Liberal Media Bias??? Will Phil and Johnny finally stop drinking the kool-aid?

[MonsterMark]

This is Mark Halperin saying this. BTW, he is the ABC News POLITICAL DIRECTOR in case you think he is a right-winger. Plus look at all the crap this guy, dad and brother are into. Woowee.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

ABC News Honcho: Press Is Liberally Biased, Needs Reform

Posted by Matthew Sheffield on October 25, 2006 - 12:58.

The national press corps is justifiably looked upon with suspicion by conservatives and in dire need of reform if it wishes to regain their confidence, especially since that's a sound business strategy.

Those are the words of ABC News political director Mark Halperin who on last night's "O'Reilly Factor" provided a resounding endorsement of the idea that the elite American media needs to stop being liberally biased. [emphasis mine]

In a followup to an Oct. 19 internet posting in which he sarcastically implied that reporters take their cues from Democrats and liberal activists, Halperin stated that the press should use the 2006 elections as an opportunity to regain the public trust:

"In this country, we've got these old news organizations, the major networks, ABC, where you [O'Reilly] used to work, the New York Times, the Washington Post. These organizations have been around a long time, and for 40 years conservatives have looked with suspicion at them. I think we've got a chance in these last two weeks to prove to conservatives that we understand their grievances, we're going to try to do better, but these organizations still have incredible sway, and conservatives are certain that we're going to be out to get them. We've got to fix that."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There isn't a big enough Owned smiley in the world for this one.*owned*

 

[fossten]

Conservatives, don't trust this guy - this bias runs deeper than you think - something's up, and I wouldn't accept his 'apology' until ABC actually changes their tactics.

********************************************************

[ ...ABC News has left in place its Political Director Mark Halperin. ...... despite the network’s acknowledgement that Halperin wrote a memo that to many seems to direct ABC reporters, anchors and producers to slant its coverage by downplaying the misstatements of ... candidate Senator John Kerry and by viewing negatively any misstatements by Republican candidate Bush.

“As Political Director, Halperin is responsible for the planning and editorial content of all political news on the network.”

Halperin’s memo claimed that the Bush campaign was trying “to get away with as much as possible….” He was born in 1965 in Bethesda, Maryland, the red-diaper baby of hard-Left-connected controversial foreign policy specialist Morton Halperin.

Morton Halperin today is Senior Vice President of the left-wing Center for American Progress (CAP) and Director of the Open Society Policy Center established by eccentric billionaire international financier George Soros.

In 1970, Halperin resigned to protest, he said, President Nixon’s decision to move American forces into Cambodia and to intensify the bombing of North Vietnam. Classified details of U.S. bombing in Cambodia had been leaked to the New York Times, and security officials, suspecting Halperin, had been tapping his telephones. Halperin sued the government over what he called this violation of his privacy, prompting public debate over how much privacy someone entrusted with classified military information should have.

Leaving government in 1970, Halperin became a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution, a liberal think tank.

Since 1961, as in a study he did for the Institute of Defense Analysis, Halperin from inside the government had advocated U.S. nuclear disarmament, even if the Soviet Union did not likewise disarm.

During President Lyndon Johnson’s administration Halperin had been in charge of compiling a classified history of U.S. involvement in Vietnam. As David Horowitz and Richard Poe reported:

This secret history later emerged [in June 1971] into public view as the so-called “Pentagon Papers.” Halperin and his deputy Leslie Gelb assigned much of the writing to leftwing opponents of the war, such as Daniel Ellsberg who, despite his background as a former Marine and a military analyst for the Rand Corporation, was already evolving into a New Left radical…With Halperin’s tacit encouragement – and perhaps active collusion – Ellsberg stole the secret history and released it to The New York Times…Not surprisingly, “The Pentagon Papers” echoed Halperin’s long-standing position

In 1975, when Mark Halperin was 10, his father became director of the Center for National Security Studies (CNSS), bankrolled by the Field Foundation and the Fund for Peace (FFP). Much of CNSS’s staff came from the ultra-leftist Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) and from the National Lawyers Guild (NLG), identified in past congressional investigations as a Communist front group

Halperin remained CNSS Director until 1992, when the election of President Bill Clinton brought him back into government.

