Media Matters for America summary, May 10, 2007
 
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 22:03:07 -0400


<x-html>
<a href="http://mediamatters.org/"><img src="http://mediamatters.org/static/images/logo_email.jpg" border="0" /></a>
<p><b></b></p>
<p><a href=""></a></p>

<style type="text/css"><!--
body    	{ font-family: verdana, sans-serif; margin: 20px}

#spread 	{ float: left; width: 560px; clear: both; }

#spread a	{ text-decoration: none; color: #003366 }            
#spread a:hover	{ text-decoration: underline }

#spread p	{ font-size: 0.9em; }

#spread h1	{ font-size: 100%; }
#spread h2	{ font-size:  90%; }
#spread h3	{ font-size:  85%; }

#spread a.read	{
	font-size: .8em;
	/*font-weight: bold;*/
	text-transform: uppercase;
}
--></style>
<div id="spread">
<p>Here are today's news items from <i>Media Matters for America</i>, 
click on the title or 'read more' to read the entirety of each story.</p>
<h1><a href="http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/2008_elections?src=other">2008 Elections</a></h1>
<p><b><a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/dailyemail/200705100004?src=other">Polling rebuts <em>Wash. Times</em> claim that Clinton "in trouble" with Dem base over war</a></b><br />
A May 9 <i>Washington
Times</i> <a href="http://mediamatters.org//rd?http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20070508-092122-3692r.htm">editorial</a>, subsequently
<a href="http://mediamatters.org//rd?http://www.gop.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=6934">highlighted</a> by the Republican National
Committee, claimed that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) "is in trouble
with the far-left base of the Democratic Party" over her 2002 vote in
favor of the <a href="http://mediamatters.org//rd?http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:h.j.res.00114:" title="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:h.j.res.00114:">resolution</a> authorizing
the use of force against Iraq. The <i>Times</i>
cited no evidence to support this claim, and in fact, the <i>Times</i>&#39; claim is contradicted by a
WNBC/Marist <a href="http://mediamatters.org//rd?http://www.maristpoll.marist.edu/usapolls/CP070508.htm" title="http://www.maristpoll.marist.edu/usapolls/CP070508.htm">poll</a> released the
previous day, May 8, at 6 p.m. The summary that accompanied the poll <a href="http://mediamatters.org//rd?http://www.maristpoll.marist.edu/" title="http://www.maristpoll.marist.edu/">stated</a>: "Hillary Clinton&#39;s
position on the war in Iraq
is also not hurting her among Democrats. Only 9% of Democrats say her position
makes them less likely to vote for her, and 48% say it actually makes them more
likely to support her."
<a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/dailyemail/200705100004?src=other" class="read">Read more</a></p>

<p><b><a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/dailyemail/200705100008?src=other">Ignoring her extensive record of bright colors and big smiles, Fox's Cameron said Clinton wearing both to solve "likability problem"</a></b><br />
On the May 9 edition of Fox News&#39; <i>Special Report with Brit Hume</i>, chief political correspondent Carl Cameron claimed that during a
May 9 campaign stop in Annapolis,
 Maryland, Sen. Hillary Rodham
Clinton (D-NY) adopted an uncharacteristic wardrobe and sunny expression in
order to benefit politically. He said: "Wearing
bright colors, smiling constantly, as if to deal with what polls say is a
likability problem, she has surged 10 points since
the Democratic debate in three new polls: <i>USA Today</i>/Gallup,
CNN, and Rasmussen." In fact, Clinton has worn
bright-colored clothing and smiled in numerous prior appearances. 
<a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/dailyemail/200705100008?src=other" class="read">Read more</a></p>

<p><b><a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/dailyemail/200705100005?src=other">Olbermann named <em>Wash. Times</em> op-ed writer "Worst Person" "runner-up" for <em>Media Matters</em> falsehood</a></b><br />
On the May 9 edition of MSNBC&#39;s <i>Countdown</i>, host Keith Olbermann named
conservative media consultant <a href="http://mediamatters.org//rd?http://www.philkent.com/phil_kent.html">Phil Kent</a> the
"runner-up" in his nightly "Worst Person in the World"
segment for repeating the debunked
claim that
philanthropist George Soros funds <i>Media
Matters for America</i>
through a variety of other
organizations in an effort to "manipulate[] the media by
stifling and smearing center-right political voices." As <i>Media Matters</i> <a href="http://mediamatters.org//items/200705090002?src=other">noted</a>,
Kent
wrote a May 8 <a href="http://mediamatters.org//rd?http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20070507-102427-1433r.htm">op-ed</a>
for <i>The Washington Times</i> that
echoed <a href="http://mediamatters.org//items/200704240003?f=h_top">baseless
assertions</a> by Fox News host <a href="http://mediamatters.org//issues_topics/people/billoreilly?src=other">Bill O&#39;Reilly</a>. Olbermann cited Kent for "repeating the lie
that the media watchdog group <i>Media Matters
for America</i> is funded by George Soros, even though all funding
records prove that it is
flatly untrue." He added: "If this
sounds like a repetition of the stuff Bill O&#39;Reilly made up, that&#39;s
because it is. The newspaper is now using as its sole source on a story: Bill-O."
<a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/dailyemail/200705100005?src=other" class="read">Read more</a></p>

