most religious Americans are moderate or progressive, in the news media it is overwhelmingly conservative leaders who present the voice of religion

LEFT BEHIND: The Skewed Representation of Religion in Major News Media
...
Religion is often depicted in the news media as a politically divisive force, with two sides roughly paralleling the broader political divide: On one side are cultural conservatives who ground their political values in religious beliefs; and on the other side are secular liberals, who have opted out of debates that center on religion-based values. The truth, however is far different: close to 90 percent of Americans today self-identify as religious, while only 22 percent belong to traditionalist sects. Yet in the cultural war depicted by news media as existing across religious lines, centrist and progressive voices are marginalized or absent altogether.

In order to begin to assess how the news media paint the picture of religion in America today, this study measured the extent to which religious leaders, both conservative and progressive, are quoted, mentioned, and interviewed in the news media.

Among the study's key findings:

• Combining newspapers and television, conservative religious leaders were quoted, mentioned, or interviewed in news stories 2.8 times as often as were progressive religious leaders.
• On television news -- the three major television networks, the three major cable new channels, and PBS -- conservative religious leaders were quoted, mentioned, or interviewed almost 3.8 times as often as progressive leaders.

• In major newspapers, conservative religious leaders were quoted, mentioned, or interviewed 2.7 times as often as progressive leaders.

Despite the fact most religious Americans are moderate or progressive, in the news media it is overwhelmingly conservative leaders who are presented as the voice of religion. This represents a particularly meaningful distortion since progressive religious leaders tend to focus on different issues and offer an entirely different perspective than their conservative counterparts.

The new rates were not only developed with no public or congressional input/oversight ...

Thursday, May 17, 2007 by The Huffington Post | Going Postal on Rate Hikes for Independent Periodicals | by Andi Zeisler
...
Which is where the conspiracy-theory stuff comes in. The new rates were not only developed with no public or congressional input/oversight, they weren’t even developed by the Postal Service itself. Rather, the plan was brewed up by an entity that happens to have a pretty hefty stake in maintaining its own primacy in the magazine realm: Time Warner publications, publisher of such checkout-counter heavies as People, Fortune, Sports Illustrated, InStyle, and Sunset. The announcement was made only weeks ago, and the short notice hasn’t allowed the small publications at risk time to do much more than mutter obscenities in the USPS’s general direction.

As the largest magazine publisher in the U.S., Time Warner shouldn’t need to look over its shoulder at the likes of a comparatively tiny operation like The Nation; nevertheless, the policy it proposed seems like a paranoid guarantee that it never has to. Many small magazines simply won’t be able to afford to continue publishing if their mailing rates increase 30 percent; fewer new magazines will be able to launch without a sizable amount of start-up capital and/or corporate backing. And what that means is that we’ll see a dwindling number of magazines devoted to independent, noncommercial discourse –whether that discourse is from the left or the right, about hunting or about pressing your own tofu. ...

Rate hike pushed by media conglomerate Time Warner threaten small and medium-circulation publications ... well above 20 or 25 percent

May 17, 2007 | Postal Rates = Free Press | Rate hike pushed by media conglomerate Time Warner threaten small and medium-circulation publications | By Robert W. McChesney

In 1792, the United States Congress converted the free press clause in the First Amendment from an abstract principle into a living reality for Americans by providing newspapers with low postal rates. These low rates were crucial for the growth and spread of the abolitionist movement, the populist movement and progressive politics. More broadly, they have been central to development of participatory democracy in general.

Today, magazines like In These Times face an immediate threat to their financial health, and perhaps survival, due to a massive postal rate increase that will go into effect on July 15.

To the surprise of many independent publishers, in February the Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC), the body in charge of determining postal rates, rejected a rate-hike plan that was submitted by the U.S. Postal Service, the people in the business of delivering the mail for the past 215 years. This plan was widely understood to call for an approximate 12 percent increase that would have hit all publications more or less equally.

