It appears that the AP’s Jennifer Loven’s article “Bush Using Straw-Man Arguments in Speeches” was so clearly one-sided, even liberal-friendly industry trade Editor & Publisher is taking another look:

Did a recent Associated Press story examining President George Bush’s alleged tendency to use a “straw man” approach in his speeches cross the line from news to biased opinion? Or was it just a long-overdue, in-depth review of the president’s public speaking approach? […]
The story, posted by AP last weekend, cited the president’s habit of using phrases such as “some say” or “some believe” when introducing a viewpoint that challenges his own.

You know, because reporters never use that device.

Loven then contends that “hardly anyone in mainstream political debate has made such assertions.”

Hardly anyone? I think that qualifies as a “straw non-man” argument.

Loven then quotes others she describes as “experts in political speech” who supported her point that Bush’s approach was misleading.
The article, however, offers no comment from Bush supporters or anyone on the president’s staff, or gives any indication they were sought for comment. It also does not explore whether such straw-man tactics are common in political figures past or present, including Democrats; although one expert does say “all politicians try to get away with it to a certain extent.”
Loven, based in Washington, D.C., could not be reached for comment Wednesday as she was out of town. Calls to AP Washington bureau chief Sandy Johnson and Executive Editor Kathleen Carroll were not immediately returned. In a statement responding to an E&P inquiry, AP spokesman Jack Stokes wrote: “Jennifer Loven’s story was one of an ongoing series of fact-checking stories that dig beyond the rhetoric. Editors tell us they want more of these stories.”

Fact-checking stories are fine. But as John Hinderaker pointed out in his analysis of Loven’s article, this story obfuscated more facts than it checked.