In February 1993, President Bill Clinton’s administration announced the appointment of Morton Halperin to the new position of Assistant Secretary of Defense for Democracy and Peacekeeping.

Morton Halperin during the mid-1970s befriended Philip Agee, a former-CIA-agent-turned-Communist who publicly identified hundreds of purported American Central Intelligence Agency agents. At least one of these agents, Athens station chief Richard Welch, was murdered shortly thereafter. Halperin flew to Europe to help Agee find safe haven after Great Britain expelled him. In the U.S., Halperin opposed legislation to punish the outing of U.S. undercover agents as Agee had done. Halperin has described the CIA as “the subverter of everybody else’s freedom.”

Halperin, as Director of the Washington, D.C. office of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), in this era also defended the right of The Progressive magazine to publish secret details it had obtained of how to make an atomic bomb.

In 1976, Halperin accused the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) of “murdering” Black Panther leader Fred Hampton.

After the U.S. Senate refused to confirm Halperin, President Clinton appointed the controversial left-wing activist to several positions that required no Senate confirmation: Special Assistant to the President, Senior Director for Democracy at the National Security Council and consultant to the Secretary of Defense and to the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy.

In 1998, Halperin became director of policy planning for the U.S. State Department. During his tenure 15 State Department laptop computers containing highly classified intelligence information disappeared, one of them checked out to Halperin’s office. Others were punished for this serious security breach, but Halperin was not.

Morton Halperin in February 2002 became Director of the Open Society Policy Center and has worked closely ever since with its creator, eccentric billionaire international financier George Soros, who committed tens of millions of dollars in 2004 to a variety of efforts to defeat President Bush. One of these Soros-funded political efforts is the Center for American Progress (CAP),

According to a March 1, 2004 report by Robert Dreyfuss in The Nation, Halperin and Soros handpicked the President of CAP, former Clinton White House Chief of Staff John Podesta. Morton Halperin today is Senior Vice President, second-in-command at CAP, where his son David is a Special Adviser on Campus Outreach. During the years 1997-2000, David Halperin worked as a speechwriter for President Clinton and the National Security Council. Among the Clinton White House email records that mysteriously disappeared when sought by investigators were ones to and from David Halperin, some of which might have involved his father.

This is the family and subculture in which Mark Halperin was raised and his political views were shaped. These are the roots from which his career has grown.

This son of a famous and influential left-wing father joined ABC News in January 1988 as a desk assistant, then soon became researcher for “World News Tonight with Peter Jennings.” For the next four years he worked with the investigative unit of “World News Tonight” and as a general assignment reporter in Washington.

In 1992, Mark Halperin became a full-time off-air reporter traveling with then-Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton’s campaign. Liberal media insiders have seen Halperin’s confidential 1992 home movie Elvis and Us, which showed Clinton’s backstage clowning and antics during the campaign.

During the 1992 campaign, Halperin violated journalistic ethics by providing to Clinton aide George Stephanopoulos a copy ABC had obtained of Mr. Clinton’s youthful “I loathe the military” letter written to his ROTC commander, according to Tom Rosenstiel’s book about ABC Strange Bedfellows. Halperin thereby gave candidate Clinton days of advance warning to prepare his response before facing reporters’ questions about this letter Clinton had no reason to believe still existed.



Having helped Clinton win, Mark Halperin then covered the President-elect’s transition to power and “was assigned to White House coverage for the first two years of the Clinton administration.”

Apparently it bothered neither ABC nor Halperin that this network’s White House reporter was the son of high-level Clinton appointee and controversial presidential advisor Morton Halperin. In 1997, the same year Mark Halperin was promoted to Political Director of ABC News, his brother David began a four-year stint as speechwriter to President Clinton.

 

[MonsterMark]

Notice how Johnny and Phil won't respond? Typical of the left when they are exposed. But then again, what can they say? Their own people are the ones admitting that they are biased to an extreme. Only now that their checkbooks are affected are they admitting it.

 

[97silverlsc]

Notice how Johnny and Phil won't respond? Typical of the left when they are exposed. But then again, what can they say? Their own people are the ones admitting that they are biased to an extreme. Only now that their checkbooks are affected are they admitting it.