Instead the PRC adopted a revised version of an extremely complicated proposal submitted by media conglomerate Time Warner that included a number of possible discounts favoring the largest publishers. Time Warner is the largest magazine publisher in the nation. To make up for the discounts and maintain their revenue targets, some magazines will have to pay a lot more than the 12 percent increase most had budgeted for. Research by McGraw-Hill, a magazine and book publisher, suggests many publications, particularly small and medium-circulation publications, could now be looking at immediate postal rate hikes well above 20 or 25 percent—thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars in additional costs that will strain already tight budgets. ...

ABC and CBS evening news shows did not cover Comey's [disturbing] testimony about [illegal?] wiretapping power struggle [by current AG Gonzales]

Wed, May 16, 2007 3:45pm EST | ABC and CBS evening news shows did not cover Comey's testimony about wiretapping power struggle

Of the three national nightly news broadcasts, only NBC's Nightly News reported on former deputy attorney general James B. Comey's May 15 congressional testimony regarding what Nightly News anchor Brian Williams called a "rare glimpse of a high-level, late-night power struggle" among the Justice Department, the FBI, and the White House over the National Security Agency's warrantless domestic wiretapping program. As NBC News justice correspondent Pete Williams reported, Comey told the Senate Judiciary Committee that current Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, who was then White House counsel, and Andrew Card, then-White House chief of staff, attempted to pressure then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, "at his [hospital] bedside ... to approve an extension of the secret NSA warrantless eavesdropping program over strong Justice Department objections even though Ashcroft was seriously ill," and did not have power as the attorney general during his recovery from surgery. ...

White House Censors Civil Liberties Report ... 200 redactions, sometimes deleting complete sectionss

May 15, 2007 | White House Censors Civil Liberties Report

We are fighting the war on terror, so, not only are civil liberties any longer relevant but neither is any report on civil liberties being violated relevant. After all, if you do not know that you have no rights, you won't complain all that much, see? From ACLU:

"Washington, DC - The American Civil Liberties Union today ridiculed White House censoring of a report submitted by the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board to exclude previously released information. The White House made more than 200 redactions to the public report, sometimes deleting entire sections. These edits resulted in former White House Counsel Lanny J. Davis’s resignation.

The following can be attributed to Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office:

"This administration has taken a see-no-evil, speak-no-evil posture. Attempting to keep well-known civil liberties violations secret is nothing short of childish. We clearly see what the administration is trying to hide when White House staff made 200 redactions and edits to the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board’s report. The board is a toothless entity that blindly and obediently advances the Bush agenda by endorsing its most egregious civil liberties violations. For the administration to take it one step further by censoring the PCLOB’s report is shameless.

"Representatives Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Christopher Shays (R-CT) and Tom Udall (D-NM), have introduced legislation which would take the civil liberties board out from under the president's control and would give it subpoena powers. We strongly support that necessary move to ensure that the board has true oversight powers - and can be a watch dog, not a lap dog."

Make no mistake, this is a direct assault on freedom of the press, on freedom of expression, on the Bill of Rights in general. Maybe Congress should meet with Lanny J. Davis and ask about those 200 redactions? ...

How MEMRI fooled the U.S Media with its Mickey Mouse Translation [... far from the first MEMRI translation "error"!]

How MEMRI fooled the U.S Media with its Mickey Mouse Translation | Ali Alarabi | May 14, 2007 ... http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m32878&hd=&size=1&l=e

How easy was it for MEMRI to fool so many of the US media outlets with its translation of a children program on Hamas TV, where a child was supposedly have said the words " we will annihilate the Jews"

It was very easy!

The controversy was fueled further when CNN decided to yank the video off the air because of major translation errors on part of MEMRI.
...
MEMERI which stands for Middle East Media Research Institute was established by former Israeli intelligence agents, the Mossad, to police Arabic media for any evidence of anti-Israeli rhetoric.
...
Here is MEMRI’s transcripts and my corrections are in black letters.

Host Saraa, a young girl: Sanabel, what will you do for the sake of the Al-Aqsa Mosque? How will you sacrifice your soul for the sake of Al-Aqsa? What will you do?

Sanabel, young girl on phone: I will shoot.

( It is rather Mickey’s character speaking the words and hand gestures " I will shoot" Not Sanable the young girl on the phone)

Farfour, a Mickey Mouse character in a tuxedo: Sanabel, what should we do if we want to liberate...

