Gee, I wonder why Hillary Clinton doesn't like the press? Here is the NY Times greedily gulping the lies of Schwiezer who has a history of lies and inaccurate stories in the past.
In the long lead up to Mrs. Clinton’s campaign announcement, aides proved adept in swatting down critical books as conservative propaganda, including Edward Klein’s “Blood Feud,” about tensions between the Clintons and the Obamas, and Daniel Halper’s “Clinton Inc.: The Audacious Rebuilding of a Political Machine.”
"But “Clinton Cash” is potentially more unsettling, both because of its focused reporting and because major news organizations including The Times, The Washington Post and Fox News have exclusive agreements with the author to pursue the story lines found in the book."
Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which includes Mr. Paul and Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, have been briefed on the book’s findings, and its contents have already made their way into several of the Republican presidential candidates’ campaigns.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/20/us/politics/new-book-clinton-cash-questions-foreign-donations-to-foundation.html?_r=0
What's unsettling is why the NY Times and Washington Post would aid and abet an unreliable smear merchant from the Right Wing Big Lie Machine in digging up dirt on Clinton.
Why is there no book on Jeb Bush's cash? These allegedly liberal papers don't care about that, they just want Hillary's head on a platter.
http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/04/20/on-msnbcs-maddow-david-brock-highlights-the-new/203350
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/peter-schweizer-nyt-fox-agreement
It's not hard to understand why she holds the press in contempt. The complete lack of standards being shown by the Times here is shocking.
Some claim she now has a new media strategy.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/hillary-clinton-2016-election-media-strategy-117118.html
Whatever. I wish the media would get a new strategy that would include even the most basic levels of professionalism in covering her rather than trying to keep up with Fox News.
The Times responded to the reaction to this news of their working Schwiezer-an Andrew Breitbart alumni.
"The New York Times acknowledged on Monday that it had made a deal with conservative writer Peter Schweizer to pursue stories based on his research into Hillary and Bill Clinton.
http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/04/20/clinton-cash-author-peter-schweizers-long-histo/203209
With the NBA playoffs on, I've been looking at odds. What do you think the odds are that the Times actually vetted Schwiezer?
http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/04/21/on-msnbc-media-matters-david-brock-questions-if/203354
In the long lead up to Mrs. Clinton’s campaign announcement, aides proved adept in swatting down critical books as conservative propaganda, including Edward Klein’s “Blood Feud,” about tensions between the Clintons and the Obamas, and Daniel Halper’s “Clinton Inc.: The Audacious Rebuilding of a Political Machine.”
"But “Clinton Cash” is potentially more unsettling, both because of its focused reporting and because major news organizations including The Times, The Washington Post and Fox News have exclusive agreements with the author to pursue the story lines found in the book."
Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which includes Mr. Paul and Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, have been briefed on the book’s findings, and its contents have already made their way into several of the Republican presidential candidates’ campaigns.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/20/us/politics/new-book-clinton-cash-questions-foreign-donations-to-foundation.html?_r=0
What's unsettling is why the NY Times and Washington Post would aid and abet an unreliable smear merchant from the Right Wing Big Lie Machine in digging up dirt on Clinton.
Why is there no book on Jeb Bush's cash? These allegedly liberal papers don't care about that, they just want Hillary's head on a platter.
http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/04/20/on-msnbcs-maddow-david-brock-highlights-the-new/203350
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/peter-schweizer-nyt-fox-agreement
It's not hard to understand why she holds the press in contempt. The complete lack of standards being shown by the Times here is shocking.
Some claim she now has a new media strategy.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/hillary-clinton-2016-election-media-strategy-117118.html
Whatever. I wish the media would get a new strategy that would include even the most basic levels of professionalism in covering her rather than trying to keep up with Fox News.
The Times responded to the reaction to this news of their working Schwiezer-an Andrew Breitbart alumni.
"The New York Times acknowledged on Monday that it had made a deal with conservative writer Peter Schweizer to pursue stories based on his research into Hillary and Bill Clinton.
Carolyn Ryan, NYT's Washington bureau chief and political editor responded to TPM through a spokesperson in an email:
We had access to some material in the book, but we wanted to do our own reporting.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/new-york-times-bill-hillary-clinton-schweizer
What exactly does that mean that they're going to 'do our own reporting?' Basically while Schweizer follows the Clintons around in his car digging for dirt, the Times will be following them around to but drivng their Times van? Again, since when did opposition research become indistinguishable from journalism?
Why don't they 'do their own reporting' on Jeb Bush's money? Why accept Schewizer's premise in the first place? What is it about his Breitbart operation that they find so legitimate?
Hillary is right: the GOP is much more concerned with how much they hate her than what they are allegedly going to do for the country.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/hillary-clinton-gop-focusing-me
So what kind of 'focused reporting' is Schwiezer know for? The kind that leads to errors and retractions:
"Media should be cautious with Republican activist and strategist Peter Schweizer's new book Clinton Cash. Schweizer has a disreputable history of reporting marked by errors and retractions, with numerous reporters excoriating him for facts that "do not check out," sources that "do not exist," and a basic failure to practice "Journalism 101."
http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/04/21/on-msnbc-media-matters-david-brock-questions-if/203354
No comments:
Post a Comment