The About-Face: Moran on ABC’s Bubble

Terry Moran spent nearly three decades at ABC News. Last week he sat down with the hosts of The Fifth Column and said something most people inside the networks still won’t: [VIDEO]

Asked straight out whether ABC News is a liberal institution, Moran answered “Yes.” He didn’t blame individual bias so much as the absence of any real disagreement inside the building. “It’s because of lack of viewpoint diversity,” he said. “That was one of the problems in covering Trump. Nobody had voted for him.”

He described sending internal emails urging colleagues to cover Trump more fairly and getting quiet thank-yous from engineers and the occasional producer—people outside the on-air and senior editorial ranks. The bubble, he insisted, is real. Journalists who never encounter the worldview of the people who actually voted for Trump struggle to understand why those voters see someone like Stephen Miller as a defender of borders rather than a “world-class hater.”

The Repairman Calls Out Tucker Carlson

The laptop story keeps expanding.

First came Tucker Carlson’s long interview with Hunter Biden, in which Hunter said he has no recollection of dropping a laptop off at a Delaware repair shop. Then came Ben Shapiro’s sharp reaction, mocking the two men as “silver spoon rich kids” complaining about elites while floating contested claims about the laptop’s origins.

Now the man at the center of the original repair-shop story has answered.

On Thursday morning, John Paul Mac Isaac appeared on the PBD Podcast.

Watch here: [VIDEO]

Mac Isaac is the owner of the Wilmington shop where the water-damaged laptop was left in 2019.

O'Reilly: Trump and reporter 'blew it' at NABJ convention

 

[VIDEO] I try to space these posts out when I do have time to post, but I have to share this.

Bill O'Reilly speaks with Chris Cuomo on NewsNation and as you probably could tell. He says Trump did himself no favors by coming to the NABJ convention in Chicago.

I have to say in 2016 I was on the phone with someone that seemed especially affected by race issues. He believed the media - or perhaps his only glance at the news if not that he deeply did any research which I doubt - that Trump was a racist. He went further than that and I'm not comfortable doing that, however, he went with the talking points about Trump in 2016.

He's likely not the only one that believes this. Now he probably would have a warped view of this. With that said I haven't spoken with him in years so only he knows. He probably would make this about the journalist here (ABC News' Rachael Scott) and never consider Trump's side.

However, O'Reilly is right. The other side will take the ammo from this and there is ammo here. The Vice President can look at this and stand one foot taller. 

The journalist may not have made herself look good by her questions here and Trump may not have helped himself here. Whether or not this matters during the 2024 race, we'll have to see.

Timcast IRL: Journalist blows whistle on how media got WOKE

 

[VIDEO] The journalist in question is Batya Ungar-Sargon who is an opinion editor at Newsweek discussing how media such as for example the N.Y. Times has become so woke and corrupt. Of course let's not forget the debate over how George Floyd died.

Chicago Mayor makes symbolic racial gesture and hammered by press

I wanted to share this with you all before the nite is out. Mayor Lori Lightfoot put out a tweet last nite shared primarily by local journalists like Mary Ann Ahearn for example where the Mayor announced she will only grant interviews with journalists of color (black or brown people). My knee jerk reaction was that she was looking for favorable people to interview her. 

As ⁦@chicagosmayor⁩ reaches her two year midway point as mayor, her spokeswoman says Lightfoot is granting 1 on 1 interviews - only to Black or Brown journalists pic.twitter.com/PAUsacD9Gj

— Mary Ann Ahern (@MaryAnnAhernNBC) May 18, 2021

Then over at Capitol Fax another possible angle, this was an opportunity to start a discussion on the composition of Chicago's political press. Why is the press almost overwhelmingly white and male? Perhaps she wanted to prioritize talking with journalists of color and women. Furthermore she was taking that opportunity to make that call when she arrived at the two year anniversary of her election to the 5th floor at city hall.

Elder: Why did media use George Floyd for systemic racism narrative?

 

[VIDEO] Today's video and one I hadn't a chance to watch before sharing it with you. And knowing Larry Elder it's going to be a good one. One can only wonder if this narrative is overplayed. You decide.

Tim Pool discusses last nite's presidential race townhalls

 

[VIDEO] There was supposed to be a debate this week with C-Span's Steve Scully and it got cancelled. The President's bout with coronavirus didn't help and then it was proposed that it could be held virtually and well the President himself balked once he was out of the hospital for coronavirus. So we get townhalls on NBC w/ Trump and ABC w/ former VPOTUS Joe Biden.