<h1><a href="http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/government_and_elections?src=other">Government and Elections</a></h1>
<p><b><a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/dailyemail/200705100009?src=other">Beck wouldn't vote for Lieberman for president "because of the way the Middle East would use it"</a></b><br />
On the May 10 edition of his nationally syndicated radio
show, CNN host <a href="http://mediamatters.org//issues_topics/people/glennbeck?src=other" target="_new" title="This external link will open in a new window">Glenn Beck</a>
said that he "wouldn&#39;t vote for [Sen.] Joe Lieberman [I-CT] as president ... because of the way
the Middle East would use it," but also
asserted, "That&#39;s not saying the same thing as I wouldn&#39;t
vote for a Jew for president." He did not explain the distinction he drew between asserting that he would not vote for Lieberman, who
is Jewish, and asserting that
he wouldn&#39;t vote for <i>any</i>
Jew for president. He stated that although he believes Lieberman "knows
how to fight this war," and "even if I didn&#39;t disagree with
him on so many social issues," he would refrain from voting for him
because of the "complications it would add in this country or on the
planet right now."
<a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/dailyemail/200705100009?src=other" class="read">Read more</a></p>

<h1><a href="http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/war_in_iraq?src=other">War in Iraq</a></h1>
<p><b><a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/dailyemail/200705100007?src=other">CNN's Blitzer asked Boehner about new Iraq timeline, but not about previous one, now expired</a></b><br />
On the May 9 <a href="http://mediamatters.org//rd?http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0705/09/sitroom.03.html" title="http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0705/09/sitroom.03.html">edition</a>
of CNN&#39;s <i>The Situation Room</i>, host Wolf Blitzer asked
House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) to explain what he meant when he <a href="http://mediamatters.org//rd?http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/07/AR2007050701689.html">said</a>
on May 6, "By
the time we get to September, October, members are going to want to know how
well this is working," which Blitzer
said was Boehner&#39;s reference "to the new strategy in trying to deal
with the security situation in Baghdad and elsewhere in Iraq."
But Blitzer did not ask Boehner to reconcile that statement with one -- as <i>Media Matters for America</i> has <a href="http://mediamatters.org//items/200705080013?f=h_topic">documented</a> --
that Boehner made during a January appearance on CNN, in which Boehner set a
different timeline regarding the war&#39;s progress, for a period of time that has already passed.
On the January 23 <a href="http://mediamatters.org//rd?http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0701/23/cnr.05.html">edition</a>
of <i>CNN Newsroom</i>, Boehner told CNN
congressional correspondent Andrea Koppel: "I think it will be rather
clear in the next 60 to 90 days as to whether [Bush&#39;s] plan is going to
work."
<a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/dailyemail/200705100007?src=other" class="read">Read more</a></p>

<h1><a href="http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/media?src=other">Media</a></h1>
<p><b><a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/dailyemail/200705100010?src=other">Vanishing graphics and creative camera work gave Fox News viewers a better look at the former Miss Canada</a></b><br />
The May 10 edition of Fox News&#39; <i>Your World with Neil Cavuto</i> featured an
interview with human rights activist and former Miss Canada Nazanin Afshin-Jam,
who spoke against human rights violations in Iran. While Afshin-Jam was on
camera, however, the virtually omnipresent text at the bottom of the screen vanished,
offering viewers an unobstructed view of Afshin-Jam, wearing a low-cut top.
Additionally, as the on-screen text disappeared, the camera pulled back
slightly, allowing more of Afshin-Jam&#39;s figure to occupy the shot.
Immediately after the camera moved from Afshin-Jam, the on-screen text
reappeared.
<a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/dailyemail/200705100010?src=other" class="read">Read more</a></p>

<h1><a href="http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/propaganda_noise_machine?src=other">Propaganda/Noise Machine</a></h1>
<p><b><a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/dailyemail/200705110001?src=other">Peas in a pod: In <em>LA Times</em> op-ed, <em>O'Reilly </em>producer misrepresented IU study to defend host</a></b><br />
In attempting to discredit an Indiana University study about Bill
O'Reilly's name-calling, Ron Mitchell, producer of <em>The O'Reilly Factor</em>, claimed that
"the researchers admit they had to make several changes to their
'coding instrument' ... until the results fit the preconceived
notion of name-calling on the Factor." In fact, the changes were done in pre-testing
in order to deliver accurate results for the study, not to make O'Reilly
look worse.
<a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/dailyemail/200705110001?src=other" class="read">Read more</a></p>




<hr />
<p>This mail was sent by <i>Media Matters for America</i>
to 'news@energy-net.org'. Please visit us at
<a href="http://mediamatters.org">http://mediamatters.org</a></p>

<p>You can help support our work; become a 
<a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/200407200002?src=other">volunteer media
monitor</a>, or 
<a href="https://mediamatters.org/donate?source=email">donate</a>
to <i>Media Matters for America</i>.</p>


<p>To change your email subscription preferences, visit <a href="http://mediamatters.org/users/prefs.html?src=other">http://mediamatters.org/users/prefs.html</a></p>

<p>If you'd like to unsubscribe from all <i>Media Matters for America</i> emails, you can just click on <a href="http://mediamatters.org/users/unsub/_TFiSm6WIkiaci7iLu6ZtH8gu6JaPh8t_vLvpt4dfhY">http://mediamatters.org/users/unsub/_TFiSm6WIkiaci7iLu6ZtH8gu6JaPh8t_vLvpt4dfhY</a>.</p>

<p>To contact us directly, reply to this mail or visit <a href="http://mediamatters.org/contact_us?src=other">http://mediamatters.org/contact_us</a></p>
</div><img src="http://mediamatters.org/static/images/tracker.gif?src=other" style="display: none;" />
</x-html>