Media Blog

NRO’s MSM watchdog.

From the Archives: Nevadans Using ‘Negro’ in a Sentence


Since liberals are so keen to point out the horrid comments of Cliven Bundy, I thought I just remind readers of what Sen. Harry Reid said of then-candidate Obama:

Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) apologized Saturday for referring to President Obama in private conversations during the 2008 presidential campaign as “light-skinned” and as having “no Negro dialect.”

“I deeply regret using such a poor choice of words,” Reid said in a statement. “I sincerely apologize for offending any and all Americans, especially African Americans, for my improper comments.”

I expect that, if Bundy apologizes, the Left won’t be as quick to forgive, however.

What Do Bloomberg’s New Anti-Gun Group and Iraqi Propagandists Have in Common?


Well, for starters, no understanding of what a bullet looks like when it’s fired from a gun. 

Here’s a photo from 2007, with the caption: “An elderly Iraqi woman shows two bullets which she says hit her house following an early coalition forces raid in the predominantly Shiite Baghdad suburb of Sadr City.”

Did someone throw the bullets at the nice old lady? Now note the similarity to the latest from Bloomberg’s group:

And what I wrote about the first picture back in 2007 is as true today as it was then:

I’m no ballistics expert or anything like that, but I do know that when a bullet has been fired, it looks just a little bit different than as pictured above.

If you’re going to put out propaganda, at least make it believable, huh?


Brian Williams Raps ‘Gin and Juice’


George R. R. Martin Not Happy With Sunday’s GOT


Spoilers ahead. . .

George R.R. Martin responded to the growing controversy from Sunday’s Game of Thrones and the major change directors made to the disturbing incest-sex-scene between siblings Jamie and Cersei Lannister that occurred in his novel, A Storm of Swords. The HBO version had Jamie rape Cersei, which Martin makes clear was not how he wrote the characters:

Re: Jaime’s changes in Breaker of Chains

[. . .]

As for your question… I think the “butterfly effect” that I have spoken of so often was at work here. In the novels, Jaime is not present at Joffrey’s death, and indeed, Cersei has been fearful that he is dead himself, that she has lost both the son and the father/ lover/ brother. And then suddenly Jaime is there before her. Maimed and changed, but Jaime nonetheless. Though the time and place is wildly inappropriate and Cersei is fearful of discovery, she is as hungry for him as he is for her. 

The whole dynamic is different in the show, where Jaime has been back for weeks at the least, maybe longer, and he and Cersei have been in each other’s company on numerous occasions, often quarreling. The setting is the same, but neither character is in the same place as in the books, which may be why Dan & David played the sept out differently. But that’s just my surmise; we never discussed this scene, to the best of my recollection. 

Also, I was writing the scene from Jaime’s POV, so the reader is inside his head, hearing his thoughts. On the TV show, the camera is necessarily external. You don’t know what anyone is thinking or feeling, just what they are saying and doing. 

If the show had retained some of Cersei’s dialogue from the books, it might have left a somewhat different impression — but that dialogue was very much shaped by the circumstances of the books, delivered by a woman who is seeing her lover again for the first time after a long while apart during which she feared he was dead. I am not sure it would have worked with the new timeline.

That’s really all I can say on this issue. The scene was always intended to be disturbing… but I do regret if it has disturbed people for the wrong reasons.

It’s interesting that Martin says the directors never discussed the change with him. I’ve read the books and know what’s in store for Jamie and Cersei and I don’t see why the HBO version thought it was necessary to deviate from the original. I guess we’ll find out in the coming weeks.

WaPost on the Ratings Slump of Meet the Press


The Post has a piece out today on NBC’s attempt to figure out why David Gregory as host of Meet the Press isn’t meeting expectations. An excerpt:

The main problem: The great-granddaddy of Sunday-morning Beltway blabfests isn’t just not No. 1. It’s No. 3 and in the midst of a three-year slide. During the first three months of this year, the NBC program finished behind perennial rivals “Face the Nation” on CBS and “This Week With George Stephanopoulos” on ABC, despite being helped by two weeks of Winter Olympics hoopla. In the final quarter of last year, viewing among people ages 25 to 54, the preferred group for TV news advertisers, fell to its lowest level ever.

