Eric Alterman dissects GE Russert's bias -- great analysis!

[DeepModem Mom]

With thanks to dennis4868, who posted the article, "Think Again, Testing Media Bias":


Alterman writes:

....A...telling test (of conservative media bias) may be found in the treatment that each candidate, receives from what is almost universally recognized as the premier news interview program—both in terms of influence and viewership—NBC's "Meet the Press." It is easy to take this too far, but as Tim Russert is the only interviewer to sit down with both Bush and Kerry in recent times, it offers one of the only true points of comparison. In watching both interviews back to back, here's what I noticed....


Alterman then presents a long list of comparisons between Russert's Bush and Kerry interviews, down to his manners with each. Some examples:

Number of times Russert asked guest to defend statements he made over 30 years ago: Kerry 2, Bush 0. (RUSSERT: And people refer back to an interview when you first ran for Congress, back with The Harvard Crimson, where you said, "Kerry said the United Nations should have control over most of our foreign military operations. I'm an internationalist. I'd like to see our troops dispersed through the world only at the directive of the United Nations…. RUSSERT: You used the word "war criminals.")

Number of times Russert tried to pretend that a 30-year statement was untrue when in fact, by his own admission it was true. Kerry 1, Bush 0. (RUSSERT: But, Senator, when you testified before the Senate, you talked about some of the hearings you had observed at the winter soldiers meeting and you said that people had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and on and on. A lot of those stories have been discredited…" Note. As Kerry points out when he notes that "A lot of them have been documented," the fact that "a lot of those stories have been discredited," clearly implies that a number of them—perhaps most, perhaps a few, we have no way of knowing from Russert's question which ones he means, have not been discredited. So when Russert asks, "So you stand by that?" he is asking Kerry to take a position that he himself endorses with his question, but is unwilling to admit. And surely Russert has heard of My Lai, and now, Tiger Force.)

Number of times Russert plays the other candidate's campaign commercials attacking the interviewee played on the air: Kerry 1, Bush 0.

Number of times Russert asks questions designed to alienate a crucial ethnic bloc: Kerry 1, Bush 0. (RUSSERT: Why not lift the embargo and overthrow Castro...)....


http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=47446&printmode=1

[papau]

1. A Great Read

:-)

[KissMyAsscroft]

2. And yet it seems all perfectly well with the moron populace..

Hmm...the same company that is profitting from the war also owns the media?...hmm...nothing to see here!

[Gman]

3. Is anyone that has any record at a disadvantage to Bush?

Bush never had a record before being TX guv or selected prez. (His record in Texas is actually Bob Bullock's.) And, the Bush 2000 campaign brushed aside the "gravitas" issues and associated questions like annoying gnats and accused the questioners of nasty politics.. Just what can you ask a fool that doesns't have a history and isn't in control of anything anyway?

On the other hand, Kerry has a long and very distinguished history of public service which is actually a disadvantage because his history, as would anyone else's similar history, invites questions! Go figure why someone with a distinguished public service history would be at a disadvantage to a n'er do well and why this would make sense in any reasonable and logical world.