Tag: mainstream media
Mainstream Media Outlets Echo Right-Wing Hysteria Over Chinese Balloon

Mainstream Media Outlets Echo Right-Wing Hysteria Over Chinese Balloon

Several mainstream media outlets are echoing the Republican Party’s preferred alarmism against the Biden administration, over an apparent Chinese surveillance balloon that transited American airspace over the weekend, which the military took down safely and with seemingly no harm done to American national security.

Officials at the Department of Defense confirmed last Thursday that the military had been tracking the balloon, following reports that it had been spotted by the public. The officials also explained that the balloon had “limited” capability to gather any intelligence that China couldn’t already have gotten via spy satellites. After an American fighter jet shot the balloon down off the coast of South Carolina on Saturday, President Joe Biden publicly announced that he had ordered on Wednesday, after a briefing, that the balloon be taken down “as soon as possible.”

Pentagon officials delayed such action, however, until it could be done safely and away from any area where civilians could be harmed by crashing debris. U.S. and Canadian defense authorities also worked together to safeguard military assets across the balloon’s flight path. (The U.S. Navy is working now to recover the crashed debris.)

Mainstream media outlets, however, are struggling to maintain any sense of perspective or to calm the public’s nerves despite all of the available facts.

On Sunday’s edition of Meet the Press, NBC News chief Washington correspondent Andrea Mitchell said the attitude now in Congress was “reminiscent of the Cold War, the ‘Evil Empire,’” and faulted the Biden administration for not “sending out someone with a lot of metal on his chest, like a Colin Powell, Desert Storm,” to explain the entire situation — when in fact the Pentagon did hold a briefing with a military officer matching that exact description.

“It was a general nobody had known,” moderator Chuck Todd clarified, apparently referring to Department of Defense press secretary and Brig. Gen. Patrick Ryder. “I mean, no offense to that general. But it was — it wasn’t the chairman of the joint chiefs.”

In response, Mitchell incorrectly claimed that the Pentagon spokesperson was “not military” and “now a press spokesperson, so he’s a public affairs official.” This mistake was especially glaring considering the fact that Mitchell covered the Friday, February 3 press conference live on-air for MSNBC. (It is also conceivable that Mitchell was mixing up Ryder with retired Rear Adm. John Kirby, a former Pentagon press secretary who now serves on the National Security Council, and not to Gen. Ryder.)

And while acknowledging the government’s ability to disrupt the balloon’s communications, Mitchell approvingly cited the idea that “we have to develop technology to take something out like this without worrying about debris falling.” Mitchell did not elaborate on how the military might someday be able to fire at a balloon without debris from either itself or a missile then falling to the ground from greater heights than regular air travel.

Moderator Chuck Todd replied, “They tested our, essentially, our electric fence.”

Likewise, CNN senior political reporter Stephen Collinson wrote an online piece titled “Why the Chinese balloon crisis could be a defining moment in the new Cold War.” While the balloon presented a “comparatively low-tech, modest security threat” in comparison to every other aspect of geopolitical intrigue, Collinson wrote that it had “created a sudden moment when the idea of a threat by China to the US homeland was neither distant, theoretical, unseen, or years in the future.”

“This all left President Joe Biden in a deeply vulnerable position as his Republican critics pounced,” Collinson pronounced dramatically.

Politico’s morning Playbook newsletter featured the headline “China deflates Biden’s SOTU swagger,” further declaring that Democrats were “eager for Biden to highlight a resilient economy and paint a sharp contrast with Hill Republicans while millions of voters tune in to watch. And yet, thanks to the balloon saga, it’s the GOP that’s relishing the chance to differentiate itself this week.”

The newsletter also uncritically carried Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s claim that Biden had “missed the opportunity to defend our sovereignty, send a message of strength, and bolster deterrence.” But separately, Politico had already reported that U.S. officials were working since last Tuesday to prevent the balloon from actually being able to collect any sensitive security information, thus making McConnell’s statement false and irrelevant.

Axios ran a similar take, outlining that Biden was preparing a speech that “takes credit for a resilient economy, celebrates record-low unemployment, and previews a broader domestic agenda designed to unify the country. … Now, a balloon from China has complicated that.”

“The president's challenge is to signal to Beijing that violating America’s airspace won’t be tolerated,” Axios wrote, “while also convincing Americans — and skeptical Republicans — that he did enough to protect U.S. airspace.” (Axios has known for well over a year that Republicans were planning a series of politically motivated investigations of the White House, yet the outlet still treats “skeptical Republicans” as an audience that Biden should somehow win over.)