Sanable: We want to fight. (The word used was we want to resist, not to fight the reference here is to resist the Israeli occupation.

Farfour: We got that. What else?

Saraa: We want to...

Sanabel: We will annihilate the Jews. Actually she is saying: (the Jews are shooting us)

Saraa:We are defending Al-Aqsa with our souls and our blood, aren't we, Sanabel?

Sanabel: I will commit martyrdom.

Sanabel actually said " I’ll be a martyr" ( as in to die for my country, and the reason for that because from a cultural and Islamic religious point of view and law, to be a martyr, one has to have died defending his family, property, religion and country,although the child does not all of this, however the usage of the Arabic version of the word Martyr, carries in it those references. and not to " commit" the word used in MEMRI translation to indicate action and/or planning. This point was elaborated further by YegaL head of MEMRI on Beck’s show by saying that the child meant " committing suicide bombing"

Farfour: We've said more than once that becoming masters of the world requires the following: First, to be happy with our Arabic language, which once upon a time ruled this world. (Excellency in the world, not Mastery of the world two totally different meanings)

Pentagon restricting testimony in Congress

Pentagon restricting testimony in Congress | Blocks staff of lower rank | By Bryan Bender, Globe Staff | May 10, 2007

WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon has placed unprecedented restrictions on who can testify before Congress, reserving the right to bar lower-ranking officers, enlisted soldiers, and career bureaucrats from appearing before oversight committees or having their remarks transcribed, according to Defense Department documents.

Robert L. Wilkie , a former Bush administration national security official who left the White House to become assistant secretary of defense for legislative affairs last year, has outlined a half-dozen guidelines that prohibit most officers below the rank of colonel from appearing in hearings, restricting testimony to high-ranking officers and civilians appointed by President Bush. ...

ABC's The View: Rosie had refused to have her first amendment rights restricted ... she was increasingly being heavily edited during recordings.

Rosie Tells ABC To Screw Its 9/11 Censorship | Offers of more money, new contract turned down by hero O'Donnell as she refuses to shut up about 9/11 | Steve Watson | Prison Planet | Wednesday, April 25, 2007
...
We can reveal that the "key elements" that could not be agreed upon were O'Donnell's propensity to continue to expose the fraud that is the government's official story of 9/11 and her pledge of allegiance to 9/11 truth.

Prominent 9/11 truth sources close to O'Donnell revealed to Alex Jones weeks ago that Rosie had refused to have her first amendment rights restricted and was likely to quit on her own terms after she was asked to stay on the show by ABC with the proviso that she tone down her stance on the issue of 9/11.

Today this has been made official.

According to our source O'Donnell has described some involved with the production of The View as "Neocon gate-keepers" and found it impossible to continue as she was increasingly being heavily edited during recordings.

The same associates were also blocking Rosie from bringing on guests of her own choosing whom she believed would further expose the 9/11 cover up.

Barbara Walters, co owner of the view stated that she had no say in the contract negotiations and added on today's show that they are prepared to be inundated with letters, and that "We have not thought about a replacement."

O'Donnell had increased The View's viewership by 15 percent over the course of the year.

O'Donnell caused uproar last month when she went on a rant about the many questions surrounding the collapse of Building 7, reaching around 30 million viewers in the process. ...

New York Post Rewrites Associated Press Story To Make It Way Worse For Dems .... extraordinary depths of dishonesty to smear Dems

Murdoch's New York Post Rewrites Associated Press Story To Make It Way Worse For Dems
April 25, 2007 -- 11:34 AM EST // View Comments (82) // Post a Comment

Oh, man. You won't be surprised to hear that Rupert Murdoch's New York Post is willing to stoop to extraordinary depths of dishonesty to smear Dems, but this one is quite remarkable.

Check out the rewrite that The Post has done on an AP story it ran today. The Post's version is far, far, far worse -- almost comically so, in fact -- for Harry Reid and the Dems than the AP story was in its original form.

