Month: June 2009

Rasmussen Continues To Lead The Fake Poll Index

Posted by on June 22, 2009 at 12:05 pm. NO Comments :

In a survey conducted by News Corpse of pollsters who invent statistical models for the purpose of advancing their bias, Rasmussen scored a new high of 100% disreputability.

Last April, I wrote about how Rasmussen had created a bogus new index to classify polling results. He labeled his survey break points as being either “mainstream Americans” or the “political class.” These groupings were based on the answers to a set of three questions that had less to do with the new classifications than on whether the subject was clinically paranoid.

Rasmussen is at it again. Now he has a survey that he calls a “Presidential Approval Index.” He arrives at the results by subtracting the number of respondents who strongly disapprove from those who strongly approve. Then he states the remainder as representative of the President’s national popularity.

The problem with this method is that it ignores all of those who approve or disapprove, albeit not strongly. In his own survey, the Presidential Approval Index is a negative 1 (-1), which he then releases to the media as demonstrating that the Obama honeymoon is over. However, his results including all respondents show that Obama is regarded favorably by a healthy majority of 54%, compared to 45% who disapprove (+7). This does not get reported to the press, but is published on the Rasmussen web site and seen only by those who sought the additional data.

Obama’s approval ratings have not varied by more than 5 points in the past three months according to Rasmussen (who typically produces lower numbers than other polling firms). But he has found a novel and dishonest way of portraying the President’s numbers as falling off. As a result of this trend toward opinion-driven polling, Rasmussen has emerged as the number one most likely pollster to be interviewed on Fox News.

The Daily Show Defense

Posted by on June 21, 2009 at 6:51 pm. NO Comments :

A new legal precedent has been introduced by the Obama Justice Department. If permitted by the court, defendants nationwide may have a powerful new tool to assert in pursuit of legal vindication.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed a Freedom of Information Act request for documents containing statements by former Vice-President Dick Cheney to Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald. The documents were part of Fitzgerald’s investigation into the leaking of Valerie Plame’s identity as a CIA operative. Scooter Libby was convicted of obstruction of justice and perjury for his role in the matter, but his sentence was later commuted by George W. Bush as he slinked from office.

The Bush administration originally denied a congressional request for these documents citing executive privilege. Now Obama’s Justice Department is also seeking to prevent this disclosure for many of the same reasons that Bush’s lawyers argued. But going further, civil division lawyer Jeffrey M. Smith, claimed that the documents should remain confidential because their release might inhibit future vice-presidents, or other officials, from speaking candidly to investigators researching criminal activity.

That is a rather surprising argument in that most Americans probably expect their representatives to be cooperative in criminal investigations. The notion that they would deliberately impede an investigation because their testimony might be made public is disturbing, to say the least. But the specific reference made by Smith as to what might scare off official witnesses is even more disturbing. He said that the prospect that “it’s going to get on ‘The Daily Show’, “ was enough for the judge to grant a denial of the FOIA request.

Seriously? Is the Daily Show now considered to be so influential that the mere mention of its name can squelch a court case? Does that mean that anyone previously convicted of a crime, who happened to have been the subject of satire by Jon Stewart can now seek to have the conviction overturned on appeal? Does Comedy Central need to seek legal counsel prior to Photoshopping public figures with funny hats or broadcasting video of them saying stupid things (which happens with way too much frequency). Is the “Daily Show Defense” this generation’s “Twinkie Defense”?

At this point the judge seemed to be unconvinced and asked the attorney to come back with more evidence to support denying the FOIA request. But just the fact that a professional, respected, government lawyer would advance this argument is pretty sad. I can’t wait to see what Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert say about it.

Washington Times Lies About ABC News

Posted by on June 20, 2009 at 1:17 am. NO Comments :

This is a textbook example of how a dishonest news enterprise will employ deceit in pursuit of a partisan agenda. All it takes is an absence of conscience and ethics, and an intent to deliberately mislead your readers.

