently, not much.

The pressing issues of the day according to NBC: Terri Schiavo, sugar subsidies, the Everglades Project, the over-asked “Will you run as a 3rd party candidate?” question, English as the official language, and the very pressing issue of deciding what to do when Fidel Castro dies. There were a few moments that allowed for internal bickering and foreign policy. Most of the time, the candidates were fighting the moderators to get in policy talking points so that the American people might be slightly more informed of what the candidates actually plan to do should they be elected President. (more…)

Come on Media Matters for America, you’re making it way too easy to prove you’re an Obama propaganda machine and should not be tax exempt. I would prefer a better challenge. I’ve already had to fix one of Chris Brown’s articles and now he has another out there filled with misinformation.

Mr. Brown wrote about the NRA’s “conspiracy theories” and, of course, one of them was about Operation Fast and Furious. Mr. Brown titles this part, “What the … Botched ATF Operation Initiated To Promote Gun Control?” First of all, Fast and Furious was NOT botched. This is how it was suppose to work. Secondly, this isn’t a “ridiculous claim” because it’s true. I already had to point out to Mr. Brown that Sharyl Attkisson at CBS News has documents proving the ATF was using Fast and Furious as a way to implement tougher gun control laws.

Mr. Brown says, “What’s truly breathtaking is LaPierre’s willingness to push such wild conjecture absent any evidence.” No, Mr. Brown it’s truly breath taking that no matter how much evidence is presented you and MMfA keep on the rose colored glasses. Again, look at the documents Ms. Attkisson provided in her report. There is evidence the ATF was using Operation Fast and Furious to promote tougher gun control.

(more…)

One of the Old Media’s favorite ways of attempting to hide the ideological track of a story is to somehow forget to mention which party someone in the news hails or to whom they owe their fealty. In this case, it is what they don’t report that misleads. This week we find a classic what-they-don’t-say story concerning the judge that blocked sections of South Carolina’s new immigration law. For those unaware, U.S. District Judge Richard Gergel temporarily blocked segments of South Carolina’s new immigration laws because he claimed that some of its provisions impinged on federal prerogatives, things over which the state has no jurisdiction. The South Carolina law was opposed in court by Obama’s left-wing, activist Department of Justice headed by Eric “Fast And Furious” Holder and a gaggle of civil rights groups. Judge Gergel agreed with these attackers and issued an injunction to stop implementation of the provisions in question.

The Old Media reported a lot of details in the story, of course. We learned all about who opposed the provisions, who scoffed at the injunction, in what District Judge Gergel hailed, and in some of the reports we even get to hear what Republican South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley had to say about it all. But there is one thing few news outlets seemed to report that might help readers understand the decision better. Judge Richard Mark Gergel is an Obama appointee. (more…)

The Department of Justice released a statement about the uproar caused by Eric Holder using the race card.

“That is a complete distortion of the attorney general’s comment. His comments both in the article and elsewhere made clear that he believes much of the criticism is launched against him are unfortunately the typical Washington gotcha game. A simple reading of those comments show he was referring to how he is identified with the president given their close relationship and all they share in common including their ideology. The position of the attorney general has been a target for partisan attacks, and given the critical work that this attorney general he is doing at the Department of Justice, it’s no surprise that some are engaging in such tactics. His critics rightly view the attorney general is a progressive force, and given our current political environment, there will those who use any opportunity to score political points.”

Here’s what we supposedly confused [bold my emphasis]:

Of that group of critics, Mr. Holder said he believed that a few — the “more extreme segment” — were motivated by animus against Mr. Obama and that he served as a stand-in for him. “This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him,” he said, “both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both African-American.”

So exactly what did we distort? There’s a key word in Mr. Savage’s sentence: animus. This is Merriam-Webster’s definition:

1: basic attitude or governing spirit : disposition, intention

2: a usually prejudiced and often spiteful or malevolent ill will

3: an inner masculine part of the female personality in the analytic psychology of C. G. Jung — compare anima

I’m going with definition 2. Those of the “most extreme segment” which, let’s be honest here, include Sharyl Attkisson, Cam Edwards, Matthew Boyle, Katie Pavlich, and myself, have a spiteful or malevolent ill will towards President Obama and Mr. Holder because of their relationship and they’re African American. Could the DOJ please explain to us how that doesn’t mean he played the race card? Mr. Holder said we have a prejudiced and often spiteful or malevolent ill will against him and President Obama because of their skin color. That’s calling us a racist. RACIST. Yes Mr. Holder played the race card. He said we are attacking him because he is African American.

