Tags for this video have been changed from 'media matters, glenn beck, crazy, liar, mccarthyism' to 'media matters, glenn beck, crazy, liar, mccarthyism, silver gopher' - edited by peggedbea

So is Media Matters actually running this as a commercial somewhere? It seems about the right length for an ad buy.

>> ^volumptuous:
Downvote because the video contains information you already knew?
Following this logic, if someone uploads a music video I've already seen, I should downvote it? I didn't really know that was the way it works around here.


It's information anyone who's been paying attention has known for years, because it's already in our face all the time. You're right though, that isn't enough to warrant a downvote. However, when you add in energizing music and repeat ad nauseum to anger and hopefully inspire your audience to action, you'd better have something in there that suggests how to focus that energy and give you something to do with that anger. Otherwise you're really just trying to get under my skin, which gets a big downvote from me. Advocacy fail; I expect better from Media Matters.

>> ^Stormsinger:
Wow...just, wow. As if there were any doubt which side is worse, let's recap a couple of the wingnut statements: "Give them rat poison", and "The noose will be around their necks, not mine, I can guarantee that."
Honestly, I'm not at all sure that context even matters here...those statements are truly "vile, disgusting, and demented".


Stick around long enough and you'll see sifters upvote comments that call for the executions of conservatives.

I'd take media matters over fox news any day.

>> ^shiner_man:
Wow! Somebody took a bunch of clips and put them together. This is brilliant! I mean, this isn't propaganda or anything.


As if you would know what propaganda was, unless somebody spelled it out for you.

And even then, I guess they'd have to pepper their rhetoric with the xenophobia, jingoism, and Luddite sensibilities that pass for conservative wisdom.

Are you familiar with the psychological term "projection"?

wow look how utterly butthurt these guys get when called out on their blatant bullshit

suck it up, ladies.. conserve those tears.

media matters, from what i've seen, is actually pretty objective.. they call out MSNBC and other liberal news networks on their shit too.

>> ^burdturgler:
blah blah whatever this is not journalistic excellence as I understand it.

It's Media Matters. There's more than a touch of irony intended.

It's not real journalistic excellence, it's more like flashes of journalistic integrity found in unlikely places.

once again ,
Ignore Trolls.
thanks again media matters .

the more i watch rick sanchez,the more i like him.maybe because he calls people out on their BS,which Bill-O needs a huge dose of,megalomania is not conducive to objective reporting.then again,Bill-O is not a reporter,just a popular commentator.
media matters is a great watchdog site to check ALL of Bill-O's lies and obfuscations out.
http://mediamatters.org/

Shame on Media Matters. None of these examples are journalism.

Cheap commentary IS NOT journalism!

These seem to merely be examples of people who would normally either spread propaganda, or let propaganda pass without being challenged actually bothering to end a propaganda session by saying "but ya know, the conversation we just had wasn't based in reality" before moving on to the next segment.

In other words, they're clips of people very narrowly avoiding becoming the subject of a Media Matters post about spreading *lies.

Media Matters has documented numerous examples of Fox News hosts and correspondents cropping comments by progressives and Democratic political figures in a manner that misrepresents them. - yt


Yeah, that never fking happens on the leftmedia.

By the way, why do leftmedia even compete under different labels? They all spew the SAME Obamaganda!

Why not just form one huge ball of fake journalists?

And to Ape Boy.....I don't need to lie. Fraudbama's thievery and failures are well-documented: BY REALITY.

From Media Matters.

Fact: GOP Presided Over the Largest Expansion of Government Since LBJ's Great Society. The Wall Street Journal noted the GOP's complicity in the largest of government since LBJ. "President Bush and the GOP Congress continue to preside over the largest expansion of government since LBJ's Great Society. Economic growth fueled by the Bush tax cuts created a 22% surge in federal revenue over the past two years. But even that flow is barely keeping pace with spending, which went up by 8% in 2005 and is set to increase by 9% in 2006. When the good times slow down, no one expects it will be easy to slam the brakes on spending." [Wall Street Journal, 1/30/06, emphasis added]

And you never said a word about it, QM, true to your lying-ass, pissy-pants form.

If the press did their job, they'd do some work to see how much of what Naomi Wolf is saying is plausible or reasonable, and then turn the same critical eye to Beck, and then present a verdict that isn't predetermined to be "they both have about the same credibility." In other words, they should try to make an objective determination about what's really happening, even if it's closer to what one of the political parties is saying than the other.

What Wolf did was look at a sequence of events that actually happened, and plotted the trajectory towards a really uncomfortable conclusion.

Essentially, she said "hey, look at the way Republicans are using fear to achieve their goals, and it's following the playbook dictators use!"

Obama wins, and now Glenn Beck comes on TV every night and accuses Obama of using Wolf's playbook for dictators.

What's a modern day reporter to do? Both the left and the right are calling each other fascists -- this must just be a simple partisan squabble, so we'll just ignore both of them, except to condemn them for their strident partisanship (of which they're equally guilty, regardless of where the facts stand).

This is a bit like Bernie Madoff saying "hey, my clients cheated me just as bad as I cheated them!" and having the press refuse to indicate in their reporting who might be telling the truth, and who might not be, because that would be "partisan".

Wolf was wrong about martial law, but I don't think it was an unreasonable thing to say "doesn't that look like where we're headed?"

Beck, some 8 weeks into Obama's presidency, is saying it's the end of capitalism and freedom, and the rise of fascism. That's just not reasonable.

The fact that some intellectuals on the left said it in the last years of Bush's presidency, doesn't mean that when entertainers on the right make the same accusation in the opening days of Obama's presidency, both have equal weight.

I think media matters is sorta right that the press shouldn't try to evoke fear, but I think more accurately, I think they need to be judicious and just make sure that what they're reporting is valid.

Saying "beware toys made in China from these manufacturers because the FDA has found that many of them contain lead paint" is justified, even if it evokes fear. Saying "Letting the Bush tax cuts expire will crash the economy and drive us into a Communist dictatorship" isn't.