Ever since ABC announced that they would host a health care themed town hall from the White House, the conservative media machine has been blasting the move as evidence that the media is “in the tank” for Barack Obama. In an effort to advance this theory, the Washington Times commissioned a study by the Center for Responsive Politics on the campaign donations made by ABC employees.

The conclusion, as represented by the Times, was that ABC is a partisan operation that is unfit to call themselves a news service. They cited data from the study that said that over $124,000 was donated by ABC employees to Obama, as compared to about $1,500 to McCain or other candidates. In addition, they sought comments from Dan Gainor of the Business & Media Institute, a far right-wing group affiliated with ultra-conservative Brent Bozell’s Media Research Center. Gainor said that…

“ABC is in bed with their source, so to speak. ABC is supposed to be a news organization, not a producer of infomercials for national health care. And I wonder what they would have done if the Bush administration had asked for positive programming to support the war on terror or Social Security initiatives.”

Gainor couldn’t have come up with two worse examples to make his point. The Bush administration asked for, and received, multiple programming opportunities to hawk his war mongering and Social Security privatization schemes – including one-sided town halls and air time on both broadcast and cable networks.

However, the New York Observer obtained the same study from the CRP and discovered what the Times had conveniently left out. As it happens, the vast majority of the donations cited in the study were from ABC employees who had nothing whatsoever to do with the production of news. The actual breakdown revealed that, of the $124,000, only $885 came from the news division.

The Times was surely aware of these facts, they simply decided to misconstrue them in order to mislead their readers and promote the false allegation of partisanship on the part of ABC News. It is this sort of brazen dishonesty that makes one wonder why anyone would give credence to anything published by the Washington Times.

Fox News Covered Up Sen. Ensign’s Cheating Scandal

Posted by on June 19, 2009 at 8:22 am. 7 Comments :

A few days ago Sen. John Ensign admitted to having an extra-marital affair with Cythia Hampton, a woman who was an employee of his campaign operation and the wife of a staffer in his senate office. In the wake of this disclosure, Ensign has apologized, resigned his senate leadership post (but not his senate seat) and floated excuses for his confession that ran the gamut from media attention to blackmail.

Today, the Las Vegas Sun has identified another twist that puts Fox News squarely in the Ensign camp as a co-conspirator to hush up the affair.

“In a letter dated five days before Sen. John Ensign’s public confession of an extramarital affair, Doug Hampton pleaded to a national Fox News anchorwoman for help in exposing the senator’s ‘heinous conduct and pursuit’ of Hampton’s wife.”

So Fox News knew of Ensign’s infidelity five days before Ensign came forward. They got the information from the husband of Ensign’s mistress. That’s a pretty good source, especially when he asserts that he had corroborating evidence. Yet Fox News failed to report the affair prior to Ensign’s press conference, and has still neglected to disclose their receipt of the letter from Mr. Hampton.

Hampton addressed the letter to Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly. Both she and Fox News have yet to comment on the matter. However, the Sun obtained a copy of Hampton’s letter that began…

“More than any time in my life I understand why people take matters into their own hands. I am disheartened! I have sought wise counsel, tried to do the right thing and continue to run into road blocks (sic) in dealing with a very terrible circumstance and injustice that lives in my life. I am hoping you and Fox News can help.”

Hampton then summarized his relationship with Ensign and gave a brief description of the affair that roiled his family. He revealed that Ensign forthrightly pursued his wife, and would not desist even after confronted by other friends and colleagues, including Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn. The letter was sent to Kelly in an apparent, last resort plea for justice from someone he presumed would show fairness and empathy. He told Kelly that…

“I love this country and considered it a great privilege to work in the US (sic) Senate. I am bringing this to you and Fox News to address this professionally and correctly. I could have sought the most liberal, Republican hating media to expose this story, but there are people’s lives at stake and justice is about proper process as well as outcome. Senator Ensign has no business serving in the US (sic) Senate anymore!”