Hmmm, maybe there's no response because it doesn't deserve one. You guys need to see your periodontists cause your flapping your gums so much they have to be bleeding profusely.

 

[fossten]

GLUG GLUG GLUG...

You know, Bryan, I've heard of this sort of thing happening to children who are brainwashed by regression therapists into falsely believing that their parents abused them. The children are unable to live in constant conflict of emotion between their actual memory and their false memory that the therapist has placed there.

Eventually, unaided by any parental guidance due to having been placed in a temp foster home, the child gives in to the suggestions of the therapist and solidifies the false memories, accepting them as real. Later, presented with incontrovertible proof that the parents did no such thing, the child angrily refuses to accept the proof and clings stubbornly to the beliefs now imprinted on his or her mind.

Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

I actually feel sorry for Phil and Johnny. They don't know any better; they are just lashing out.

 

[97silverlsc]

Blah blah blah blah blah

You truly are a legend in your own delusional mind, aren't you fossie. I feel sorry for anyone who has to associate with your pompous self.

 

[fossten]

You truly are a legend in your own delusional mind, aren't you fossie. I feel sorry for anyone who has to associate with your pompous self.

I know that you're just lashing out in anger, Phil, and I pity you. Maybe you should see a counselor. They are really good at getting you to release all that repressed anger.

Just remember: It isn't really Bush that you hate, it's yourself.

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

Notice how Johnny and Phil won't respond? Typical of the left when they are exposed. But then again, what can they say? Their own people are the ones admitting that they are biased to an extreme. Only now that their checkbooks are affected are they admitting it.

Oh BOY! You found ONE previously alleged left-winger from the MSM to "admit" (stretching the definition of that word beyond it's limits BTW) that the conservatives "have looked with suspicion at them"? And you call that "a resounding endorsement of the idea that the elite American media needs to stop being liberally biased"??? Talk about taking something out of context. All he said was that the MSM needs to regain the confidence of the conservatives. BFD. Just because TRUTH HURTS conservatives doesn't mean it's "liberal bias".

Better keep your tin foil hat firmly attached, the "Drive By Media" is comin' to get 'cha!

:bowrofl: You guys are a JOKE!

 

[fossten]

Oh BOY! You found ONE previously alleged left-winger from the MSM to "admit" (stretching the definition of that word beyond it's limits BTW) that the conservatives "have looked with suspicion at them"? And you call that "a resounding endorsement of the idea that the elite American media needs to stop being liberally biased"??? Talk about taking something out of context. All he said was that the MSM needs to regain the confidence of the conservatives. BFD. Just because TRUTH HURTS conservatives doesn't mean it's "liberal bias".

Better keep your tin foil hat firmly attached, the "Drive By Media" is comin' to get 'cha!

:bowrofl: You guys are a JOKE!

OH please, hater. You want a taste of liberal bias? If you could drag yourself away from your bhong long enough to search this forum, you'd know that I've posted literally dozens of examples in several threads exposing liberal bias. So the POLITICAL DIRECTOR for one of the MAJOR networks admits it, but he's just one guy?

Save your useless tripe for Democrap Underground. Go bash some Christians there.

 

[MonsterMark]

Oh BOY! You found ONE previously alleged left-winger from the MSM to "admit" (stretching the definition of that word beyond it's limits BTW) that the conservatives "have looked with suspicion at them"?

Johnny. This another rabbit hole. It goes much deeper. And please, take a look at this guy. If you do, you will not be capable of coming back here and telling me that he is an 'alleged left-winger' without looking at yourself in the mirror first.

Here is what I would do if I were a major news network. I would set up 2 competing divisions within my network. Liberal and conservative. Give them a story and let them cover it. Then put them both on at the same time and let them tell their story. Let them spin their spin and may the best team win. I would always have on 2 reporters. They each get the same amount of time. No arguing. Just make your point. People would tune into that. Let the battle of ideas win.

 

[MonsterMark]

Remember Johnny... A spoon full of sugar helps the medicine go down, the medicine go down, the medicine go down...

Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist

http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=6664

Date: December 14, 2005
Contact: Meg Sullivan
( msullivan@support.ucla.edu )


While the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal is conservative, the newspaper's news pages are liberal, even more liberal than The New York Times. The Drudge Report may have a right-wing reputation, but it leans left. Coverage by public television and radio is conservative compared to the rest of the mainstream media. Meanwhile, almost all major media outlets tilt to the left.

These are just a few of the surprising findings from a UCLA-led study, which is believed to be the first successful attempt at objectively quantifying bias in a range of media outlets and ranking them accordingly.

"I suspected that many media outlets would tilt to the left because surveys have shown that reporters tend to vote more Democrat than Republican," said Tim Groseclose, a UCLA political scientist and the study's lead author. "But I was surprised at just how pronounced the distinctions are."

"Overall, the major media outlets are quite moderate compared to members of Congress, but even so, there is a quantifiable and significant bias in that nearly all of them lean to the left," said co?author Jeffrey Milyo, University of Missouri economist and public policy scholar.

The results appear in the latest issue of the Quarterly Journal of Economics, which will become available in mid-December.

Groseclose and Milyo based their research on a standard gauge of a lawmaker's support for liberal causes. Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) tracks the percentage of times that each lawmaker votes on the liberal side of an issue. Based on these votes, the ADA assigns a numerical score to each lawmaker, where "100" is the most liberal and "0" is the most conservative. After adjustments to compensate for disproportionate representation that the Senate gives to low?population states and the lack of representation for the District of Columbia, the average ADA score in Congress (50.1) was assumed to represent the political position of the average U.S. voter.

Groseclose and Milyo then directed 21 research assistants — most of them college students — to scour U.S. media coverage of the past 10 years. They tallied the number of times each media outlet referred to think tanks and policy groups, such as the left-leaning NAACP or the right-leaning Heritage Foundation.

Next, they did the same exercise with speeches of U.S. lawmakers. If a media outlet displayed a citation pattern similar to that of a lawmaker, then Groseclose and Milyo's method assigned both a similar ADA score.

"A media person would have never done this study," said Groseclose, a UCLA political science professor, whose research and teaching focuses on the U.S. Congress. "It takes a Congress scholar even to think of using ADA scores as a measure. And I don't think many media scholars would have considered comparing news stories to congressional speeches."

Of the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center, with CBS' "Evening News," The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times ranking second, third and fourth most liberal behind the news pages of The Wall Street Journal.

Only Fox News' "Special Report With Brit Hume" and The Washington Times scored right of the average U.S. voter.

The most centrist outlet proved to be the "NewsHour With Jim Lehrer." CNN's "NewsNight With Aaron Brown" and ABC's "Good Morning America" were a close second and third.

"Our estimates for these outlets, we feel, give particular credibility to our efforts, as three of the four moderators for the 2004 presidential and vice-presidential debates came from these three news outlets — Jim Lehrer, Charlie Gibson and Gwen Ifill," Groseclose said. "If these newscasters weren't centrist, staffers for one of the campaign teams would have objected and insisted on other moderators."

The fourth most centrist outlet was "Special Report With Brit Hume" on Fox News, which often is cited by liberals as an egregious example of a right-wing outlet. While this news program proved to be right of center, the study found ABC's "World News Tonight" and NBC's "Nightly News" to be left of center. All three outlets were approximately equidistant from the center, the report found.

"If viewers spent an equal amount of time watching Fox's 'Special Report' as ABC's 'World News' and NBC's 'Nightly News,' then they would receive a nearly perfectly balanced version of the news," said Milyo, an associate professor of economics and public affairs at the University of Missouri at Columbia.

Five news outlets — "NewsHour With Jim Lehrer," ABC's "Good Morning America," CNN's "NewsNight With Aaron Brown," Fox News' "Special Report With Brit Hume" and the Drudge Report — were in a statistical dead heat in the race for the most centrist news outlet. Of the print media, USA Today was the most centrist.

An additional feature of the study shows how each outlet compares in political orientation with actual lawmakers. The news pages of The Wall Street Journal scored a little to the left of the average American Democrat, as determined by the average ADA score of all Democrats in Congress (85 versus 84). With scores in the mid-70s, CBS' "Evening News" and The New York Times looked similar to Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., who has an ADA score of 74.

