Rolling Stone gave liberal women in Congress the rock star treatment in their March issue, with glowing interviews and glamorous photo shoots. The “Women Shaping the Future” are Speaker Nancy Pelosi and "the new voices of the House" Reps. Jahana Hayes, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Ilhan Omar.
In a friendly softball interview with Rolling Stone founder Jann Wenner for Tuesday’s NBC Today, co-host Matt Lauer celebrated the liberal magazine’s 50th anniversary: “For five decades, Rolling Stone magazine has been the home of the cool, the groundbreaking and the controversial....its influence has stretched into pop culture, entertainment, and politics, ultimately becoming the cultural bible for baby boomers.”
The journalists at CBS This Morning on Tuesday offered breathtakingly little interest into one of the biggest fake news outrages in recent years. Talking to Rolling Stone publisher Jann Wenner about the 50th anniversary of the magazine’s founding, the show’s co-hosts managed just two questions on Rolling Stone’s false accusation of rape at the University of Virginia. Gayle King dismissed the bogus story because it “happens so rarely” at the publication.
The day after Election Day, Rolling Stone publisher Jann Wenner met with President Barack Obama. The primary takeaway from that interview, published in late November, was, as Tim Graham at NewsBusters noted, how Obama partly blamed Hillary Clinton's election loss to Donald Trump on “Fox News in every bar and restaurant in big chunks of the country.” Additionally, Wenner, in what seemed at the time to be a crybaby throwaway line, suggested that "the news business and the newspaper industry, which is being destroyed by Facebook, needs a subsidy so we can maintain a free press." Unfortunately, New York Times President and CEO Mark Thompson shares both Wenner's lament and his suggested remedy. Thursday, establishment press pressure on Facebook brought about potentially ugly results.
The media’s hypocritical obsession of dismissing fake news as largely the right’s problem was on display for disaffected viewers on CNN Wednesday afternoon as host Brooke Baldwin and her panel hailed the “high” “journalistic standards” of fake-rape-story-peddling Rolling Stone in their “Shakespearean tragedy” of a post-election interview with President Obama.
Mediaite pulled out the funniest part of Barack Obama’s latest softball interview with Rolling Stone publisher Jann Wenner. When asked about Donald Trump’s victory, he blamed part of it on “Fox News in every bar and restaurant in big chunks of the country.”
Let’s not wait for PolitiFact to judge whether Fox News is actually on the TV set in every bar and restaurant in the red states. (They won’t.)
Once again, Rolling Stone has come under fire for its lack of journalistic ethics over actor Sean Penn’s recent interview with Joaquin Guzman – better known as “El Chapo” – and giving the drug cartel kingpin editorial approval of the article. The beginning of Penn’s article came with a disclosure - confessing that names had been changed, locations were unnamed, and that the world’s most famous prison escapee of 2015 reviewed and approve the article prior to publication. Yes, the same magazine that painted an innocent University of Virginia fraternity as a den of gang rapists had no problem publishing a sympathetic piece for real devil.
New Republic staff writer Elizabeth Stoker Bruenig has clearly run out of defenses for the conduct of those involved in the disgraceful, scandalous journalistic malpractice which gave rise to the now-retracted and thoroughly discredited "A Rape on Campus: The Struggle for Justice at UVA" at Rolling Stone.
So here's her last refuge: Conservatism deserves some of the blame, because Sabrina Rubin Erdely and others associated with the story supposedly "Used Rightwing Tactics to Make a Leftist Point" (links are in original; bolds and numbered tags are mine):
Earlier this evening, the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism issued its report on Rolling Stone Magazine's November "A Rape on Campus" story. The report follows up on the magazine's request of Columbia to conduct an independent review of how the disastrously false 9,000-word story made it through to publication.
USA Today is reporting that for all the harsh criticism the piece's author and the others at the magazine received, and despite the fact that RS has now formally and fully retracted the story, no one is losing their job or suffering any other visible consequences. In fact, the magazine considers the whole affair "an isolated and unusual episode" (bolds are mine):
Every musician and celebrity used to dream of being “on the cover of the Rolling Stone,” but that is apparently changing after the biweekly magazine for aged hippies interested in music ran a feature story and cover photo spotlighting alleged Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.
The reaction has been explosive, with famous people ranging from wrestlers to actors and musicians slamming the publication's sympathetic coverage of the accused terrorist and publisher Jann Wenner with remarks ranging from “pathetic” to “irresponsible.”
With less than three weeks to go before the crucial midterm elections, the folks at Rolling Stone magazine have decided to pen a love letter to Barack Obama clearly in the hopes of motivating readers to get out and vote for Democrats.
Forget about the President's horrible poll numbers and the feeling by a stunning number of Americans that the country is on the wrong track, the current White House resident has a truly impressive list of accomplishments according to author Tim Dickinson, so much so that he's the best leader America has had since Lyndon Baines Johnson (h/t NB reader Dave, accompanying spoof cover photo courtesy The Razor):
One of the more annoying tics in the current bubble of national media coverage of Gen. Stanley McChrystal's truly bizarre granting of access to Rolling Stone magazine was the utter lack of any description of the magazine -- neither its ideology (hard-left) or its central focus (rock and pop music). Washington Post media reporter Howard Kurtz provided a little depth with an article on Thursday, which began:
In the summer of 2008, Rolling Stone founder Jann Wenner ended an interview with Barack Obama -- whose campaign he financially supported -- by saying, "Good luck. We are following you daily with great hope and admiration."
So Kurtz pronounced it "surprising" when the magazine was "assailing Obama from the left." But in fact, we pointed out in February 2008 that venomous Rolling Stone political writer Matt Taibbi was trashing both Obama and Hillary Clinton as "superficial, posturing conservatives." So why couldn't reporters acknowledge this was a left-wing, anti-war magazine? Wouldn't that color how people saw a "Runaway General" controversy?