At this time there is no confirmation from Fox news that they received the letter. However, they did not deny having received it when given the opportunity. It seems improbable that a letter from a staff member of a U.S. senator, alleging that his boss and his wife were having an affair, would be ignored.

It is also curious how Ensign became aware that a major news organization was going to report the affair. Did he learn this from Kelly? That would not be surprising in the course of an investigation wherein a reporter sought comment from someone accused of impropriety. The problem is that, under ordinary circumstances, such a reporter would then publish the story, but neither Kelly, nor any other reporter at Fox did so. So if Ensign did learn of the letter to Fox News from Kelly, it was more of a tip off than a journalistic inquiry.

The Ensign scandal seems to get dirtier by the day. It is not merely a matter of his personal indiscretions, but Mrs. Hampton also received salary increases during the period the affair took place. And Ensign also gave the Hampton’s son, Brandon, a job at the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which Ensign chaired.

This combination of sexual, fiscal, and political improprieties, exacerbated by the collusion of a major television news network, would be juicy fare for a sensationalistic, tabloid news enterprise. Ironically, it would be perfect for Fox News, but i wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for their report.

[Update] Fox News was contacted by The Huffington Post and they gave this statement:

“We never received any letter from Mr. Hampton,” Lowell told the Huffington Post. “He might have sent it, but we never received it. He did reach out to us about 24 hours before the news conference, and he sent an e-mail to a booker on my staff.”

“We followed up with him, but he seemed evasive and not credible, thus we didn’t pursue it,” he said.

Hampton was apparently so lacking in credibility that Ensign came out and confessed less than 24 hours after Fox decided not to pursue it. The Fox spokesman also denied tipping Ensign off. He said that “Somehow, somebody told the Senator something” but insisted it wasn’t anyone from their editorial staff. Uh huh…..

[Update 2] The Sun has some more details, including financial compensation Ensign doled out to the Hampton family.

[Update 3] Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post is reporting that…

After the news conference, Lowell passed Hampton’s contact information to his Washington bureau but did not send the letter or show it to senior Fox executives, who have expressed unhappiness at not being informed. “The letter was an allegation of an affair,” Lowell said. “I don’t know that it would have shined a light on anything new.”

Two problems: First, there were several new developments revealed in the letter, like the involvement of Sen. Coburn and the fact that the Hamptons were fired. Second, If the Fox executives were so unhappy about not being informed about the letter after Ensign’s press conference, then why have they still not produced a single story about it three days after the fact? To date there have been precisely ZERO stories on Fox News, FoxNews.com, or TheFox Nation.com, that address the existence of a letter they have had in their possession for at least five days.

It appears that the Fox producer for Megyn Kelly’s program is attempting to fall on his sword.

[Update 4] Apparently Fox News lied (again) about when they received the letter from Hampton. The Las Vegas Sun has a FedEx receipt that confirms that Fox received the letter on June 12, three days before they previously acknowledged receipt. So Fox had three extra days to investigate (which they didn’t do) and to tip off Ensign (which they probably did do).

Murdoch Pawns Off Weekly Standard To Anschutz

Posted by on June 19, 2009 at 6:38 am. NO Comments :

Rupert Mudoch’s News Corp. has been bleeding badly financially. They have lost 49% of their stock value in the past 52 weeks. And acquiring the Wall Street Journal for $5 billion just as the newspaper business was collapsing couldn’t have helped matters.

Now News Corp. is reporting that they are unloading the Weekly Standard, the uber-rightist magazine founded by neo-icon, William Kristal. No reason or sale price was given in the announcement, but it is fairly evident that Murdoch needs to raise some cash and cut costs to service his massive debt.

The buyer is Clarity Media Group, a part of Phillip Anschutz’s billion dollar media and entertainment conglomerate. Clarity is the publisher of the Washington Examiner, a conservative freebie tabloid in D.C.