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters.

The Kind And Gentle Man Who Confronted The Mainstream Media

The Kind And Gentle Man Who Confronted The Mainstream Media

I believe I spoke with Eric Boehlert, the penetrating observer and gadfly of American journalism who died last week in a tragic bicycle accident, only once, in 1996. As a young media critic for Salon, Boehlert phoned to interview me about my book Fools for Scandal: How the Media Invented Whitewater.

Two things stood out about our conversation: Eric’s diligence—he’d actually read and thought about the book, a rarity—and his personal warmth. He’d done me the great favor of independently fact-checking a few of the book’s more counter-intuitive passages—such as the time a savings and loan “investigator” who’d peddled “Presidential Bitch” T-shirts out of her government office collapsed and was hospitalized during a Senate hearing after being confronted with proof she’d manufactured evidence.

“Mainstream” reporters deeply invested in the phony scandal somehow contrived to ignore the episode. Viewers of C-SPAN saw the whole thing. The New York Times, however, failed to notice.

Boehlert and I had stayed in touch by email ever since. Also partly, I suppose, by quoting each other’s work. I considered his Press Run website an invaluable resource.

Like my old friend James Fallows, I found Boehlert “a conscience and inspiration. He was fearless and absolutely unsparing in his writing about this era’s mainstream press. I am so sorry for him, and for his family, and for all of us to have lost his courage and voice.”

Everybody who knew Eric personally spoke of his kindness and generosity. A fine athlete, he coached kids’ baseball and basketball in his adopted hometown of Montclair, New Jersey.

On his MSNBC program, Chris Hayes played a characteristic video clip of Boehlert talking bluntly about the deleterious influence of Fox News on the body politic.

“Fox News is a closed society,” he pointed out. “They do not have people on the air who disagree with them. None of these people venture into the public square to have actual debate. So they lie without consequence, and they’ve done it for years and it’s just gotten more and more extreme. So they’re absolutely boxed in. But they don’t care, right? They know they can lie to their viewers. Their viewers expect to be lied to. This is the cushion that they’ve always had.”

Hayes ended a eulogy by saying: “I learned a lot from him and he is going to be deeply, deeply missed.”

Amen to that.

That said, calling out Fox News on MSNBC is pretty much preaching to the choir. Where Boehlert really excelled was in confronting the blind spots and herd-behavior of the so-called “mainstream” media.

Consider Boehlert’s final Press Run column, headlined “Why is the press rooting against Biden?” There his targets were CNN, the Washington Post, Meet the Press, and Axios.

Keying in on the Biden administration’s extraordinary success in job creation, Boehlert’s column implicitly asked, “What’s worse, that you’re out of a job, or that the price of gasoline has risen 25 cents per gallon?”

Put that way, the question answers itself.

So why were “mainstream” outlets virtually unanimous in burying last week’s blockbuster report of 400,000 new jobs in March? Sample headlines: “Booming Job Growth Is a Double-Edged Sword For Joe Biden” (CNN); “Biden Gets a Strong Jobs Report, But a Sour Mood Still Prevails” (Washington Post)

When it comes to the Biden economy, the glass is always half empty. On CNN particularly, you are not going to see any positive economic news without the next shot being of a gas pump, with a motorist in an SUV complaining how he can’t hardly afford to fill his tank. Ditto NBC and the rest.

“That’s why,” Boehlert wrote “according to a recent poll, 37 percent of Americans think the economy lost jobs over the last year, when it’s gained seven million. (Just 28 percent of people know jobs are up.)

“Virtually all the Beltway coverage today agrees on this central point: When it comes to the economy, Biden’s approval rating is taking a hit because Americans are freaked out by inflation. But maybe it’s taking a hit because Americans are under the false impression that jobs are disappearing. Voters don’t know what they don’t know because the press isn’t interested in telling them.”

Exactly why that’s so is hard to say. Maybe the Biden administration isn’t so good about blowing its own horn. Also, inflation affects everybody, while other people’s jobs directly affect only them, not necessarily you.

That said, Boehlert puts it bluntly: “Biden is facing not just one organized opposition in the form of the GOP, but another in the form of the Beltway press corps.”

