Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • I like Media Matters (mediamatters.org).

    -- Douglas Hunter
    • Ovid asked for unbiased source. MediaMatters is about as partisan as you can get: it was created specifically to go after the right wing.

      It was started by David Brock, the guy who wrote the attack book on Anita Hill, but later switched sides, as told in his anti-conservative attack article, "Confessions of a Right-Wing Hit Man," followed by a book of the same M.O., Blinded By The Right.

      As Slate [msn.com] (an online mag that definitely leans left) wrote, And here [Brock] is, back in the news again, on the same theme, unsurprisingly, this time as founder of a new Web site called Media Matters for America. Backed by $2 million raised from liberal contributors, the site promises to monitor and correct misinformation and lies from the conservative media "in real time."

      Read the About page and see all the liberals listed on the editorial staff. Then look at the content and just try to find something criticizing Kerry or the left. Really, this is about as biased and partisan as it comes.

      Now, the site I like is FactCheck.org [factcheck.org], the site mentioned (erroneously) by Cheney in the debate. They also appear regularly on PBS News Hour. Many have claimed the site leans right, but frankly, I find no evidence of that. There have been times this election season when they have been much more highly critical of Bush than of Kerry, and vice versa. Looking right now at the top 7 items, four are against Bush, one is against Kerry, and the other two are against both.
      • Right on about factcheck.org -- although it would be wonderful if they delivered the checks via RSS...
      • Let me second (third?) the vote for FactCheck. They're equally critical of both sides when they exaggerate or mis-state. They don't do RSS, but they do have e-mail alerts you can subscribe to.

        --

        --rjray

      • I believe that Ovid asked for an independant source of media criticism. FactCheck.org is dedicated to holding politicians accountable, not the media. I agree that they do a nice job.

        I suppose I could have pointed out that Media Matters' mission statement is to "correct conservative misinformation in the U.S. media", but I suspect most folks will read that themselves.

        -- Douglas Hunter