In a November 15 post on NBC News' First Read blog, NBC News political director Chuck Todd criticized Media Matters for America over a recent item headlined "Some debate 'don'ts' for CNN's Blitzer, Malveaux, Roberts, and Brown," which Media Matters posted in anticipation of the November 15 Democratic presidential debate in Las Vegas. Todd described the item as “fascinating,” writing, “Why was the list fascinating? Because of what Media Matters chose to bring up for [Sen. Barack] Obama [IL] and [former Sen. John] Edwards [NC] compared to its suggestions for how to address [Sen. Hillary Rodham] Clinton [NY].” Todd further wrote: “Their 'don'ts' read more like facetious attacks on Edwards and Obama -- right out of the oppo shop of either the RNC or, say, opponents of Edwards and Obama.” Purportedly to illustrate his point, Todd listed seven of the first eight Media Matters “Don'ts” included in the item. The one he left out? The fourth entry, which "call[ed] out" Todd's colleague, NBC News Washington bureau chief and Meet the Press host Tim Russert.

Specifically, the fourth entry on the list read:

Don't misleadingly crop quotes when challenging a candidate's consistency on a particular issue, as NBC Washington bureau chief Tim Russert did on the November 11 broadcast of Meet the Press, when he suggested that Obama has “not been a leader against the [Iraq] war.”

What was different about this “Don't[]” as opposed to the others in the first eight? It involved the exposure of a serious misrepresentation by Russert. Indeed, three of the 17 Media Matters “Don'ts” had to do with misrepresentations Russert made in questions to Obama and Clinton. But while Todd went on to list three of the Media Matters “Don'ts” concerning Clinton -- purporting to contrast them with those involving Obama or Edwards -- he neglected to mention any of the three “Don'ts” that documented Russert's misleadingly cropped quotes and factual falsehoods in questions to the Democratic candidates.

Specifically, Media Matters included the following “Don'ts” mentioning Russert:

• Don't misleadingly crop quotes when challenging a candidate's consistency on a particular issue, as NBC Washington bureau chief Tim Russert did on the November 11 broadcast of Meet the Press, when he suggested that Obama has “not been a leader against the [Iraq] war.”

• Don't misrepresent exchanges from past debates, as Russert did during the October 30 Democratic debate when he asked Clinton, regarding Social Security: “Why do you have one public position and one private position?”

• Don't purport to cite written documentation while misrepresenting it, as Russert did during the October 30 debate, when he falsely claimed that a letter written in 2002 by President Clinton “specifically ask[ed] that any communication between” him and the first lady “not be made available to the public until 2012.”

Moreover, in listing the “7 of the first 8 ... [s]eriously stunning” “Don'ts,” Todd mentioned that the entries each had links, but he omitted them. Had he included them, readers would have seen that the entries were not, as he suggested, “facetious attacks on Edwards and Obama,” but references to prior Media Matters items exposing media misinformation about Obama and Edwards.

From Todd's November 15 entry at NBC's First Read blog:

From NBC's Chuck Todd

For the most part, I love reading media watchdog sites. It's a healthy exercise for anyone in this business. But one site, in particular, has a hard time keeping its own bias in check, which of course is beyond ironic.

Yesterday, the liberal watchdog site, Media Matters, posted a fascinating list of “Don'ts” for tonight's CNN debate moderators. Why was the list fascinating? Because of what Media Matters chose to bring up for Obama and Edwards compared to its suggestions for how to address Clinton. Their “don'ts” read more like facetious attacks on Edwards and Obama -- right out of the oppo shop of either the RNC or, say, opponents of Edwards and Obama. By repeating these things, isn't Media Matters doing Clinton or other opponents of Edwards and Obama a favor?

Just putting links in their facetious questions isn't enough to somehow distance themselves from looking as if they are more interested in repeating the personal negatives of Obama and Edwards than, say, any personal negative regarding Clinton.

By the way, since they have so many questions, we have one for them, Don't they need to fully disclose their relationship with Hillary Clinton? After all, at the YearlyKos Convention in Chicago on Aug. 4, she touted her involvement with the group:

[...]

“I only wish that we had this active and fighting blogosphere about 15 years ago because we have certainly suffered over the last years from a real imbalance in the political world in our country. But we are righting that balance -- or lefting that balance -- not sure which, and we are certainly better prepared and more focused on taking our arguments and making them effective and disseminating them widely and really putting together a network in the blogosphere in a lot of the new progressive infrastructure -- institutions that I helped to start and support like Media Matters and Center for American Progress. We're beginning to match what I had said for years was the advantage of the other side.”

Here are some examples of their “don'ts”:

-- Don't contradict your own reporting and suggest that Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) “cash[ed] in” on a stock deal in which he lost $13,000.

-- Don't say that Obama's position on Pakistan is “very much in line with what” President Bush says regarding Pakistan.

-- Don't contradict your own reporting -- again -- and say that Obama, in following legal requirements to count purchasers of his campaign merchandise as campaign contributors, is “apparently using some creative math” and “overselling his grassroots support.”

-- Don't tell Obama that "[i]t's difficult to say that you're against the war and at the same time not say that you're against the troops."

-- Don't suggest that former Sen. John Edwards' (D-NC) work “for financial markets” might “contradict his anti-poverty message.”

-- Don't adopt GOP framing and ask Edwards about his “flip-flop” on Iraq “to win the vote.”

-- Don't ask about former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee's (R) “pretty interesting” quip that "[w]e've had a Congress that's spent money like John Edwards at a beauty shop."

Those were 7 of the first 8 “don't” suggestions... Seriously stunning. We're guessing Edwards and Obama partisans don't believe they need any more “help” from David Brock and his team.

Meanwhile, here are some of the Clinton “don'ts,” buried toward the END of this list.

-- Don't base questions on premises that contradict available polling data, such as whether the Clinton campaign -- while leading all other candidates in head-to-head matchups -- is “feeling desperate.”

-- Don't ask whether Clinton -- but not former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) -- is “going too far” and “politicizing 9-11” in her campaign ads.

-- Don't hold Democratic and Republican candidates to differing standards regarding the Iraq war and the budget -- for example, by repeating Republican attacks on Obama and Clinton for voting against an Iraq supplemental funding bill without noting that Republican candidates have also voted against Iraq supplementals.

Is Media Matters a liberal/Democratic media watchdog site or a Clinton watchdog site? Judging by this list of “don'ts,” it's not easy for one to tell the difference.