Now I get NBC’s desire for better ratings, but they hired a psychological consultant to help with their evaluation? 

Last year, the network undertook an unusual assessment of the 43-year-old journalist, commissioning a psychological consultant to interview his friends and even his wife. The idea, according to a network spokeswoman, Meghan Pianta, was “to get perspective and insight from people who know him best.” But the research project struck some at NBC as odd, given that Gregory has been employed there for nearly 20 years.

I would love to see a breakdown — if it exists — of how many conservatives stopped watching Meet the Press over the past few years. I don’t watch NBC, and haven’t for years, because of its symbiotic relationship with the Muppets of MSNBC. 

Maybe it’s the NBC suits who didn’t think MSNBC’s liberal-bias would hurt NBC News as a brand who need the psychological evaluation.​



SEIU Trying to Unionize Media Matters


And the best part is Media Matters is fighting it. Why does Media Matters hate organized labor?


Mega-donors: Bloomberg vs. Koch Brothers


Here’s how the New York Times describes Mike Bloomber’s announcement to spend $50 million to fight the NRA. It’s a “grass roots network”:

Michael R. Bloomberg, making his first major political investment since leaving office, plans to spend $50 million this year building a nationwide grass-roots network to motivate voters who feel strongly about curbing gun violence, an organization he hopes can eventually outmuscle the National Rifle Association.

Let’s compare the above to how the editors of the New York Times describe the Koch brothers and their involvement in politics. “Oligarchs”:

Democrats have for too long been passive in the face of the vast amounts of corporate money, most of it secret, that are being spent to evict them from office and dismantle their policies. By far the largest voice in many of this year’s political races, for example, has been that of the Koch brothers, who have spent tens of millions of dollars peddling phony stories about the impact of health care reform, all in order to put Republicans in control of the Senate after the November elections.

Now Democrats are starting to fight back, deciding they should at least try to counter the tycoons with some low-cost speech of their own. Democrats may never have the same resources at their disposal — no party should — but they can use their political pulpits to stand up for a few basic principles, including the importance of widespread health-insurance coverage, environmental protection and safety-net programs.

[. . .]

Mr. Reid’s comments have gone to the heart of the matter. In his most recent speech, he pointed out that the fundamental purpose of the Kochs’ spending is to rig the economic system for their benefit and for that of other oligarchs. They own an industrial network that ranks No. 14 on the list of the most toxic American air polluters, and got their money’s worth in 2010 by helping elect a Republican House majority that has resisted environmental regulation.

If you agree with editors of the Times, you’re the leader of a “grass-roots network.” If not, you’re an “oligarch.”


Foreign Policy Thought Leader Ronan Farrow on Ukraine


Via Mediaite:

Ronan Farrow Advises Obama to ‘Hold the Course’ of Inaction on Ukraine Crisis

I don’t think Mediaite is particularly fair here with their headline, no matter how much I dislike Farrow. Farrow goes on to applaud the president for “exercising caution” amid calls from some in Congress to provide lethal military aid directly to Ukraine. Inaction implies the president is doing nothing, but sanctions, warplanes to NATO allies, etc., isn’t exactly “inaction.”




Video: Sharyl Attkisson Tells How CBS Killed Her Obama Reporting


Here’s Howard Kurtz interviewing former CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson on her past reporting on stories like Benghazi and why she left CBS. Good stuff:


It’s Jon Stewart’s Fault Sebelius Had to Resign?


Via Mediaite:

While the White House has made it clear that it was Health and Human Services Sec. Kathleen Sebelius‘ decision to resign this week, NBC News reporter Kristen Welker revealed on Friday that the administration wanted move on to a new head of HHS who was not “battered and bruised.” She added that her sources tell her the White House was concerned with Sebelius’ “rocky” October, 2013 performance on Comedy Central’s The Daily Show.

