Rich Noyes is the Senior Editor for Newsbusters
Rich Noyes is currently Research Director at the Media Research Center where he is co-editor of Notable Quotables, MRC’s bi-weekly compilation of the latest outrageous, sometimes humorous, quotes in the liberal media, and the Media Reality Check, a regular analysis of how major news stories are distorted or ignored.
Noyes has authored or co-authored many of MRC’s authoritative Special Reports, including: The Censorship Election: How the Broadcast Networks Buried the Bad News That Threatened Barack Obama’s Quest for a Second Term; TV’s Tea Party Travesty: How ABC, CBS and NBC Have Dismissed and Disparaged the Tea Party Movement; Cheerleaders for the Revolution: Network Coverage of Barack Obama’s First 100 Days; Better Off Red? Twenty Years After the Fall of the Berlin Wall, Recalling the Liberal Media’s Blindness to the Evils of Communism; and Megaphone for a Dictator: CNN’s Coverage of Fidel Castro's Cuba, 1997-2002.
An expert with nearly 30 years of experience studying the news media’s impact on U.S. politics, Noyes has discussed the issue of liberal bias on the Fox News Channel, CNN, MSNBC and dozens of radio talk shows, and has authored articles which have appeared in the Journal of Political Science, New York Post, Investor’s Business Daily, Roll Call and Human Events.
Latest from Rich Noyes
As 2016 comes to a close, this week NewsBusters will be recounting the most obnoxious liberal bias of the year. Today’s installment: the most outrageous examples of journalists fawning over liberal or left-wing icons, including Barack Obama’s “keen intelligence,” the “fundamentally honest” Hillary Clinton, and the “tremendous sense of pride” Cubans supposedly feel for their dead dictator, Fidel Castro.
Looking back at the media’s track record on communism, one sees a press that was too willing to act as a mouthpiece for the world’s worst dictatorships, and too accepting of the perverse claim that communism meant safety and security for its people.
Last year, ABC's George Stephanopoulos used his perch as anchor of This Week to trash author Peter Schweizer for his book Clinton Cash, which alleged serious conflicts of interest between the Clinton Foundation and Hillary Clinton's State Department. But now that Schweizer is questioning the conflicts of interest that may surround Donald Trump's presidency, This Week finds Schweizer worth citing as an expert source.
With all the headlines about “fake news,” the liberal media elite don’t have a perfect track record, either. Reporter Jayson Blair concocted stories for the New York Times back in 2003, while Stephen Glass fabricated numerous pieces for The New Republic in the late 1990s. The most notorious scam of this sort was the 1980 front-page Washington Post article by reporter Janet Cooke headlined “Jimmy’s World: 8-Year-Old Heroin Addict Lives for a Fix.”
In her 2003 book, Useful Idiots: How Liberals Got it Wrong in the Cold War and Still Blame America First, conservative writer Mona Charen offered an excellent juxtaposition of the horrors of the island prison Fidel Castro established with the fawning treatment he received from American journalists. Written after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the opening of the archives of the once totalitarian Eastern Bloc, Charen’s book establishes the foolish and naive thinking that Western liberals — including many journalists — employed in their attempt to sugarcoat the realities of communism, including in Cuba.
Fidel Castro’s communist regime executed hundreds of political opponents and drove tens of thousands more into exile; hundreds of dissidents today languish in Cuban prisons. Yet liberals in the U.S. media — who rightly condemned such abuses when perpetrated by dictators such as Chile’s Augusto Pinochet — inexplicably remain enchanted with Castro and his socialist revolution. For almost 30 years, the Media Research Center has documented the liberal media’s infatuation with Fidel Castro and Cuba’s communism; details within.
During the campaign, the liberal news media did everything they could to prevent Donald Trump’s election, but he won anyway. Now, journalists are trashing the way Trump is handling his transition, as well as his early Cabinet picks. But eight years ago, viewers heard a very different tone coming from the media, as journalists celebrated the election of Barack Obama, cheered the “brain power” of the “team of geniuses” he was assembling for his Cabinet, and tingled over how “cool” Obama seemed as he assumed the responsibilities of office.
Since Sunday evening, ABC, CBS and NBC (along with a host of other establishment media outlets) have been engaged in a feeding frenzy over Donald Trump’s appointment of Steve Bannon, with reporters relentlessly employing phrases such as “white nationalist,” “white supremacist,” “extremist,” “racist” and “anti-Semitic” to solidify the image of Bannon as a dangerous pick for a top White House position. But since Friday, those same networks have been blind to the controversies surrounding the top candidate for Democratic National Committee Chairman, Rep. Keith Ellison.
Less than 24 hours after CBS and the other networks declared that Donald Trump had been elected president, one of their prime time crime dramas took a thinly-veiled jab at the new President-elect, as [spoiler alert!] a homicidal teenager justifies his murders of entire families as a way to punish high school bullies by citing “some politicians” who say “the best way to handle terrorists is to take out their whole families.”
The liberal media establishment has spent the past 25 years celebrating Clinton as an “icon of American womanhood,” while fiercely attacking those who would challenge her ethics. Far from impeding Hillary Clinton’s career with critical coverage, the establishment media have enabled her political rise with what amounts to a 25-year long infomercial on her behalf: admiring testimonials about her greatness, and nasty slams against her critics. The MRC has compiled the evidence in a 28-page Special Report, which you can download for free.
In the twelve weeks since the party conventions concluded in late July, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has received significantly more broadcast network news coverage than his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, but nearly all of that coverage (91%) has been hostile, according to a new study by the Media Research Center (MRC). The networks spent far more airtime focusing on the personal controversies involving Trump (440 minutes) than about similar controversies involving Clinton (185 minutes).
Monday’s NBC Nightly News led off with anchor Lester Holt decrying the “dark consequences” of Donald Trump’s “fiery and unsupported” warnings of a “rigged” election next month, and on Tuesday morning, MSNBC anchor Craig Melvin labeled Trump’s concerns “dangerous.” But back in 2004, NBC’s cable network MSNBC was the leader in casting doubt on the legitimacy of an election outcome, as then-8pm host Keith Olbermann spent night after night venting loopy left-wing fantasies about how President George W. Bush had supposedly stolen the election from John Kerry.
An MRC analysis of the ABC, CBS and NBC morning and evening news shows from Friday evening, October 7 through Sunday evening, October 9, found a whopping 103 minutes of airtime devoted to audio recordings of Donald Trump talking about his attempted sexual conquests, but less than eight minutes spent on speech excerpts showing Hillary Clinton boasting in her speeches to big Wall Street banks that she had to present one set of policy views to the public, while keeping her private views to herself.
The 2016 presidential and vice presidential debates have already been notable for their bias, with NBC’s Lester Holt pounding Donald Trump with a skewed set of questions during the first debate, and CBS’s Elaine Quijano doing the same with Mike Pence on Tuesday. So what should viewers expect at tomorrow night’s town hall-style debate? A look at the past six town hall debates finds — with one exception — each of the moderators has favored calling on audience members who planned to ask liberal-themed questions.
For 90 minutes Tuesday night, the media spotlight will be aimed squarely at Indiana Governor Mike Pence and Virginia Senator Tim Kaine, the Republican and Democratic vice presidential candidates. And, unless one of them makes a colossal mistake during their debate, it will probably be the last time either candidate gets much national TV attention this year.
In the September 26 edition: top newspapers want reporters to go easy on Hillary Clinton in order to save the country from the “dangerous” Donald Trump, as a New York Times columnist confesses her liberal friends want the media to give Hillary “a total free pass.” Also: CBS tweaks a video to hide Bill Clinton saying his wife has “frequently” had episodes similiar to her 9/11 collapse; CNN creates a false quote of Trump proposing “racial profiling” and then attacks him for it; and Andrea Mitchell frets that the terrorist attack in New York City will knock Hillary “off message.”
Not since Ross Perot in 1996 has a third-party presidential candidate polled as strongly as Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson is right now — he’s currently averaging more than eight percent, according to RealClearPolitics. At the same time, other polls show record levels of voter disapproval for the Democratic and Republican nominees Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. In spite of this, the broadcast network evening newscasts are essentially blacking out the existence of alternatives to Clinton and Trump — a potentially fatal blow to candidates who are required to average 15 percent support to qualify for the upcoming presidential debates.
In the August 29 edition of Notable Quotables: Journalists fret about presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton being victimized by a sexist double standard, while reporters find it admirable that President Obama took a principled stand in favor of his vacation instead of visiting flood-ravaged Lousiana. At the same time, MSNBC's Joe Scarborough blames "extreme" talk radio for the "dumbing down" of the GOP that enabled the rise of Donald Trump, while some journalists say their objectivity (as if!) must be sacrificed to the larger goal of stopping "dangerous" Trump from winning the White House.
With both the Republican and Democratic conventions now concluded, it’s time to judge the news media on how fairly they covered the two parties. Media Research Center analysts looked at various aspects of coverage, all of which demonstrate that journalists obviously favored the Democratic gathering.
The real test for fair and balanced coverage isn’t the amount of airtime, but the spin reporters employ in reaction to the speeches and events at each convention. Using media coverage of last week’s Republican convention as a template, here are five ways the media can prove they’re not biased by treating the Democrats in a similar fashion.