Here's the headline and lede of the original AP story (there were many versions of it throughout the day looking basically like this): ...

dramatic drop in sectarian violence ... U.S. officials exclude car bombs in touting drop in Iraq violence

Wed, Apr. 25, 2007 | IRAQ WAR | U.S. officials exclude car bombs in touting drop in Iraq violence | By Nancy A. Youssef | McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON - U.S. officials who say there has been a dramatic drop in sectarian violence in Iraq since President Bush began sending more American troops into Baghdad aren't counting one of the main killers of Iraqi civilians.

Car bombs and other explosive devices have killed thousands of Iraqis in the past three years, but the administration doesn't include them in the casualty counts it has been citing as evidence that the surge of additional U.S. forces is beginning to defuse tensions between Shiite and Sunni Muslims.

President Bush explained why in a television interview on Tuesday. "If the standard of success is no car bombings or suicide bombings, we have just handed those who commit suicide bombings a huge victory," he told TV interviewer Charlie Rose.

Others, however, say that not counting bombing victims skews the evidence of how well the Baghdad security plan is protecting the civilian population - one of the surge's main goals.

"Since the administration keeps saying that failure is not an option, they are redefining success in a way that suits them," said James Denselow, an Iraq specialist at London-based Chatham House, a foreign policy think tank. ...

Great Education Myth: cannot school way out: “real annual earnings of college graduates actually declined” between 2000 and 2004.

Flattening the Great Education Myth | By David Sirota | San Francisco Chronicle - 12/4/06 (Permalink)

Helena is not the kind of place that top government officials, business leaders or Washington pundits usually think of when they discuss international trade policy. That’s too bad, because had they attended the community meeting in this mountain hamlet last month, they would have seen firsthand how powerless middle America is in what has become a vacuum of national leadership on globalization.
...
Sadly, the hard data tells us that, as comforting as this Great Education Myth is, we cannot school our way out of the problems accompanying a national trade policy devoid of wage, environmental and human-rights protections.

As Fortune Magazine reported last year, “The skill premium, the extra value of higher education, must have declined after three decades of growing.” Citing the U.S. government’s Economic Report of the President, the magazine noted that “real annual earnings of college graduates actually declined” between 2000 and 2004. The magazine also noted that new studies “show companies massively shifting high-skilled work — research, development, engineering, even corporate finance — from the United States to low-cost countries like India and China.”

It’s not that workers in these other countries are smarter, says Sheldon Steinbach of the American Council on Education. “One could be educationally competitive and easily lose out in the global economic marketplace,” he told the Los Angeles Times. Why? “Because of significantly lower wages being paid elsewhere.” ...

There’s no labor shortage - there’s a cheap labor shortage, ... no shortage of high-tech engineers here in America ...

The Great Labor Shortage Lie

I’ve said many times before that the best place for information is the business press. The material is written for people who need cold, hard information in order to make money, rather than for the professional political pontificators who are aroused by Beltway spin. The only challenge when reading the business press is to get through the corporate PR. But if you have the patience, you will find out what’s really going on and who is lying to you. This week’s piece in Businessweek on the job market is a good example.

The article begins with a sensationalist headline that only Bill Gates and Tom Friedman could love: “Where Are All The Workers? Companies worldwide are suddenly scrambling to manage a labor crunch.” This is the public rationale from corporate executives (especially in the high-tech industries) for massive job outsourcing and exploitation of the H-1B program: We can’t find the workers we need. We are expected, for instance, to ignore academic studies published recently by the National Academy of Sciences showing that, in fact, there is no shortage of high-tech engineers here in America. We are expected to ignore the data showing that companies are using the H-1B program to drive down domestic workers’ wages by forcing them into competition with imported workers from impoverished countries. We are expected, in short, to believe that layoffs, wage stagnation and pension/health care cutbacks have absolutely nothing to do with corporate executives trying to line their own pockets, and everything to do with workers themselves - and we are expected to believe all this at the very same time new government data shows that the share of national income going to wages is at a record low, and the share going to corporate profits is at a record high.

Yet a few paragraphs into the Businessweek article, the real story starts to trickle out:

“A global labor crunch, already being felt by some employers, appears to have intensified in recent months. That’s in spite of widely publicized layoffs, including Citigroup’s plans to shed as many as 15,000 staffers… Corporations are determined to keep labor costs under control, so they’re reaching deeper into their bag of tricks…Some are lowering their standards for new hires or moving operations to virgin territories other outsourcers haven’t discovered… Economists, of course, will tell you there’s no such thing as a labor shortage. From a worker’s viewpoint, many so-called shortages could quickly be solved if employers were to offer more money. And worldwide, millions of people still can’t find jobs. The strongest evidence that there’s no general shortage today is that overall worker pay has barely outpaced inflation.”

