Networks continue to ignore NY Times' military analyst story, but all find time for Hannah Montana
SUMMARY: Since The New York Times reported on the hidden ties between media military analysts and the Pentagon on April 20, ABC, CBS, and NBC have still not mentioned the report. By contrast, during their April 28 evening news broadcasts, all three networks reported on the Vanity Fair photo of Miley Cyrus.
Since The New York Times reported on the hidden ties between media military analysts and the Pentagon on April 20, the three major broadcast networks -- ABC, CBS, and NBC -- have still not mentioned the report at all, according to a Media Matters for America search* of the Nexis news database. Times reporter David Barstow wrote that "the Bush administration has used its control over access and information in an effort to transform" these military analysts, many of whom have clients with an interest in obtaining Pentagon contracts, "into a kind of media Trojan horse -- an instrument intended to shape terrorism coverage from inside the major TV and radio networks." As Media Matters noted, the three networks also reportedly declined to participate in a segment on the April 24 edition of PBS' NewsHour regarding the Times story; Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC also refused to appear in the PBS segment.
By contrast, during their April 28 evening newscasts, all three broadcast networks reported on the Vanity Fair photo of Miley Cyrus, star of Disney Channel's Hannah Montana: ABC devoted about two and a half minutes to that story, while CBS and NBC each devoted about two minutes to it.
* Search terms = "publication (ABC or CBS or CNN or MSNBC or NBC or NPR or Fox) and (Pentagon OR (Department w/2 Defense) OR New York Times OR (military w/10 analys!))" Programs searched in the Nexis database on networks that didn't mention the Times report include:
ABC = Good Morning America, Nightline, World News with Charles Gibson
CBS = CBS Evening News with Katie Couric, The Early Show, Face the Nation
NBC = Nightly News with Brian Williams, Today, Meet the Press
Networks continue to ignore NY Times' military analyst story, but all find time for Hannah Montana star
I guess we all have our priorities....
Let's all watch tonight and see how thoroughly they ignore the story about McCant's flip flop on how long we should stay in Iraq. Seems that he was for pulling out before he was against it. DOH!
I liked Stephanie Millers take on BillO's coverage of the Miley Cyrus essentially non issue during Right-Wing World.......
How Billy continuously runs the racy photos over and over throughout his segment while making the claim that they are disgusting......
BillO scares me sometimes with his lack of intellect on these kinds of situations.....
I am hardly condoning any media monitoring of Miley Cyrus and her exploits, but newspaper investigative arms do all sorts of stories that don't get network news coverage......just as network news investigations that don't get reprinted or even mentioned in newspapers. The networks are not compelled to broadcast newspaper investigations, including those that look unfavorably upon the current administration, even though MMFA would like them to.
newspapers and tv networks have no power to impeach. that remains with congress. i disagree with practically everything you said, but the democrats control congress and if the members thought there was an impeachable offense, they could act upon it. kucinich has been talking about it for years, but it wasn't going to happen, because there's nothing there.
We don't know if there is something there or not. Very few items have been thoroughly investigated. The single Republican (not even an independent) prosecutor who was allowed to do his job got a conviction. Imagine if there were even half of the independent prosecutor investigations there were under Clinton.
Sadly, I think the American public will probably remain unaware of most of what was done in our name by this administration for many years.
That argument might carry some weight if the NYT story was just about the current administration, but it's also in large measure a story about the networks' and their (at best) negligence in hiring "military analysts" who were part of a Pentagon propaganda program. This thing stinks to high Hell. The networks would do 24/7 coverage of a cat up a tree rather than address this story; they are hoping it will just go away. Well done MMFA and others for continuing to bring it up.
because there's nothing there.
Can you be sure? Wouldn't you like to know the truth, or are you content to have your head in the sand and trust your leaders? It's easy for intellectual lightweights to have blind faith because it doesn't require rational thought and analysis - much easier to just go along to get along.
No sh*t? They do have the power to decide what to cover and what not to cover. What percentage of people still think Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11? How many believe that we really went there to find WMD? How many still think we DID find WMD?
If the press had done its job and looked into these matters, as well as the Attorneys General irregularities, illegal wiretaps, torture, etc., the public would be too outraged for Congress not to act.
Or, are you one of those partisan hacks who think that what Bill Clinton was impeached for was more serious than anything Bush has done?
But how many times do they get a pass on looking the other way while we're sucked deeper into the Maelstrom in Iraq?
When do they become complicit in the lie?
You both make good points, I don't applaud the effort of the media in this country today, that is why I believe, as Wes does, that they have peaked and are on their way into some marginalized area of fluff nowadays. People don't really go there for depth, analysis or fair reporting anymore, they probably do go there for Hannah Montana news. It's why internet news is the source for many, good, and bad as people feed their preconceived notions much of the time too instead of bipartisan news analysis.
It is what it is, I suppose.......we might as well renew our Vanity Fair subscriptions and be done with it, right?
Now that just sounded elitist. I hope you're not planning on walking into any dinettes and ordering juice. :)
Of course they're not compelled in this case, because they were an unwitting enabler of this propaganda effort. They gave the Bush puppets air time. Now they're embarrassed by it. They don't want to indict themselves. They've got reputations, careers, salaries and ad revenues to maintain.
My money is on none of them blinking.
And why it always about what MMFA expects or wants?