Most of the outlets were less liberal than Lieberman but more liberal than former Sen. John Breaux, D-La. Those media outlets included the Drudge Report, ABC's "World News Tonight," NBC's "Nightly News," USA Today, NBC's "Today Show," Time magazine, U.S. News & World Report, Newsweek, NPR's "Morning Edition," CBS' "Early Show" and The Washington Post.

Since Groseclose and Milyo were more concerned with bias in news reporting than opinion pieces, which are designed to stake a political position, they omitted editorials and Op?Eds from their tallies. This is one reason their study finds The Wall Street Journal more liberal than conventional wisdom asserts.

Another finding that contradicted conventional wisdom was that the Drudge Report was slightly left of center.

"One thing people should keep in mind is that our data for the Drudge Report was based almost entirely on the articles that the Drudge Report lists on other Web sites," said Groseclose. "Very little was based on the stories that Matt Drudge himself wrote. The fact that the Drudge Report appears left of center is merely a reflection of the overall bias of the media."

Yet another finding that contradicted conventional wisdom relates to National Public Radio, often cited by conservatives as an egregious example of a liberal news outlet. But according to the UCLA-University of Missouri study, it ranked eighth most liberal of the 20 that the study examined.

"By our estimate, NPR hardly differs from the average mainstream news outlet," Groseclose said. "Its score is approximately equal to those of Time, Newsweek and U.S. News & World Report and its score is slightly more conservative than The Washington Post's. If anything, government?funded outlets in our sample have a slightly lower average ADA score (61), than the private outlets in our sample (62.8)."

The researchers took numerous steps to safeguard against bias — or the appearance of same — in the work, which took close to three years to complete. They went to great lengths to ensure that as many research assistants supported Democratic candidate Al Gore in the 2000 election as supported President George Bush. They also sought no outside funding, a rarity in scholarly research.

"No matter the results, we feared our findings would've been suspect if we'd received support from any group that could be perceived as right- or left-leaning, so we consciously decided to fund this project only with our own salaries and research funds that our own universities provided," Groseclose said.

The results break new ground.

"Past researchers have been able to say whether an outlet is conservative or liberal, but no one has ever compared media outlets to lawmakers," Groseclose said. "Our work gives a precise characterization of the bias and relates it to known commodity — politicians."

-UCLA-

 

[MonsterMark]

Adding insult to injury, here, drink this.... glug, glug.

Courtesy of Powerline

{excerpted}


Quote:
...Beyond that, though, one stiking feature of the interview was Halperin's ready admission of the liberal bias that pervades old media. Here are a few exchanges; there were more to the same effect:

MH: You’re asking me should people be skeptical? I think anyone who’s conservative should be skeptical of anything the old media does. ***

HH: But the old media is overwhelmingly liberal, correct, Mark Halperin?

MH: Correct, as we say in the book.

HH: And so everyone that you work with, or 95% of people you work with, are old liberals.

MH: I don’t know if it’s 95%, and unfortunately, they’re not all old. There are a lot of young liberals here, too. But it certainly, there are enough in the old media, not just in ABC, but in old media generally, that it tilts the coverage quite frequently, in many issues, in a liberal direction, which is completely improper. And it goes from the big and major like CBS’ outrageous story about President Bush’s draft record right before the 2004 election, to the insidious and small use of language describing Nancy Pelosi’s liberal policies and ideas different than they would Newt Gingrich’s conservative ones.

HH: And these liberals…you know, Terry Moran on this program said…Terry Moran on this program from ABC, your colleague…

MH: Right.

HH: …said that the media hates the military, has a deep suspicion of it. Do you agree with that?

MH: I totally agree. It’s one of the huge biases, along with gays, guns, abortion, and many other things.

MH: First of all, I never say MSM, because I don’t believe the old media is mainstream. They’re out of the mainstream on most of the issues I’ve been referring to. So I don’t use that phrase. I believe that as I’ve said several times, happy to say again, that anyone who’s conservative in this country has every justification to be skeptical about anything, an internal memo, or product that goes on the air, from the old media, because of a forty year or more history of liberal bias on a range of issues. And after what CBS News did in 2004, regarding the President’s National Guard record, I would be…I am thankful that any conservative looks to us ever for news and information, given how outrageous what they did was. ...