The House Judiciary Committee recently held a hearing on social media filtering practices. Unsurprisingly, a Pew Research Center study found that “Today around seven-in-ten Americans use social media to connect with one another, engage with news content, share information and entertain themselves.” With so many Americans on these platforms, we should know how the platforms determine the content they’re sharing.
On Wednesday, a Global Opinions Editor at the Washington Post praised the work of Christopher Steele as "extraordinarily prescient," created by a man who "had stumbled onto a breathtaking threat to U.S. national security." Accordingly, Steele, per the headline at Christian Caryl's opinion piece, "is a hero – and Americans owe him their thanks" — a Four-Pinocchio claim by the Post's own standards.
Google’s new fact-checker is just as bias as you would expect. On Tuesday, The Daily Caller reported that the feature, for the most part, only targets conservative sites. For example, both The Daily Caller and Daily Wire are fact checked (and mostly incorrectly as the two sites point out), but Vox, HuffPost, ThinkProgress, Slate, Salon, Mother Jones, and Daily Kos are not.
Politico media reporter Michael Calderone reports that Mother Jones employees complained years ago about alleged sexual harassment by David Corn, the magazine’s Washington bureau chief.
As Houston lays flooded by Hurricane Harvey, the liberal media and climate alarmists raced to connect the natural disaster to their manmade global warming agenda in spite of scientific disagreement. On broadcast and cable news, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow and Thomas Roberts, CBS fill-in co-host Dana Jacobson, CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin and others tried to link Harvey to human-caused global warming. The Los Angeles Times editorial board said the hurricane “should be a warning to Trump that climate change is a global threat.” One newspaper editor in Australia even used the disaster as an opportunity to attack ExxonMobil and promote the “ExxonKnew” crusade.
The Twitter website has become the go-to place for people in the “mainstream media” who have said things they wish they hadn’t stated on television. They can then apologize in a format that far fewer individuals will notice. A perfect example of this principle took place on Tuesday, August 22, by Bret Stephens, a right-of-center columnist for the New York Times who was also hired by NBC News and MSNBC on Wednesday, June 28.
“It’s a lot cheaper to grab a couple drugs and kill you than it is to provide you with life sustaining therapy,” Dr. Brian Callister of Reno, NV told the Patients’ Rights Action Fund. “Simple as that.” His words appeared in a sobering video PRAF released exposing the shockingly limited treatment options available to terminally ill patients.
At one time officially, and since then unofficially, the “S” in “ESPN” stood for “sports,” and, according to Mother Jones blogger Kevin Drum, that’s entirely fitting. As for the frequent complaint from conservatives about the channel’s liberal bias, Drum says, “I don't really get it...I'm not a heavy ESPN viewer, but I watch enough to have some sense of its political leanings. And I haven't really discerned much. Mostly they seem to call games and then argue about whether Tom Brady can play football into his fifties. You know, sports stuff.”
On Friday (appearing in Saturday's print edition), the New York Times published its first column by Bret Stephens, the former Wall Street Journal columnist recently hired as a "conservative" voice. Its theme was that the political "hyperbole" about climate change doesn't match the underlying science — even if one trusts the underlying science. That alone was enough to send journalists into unhinged and often profane orbit.
Though it’s not clear whether the Democratic party will produce a post-presidential-election “autopsy report” like Republicans did in early 2013, there has been a lot of self-scrutiny among liberals since Hillary Clinton’s surprise loss. One example is Kevin Drum's Friday post written in response to a fellow liberal’s cluelessness. After New York Times columnist Paul Krugman claimed to be unaware that “affluent liberals…sneer at the Joe Sixpacks,” an amazed Drum declared, “I'm not here to get into a fight with Krugman, but come on. Sure, the right-wing media fans the flames of this stuff, but is there really any question that liberal city folks tend to sneer at rural working-class folks? I'm not even talking about stuff like abortion and guns and gay marriage, where we disagree over major points of policy. I'm talking about lifestyle.”
For the but-tell-us-how-you-really-feel file, this headline on a Friday post by Mother Jones blogger Kevin Drum: “Fuck You, James Comey.” The post, of course, centered on the presumed effect on presidential voting of Comey’s October 28 letter which jump-started the Hillary Clinton e-mail story. “When an election is close…there are dozens of people, events, and movements that can make a difference of 1 percent or so,” wrote Drum. “But if we're going to choose one particular person who managed to hand the White House to a buffoonish game show host, it's FBI director James Comey, the guy who…provided the match that Trump used to light the country on fire.”
Conservatives are unwilling to let Hillary be Hillary where transparency is concerned, and “it drives them crazy,” believes Kevin Drum. In a post last Wednesday, Drum argued that whenever the right has “forced…openness on Clinton in an effort to destroy her,” it’s “done nothing except paint a portrait of a pretty normal politician,” a failure that’s left those conservatives with “bizarre levels” of “Clinton Derangement Syndrome.”