Well here’s hoping the next head of HHS can stand up to the intense scrutiny of a late-night satirist.

Stephen Colbert and Diversity at CBS


What surprises me the most about the news that Stephen Colbert will replace David Letterman as the host of Late Night is the speed at which CBS and Les Moonves made the decision. And from the way the New York Times describes it, Colbert was always CBS’s first choice:

Leslie Moonves, the chief executive of CBS, who was the primary mover in getting the deal done, said the negotiations moved at a breakneck pace beginning the day Mr. Letterman announced his plans. Mr. Moonves said a “barrage of calls” immediately came in from representatives of comics seeking the job. But when Mr. Colbert’s agent, James Dixon, called to express Mr. Colbert’s interest, the talks quickly became serious.

Not that I care who CBS picked, but I wonder if Moonves has violated any diversity policy in place at CBS with the hiring of the white, male, and heterosexual Colbert. Where any minorities, women, or LGBT hosts ever seriously considered? 

In the past, Moonves has made statements on the importance of diversity at CBS. For example, he reportedly told students at the University of Miami in a November 2013 visit that:

Diversity is an issue, especially during prime-time shows, while a better job has been done in news, sports and reality shows. 

And Moonves made this comment in January when announcing the promotion of Josie Thomas to that of “chief diversity officer”:

“CBS’ commitment to diversity is a key part of our growth strategy.”

Over to you, Josie. Did Moonves do something wrong or is he just a hypocrite? Let’s see what an investigation turns up.

CNN Decides on Piers Morgan’s Replacement


They’re going with a multiple-anchor format at 9 p.m. Via TV Newser:

Two weeks after Piers Morgan signed off from CNN’s primetime lineup, the network has announced plans for the 9pm ET timeslot. Beginning this summer, CNN will air original series — like Anthony Bourdain‘s “Parts Unknown” and Morgan Spurlock‘s “Inside Man,” as well as several new series that are in development — during the hour.

In addition to “Parts Unknown” and “Inside Man,” CNN has announced shows with Mike Rowe of “Dirty Jobs,” John Walsh of “America’s Most Wanted” and Lisa Ling. The shows will rotate with CNN’s in-house documentaries, like the ten-part “The Sixties” and a new multi-part documentary from the producers of “Chicagoland,” in the 9pm ET timeslot.

Stephen Colbert to Replace David Letterman


Details here.

PolitiFact on Equal Pay: ‘Mostly True’, ‘Mostly False’, and ‘Half True’


So, let’s see what PolitFact has to say about all these equal pay claims, shall we?

First they fact-checked this statement from President Obama dated June 21, 2012. . .

“Women (are) paid 77 cents on the dollar for doing the same work as men.”

. . . and found it “Mostly False”:

The Obama campaign took a legitimate statistic and described it in a way that makes it sound much more dramatic than it actually is. The 77-cent figure is real, but it does not factor in occupations held, hours worked or length of tenure. Describing that statistic as referring to the pay for women “doing the same work as men” earns it a rating of Mostly False.

Then they fact-checked this statement from President Obama dated January 28, 2014. . .

Women “make 77 cents for every dollar a man earns.”

. . .and found it “Mostly True”:

It’s worth noting that the entire 77-cent gap is not necessarily due to discrimination — a conclusion some listeners might have drawn when hearing Obama mention “equal pay for equal work” shortly after citing the 77-cent figure. And there are alternative calculations that show a smaller overall gap. Still, the 77-cent ratio is a credible figure from a credible agency. We rate the claim Mostly True.

Some of the other rulings on equal pay. . .

Terry McAuliffe: ”Women still earn about 77 cents for every dollar a man earns for working the same job.” — “Mostly False

Wendy Davis: Women “are still paid 82 cents for every dollar a man earns in Texas.” — “Mostly True

Wendy Davis: ”Texas women make an average of $8,355 less per year than men doing the very same job.” — “Mostly False

Jimmy Carter: Women in the U.S. get 23 percent less pay than men for the same exact work. — “Mostly False

And this next one deserves a specil mention. . .

