About us Login Get email updates
County Fair
Print

How to fail at media criticism

July 28, 2009 11:14 am ET by Simon Maloy

We frequently point out the various ways in which our friends at NewsBusters reveal themselves to be sub-par media critics, and -- wouldn't you know it - we found another one. And it's a pretty good one, too. Yesterday, NewsBusters' Clay Waters observed that the New York Times had dismissed the Birthers as conspiracy theorists, but couldn't bring themselves to do the same for the 9/11 Truthers, to whom the paper showed "respect." Waters wrote:

Media reporter Brian Stelter's Saturday Business story, "A Dispute Over Obama's Birth Lives On in the Media," questioned those questioning Obama's birth certificate, his citizenship, and his resulting eligibility for the presidency. Good for the Times. But where is the Times's critcism when liberals gin up wackier conspiracy theories?

Back in June 2006, Times reporter Alan Feuer showed far more respect to a conspiracy theory many times more incendiary and implausible: That the 9-11 attacks were an inside job, that the controlled demolition of the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon were engineered by President Bush. Yet not once did Feuer dismiss the 9-11 Truthers bizarre charge as a "conspiracy theory," as Stelter did in the first line of his Sunday piece on the Birthers.

First of all, the 2006 Times article doesn't come anywhere close to conferring "respect" on the 9/11 Truthers - Feuer observed that one of the ringleaders lived in a cave, that another recites profanity-laced Roman history, and that the crux of their entire argument is undermined by thorough scientific analysis. But as to Waters' specific claim that Feuer never "dismissed" the Truthers as conspiracy theorists, let's take a look at Feuer's article, with relevant portions highlighted:

In fairness to Waters, nobody really reads headlines anyway... 

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by captfoster2 (July 28, 2009 11:35 am ET)
         
      NewsBusters has shown itself to be more of a parody than TheOnion is!

      Of course... TheOnion at least knows it and openly admits to being parody.

      Ever been to their site? I have... and still find myself laughing my ass off at the worthlessness of the place just thinking about it.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by peebs755 (July 28, 2009 1:11 pm ET)
      1  
      I'm getting ground down. All the lies are starting to wear me out. I remember a time when people were afraid to lie because they'd get called out. Now, no one calls them out. (this site excluded) They know they can get away with it, and the sh*t deluge just keeps coming.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (July 28, 2009 1:57 pm ET)
           
        Yeah, remember all of those mainstream librul tv & radio hosts who were all aboard the Inside Job bandwagon long after it was completely debunked? I don't recall The Times calling them out either!

        Funny how many probable Newsbusters fans come to this site, day in and day out, flailing away trying to find errors in MMFA items (and almost always failing). The LIberal Media Myth is one of those things you've got to really want to believe, with all of your strength,in order to believe.

        Another great wingnut site is Olbermannwatch. A few used to link to it here, and it was pretty hilarious. The links were all breathless accusations (Olbermann lies about XXX !!!), that led to opinion pieces that generally had nothing to do with the claim in the link.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by Ecotopian (July 28, 2009 7:58 pm ET)
           
        Actually, ConWebWatch does a fine job of calling out NewsBusters, WorldNetDaily et al. I highly recommend it.
        Report Abuse