There, finally, is the real story - the story that corporate executives and staid political pundits don’t want anyone to talk about: The Great Labor Shortage Lie (related, of course, to the Great Education Myth - the one I’ve debunked before that claims all of working America’s problems are due to a bad education system). There’s no labor shortage - there’s a cheap labor shortage, because, as the free market fundamentalists all love to say, supply and demand rules everything. And if that’s the case - then there’s no way you can have a real labor supply shortage at the very same time wages (the monetized manifestation of employer demand for labor) continue to stagnate.
...
... Put another way, the Big Money interests want to preserve a tool to rig the labor market so as to make sure its natural supply-and-demand dynamics are never allowed to work to raise wages here at home. And politicians like McCain whose campaigns are funded by these same Big Money interests will do anything to help them. ...

the Washington press corps remains almost as lax today about holding Bush accountable as it was in 2002 and 2003 ...

The Ongoing Iraq Intel Fraud | By Robert Parry | May 5, 2007

Almost five years and perhaps half a million deaths too late, it’s finally the accepted wisdom in Washington that the intelligence that George W. Bush used to justify invading Iraq was garbage. But the pattern of twisting the truth about Iraq continues unabated and the President is still rarely called on it.

Bush has never stopped making statements about the Iraq War that are untrue, illogical or irrelevant. Yet, the Washington press corps remains almost as lax today about holding Bush accountable as it was in 2002 and 2003.

So, when Bush mocks Democratic “politicians in Washington” who supposedly seek to substitute their judgments for those of experienced commanders on the ground, the national news media stays silent on Bush’s hypocrisy. It’s almost never mentioned that he was the Washington politician in December who overruled the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the two top generals in Iraq on the escalation of the war.

Bush not only rejected the advice of the Joint Chiefs and his field generals, John Abizaid and George Casey, but then replaced Abizaid and Casey with new commanders who were compliant to Bush’s wishes. Though the removals fell within Bush’s Commander-in-Chief powers, it can’t be said he was respecting the judgments of the combat generals. ...

More Cherry-Picking

But the U.S. news media continues to let Bush get away with cherry-picking the few facts that tend to bolster his position, while ignoring the more significant information that undercuts him.

For instance, the remarkable “Atiyah” comment that “prolonging the [Iraq] war is in our interest” was first reported by Consortiumnews.com in a story posted on the Internet on Oct. 3, 2006. That story was matched by a Christian Science Monitor article on Oct. 6, but the revelation has been widely ignored by other news organizations.
...
Hagel, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, cited "national intelligence" attributing "maybe 10 percent" of the insurgency and violence to al-Qaeda and noting that Iraqis across the board have no fondness for the non-Iraqi terrorists who have swarmed into Iraq to fight the Americans.

The Iraqis “don't like the terrorists. What's happened in Anbar province is the tribes are finally starting to connect with us because al-Qaeda started killing some of their leadership and threatening their people. So the tribes now are at war with al-Qaeda."

"So," said Hagel, "when I hear people say, 'Well, if we leave them to that, it will be chaos' – what do you think is going on now? Scaring the American people into this blind alley is so dangerous." [Washington Post, April 30, 2007]

But President Bush continues to get a relatively easy ride on his Iraq arguments because the U.S. news media has little more appetite now for challenging him and his influential right-wing backers than the press corps did in 2002-03, when the prevailing Washington conventional wisdom was that invading Iraq was one peachy idea. ...

Post 9/11: the "mainstream" media – crumbled almost immediately. -- moment of utter capitulation lasted for years

May 7, 2007 | The Failure of the 'Mainstream' | The media, the intellectuals, and the politicians all failed us in the run-up to war

In contemplating how and why we got where we are today – stuck in the quagmire of Iraq and faced with a relentless assault on our civil liberties at home – three major failures come to mind, three institutions that imploded under enormous pressure. Like the steel girders that held up the World Trade Center towers, these cultural-political pillars melted under the tremendous emotional heat generated by the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and their collapse paved the way for all that came after.