Pool thinks that the differences between Trump w/ relentless questions with Biden having a "picnic" proves journalism is dead. The long time stance of the right on the state of journalism is that the mainstream/fake news media is heavily bias and will create a narrative to skew the opinion of the American public.

Just take the aforementioned Steve Scully it turns out his twitter wasn't hacked, he lied. He actually did message an anti-Trumper for advice on his debate. It seems he just wasn't smart enough to send a private message on twitter instead of accidentally tweeting. He got suspended indefinitely by C-Span for this and gave Trump his evidence as far as any bias against him.

Anyone watched these townhalls? Any thoughts?

Saw #ThePost on Friday

[VIDEO] It allowed me to come to some conclusions especially with the term "fake news" flying around since Trump ran for President in 2016 and during the administration of President Trump currently. It depicts a battle - mainly legal battle - between the press and the government.

Basically some documents were smuggled from the Pentagon analyzing the war in Vietnam and those papers which have been publicly released shows a history of deception by the government as far as their Vietnam policy. The papers apparently start well before America became involved with the Vietnam War and it's escalation. There was a court case NY Times vs. U.S. which allowed the Times and the Washington Post to publish government documents without an reprisal by the government. In other words, the gov't can't censor you because they don't like the fact that you published some documents they didn't want you to see!

Allow me to share the big picture of the movie. We have a free press in this country, and resultantly free speech. With that said and I tweeted this out during the course of the movie - not during the movie of course.

#ThePost it’s fine with me if @realDonaldTrump takes on #FakeNews and it’s also fine w/ me if the press takes on the President #fb

— Levois J (@levois) January 5, 2018

There is no issue with me if President Trump pushed back against the press - or least the press he refers to as Fake News. Among conservatives I've seen that they believe the press has a bias against them. They believe the press or mainstream media trends liberal and in their coverage of Republicans or conservatives is colored with a liberal slant. Thus perhaps for many on the right - or perhaps "alt-right" - it's refreshing that the President isn't going along with that and is effectively punching back.

Our nation is supposed to have checks and balances between the President, Congress and judiciary. Who checks the press? We do need a strong press to check the government and it's three branches. A strong press is worthless if it's unwilling to check the government. As addressed in the movie, there were occasions - and perhaps they still ocurr - that newspaper publishers & editors or producers, reporters, journalists, etc. can be chummy with politicians on occasion. Thus it's possible to think that perhaps the press would cover for the politicians that they are chummy with when things are found out about them.

With that said when Trump takes on CNN or MSNBC or the NY Times it's entirely OK with me if her refers to those outlets as "fake news". We should consume news or information, we need not think that everything they say doesn't have a bias. We need not believe they don't have an agenda and perhaps it doesn't always benefit the people who consume the news & information they publish.

So it's OK with me if Trump calls the mainstream media "fake news". It's also OK with me if the media pushes back against Trump. What we're seeing is healthy. Who says the politicians shouldn't challenge the press - of course without suppressing them legally? Also who says the press shouldn't challenge the politicians?

BTW, if you check hashtag #ThePost on twitter you may see mostly negative views of The Post. Many have opted not to even watch the movie thanks to the liberal politics of Tom Hanks and Merryl Streep. Indeed another tweet I saw connected this movie with the Harvey Weinstein scandal. And I've learned that the film has only earned a half-million dollars when it was released New Year's weekend. Although when I saw the movie it was almost a full-house in my theater.

It's still a great movie and yes I can separate the politics or even complicity in some social context i.e. Weinstein from the work of art. Then again that's the beauty of America, we have the right to support or not support whatever we want for whatever reasons we have. Besides, I gave that dreadful Al Gore global warming sequel a chance even though I'm not likely to ever want to see it again!

NBC News the new FOX News....don't do it!!!!

A laudable goal, however, I would rather NBC News becomes an objective news organization. There is room in the marketplace for either a conservative news/commentary outlet or a liberal news/commentary outlet. It's time to get back to this idea of objectivity in the news to steal a tagline from FOX News "fair & balanced".

I've watched MSNBC from the beginning in 1995 and I had been a long way from noting a liberal/conservative bias at the time. Then learned as time went on how much further leftward that network began to turn and even without watching any programming from that network.

