<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>

<rss version="2.0"
 xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule"
>

<channel>
<title>Media Matters - Bob Franken</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/tools/syndication/tag_rss/bob_franken</link>
<description>This link is for use by RSS-enabled software to retrieve Media Matters items matching the term: Bob Franken</description>
<language>en-US</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2008, Media Matters for America</copyright>

<item>
<title>CNN used coffee klatch at Baltimore diner to challenge its own poll</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200701040009</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200701040009</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 4 Jan 2007 16:35:41 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>CNN&#x27;s Baghdad reporter says Iraq is embroiled in &#x22;civil war,&#x22; but rest of network is still hedging</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200611280013</link>
<description>In several reports from Baghdad,
CNN&#x27;s Michael Ware has stated that Iraq is embroiled in a civil war.
However, several other CNN reporters and analysts have continued to avoid the unqualified use of the term
&#x22;civil war.&#x22;

&#x3C;br /&#x3E;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200611280013</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2006 18:19:55 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Before midterms, media downplayed potential Dem gains in House and Senate, touting GOP&#x27;s &#x22;formidable&#x22; and &#x22;stunning&#x22; get-out-the-vote campaign; will they revisit?</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200611090001</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200611090001</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 8 Nov 2006 19:00:05 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Despite numerous rebuttals from conservatives, media continue to describe Foley emails as &#x22;over friendly&#x22;</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200610030010</link>
<description>Numerous news outlets have continued to uncritically report House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert&#x27;s description of the emails Rep. Mark Foley allegedly sent to a 16-year-old former congressional page as &#x22;over friendly&#x22; and, in some cases, have themselves adopted his characterization.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200610030010</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 3 Oct 2006 17:34:17 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>CNN report failed to identify George Allen defender as Allen campaign operative</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200609270009</link>
<description>CNN national correspondent Bob Franken quoted Doug Jones, a former football teammate of Sen. George Allen&#x27;s, defending Allen against the charge that Allen has expressed racist views. But Franken failed to identify Jones as a Republican official and member of Allen&#x27;s re-election campaign.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200609270009</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Sep 2006 14:58:37 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>GOP strategists christen &#x22;Democrat [sic] Party&#x22; -- and the media comply</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200608160005</link>
<description>Several media figures, including news reporters, echoed Republicans by employing the word &#x22;Democrat&#x22; as an adjective to refer to things or people of, or relating to, the Democratic Party.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200608160005</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Aug 2006 19:41:15 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Filling in Bush&#x27;s blanks: The media&#x27;s pattern of conjuring statements beneficial to the administration</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200604170004</link>
<description>In reporting on the scandals and issues confronting the Bush administration, various media outlets have imputed to President Bush and members of his administration comments or statements they have not actually made. These phony statements often arise as a result of reporters misinterpreting an administration official&#x27;s statement or inaccurately attributing a position or statement to an administration official.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200604170004</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 17 Apr 2006 14:39:45 EST</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>