Contrary to partisan mythology, it can definitely happen to Democratic presidents. In my experience, Beltway reporters lean not so much left or right, but pro-career. And as in the natural world, the safest place during a stampede is in the middle of the herd. Eric, however, followed his own lead.
Media Must Stop Whitewashing Republican Worship Of Dictator Putin

Media Must Stop Whitewashing Republican Worship Of Dictator Putin

American politicians cheerleading a dictator as he sends tanks into a neighboring country and bombs a sovereign nation ought to be a huge news story. The fact that portions of a major U.S. political party, and its aligned media outlets, sanction Russia’s massive invasion of Ukraine represents a stunning turning point for the Republican Party and how this country traditionally deals with foreign crises.

Assigning its loyalty and admiration to the Kremlin instead of the West Wing, key parts of the GOP, led by Trump who called Putin’s move “genius,” is embracing a truly radical worldview. But that’s not how the treasonous behavior is being portrayed by the press, which for days has matter-of-factly described the GOP as being “divided” over the prospect of a tyrannical Russian leader — his adversaries regularly end up dead — launching an invasion.

Ho-hum language abounds. There’s been a “split,” the New York Times reports, suggesting that Republicans who turn a blind eye to Putin’s invasion are merely “America First” “isolationists.” The party is facing “foreign policy factionalism,” Politico insisted. It’s sending “mixed messages,” NBC News announced, which went on to describe the GOP’s pro-Putin wing as “a newer brand of America Firsters,” “Republican doves,” and “the libertarian right” which has an “anti-interventionist strain.” None of that accurately describes this unprecedented trend in American politics of endorsing murderous autocrats.

More pedestrian presentation from NBC:

The fissures point to a growing divide in the Republican Party, between traditional foreign policy hawks who have advocated for a more confrontational U.S. posture to the Russian strongman and a Trump-aligned “MAGA” faction that has expressed some sympathy for Putin's tactics or described them as effective.

The Washington Post on Wednesday suggested it was a “novel phenomenon” that a portion of a U.S. political party was siding with the Kremlin over the White House. Novel? The Post article didn’t quote one Democrat or one expert on the rise of authoritarianism to put the GOP’s shocking behavior in context.

The Beltway press treats this as if it were nothing more than an inter-party squabble over taxes or immigration policy, not portions of the party tacitly supporting the largest land invasion in Europe since World War II, a possibly brutal blitzkrieg that could leave thousands of civilians dead. And spearheaded, ironically, by the former Soviet Union, which for decades served as the epicenter of right wing suspicion and hostility; the proverbial Evil Empire.

Today’s kind words for Putin would be like in 1990 after Saddam Hussein’s Iraq invaded Kuwait, if the Democratic Party had been “divided” over whether the deadly incursion was a good thing or a bad thing, and the D.C. press shrugging and treating it as normal political posturing. In truth, if a single elected Democratic official had even breathed a sentence of support for Hussein back then it would have been a huge story and created a maelstrom of media trouble for the party. Yet Republicans singing Putin’s praise in 2022 is treated as no big deal.

It’s the latest example of the media constantly normalizing reckless conservative behavior. “Trump’s own giddy rush to side with a foreign leader who is proving to be an enemy of the United States and the West is shocking even by Trump’s self-serving standards,” CNN’s Stephen Collinson wrote. It’s “shocking” if you haven’t covered politics for the last six years.

The Putin appeasement coverage also lacks key context — what does this mean that one of America’s two major political parties supports a tyrant who invades his neighbor without cause? A U.S. party that politely regurgitates Kremlin talking points and embraces institutional appeasement for Putin, who in the previous decade stridently defended a Syrian regime that killed tens of thousands of its people in a civil war.

It’s not a minor faction either. Thanks to Trump’s worshipful embrace of Putin for years, 62 percent of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents insist Putin is “a stronger leader” than Biden, according to a recent poll.

The GOP’s Putin bromance actually began under President Barack Obama, when Republicans and the right-wing media marveled at Putin’s political prowess. (Matt Drudge: “Putin is the leader of the free world.”) Why the sudden Republican attraction? Putin (a “macho man”) was defying the U.S. with regards to Syria and when Russia invaded Crimea.

Today it’s not just about oppositional politics — it’s not the GOP conveniently and temporarily embracing Putin because he’s squaring off against another Democratic president. Instead, it’s genuine admiration of an undemocratic strongman imposing his will, which is exactly why Republicans slavishly supported Trump for four years. This is another glimpse into the growing, and unapologetic, undemocratic movement within the GOP — and the press portrays it as normal.