I at one point watched CNN and could say roughly the same thing. There may not have been a real leftward slant there, but certainly they have been accused of such as time has gone on.

So perhaps since the turn of the century if I watch any 24/7 cable news it has been FOX News because at one point I have percieved it as a lot more objective. Or I believed the ads and the marketing although I accept it as a right-leaning outlet.

So with all this opinion along different ideological lines, would simple objectivity and good reporting be what it takes for NBC News and MSNBC to change their fortunes? There ought to be a network that has room for conservative, liberal, or even libertarian viewpoints while still showing objective stories with no ideological slant.

Hat-tip Newsalert!

"Spotlight"

I have a knack lately for watching controversial films. Today I saw Spotlight about a team of investigative journalists looking into the many allegations of sexual misconduct with minors by priests. The movie had me groaning as far as the various allegations of the misconduct, but I only took it as something that happened between a minor and a priests.

I know of no one who had truly been abused as many young Catholic parishioners had. It somewhat doesn't help that I'm personally not Catholic. How would I have responded if my child had been abused sexually by a clergyman I thought I could trust.

We see how it was handled by many involved especially the victims. Many didn't want to acknowledge what happened and hadn't for many years afterwards. They weren't ready and if it involved their parents they probably didn't believe it either. Thankfully the work of an investigative journalist team exposed more than the Catholic Archdiocese of Boston was able to cover up.

Sometimes courageous people on a mission and willing to stand on their own can truly expose something very big. Unfortunately such people become a target in a variety of ways, but these individuals know something is going on and hopefully influence others to take a look.

What's going on in Ferguson, Missouri???

To be honest, I haven't really been following closely the situation in Ferguson, Missouri. After the shooting death of an unarmed Black teenaged male by police there there have been some unrest there. I've seen a number of social media blurbs on this situation so far, but not followed very closely.

I found out via Reason that a St. Louis, Missouri Alderman - Antonio French - who had been tweeting about the unrest had been arrested. This is news to me because I've followed Ald. French for a number of years now although not always consistent.

Ald. French once operated a political/urban website PubDef before he had been elected to the St. Louis Board of Alderman in 2009. He probably was following the unrest as the journalist he had been known as before becoming a public official. That I can respect, unfortunately he was sent to jail for it.

BTW, I found an article that stated that he was freed from police custody. The reason for the arrest according to him, he didn't listen. HMMM!

I'm only now attempting to figure out what happened in Ferguson. So I don't want to comment, but it was stated that this teen had been unarmed which makes this puzzling. So why did this young man get shot?

Then I thought about what happened in New York with another Black man being manhandled by police and he gets choked to death. Not entirely certain what happened there but somehow this man caught the attention of police there.

These are seemingly both cases of excessive force and unfortunately both of them involved Black men. Both of these cases got noticed by users of social networking and causing controversy. I hope the facts come out and hopefully things will calm down in Ferguson.

Reporter ordered to give up their notes...

Well it was so ordered by federal district Judge James Zagel who is known for being the presiding judge over Ousted governor Rod Blagojevich's criminal trials for corruption:

During a brief hearing last week, U.S. District Judge James Zagel brought up the idea of compelling the Tribune to turn over its notes from a conversation with the juror before any of the lawyers in the case even raised the issue. The judge identified the juror in Monday's ruling as Candy Chiles.

The defense argues that the Chicago woman compromised the verdict by concealing her criminal history and potential bias during jury selection. In an effort to bolster their position, Cellini's lawyers sought access to notes of Tribune reporter Annie Sweeney from a brief interview with Chiles.

In his ruling issued late Monday, Zagel ordered that Sweeney "produce any and all notes, memoranda, tape recordings, documents, or other records, from Oct. 3, 2011, to present, of any conversations the journalist had with the juror" related to her previous criminal history or answers during jury selection.

Cellini's attorneys could not be reached Monday for comment.

The Tribune filed a motion Monday morning suggesting the subpoenas were a fishing expedition and saying Cellini's lawyers should instead question the juror, other jurors in the case, co-workers, neighbors, friends and family.

"Subpoenas to journalists should be a last resort in exceptional cases — not an automatic first step," the newspaper's lawyers wrote.

Tribune editor Gerould Kern offered his thoughts on this ruling:

Journalists must be free to ask questions and collect information secure in the knowledge that their notes will not be seized by the government or litigants in court and used for other purposes. Unfortunately, that security now is threatened by this ruling.