Don’t expect much to change at the Standard. Kristal will likely stay aboard, along with executive editor Fred Barnes. Both will also remain Fox News contributors. If anything, the magazine may begin to feature more stories dealing with Anschutz’s obsession for Dark Ages Christian Fundamentalism. He is a major backer of the Discovery Institute, a creationist think tank. He also finances anti-gay and pro-censorship organizations and initiatives.

In other words…more of the same.

FOX NEWS FLASH: Journalism Is Dead!

Posted by on June 18, 2009 at 9:06 pm. 1 Comments :

You have to give credit where credit’s due. And when an enterprise like Fox News, that has an unparalleled reputation for mis- and dis-information, actually gets something right, a little positive reinforcement is in order. Especially when the likes of Sean Hannity is reporting this news under the imprimatur of Fox.

Earlier this week, ABC announced that they would be airing a health care themed town hall from the White House. The network advertised the event as a news broadcast that would delve into the pros and cons of the President’s policy.

Fox News, along with their vast network of rightist acolytes, went batty over what they said was “the death of journalism.” Of course, this is something that we at News Corpse have been saying for almost five years now. But the problem that Fox has is that they regard the ABC program as an infomercial for Obama’s plan. They assert that nothing like this has ever happened before.

Once again, Fox News is either pathetically ignorant or desperately dishonest (yeah, I know. It’s both). Last year Fox News broadcast a special from the Bush White House they called “Fighting To The Finish.” And there was also their highly promoted exclusive, “Dick Cheney: No Retreat.” These are just two blatant examples of hypocrisy by Fox. There are many more incidents of Fox serving as the PR agency for the Republican Party. But somehow, ABC having a town hall where they assert that multiple views will be discussed, is an abomination that (finally) heralds the end of journalism.

I guess that I should just be satisfied that they are acknowledging something close to reality at all. Even though they don’t grasp their own role in journalism’s demise.

Jill Greenberg Makes Glenn Beck Cry

Posted by on June 17, 2009 at 1:41 pm. NO Comments :

Last year, photographer Jill Greenberg became the subject of a mini-controversy over some less than flattering pictures of John McCain. The Republican media machine, led by Rupert Murdoch’s New York Post, condemned her for “not manipulating” the photos to make McCain look better. The vitriol directed at her was intense and threatened to curtail her access to conservative public figures.

Enter Glenn Beck. Greenberg just completed an assignment for GQ Magazine that features her photos of a sobbing Beck. This is a little more than ironic in that Greenberg is famous for her series of crying children:

What could be more appropriate than Beck portrayed in the same manner as the wailing toddlers with whom he has so much in common? He is just as infantile and ill-informed as the crybabies Greenberg previously captured so movingly.

It is also notable that the man who insists that his tears are genuine can put on a performance like this. He has previously asserted that he could never fake the emotion that pours out of him when contemplating the ruin of America by evil liberals. He told a Philadelphia Magazine reporter who questioned his sincerity that…

“If you’re going to make that case, I deserve a frickin’ Emmy. That’s unbelievable acting.”

I’m not sure I agree with his assessment of his acting skills. In fact, the reason so many people suspect him of feigning sentimentality is that he is such a bad actor. If he were any good at it, no one would be questioning him.

Under George W. Bush, Republicans peddled a flavor of right-wing ideology they called “compassionate conservatism.” It was a transparent ploy to make us believe that the party of selfishness actually cared. But don’t let Beck’s weepy punditry fool you into thinking that he gives a damn about anything but his own place on the media throne. He envisions himself a leader of a peasant uprising. He spent much of his show today haranguing his audience for not being out in the streets fighting for…well, whatever it is that Beck tells them to fight for. He begins every show by exhorting his viewers to, “Come on, follow me.”

Thank goodness for artists who can express the deeper meaning of their subjects with honesty and insight. Jill Greenberg deserves our gratitude for eliciting this vision of Beck – one that captures both his childishness and his superficial dishonesty.

To Neil Cavuto: This Is Why Obama Hates You So Much

Posted by on June 16, 2009 at 5:33 pm. 4 Comments :

Today on “Your World with Neil Cavuto”, the show’s host spent several minutes whining about the scant attention he feels he is getting from Barack Obama and his administration. Cavuto performed a set piece that complained that Obama had made himself available to other networks and programs, but not his.

“Now, I have to be honest, he’s been everywhere else today to talk about health care today, seemingly with anyone with a pulse today. Just not here. Just not with me.”

You can almost hear him choking back the tears. He attempted to insert some comedy by way of jokes about Obama appearing with SpongeBob SquarePants before sitting down with Fox News. However, the humor was exceedingly distasteful as it appeared to cast Obama as something that SpongeBob stepped in and tried to wipe off of his shoe (seriously). And if this prepared lament was not enough, he brought it up repeatedly throughout the remainder of the show while interviewing other guests. The core of his concern was stated thusly:

“Why do you hate us so much, Mr. President? Because we challenge you or because we won’t worship you? Or both?”

This is nothing new for Cavuto. He frequently takes to mocking Obama and other Democrats because he feels neglected. He has recently been attacking the administration for not making the various issue “czars” available for Fox-applied abuse. In the course of these complaints he ridicules both the position and the person holding it. He boldly expresses his disapproval of Obama’s affinity for czars and that there are any czars appointed in the first place. Perhaps he should be informed that George Bush had at least a dozen czars of his own. (And can we please retire the title “czar” in favor of something like Manager or Auditor?)

If Cavuto thinks that derision and insults will lure subjects into his lair, he is going to be sorely disappointed. In fact, it is that very behavior that is likely responsible for the cold shoulder he is presently experiencing. Here is what Obama had to say on the subject in an interview today with John Harwood of CNBC:

“I’ve got one television station that is entirely devoted to attacking my administration…That’s a pretty big megaphone. You’d be hard pressed if you watched the entire day to find a positive story about me on that front.”

If Obama didn’t have a reason to snub Fox before (which he did), Cavuto has certainly given him one. It is probably not a good idea to callously offend people that you want to interview. And if there is one thing we can learn
from this, it is that avoiding Fox News is really pissing off Fox News. This is one of the most effective actions that any Democrat or progressive can take in the battle to reform the media and to punish propaganda mills like Fox.

Let them whine. Let them display silly little countdown clocks (as Chris Wallace did during last year’s campaign). Let them escalate their rudeness and incivility. That will only make it all the more apparent that they are a deliberately hostile harbor into which we ought not sail. Simply put…

Stay the HELL off of Fox News!

Update 6/17/2009: Cavuto spent the first eight minutes of his program today whining that Obama would not cave in to his ego. That’s about 18% of his airtime.

Michael Moore’s Campaign To Save Our CEOs

Posted by on June 15, 2009 at 3:19 pm. NO Comments :

This past weekend, a few lucky moviegoers were treated to a preview of what to expect when Michael Moore’s new movie is released in October. The short trailer consisted only of Moore making a personal plea on the behalf of the troubled corporations and executives who have suffered so much in this economic downturn:

“The downturn in the economy has hurt many people, people who have had no choice but to go on government assistance. Yet our welfare agencies can only do so much. That’s why I’m asking you to reach into your pockets right now and lend a hand. Ushers will be coming down the aisles to collect your donations for Citibank, Bank of America, AIG, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and a host of other needy banks and corporations. Won’t you please give generously?”

Those familiar with Moore’s work would be safe to assume that this project will contain a fair measure of disdain directed at greedy industrialists and ineffectual politicians. He is likely to highlight the hypocrisy of partisan rhetoric that condemns government intrusion into contracts that protect executive bonuses, but advocates for such intrusion to break contracts that benefit unions and workers.