(more…)

The Left’s propagandists are constantly trying to convince us that there’s no inherent media bias. One of my fellow bloggers at TheRightSphere.com, Brock Boehlert, provides a perfect counter to the liberal noise-machine’s disconnected-from-reality talking point:

Take a look at these headlines:

The President’s Jobless Recovery
Frustrated Job Seekers Cause Jobless Rate To Drop
Economy Adds Few New Jobs
Low Jobless Rate Reflects Lost Hope
US Jobless Rate Drops But For Wrong Reasons

Recent headlines regarding the drop in the unemployment rate from 9% to 8.6% right?

Wrong.

Wrong, indeed. Those headlines are from 2004 when then President Bush was gearing up for re-election and the unemployment rate had dropped to 5.7%. How many millions of Americans would be jumping for joy at that unemployment rate right now? Yet, back then news outlets, including some allegedly unbiased sources like the Associated Press, were cranking out doom and gloom stories about the rate drop actually being bad news.

Now, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. The facts back then were similar to the facts now. The unemployment rate had dropped because over 300,000 had just given up looking for work. Now take a look at some headlines from last week after the unemployment rate dropped from 9% to 8.7%:

Here are headlines from Friday’s job numbers:

Unemployment Rate Drops To 8.6% Raising Hopes
Jobless Rate Drop Could Boost Obama
Obama Gets Economic Indicator He Can Crow About
Good News On Job Front For Obama
Jobless Rate Lowest In 2.5 Years

See the difference? I am not one to go one about “the liberal media.” That would indicate the media as a whole has a sought after liberal agenda (and some of them do but they’re easy to spot). The problem is, most journalists have an inherent bias that affects their reporting. They just don’t realize it. It just comes out naturally. The majority of those who work in journalism are Democrats/liberals.

I’m not as generous as my TheRightSphere.com colleague. I happen to think a lot more journalists intentionally skew the news to push an agenda, but the overall point is accurate. The media is dominated by Leftists and their bias comes out naturally.

(more…)

CHRIS MATTHEWS:  Tonight, President Barack Obama. Let’s play Hardball.

OBAMA:  Hello, Chris. Hey, you ever see someone about your ADHD problem?

MATTHEWS:  Too busy. Sir, recently I criticized you pretty harshly. You came on anyway. I’d like to kiss and make up.

[from off screen]

MICHELLE:  You keep your distance, buddy boy.  I’m watching.

MATTHEWS:  Yes’m. Sir, rumor is you cut the Asia trip short for clandestine meetings with the Supercommittee.

OBAMA:  Not true, Chris. I returned earlier, but for a more important reason than rescuing our economy: I wanted to save the NBA season, and in so doing show the world I deserve the Nobel Peace Prize.

MATTHEWS:  You’re involved in the negotiations?

OBAMA:  Hush-hush summit at Camp David. Reverend Jackson and Secretary of State Clinton were my lead mediators. Kobe Bryant and David Stern agreed to represent their constituents. (more…)

Fifty-two Congressmen, including Representative and GOP presidential candidate Michele Bachmann, are demanding Attorney General Eric Holder’s resignation over Operation Fast and Furious. While the new media has reached out to Congress, there is still no excuse for the Old Media to not say anything, especially since these Congressmen held a press conference Tuesday, November 15.

Then again, are you shocked NBC Nightly News and ABC World News didn’t cover the press conference? We know all year Mr. Williams and Ms. Sawyer have never mentioned Operation Fast and Furious once. If they covered the press conference they’d be forced to talk and explain Operation Fast and Furious. I’m disappointed CBS didn’t run a story on the press conference, but since they’ve been on top of the story I’m willing to forgive them. Here are some topics NBC and ABC thought were more important than congressmen calling for Mr. Holder’s resignation:

• Low cost Lipitor!
• Annie Leibovitz says go iPhone!
• Texas court says dogs have sentimental value
• ACL injuries
• New Kennedy tapes

They will do anything to avoid talking about Operation Fast and Furious. Like Cam Edwards said they’d run an entire 30 minute show on Brian Williams and puppies before they talk about Fast & Furious. (more…)