See Media Bloodhound for the stark case of vanishing text. And context.
A little sports misinformation from MSNBC this afternoon, where NBC political director/White House correspondent Chuck Todd falsely besmirched Georgetown University's basketball team, as Georgetown grad Norah O'Donnell cried foul - but didn't correct Todd's glaring falsehood.
Todd: "Just so you know, this is really about going to places that have true basketball power, like a George Mason, that have been to a final four recently. Not like these Georgetowns or Dukes; they don't go to Final Fours any more."
O'Donnell: "We don't need this kind of trash talk, because I am actually a Hoya. Cheap shot."
Cheap, indeed. And false.
Chuck Todd attended George Washington, which is still seeking its first Final Four appearance.
(Not conservative misinformation: just a point of personal privilege.)
Tough timing for Andrew Breitbart, the Hollywood conservative who just this week launched his culture and movie-bashing group blog, Big Hollywood, which is supposed to highlight how evil and liberal and out of touch the movie studios are, and how they're ruining our culture by poisoning it with liberal propaganda. (There, I just saved you the need of ever having to read the blog!)
Tough timing for Breitbart because I just read that HBO in February will be airing Taking Chance, an original movie staring Kevin Becon as a United State Marine officer who transports the remains of a soldier, Chance Phelps, killed outside of Baghdad in 2004. The heart wrenching Chance story was first told on the right-wing blog, BlackFive. See the Taking Chance trailer here. I got chills just watching it and I'll be sure to tune in February 21.
But the deeply evocative project, about honor and service and America, runs completely counter to Big Hollywood's name calling mantra about how liberal movie makers seek to undermine the military.
So Big Hollywood, how do you explain Taking Chance?
Newsbusters Managing Editor Ken Sheperd complains about "Comic Books Crawling with Pro-Obama Bias."
What has him so upset? Apparently an upcoming issue of Spiderman features the super hero preventing a villain "from spoiling Obama's swearing-in."
Which pretty much tells you what you need to know about the gang at Newsbusters: not only do they spend their time sniffing out liberal bias in comic books, they consider it an example of "pro-Obama bias" when a criminal is prevented from disrupting Obama's swearing-in. Apparently for the comic industry to remain bias-free, it must depict criminals successfully undermining Obama.
It was made in the context of the unfolding Blago/Burris controversy. Jackson, who had been considered by Blago as a possible candidate to fill Barack Obama's senate seat, told CNN that it would be unfortunate if the issue of whether to seat Burris or not became "racialized."
The Hill reported it this way:
"The longer this process takes the more racialized this seat becomes and the more difficult it becomes for Democrats to hold it in 2010," Jackson, a onetime candidate for the seat, told CNN.
From that, The Hill made this rather sweeping, and damning, generalization about Democrats [emphasis added]:
Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D) warned Tuesday that Senate Democrats risk alienating black voters by refusing to seat Roland Burris, creating racial tension that could result in the party losing the Illinois Senate seat in 2010.
Is that really what Jackson claimed, that Democrats would alienate black voters? That's not how I read Jackson's somewhat amorphous CNN quote and I'm not sure how The Hill came to that conclusion. Because that same day Jackson also spoke to Politico about the Burris situation and seemed to making the opposite point from what The Hill claimed:
But [Jackson] said that use of the race card by Burris' supporters hurts Democrats' chances for holding the seat in 2010. "A racialized Senate seat is not something that the people of Illinois want," Jackson said. "They want people to speak to their concerns and the genuine economic hardships they confront. So the racialization of Senate seat is going to be a profound problem for Democrats," he said.
In an article that portrays Vice President-elect Joe Biden as a goof (gee, where have we seen that unflattering meme before?) the Politico plays dumb and pretends it's very weird and bizarre that Biden is going on an overseas trip as chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee and before he's sworn in as vice president. Politico suggests the world leaders Biden meets with will be wildly confused by his presence.
Pretty thin gruel for a news story, which was highlighted by Politico's lame attempt to back up the non-story by claiming "foreign policy observers" are equally confused about Biden's trip.
Question: Who were the only two "foreign policy observers" Politco quoted for the anti-Biden article?
Answer: Two right-wing, partisan think tank employees.
One from the conservative American Enterprise Institute and another from the even more conservative Heritage Foundation. That's who Politico dialed up to get insightful, independent quotes about the Democratic VP.
It came in response to the Journal's rather hysterical, Franken's-stealing-the-election editorial.
Wrote Judge Edward J. Cleary:
One can only assume, based on the tone of the editorial, the numerous inaccuracies, and the over-the-top slam at Al Franken ("tainted and undeserving?") that had [Republican] Norm Coleman come out on top in this recount, the members of the Board would have been praised as "strong-willed, intelligent, and perceptive."
We won't hold our breath waiting for that editorial to appear.
(h/t Steven Benen.)