That’s why Trump’s former secretary of state Mike Pompeo, who is rumored to have presidential ambitions, told Fox News that Putin is “a very talented statesman” with “lots of gifts," adding, “He knows how to use power. We should respect that.” It’s why the Republican Senate candidate in Missouri, former Gov. Eric Greitens, warned about “bloodthirsty Washington elites" and their "warmongering” against Russia.

And it’s why Tucker Carlson tells his millions of Fox News viewers each night that Biden is the one who needlessly provoked Russia, and that Ukraine is not a country worth saving.

Stop whitewashing the madness.

Reprinted with permission from PressRun

Trump Media Coverage Fails To Highlight His Grave Threat To Democracy

Trump Media Coverage Fails To Highlight His Grave Threat To Democracy

Over the weekend, former President Donald Trump escalated his ongoing attacks on American democracy as he offered the potential of pardons for January 6 insurrectionists if he were reelected in 2024, incited further demonstrations against officials who are now investigating him, and asserted once again that the 2020 election should have been overturned.

Mainstream media outlets, however, are continuing to treat the rising of an American fascist movement as a political curiosity, providing horse-race coverage instead of examining it first and foremost as an ongoing threat to the republic.

During his speech at a Texas rally, Trump claimed that the January 6 insurrectionists “are being treated so unfairly,” saying, “If it requires pardons, we will give them pardons.” To be clear, the most severe sentences handed down thus far have been for rioters who assaulted police officers, and members of the far-right Oath Keepers militia group have been indicted for seditious conspiracy, directly relating to an alleged effort to overthrow the government. Yet Trump made this promise to a cheering crowd, including supporters standing right behind him and wearing T-shirts labeled “Cops for Trump.”

Trump also called for his supporters to take to the streets again, for “the biggest protest we have ever had in Washington, D.C., in New York, in Atlanta,” if “these radical, vicious, racist prosecutors” who are investigating both his conduct surrounding the election and his personal business dealings “do anything wrong or illegal.” In response, the district attorney in Fulton County, Georgia, who has impaneled a grand jury to investigate Trump’s threatening phone call with Georgia’s secretary of state, has asked for assistance from the FBI to guarantee the security of the Fulton County courthouse and government center.

“We must work together to keep the public safe and ensure that we do not have a tragedy in Atlanta similar to what happened at the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021,” District Attorney Fani Willis said in an official letter on Sunday.

In addition, Trump released another statement over the weekend, directly attacking former Vice President Mike Pence and claiming that he “could have overturned the election.”

Mainstream media outlets should be treating all of this as a five-alarm fire for American democracy and the U.S. Constitution. But instead, Politico’s Playbook on Sunday pondered how Trump’s declarations might affect Republican messaging and prospects for the midterm election.

It’s clear that Trump isn’t moving on. Will the MAGA base? Will the GOP? And how will that affect the party’s ability to retake the House? Is there any chance that House Republicans distance themselves from the former president, or will this be yet another confirmation that it’s Trump’s party now?

The New York Times positioned Trump’s comments in terms of supposed Republican infighting and messaging: “The statement signifies an increase in the intensity of the former president’s push to litigate the 2020 election and comes days after Senator Mitch McConnell, the minority leader, issued a public warning to Republican candidates to ‘respect the results of our democratic process’ during an interview with CNN.” (The alleged conflict among Republicans is also exaggerated by mainstream media outlets.)

The Washington Post ran a piece Sunday evening, titled “Trump’s Texas trip illustrates his upsides and downsides for Republicans and their midterm hopes.” Immediately after the paragraph detailing Trump’s offer of pardons to January 6 rioters, along with his incitement of new demonstrations against district attorneys, the article proceeded to discuss what this might mean for Republican candidates in primary and general elections:

Trump may be out of office, and not yet an official candidate for president in 2024, but he still represents a conundrum for his party. The former president retains an unchallenged grip over the base of the party. In most states, separation from Trump’s desires and policies is a sure path to defeat in a Republican primary and risks lower GOP turnout in a general election.
But Trump’s continued effort to downplay the events of January 6 while stoking agitation for future violence risks alienating the independent and moderate voters Republicans desperately need and think they are set to gain in November.

And in a separate but also consequential example of missing the real message, The Associated Press said that Trump’s “offer represents an attempt by Trump to further minimize the most significant attack on the seat of government since the War of 1812.”

Trump didn’t just “minimize” what happened, he is actively trying to seed more of it.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters