Home Contact Advertise About us Donate Forums Webmasters

CNN Bias We all see the Republicans who appear in the media and claim CNN is a liberal news network. They are wrong, they do this to make you think they have a liberal bias so if they report anything negative about Bush or another Republican you think it is a result of their liberal bias. That is just flat out BS, the truth is CNN is part of the corporate owned and controlled media in America. Not one show on CNN is hosted by a stand alone liberal, they are either moderate or conservative. This web site will show you clear cut examples of their corporate and right-leaning slant on the news. CNN Moving Right: Hires 3 More Conservatives CNN is quickly becoming the new FOX, they have clearly decided to move way to the right in an attempt to get more right wing viewers. They get rid of Robert Novak, then they hire 3 Conservatives to replace him. ------- This week, CNN Headline News announced it will give a full primetime hour to right-wing talk radio host Glenn Beck. "CNN's Headline News has signed conservative radio host Glenn Beck for an hourlong talkshow in hopes of building on the ratings momentum generated by a revamped primetime lineup anchored by 'Nancy Grace,'" Variety's Michael Learmonth scoops. The announcement will be made today. == Conservative talk show host Bill Bennett will become a CNN political analyst early in 2006, TVNewser has learned. In addition to the "political analyst" role, Bennett is expected to appear on a culture show the network may launch next year. == CNN Signs Former GOP Rep. J.C. Watts 1-18-06 -- CNN has found a new conservative commentator: Former Republican congressman J.C. Watts Jr. "will join CNN as a regular contributor to offer analysis on politics and policy for programs throughout the network," Jon Klein announced today. ------- Where is that liberal media again ? Not at CNN, Folks it's time to boycott CNN until they bring some balance back to their shows. 8-19-05 - CNN is putting people on the air who are lying about Bill Clinton, Jamie Gorelick, Able Danger, and the 1995 wall guidelines. Whe you see these people you need to know they are lying, and you should contact CNN and complain. They do not correct them either, they just let them lie their ass off with no corrections. Here is the truth - In the past week, conservative media -- including two New York Post columnists and two Post editorials -- have falsely suggested that information obtained by military intelligence purportedly identifying lead 9-11 hijacker Mohammed Atta may have been withheld from law enforcement officials because of a 1995 memo written by then-Clinton deputy attorney general Jamie Gorelick. But the Gorelick memo and ensuing guidelines, which conservatives claim created a "wall" between intelligence agencies and law enforcement officials, had nothing to do with military intelligence -- those documents addressed communications only among divisions within the Department of Justice. Moreover, as Media Matters for America has previously noted, the "wall" that conservatives accuse Gorelick of enacting had been operative well before Gorelick -- or Clinton -- took office. But if Able Danger did in fact identify Atta, the Gorelick memo and the subsequent 1995 Clinton administration guidelines based on it did not prevent the group from sharing that information with intelligence agencies or law enforcement officials. As former Attorney General John Ashcroft noted in his testimony before the 9-11 Commission, the Gorelick memo provided the "basic architecture" for the 1995 guidelines established by then-Attorney General Janet Reno that formalized rules for intelligence sharing that were already in place. But, as the 1995 guidelines clearly state, the Gorelick memo and the guidelines applied only to intelligence sharing "between the FBI and the Criminal Division" within the Justice Department, not a military unit established by the Defense Department. 9-11 Commission executive director Philip Zelikow also clearly noted during the commission's hearings that the "wall" applied only to the Justice Department: "Over time, the wall requirement came to be interpreted by the Justice Department, and particularly the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, as imposing an increasingly stringent barrier to communications between FBI intelligence agents and criminal prosecutors." More........ CNN Lying About The Wall And Able Danger 8-12-05 -- CNN again today proves how they are in bed with Corporate America and the Bush administration. They just did a long segment showing gas prices from around the world, and how we have it great because our gas is still very cheap compared to what the rest of the world pays. What a load of right-wing corporate BS that is, gas just hit $2.49 a gallon here in Peoria Illinois. That is a lot of money, especially for the guy making $7, $8, $9, or $10, an hour. A hell of a lot of people make $10 or less an hour and they are feeling the pain at the pump big time. I personally know a few people who avoid buying things and doing things to make sure they have enough money to pay the bills every month. It cost so much for gas they stay home more to save money and burn less gas. Not to mention the people on fixed incomes and social security who are screwed, that 2% COLA raise every year does not cover gas prices going up 20 cents in a week. Yet CNN, MSNBC, and FOX act like $2.49 a gallon for gas is nothing and it does not bother anyone. Tell that to the retiree on social security who is broke by the 25th of the month and has to decide on putting gas in the car or buying food for the week. The corporate stooges at CNN think $2.40 for a gallon of gas is just great, well 64 percent of the people say different. The average price of a gallon of regular gasoline was more than $2.40 per gallon at week's end, compared with $1.86 a year ago and about $2.21 in April, according to the auto club AAA. The poll conducted for The Associated Press and America Online News found that 64 percent say gas prices will cause money problems for them in the next six months. Those most likely to be worried about the financial impact are people with low incomes, the unemployed and minorities. The AP-AOL survey of 1,000 adults was conducted Aug. 9-11 by Ipsos, an international polling firm. And Wolf Blitzer is a fool, yesterday he interviewed former President Clinton. He asked him a question about Hillary running for President, Clinton said you are just trying to make news. Wolf said it's my job to make news, ummm, wrong Wolf, it's your damn job to report the news, not make the news, no wonder you are not looked at as a real journalist. You dont even know what your job is, what does that say about you. Cable News Has Run Out of News Referring to cable news as "right wing" is about as obvious these days as calling it "televised." Sure it's transparently biased and apologetic to the Bush administration and the Republican party, thus extinguishing any notion of the Fourth Estate. But perhaps some day in our lifetime cable news will return to delivering investigative, insightful journalism which questions our leadership rather than defending it -- Shut up. It could happen. What's become increasingly disturbing, though, is how the news networks have simply run out of news. Or worse, they're actively avoiding real news. Sure. We get it. It's hard work finding and saying all that elusive news. What with a war on; an investigation into national security leaks from the office of "The War President"; global warming; genocide; and those goddamn crazy sharks. Why sift for pointed stories from all that noise when you can engage in discourse which might appeal to, say, a six-year-old? Wolf Blitzer: "Do you like tatertots, Mr. Rumsfeld?" Donald Rumsfeld: "The question is not whether I like tots. Do I like tots? Of course I like tots as much as tots deserve my affection which is a lot in a broad stroke description of tots with errrrmmmm... ketchup. So do I like tots? Of course I like tots and ketchup. The question that needs to be asked about tots is --" Wolf Blitzer: "Mr. Secretary! I have to interrupt with breaking news. We go now live to Bumpus, Virginia where some kid stepped on a bee!" Here's three actual CNN stories from the past several days. These, sadly, are very real. 1) Wolf Blitzer, on Sunday, blew the lid off the Brad & Jennifer split (old!) with an in-depth report on a newly invented marital issue called "Emotional Cheating." Brad cheated on Jennifer... with his thoughts. 2) Yesterday, CNN spent many precious broadcast minutes delving into an issue which cuts to the very core of the Rove Leak investigation. The special report: "Why do men have nipples?" Look it up. 3) And today's top story? "Man forgets wife at gas station." Look, unless the gas station is in the town of Wekillwivesatgasstations, Kentucky, the wife will make it home with only minor cuts and bruises. Even if the husband drove off and never returned, she'll be okay. Besides, maybe she deserved it. Did you consider that, CNN? Maybe she's a stupid-head. Maybe she cheated on her husband with her thoughts. You told me the other day that it's wrong to cheat with your thoughts, CNN. Maybe... Yeah... Can we stop now and go back to talking about the right-wing media? Because on second thought, reporting pointless news items is bad enough, but now I'm literally reporting on the reporting of thought-cheating, nipples, and abandoned wives. Cable News Has Run Out of News One of the best examples of bias from CNN is how they use Gallop to slant their polls to help Bush and make him look better. Gallup adds a 16 percent Republican bias to guarantee Bush always comes out smelling like a rose. And Gallup did not just rig this one poll, they rig all their polls. Would a liberal news network use a polling company that rigs their polls to favor the Republicans. Of course not, because they are not liberal. CNN/USA Today/Gallup ran a flash poll after the Presidents June 28th speech to the nation. But CNN did not tell their viewers that 50 percent of the poll's 323 respondents were Republicans, while only 23 percent were Democrats. As Media Matters for America has noted, this sample differs dramatically from the partisan makeup of the broader American public. In fact, the National Annenberg Election Survey found that 31.8 percent of registered voters were self-identified Republicans, compared to 34.6 percent who were self-identified Democrats, based on random samples covering 67,777 registered voters surveyed over 13 months from 2003 to 2004. Similarly, Gallup's own study, based on polling data from 37,000 interviews in 2004, found 34 percent of Americans self-identifying as Republicans; 34 percent self-identifying as Democrats; and 31 percent self-identifying as independents. Additionally, because Gallup's flash poll was part of a broader "panel survey," the sample was not random. Rather, it included only people who agreed to take a survey; said they intended to watch the speech; actually watched the speech; and were at home and willing to be interviewed a second time when Gallup called back after the speech on the night of June 28. Ask yourself if an objective news network would use a polling company who rigs their polls, the answer is no. CNN Uses Rigged Gallup Poll to Make Bush Look Better CNN, Kurtz derided as "ludicrous" the "Democratic" notion that Bush timed Supreme Court nomination to distract from Rove scandal Reporting on President Bush's July 19 nomination of Judge John G. Roberts Jr. to the Supreme Court, various CNN correspondents derided as "ludicrous" and "overwrought" the suggestion -- often attributed solely to "Democrats" or "liberals" -- that the White House may have accelerated the nomination to divert media attention from the scandal surrounding White House senior adviser Karl Rove. In fact, news reports suggest the White House did accelerate the nomination to distract the media, and both Republicans and Democrats have suggested that the nomination was moved up to shift focus away from Rove. Many Republicans were reportedly happy the White House was "changing the subject." Rove was recently implicated in the outing of former CIA operative Valerie Plame. CNN's chief national correspondent John King twice belittled the idea that the White House moved up the nomination to divert attention from Rove. On the July 19 edition of CNN's Inside Politics, King said, "It is ludicrous to think that the president of the United States would rush a decision simply to change the subject." Later, on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360, King said, "The idea that they said, 'Oh my God, we're in trouble because of Karl Rove; we need to rush this' -- I think that's a bit of a stretch." CNN senior analyst Jeff Greenfield similarly brushed off the notion on the July 19 edition of CNN's Wolf Blitzer Reports, saying: "I think we're being a little bit overwrought in thinking that this is a clever move to get Karl Rove off the front page." Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz, who also hosts CNN's Reliable Sources, and CNN White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux implied that Democrats and liberals were alone in suggesting that the White House had moved the nomination forward. In his July 20 "Media Notes" column (via Nexis*), Kurtz wrote: "The prime-time maneuver also neutralized the blogosphere, although liberals were convinced it was all a plot to knock Karl Rove and the CIA leak story off the front pages." On the July 19 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight, Malveaux said: "Well, what the Democrats are suggesting is that perhaps this information is coming out to take Rove and the CIA leak investigation off the front pages of the newspapers." There are indications, however, that the White House did accelerate the timing of the nomination to draw media focus from Rove's alleged involvement in the CIA leak scandal. Bloomberg reported on July 20 that "two administration officials" said the nomination was moved forward in response to the Rove controversy: Bush originally had planned to announce a replacement for retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on July 26 or 27, just before his planned July 28 departure for a month-long vacation at his Crawford, Texas, ranch, said two administration officials, who spoke on the condition they not be named. The officials said those plans changed because Rove has become a focus of Fitzgerald's interest and of news accounts about the matter. Full Story: Kurtz Shows His Republican Bias CNN's Jack Valenti continues to peddle GOP spin while ostensibly representing Democrats Former Motion Picture Association of America president Jack Valenti once again peddled Republican spin while ostensibly representing the Democratic viewpoint on the "Strategy Session" segment of CNN's Inside Politics. Paired opposite Republican strategist Terry Holt on the July 18 edition of Inside Politics, Valenti argued that the controversy over the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame is "all about politics," suggested that Democrats are looking for "payback," and claimed that the public doesn't care about the matter. Valenti is now a perfect six-for-six in "Strategy Session" appearances: He's been on six times, and in each appearance he repeated GOP spin, praised Republicans, criticized Democrats, or some combination of the three. After being introduced as "former aide to President Lyndon Johnson" and asked by host Dana Bash whether President Bush has a political problem due to his promise to fire those responsible for the leak, Valenti opted not to take the obvious Democratic position ("Yes"), instead dismissing the whole matter as "all about politics" and an instance of Democrats "tasting the sweet juices of payback time": BASH: Not clear if the law was broken, but this isn't just about the law, Jack Valenti, this is about politics and the president having a certain standard that he set for himself, right? VALENTI: This is all about politics. I think that Karl Rove wielded the sharpest broadsword in the election, slashing about, and left a lot of wounded Democrats on the election battlefield. And now the Democrats, tasting the sweet juices of payback time. And so this thing is going to go on. Full Story: Valenti is CNN's Pretend Democrat CNN's Henry followed AP's lead, reported Wilson "suggested" Plame was not undercover at the time of Novak leak CNN congressional correspondent Ed Henry repeated the false claim that former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV "suggested" that his wife, covert CIA operative Valerie Plame, was not undercover at the time columnist Robert D. Novak revealed her identity in a July 2003 column. Henry appeared to be referring to Wilson's comment in a July 14 interview on CNN's Wolf Blitzer Reports. "My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity," Wilson said. But the context of the interview demonstrates that Wilson was simply noting that Plame's identity was no longer secret after Novak publicly revealed it. In a June 15 article, the Associated Press similarly misconstrued this statement but soon after issued a correction to that effect. Full Story: CNN's Henry Parrots GOP Lies CNN's Bash repeated debunked GOP talking point on Wilson On the July 14 edition of CNN's Inside Politics, White House correspondent Dana Bash repeated the GOP's false assertion that former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV had claimed Vice President Dick Cheney sent him to Niger to investigate reports that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had tried to purchase yellowcake uranium there. In fact, Wilson never claimed Cheney sent him to Niger. Nevertheless, Bash reiterated the Republican talking point without telling viewers that it was bogus. In an effort to deflect criticism of White House senior adviser Karl Rove, the Republican National Committee (RNC) has claimed that Rove leaked the identity of Wilson's wife, undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame, in order to correct Wilson's false claim that Cheney's office had sent him to Niger. But the RNC supports this claim by distorting Wilson's July 2003 New York Times op-ed and his August 2003 appearance on CNN's Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer. In both instances, Wilson made clear that his trip was authorized by officials at the CIA, not Cheney. Full Story: CNN's Bash Repeated GOP Talking Points Another CNN anchor pushed loaded conservative term "Borked" On CNN's American Morning, anchor Carol Costello asked former Supreme Court clerk and