We believe that these subpoenas are unnecessary and in fact do harm to the independence of the reporting process. We are disappointed by Judge Zagel's ruling, and we now are considering our options.

I know that at times we don't care for the work of the journalists. We may believe them to be bias towards one point of view or another. Sometimes they may be unfair to the other side of a story.

That being said if we complain about journalism in this nation for exactly that, then how do we expect it to ever get better if judges are willing to force reporters to give up their notes. Should they chase down reporters chasing a story without interfering with the judicial process or should they chase down the person whom the story was about?

Hat-tip Capitol Fax!

Michigan Considers Law to License Journalists

Hmmmm, I'm not so sure this is going to truly insure a free press now is it. Perhaps giving business licenses doesn't insure free enterprise, but at least we want to be sure doctors or lawyers are licensed for example. But a journalist?

A Michigan lawmaker wants to license reporters to ensure they’re credible and vet them for “good moral character.”

Senator Bruce Patterson is introducing legislation that will regulate reporters much like the state does with hairdressers, auto mechanics and plumbers. Patterson, who also practices constitutional law, says that the general public is being overwhelmed by an increasing number of media outlets--traditional, online and citizen generated--and an even greater amount misinformation.

“Legitimate media sources are critically important to our government,” he said.

He told FoxNews.com that some reporters covering state politics don’t know what they’re talking about and they’re working for publications he’s never heard of, so he wants to install a process that’ll help him and the general public figure out which reporters to trust.

“We have to be able to get good information,” he said. “We have to be able to rely on the source and to understand the credentials of the source.”

Critics say the proposed law will stem press freedoms and is bound to be politicized with disgruntles politicians going after reporters who don’t paint them in a positive light. They say that adding members of the so-called fourth estate to the list of government regulated occupations would likely be found unconstitutional.

Who's to say that if a gov't was dominated by Democrats they wouldn't attempt to only license those who are more of their persuasion and vice-versa for Republicans? It's has been alleged depending upon the ideology of any given individual that the media is biased. It is possible that this can only create another bias on the part of the media to ensure that they remain licensed by the gov't.

EDIT: Instapundit found this story over the weekend noting that

How about requiring that all sitting legislators pass a test on the constitution? And maybe an IQ test, too . . . .

Okay, if you read the fine print, the bill doesn’t really do anything other than label. But it wouldn’t be irrational to fear the camel’s nose. And how do you deal with the camel’s nose? You cut it off.

Requiring politicos pass a test on either the state or US constitution? I can definitely go for that there are plenty who are woefully ignorant of at least the US constitution. As a matter of fact I check out the Illinois constitution a lot more now that I follow state issues more.

BTW, Bruce Patterson is a Republican (that wasn't noted in the FOX News article) and apparently he's running for Michigan Attorney General. The article notes that Patterson doesn't actually expect this to become law but to at the very least provoke a discussion.

State's Attorney wrongly takes on student journalist

Hmmm, there was trouble I thought last year when she was on the cable access TV program Public Affairs she said that no one should buy guns and that we're safer without them. She was mentioned in a recent article regarding an Illinois Supreme Court ruling about having guns in your car. She really doesn't trust people with guns.

Today she turns her attention to Northwestern University journalism students:

The story involves Anthony McKinney, who has been in prison for more than 30 years for gunning down a security guard.

McKinney wants his freedom, arguing he's innocent, based on evidence gathered by journalism students at the Medill Innocence Project at Northwestern University.

Alvarez wants all the students' notes and materials, as well as their class grades, to see if they skewed their reporting for better grades.

Her prosecutors also allege the students paid for witness statements, an allegation the young journalists firmly deny.

But Alvarez is guilty of trying to do an end run around a key right for reporters.

In Illinois, there's the Illinois Reporter's Privilege Act. Because of the act, a prosecutor must jump through several high hoops before a judge will allow access to a reporter's source materials.

She a Latina woman who was the first to be elected Cook County States Attorney. She had two things going for her if no one was really impressed by her background as a prosecutor for the Cook County State's Attorney. She was a woman and a Latino. That works for a lot of people especially if they want to see more Latinos or women in offices like these.

Unfortunately one wonders if she just realized the powers of her office and is a little to eager to use them.

Via CapFax morning shorts.