Gina Raimondo: ”Women make 77 cents for every dollar earned by men.” — “Half True

The problem is that in the “Mostly True” rulings, PolitFact goes on to explain why the 77-cent number is too simplistic. So, why rule that they statements are “Mostly True” when the intent of the speaker is to obfuscate? 

And look again: Raimondo said basically the same thing as Obama, but Obama gets it “Mostly True”  and the woman only gets it “Half True.” Maybe women are given only 77 percent as much credibility as men at PolitiFact . . .




The Smoking Gun Calls Al Sharpton a Liar


Over to you, Reverend:

Facts Derail Lying Sharpton’s Informant Tale

Former FBI Mafia snitch spins fabricated story of “CI-7″ work

APRIL 9–In a desperate effort to explain away his work as a paid government informant, the Rev. Al Sharpton yesterday claimed that he first ran into the FBI’s arms after his life was threatened by gangsters, an incident that prompted him to then record 10 face-to-face encounters with one of those dangerous hoodlums.

That story is a lie.

In fact, Sharpton’s fabricated tale is belied by FBI records that provide a clear account of when and why he began working as a cooperating informant. After unveiling his fable at a morning press conference, Sharpton repeated his claims last night at the close of his “PoliticsNation” show on MSNBC, where fact checkers and bosses alike do not appear concerned with the truthfulness of the host’s off- and on-air pronouncements.

The rest here.

Hat tip: @JohnnyDollar01

Nick Searcy Talks Justified


Here’s a clip of Searcy, who plays Chief Deputy U.S. Marshall Art Mullen on the hit show Justified, talking about the show with Greg Gutfeld and the Red Eye gang. Good stuff.

Rep. Vance McAllister Getting Advice from Willie Robertson?


Did Rep. McAllister really get advice from the Duck Dynasty star or is he just name-dropping? Via the News Star:

U.S. Rep. Vance McAllister, whose candidacy was bolstered by the endorsements of the “Duck Dynasty” stars, said Willie Robertson told him to focus on his family following this week’s scandal in which the married congressman admitted to an affair with a staffer.

The Robertsons, who operate the Duck Commander company in West Monroe, filmed campaign spots for McAllister during last fall’s election in which the Republican candidate from Swartz pulled off an unlikely upset.

“Willie told me that he was a friend and that I needed to work things out privately,” said McAllister, who said he hasn’t spoken to patriarch Phil Robertson since the scandal broke Monday.

And Robertson’s response when asked:

When contacted by The News-Star, Willie Robertson said he has “no comment at this time” regarding McAllister.

Maybe Willie Robertson should run for Congress instead of McAllister?


NBC Can’t Decide on the Unemployment Rate


Did it rise to 6.7 percent or did it remain flat at 6.7 percent?

ABC’s Rick Klein Pleads for Transparency on Obamacare Numbers


Klein writes:

Here, on this deadline day that may not actually be all that much of a deadline, is a modest proposal: radical transparency starting now. No more selective releases of data, no more implausible claims that the numbers are still being tallied up and therefore can’t be released – until the president needs a fresh figure to liven up a speech. If the media are to judge, truly and honestly, how the new health care law is working, we need the numbers – all of them. That’s the number of enrollees at the federal and all state-level exchanges; the demographic breakdowns, to the extent they are knowable; details of what if any health coverage the new enrollees had before; and information, perhaps scooped up through the insurance companies, about how many new sign-ups are actually paying monthly premiums. Honest coverage demands honest answers to these questions. All involved know there will be plenty of room for politics regardless.

The president is scheduled to speak about Obamacare today around 4:30. Any bets if Klein will get what he wants from the administration?

The View, Now Topless


Jenny McCarthy and Sherri Shepherd went topless in their segment on Lena Dunham and Girls today.

So stupid.


Sign up for free NRO e-mails today:

Subscribe to National Review