However, the tone of this documentary, based on the trailer, appears to be deeply critical of corporate bailouts and government spending. Sound familiar? That is the principle theme upon which the Tea Parties held earlier this year were based. It is the issue that supposedly motivated thousands of “non-partisan” protesters to “spontaneously” gather in parking lots across America with tea bags dangling from their hats. Will those same people be filling seats in theaters to see a movie that addresses the same concerns?

What I’m really wondering, however, is whether Fox News will turn the debut of this movie into a major news event, as they did with the FNC Tea Party Day. Will they promote it for weeks prior to the opening? Will Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity be dispatched to metropolitan cineplexes to cover the premiere – LIVE – and for the full hour of their programs? Isn’t this precisely the issue that they claimed had captured the hearts and minds of a nation that was screaming out for reform? And wasn’t that the pretense for their wall-to-wall coverage of the Tea Partiers?

I’ll go on record right now – more than three months before the release – to predict that more people will attend the opening night of this movie than attended the Tea Parties nationwide. That’s just the opening night. Wouldn’t that make this event at least as representative of the public mood as the Tea Parties were said to be? Wouldn’t that suggest that it deserves at least as much attention from Fox News and the rest of the media? And remember, the Tea Parties were free. People will have to pay to see Moore’s film. Isn’t that an even greater expression of support?

Somehow, I’m not expecting Beck to be preening on a specially erected festival stage outside an Alamo movie house on October 2, with Ted Nugent on lead guitar. More likely he and his Fox cohorts will bash the film and its director in an attempt to preempt the message and its impact. And, of course, they will then continue to insist, through it all, that they don’t regard this as a partisan issue.

Did Fox News Capitulate To Scientology?

Posted by on June 14, 2009 at 1:30 pm. 6 Comments :

Last April, Fox News entertainment reporter, Roger Friedman, was fired, allegedly because he had acquired and viewed a bootleg copy of 20th Century Fox’s “X-Men Origins: Wolverine.” At the time it appeared a rather harsh sentence considering that Fox has no problem with continuing to employ people who…

  • …joke about assassinating Barack Obama (Liz Trotta).
  • …read Republican Party press releases on the air as if they were actually news (Jon Scott).
  • …express a desire to strangle competing reporters (Bill O’Reilly).
  • …yearn to choke Michael Moore to death (Glenn Beck).

I also wondered whether Fox might have been itching for an excuse to cast Friedman overboard due to his blasphemous praise of Fox nemesis Michael Moore:

On Fahrenheit 9/11: “It turns out to be a really brilliant piece of work, and a film that members of all political parties should see without fail.” He continued, “…a tribute to patriotism, to the American sense of duty – and at the same time an indictment of stupidity and avarice.”

On Sicko: “Filmmaker Michael Moore’s brilliant and uplifting new documentary, ‘Sicko,’ deals with the failings of the U.S. healthcare system, both real and perceived. But this time around, the controversial documentarian seems to be letting the subject matter do the talking, and in the process shows a new maturity.”

Now the New York Daily News is reporting that Friedman is suing Fox News for wrongful termination, and the reason is something I had not anticipated. He is claiming that Rupert Murdoch and News Corp bowed to pressure from Kelly Preston and Tom Cruise who wanted Friedman fired because he had written critically of Scientology. At first, that seems to be a frivolous assertion, but upon further examination it becomes more plausible.

The Scientology organization has a reputation for being fiercely aggressive when it believes that it has been disparaged. And Friedman did indeed write multiple columns that were less than complimentary to Scientology. For example: Television Star Exits Scientology and Will Scientology Celebs Sign ‘Spiritual’ Contract? and Isaac Hayes’ History With Scientology. And there were others that touched on big stars like Will Smith and Tom Cruise.

I can’t pretend to know the truth about Friedman’s claim. Fox may have already had it in for him due to the Wolverine episode or his acclaim for Moore’s movies. All I can say is that, if Scientology really has Fox cowering before it, I wish Bill O’Reilly or Glenn Beck would say something to piss them off. Now that’s entertainment.