The first pillar to fall – the "mainstream" media – crumbled almost immediately. Hours after the World Trade Center came crashing down, reporters had already pinned on their flag lapels and started parroting the government line. Bill Moyers, in his comprehensive look at how and why the "major" media melted down in the heat of the moment, chronicles the sorry story but doesn't really come to any firm conclusions about why that moment of utter capitulation lasted for years – and has only worn off just recently (which accounts for the fact that the Moyers documentary was made at all). In any case, Moyers details the pathetic story of how professional journalists abdicated their responsibilities to their readers and themselves – but doesn't readily explain why.

After all, these guys have tremendous resources and real power: that's why they call them the "Fourth Estate." The ability to shape public opinion and set the terms of the debate is a powerful weapon in any hands, and the extreme concentration of media ownership is a real factor in enforcing an informal "party line" in what is laughingly referred to as the "mainstream" media, or the MSM, as the right wing of the blogosphere likes to put it. ...

Blitzer's list of recent Washington sex scandals included only Democrats [... skipping numerous Republicans in the 33 year time period]

Blitzer's list of recent Washington sex scandals included only Democrats | Fri, May 4, 2007 8:09pm EST
...
Blitzer listed three sex scandals: former President Bill Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky (1998), former Sen. Gary Hart's (D-CO) liaison with Donna Rice (1987), and former House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Wilbur Mills' (D-AR) involvement with Fanne Foxe (1974). But there have also been numerous -- and more recent -- sex scandals involving Republicans. For example:

* On September 29, 2006, then-Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) resigned after ABC News asked him about sexually explicit instant messages to underage former congressional pages. ... One former page, however, described those emails as "sick sick sick sick sick."
* In 1999, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich's (R-GA) "long-term" affair with congressional aide Callista Bisek -- whom he later married -- was revealed while he was seeking a divorce from his second wife. ...
* In December 1998, during impeachment proceedings against Clinton stemming from the Lewinsky affair, then-House Speaker-designate Bob Livingston (R-LA) admitted to having an extramarital affair. ...
* In a November 22, 1992, article, The Washington Post reported that then-Sen. Robert Packwood (R-OR) had made numerous "uninvited sexual advances to women who have worked for him or with him." ...
* In September 1998, Salon.com reported that then-House Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde (R-IL) had engaged in an extramarital affair with Cherie Snodgrass from 1965 to 1969. ...

Kansas City Paper Hatchets McClatchy Story on Missouri GOP 'Voter Fraud' Scam to Make it GOP Friendly

5/5/2007 12:54PM | Kansas City Paper Hatchets McClatchy Story on Missouri GOP 'Voter Fraud' Scam to Make it GOP Friendly

Removes References to Republican Missouri Politicians, Karl Rove, Thor Hearne, ACVR, Lack of 'Voter Fraud' Evidence and More | Yet Another Mind-Blowing Mainstream Media Embarrassment...

Howard Beale at the Show-Me State's watchdog, Fired Up! Missouri, hits another home run on Friday with a devastating piece comparing the Kansas City Star's altered version of Greg Gordon's recent brilliant piece at McClatchy exposing Missouri as "Ground Zero" for the GOP's widespread, well-funded national "voter fraud" scam. As Thor Hearne, of the now-defunct American Center for Voting Rights (BRAD BLOG's Special Coverage Page here) and his Missouri law firm Lathrop & Gage were at the epicenter of "Ground Zero," the Star's actions in butchering the original piece --- in order to save GOP/Missouri face and deceive their own readers in the bargain --- is all the more scandalous.

The Star, it seems, after waiting a day to run the story in their pages at all, managed to hack up Gordon's excellent exposé to effectively excise as much GOP culpability as possible. With a particular eye towards removing anything that could be seen as embarrassing to local GOP'ers, like Thor Hearne, Gov. Matt Blunt, etc.

"Every change made to the story has the clear effect of reducing the exposure of the GOP," writes Beale, who calls the hatchet job "a total embarrassment" for the once-distinguished KC newspaper which is, ironically enough, actually owned by McClatchy!