What about the people?
I imagine a great many American people who don't favor this war would find the media's neglect of this issue pretty insulting, just like all the other war issues they've neglected.
You consistently blow faulty logic wide open.
The national news audience has been decreasing at an average rate of one million veiwers/yr. Its even increased a little this year. 53 million in 1980. 21.5 million last tuesday.
I wonder what they might do to reverse this. It could be a leap to assume they want to do anything about it.
There was a lemming call on another thread. This looks like a much better example.
Seems like sort of a chicken-or-egg question. Did the media start losing viewers and prestige because it stopped doing anything resembling investigative reporting (I mean, not counting those hard-hitting, "What bikini should you wear this summer?" pieces)? Or did they stop doing in-depth reporting as a response to losing audience share?
I know why I cannot take watching local or national news any longer, and the papers are little better. They have more or less given up investigative reporting, too. Sure the NYT did this story, but where was the investigation during the run-up?
left of center bias?
where?
I want to get my news there
You mean there is somewhere right now that is not all Wright (Right) all the time?
Thom.steve wrote:
>>that'll be a benefit . . . to equal out the slight left-of-center bias. Even the WSJ isn't immune to that epidemic
Oh really? And do you think you can come even close to backing up that charge in the comments section here? By the way, the WSJ editorial page is hardly left-of-center.
Thomp,
Show me one example of the WSJ slanting left in their news reporting.
How low does this country have to sink before the media stops it with its fun and games?
The Wright episode is another media entertainment show too.
This is just my take on this in reference to the networks. We all remember when the WAPO broke the story about Walter Reed the nets were all over it for a few days and maybe a few follow up reports in the following weeks but not a peep since. Maybe the reasons the nets aren't touching this is it makes them look especially gullible in light of where these officers were giving their "analysis". This is why I quit watching the Today show months ago as all they could cover at the time was the death of Anna Nicole Smith and not a peep about the billions of dollars Bremer lost in Iraq. If a semi nude picture of a 15 yr old girl is news I'm the Queen of England (you may call me "Your Royalness". ;) Plus to boot it's in a magazine that I would dare say is read by adults not a lot of tweens who look up to Hannah Montana as some sort of role model.
I'm sick of what passes for news on the nets now. If I want to see this kind of "news" coverage I'll watch TMZ. Speaking of TMZ did anyone see the Playboy 50th anniv bimbo, on there, call Obama "UMBAMA" and her handler tried to correct her and called him "Osama Bin Laden" then she corrected herself to say "Obama"? I swear to god she did and I cracked up and the Playboy bimbo still couldn't get his name right after she was corrected. No wonder we rate lower in education scores than other countries!!!!!
oh, i pretty much have to agree. i just love it when they take a story, let's say it's the guy who got killed by the shark a few days ago, and they say they will stay on top of the developments. like what developments, it's over. heck, i actually heard some guy on the radio refer to it as an alleged shark attack.
they started using alleged years ago to protect themselves when reporting on a crime, so avoided calling the perpetrator a criminal. did he think the shark was going to sue him because it hadn't been printed in a court of law.
they just like the drama, as when there is a carjacking and the guy is roaming the freeways, or there's a fire and they play this cat and mouse thing, will the home burn or will the firemen save it.
pathetic.
Good,
I heard today the alleged assailant is a white male, sixteen feet long.
If someone knocks on your door and claims to be the pizza delivery, this could be an old SNL skit. ;-)
IO,
Do you think the NYT's expose of a concerted propaganda effort made by our military is a story? Why or why not? If you answered "yes," is it a bigger story than a picture of Miley Cyrus?
And thank you for addressing the personal attack rather than offering a response to friedbergerboy's questions above.
Do you just ignore the rational dialogue and wait for someone to come along and insult you personally in order to respond?
Since they abdicated long ago their mission to serve,protect
the magana carta,is disgusting how they resort to play
the clowns like the today show,they think are fun.
Murrow had to be very sad with all of them.
MMFA is exploiting Miley Cyrus by using this non-story to create this thread.
Has MMFA jumped the shark?
Haha. Good one, AA.
I raised a similar complaint yesterday on MSNBC's Newsvine that this Miley Cyrus story was getting way too much attention. But it's continuing to get an undue amount of attention today. The U.S. press takes its cues from celebrity reporting. TMZ has infiltrated the legitimate news.
You'd be hard pressed to remember that our nation is at war and that we are now in a recession.
Hannah Montana is so much more important than 4,000+ Americans dying in Iraq.
Funny how important things like why male escort and fake journalist Jeff Gannon had overnight Whitehouse access are overlooked but everyone knows what today's "Milli Vanilli" starlets are up to.
especially the ones who still think Bush is doing a "hell of a job". I am ashamed of even Bill Moyers for not doing the right thing. Of course, who watches PBS? What about the oft watched Bill O'Reilly? Can you IMAGINE? Media Matters has provided an easy way to contact the networks and any other news organization. If this story gets more and more buried, we will then know who to blame for the continued "misinformation" that is well documented in the MSM. If ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, and Fox ignore this story, we have all the proof we need to mount a concerted effort to MAKE the executives responsible accountable. If the MSM are not willing to be a voice for truth, we, the viewers must FORCE them to do the job a "free press" is mandated to do. Without a free press, we are doomed.