See Beale's full piece for the undeniable sham exposed when the two versions of the story are compared side-by-side.

By way of just one example, the headline of Gordon/McClatchy's original was changed from "2006 Missouri's election was ground zero for GOP" to the Fox "News"-like "GOP sought to suppress votes in Missouri, critics say."

As Beale points out, this not-so-subtle change has the effect of turning the detailed, fact-based reporting by Gordon into a "he-said-she-said" difference of opinion:

The story was obviously not initiated by --nor is it at all about-- the claims of "critics" nor anyone else. Gordon was not reporting on some press event by Democrats who were making claims of voter suppression. Rather he did real reporting and wrote about how, as the facts indicate, the GOP historically undertook specific actions on the issue of voter fraud in Missouri with the intent of helping Republican candidates.

The Star's editorial decision, via its headline, to turn the story into some sort of he-said-she-said difference of opinion is an insult to the intelligence of its readers as well as a slap in the face to Greg Gordon, whose remarkable reporting their headline trivializes. ...

Beck's global warming special dominated by industry-funded "experts," serial misinformers

Beck's global warming special dominated by industry-funded "experts," serial misinformers

CNN Headline News host Glenn Beck's May 2 hour-long special, Exposed: The Climate of Fear, purported to present the "other side of the climate debate that you don't hear anywhere." Introducing the show, Beck stated: "I want you to know right up front, this is not a balanced look at global warming." Indeed, Beck relied heavily on people with energy industry ties and others espousing positions on global warming that have been soundly debunked or rejected by the overwhelming majority of scientists studying climate change.

Here is a list of those featured:

Marlo Lewis: Lewis is a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), an institution funded by the energy industry. ...

Timothy Ball: Ball is a climatologist who is also the chairman of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project, a Canadian environmental think tank whose three-person board of directors includes an executive of the High Park Advocacy Group, a Toronto-based lobby firm that specializes in 'energy, environment and ethics." Timothy Egan, High Park Advocacy Group president, is "a registered lobbyist for the Canadian Gas Association and the Canadian Electricity Association," in addition to serving on Natural Resources Stewardship Project's board. ...

Patrick J. Michaels: Michaels is senior fellow in environmental studies at the Cato Institute; research professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia; ... and editor of World Climate Report, a biweekly newsletter on climate studies funded in large part by the coal industry. According to a 1998 article by Institute for Public Accuracy executive director Norman Solomon, the Cato Institute has received financial support from energy companies -- including Chevron Companies, Exxon Company, Shell Oil Company, and Tenneco Gas, as well as the American Petroleum Institute, Amoco Foundation, and Atlantic Richfield Foundation. ...

Chris Horner: Horner is a senior fellow at CEI ...

John Christy: Christy is the director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama-Huntsville and Alabama state climatologist. Christy and fellow University of Alabama professor Roy Spencer co-authored a 2003 global warming study based on extensive data from weather satellites. Their report, which concluded that the troposphere had not warmed in recent decades, was ultimately found to have significant errors. The New York Times reported that when their miscalculations were taken into account, the data used in their study actually showed warming in the troposphere. ...

Bjorn Lomborg: ... lambasted Lomborg's book for "egregious distortions," "elementary blunders of quantitative manipulation and presentation that no self-respecting statistician ought to commit," and sections that were "poorly researched and ... rife with careless mistakes." Lomborg has repeatedly attacked Gore's documentary ...

David R. Legates: ... His 2006 report, "Climate Science: Climate Change and Its Impacts," was published by the National Center for Policy Analysis, a conservative think tank that has received substantial funding from energy interests such as ExxonMobil Corp. ...

Patrick Moore: Patrick Moore is a former leader of the environmental activist group Greenpeace who has served as a corporate consultant since 1991. ... In fact, as the Columbia Journalism Review reported, CSEC was formed by the Nuclear Energy Institute in 2006 and continues to receive most of its funding from that body. NEI is the policy organization of the nuclear energy and technology industry, and seeks to "promote the beneficial uses of nuclear energy and technologies in the United States and around the world." ...