legal columnist Edward Lazarus, "[H]ow many [Supreme Court nominees] will be Borked?" In using the term "Borked" without comment, she echoed a conservative mantra that evokes the 1987 confirmation battle over defeated Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork. Conservatives have used the term to refer to any instance in which a nominee is forced to answer unwelcome questions on his or her views, implying that Bork and others like him have been wrongly attacked. As Media Matters for America pointed out when CNN used the term during a July 1 interview with Bork, the former judge failed to provide evidence that opponents had questioned him unfairly. Full Story: CNN's Costello Used Loaded Conservative Term CNN's Blitzer left out key fact in discussing Bush Iraq speech CNN host Wolf Blitzer noted that President Bush mentioned the 9-11 attacks in his June 28 speech on the war in Iraq, but he left out a key fact: Even Bush has acknowledged that there is no evidence that Saddam Hussein had anything to do with 9-11. NBC News made a similar omission in its coverage following Bush's speech. On the June 29 edition of CNN's Wolf Blitzer Reports, Blitzer showed a clip of an interview with Rep. Robin Hayes (R-NC), who claimed that "the evidence is very clear" that Saddam was involved in 9-11 but that he couldn't provide specific evidence because only congressmen "get access to it." Blitzer then asked R. Nicholas Burns, deputy assistant secretary of state for public affairs: "Have you seen evidence there, Mr. Secretary, of a direct link between Saddam Hussein and those who perpetrated 9-11?" Burns did not respond directly but hinted that such a link did exist. "Wolf, I would just refer to you what the president said last night. He did refer to 9-11," he said. Blitzer did not inform viewers that both Bush and the 9-11 commission have contradicted the claim that Saddam was involved in the 9-11 attacks. Blitzer's treatment of Burns contrasts with CNN anchor Carol Costello's interview of Hayes earlier in the day. Blitzer showed the clip of Hayes's claim, but not Costello's response, in which she insisted, "There's no evidence of that." Full Story: Blitzer Shows His Bias For Bush ABC asked Rice about Downing Street memo; CNN and Fox passed Of Sunday morning news program hosts who interviewed Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on June 19, only ABC's George Stephanopoulos asked Rice about the recently leaked Downing Street memo. The memo contains the recorded minutes of a July 23, 2002, meeting of senior British cabinet officials and advisers and includes British intelligence chief Richard Dearlove's statement, based on meetings with U.S. officials in Washington, that President Bush was determined even then to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq "through military action" and that "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." Though Chris Wallace, host of Fox Broadcasting Co.'s Fox News Sunday, and CNN Late Edition host Wolf Blitzer also interviewed Rice on Iraq policy that day, neither brought up the memo, which had been the subject of informal hearings on Capitol Hill earlier in the week. Full Story: CNN Ignores Negative News on Bush Downing Street Memo CNN to Al Jazeera: Why Report Civilian Deaths? As the casualties mount in the besieged Iraqi city of Fallujah, Qatar-based Al Jazeera has been one of the only news networks broadcasting from the inside, relaying images of destruction and civilian victims-- including women and children. But when CNN anchor Daryn Kagan interviewed the network's editor-in-chief, Ahmed Al-Sheik, on Monday (4/12/04)-- a rare opportunity to get independent information about events in Fallujah-- she used the occasion to badger Al-Sheik about whether the civilian deaths were really "the story" in Fallujah. Note: Daryn Kagan is dating Rush Limbaugh. Full Story: CNN to Al Jazeera: Why Report Civilian Deaths? CNN's Nic Robertson repeated discredited link between Zarqawi, Saddam CNN senior international correspondent Nic Robertson stated that Jordanian-born terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi "was dubbed the Al Qaeda link to Saddam Hussein" in 2003, but failed to note that this "link," which the Bush administration has perpetuated, has been thoroughly discredited. In the aftermath of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, Zarqawi has emerged as a leader of the Iraqi insurgency. But Zarqawi's pre-war connections to both Saddam and Al Qaeda do not indicate cooperation or coordination. The Bush administration has repeatedly attempted to link Saddam and Al Qaeda through Zarqawi as part of its justification for the Iraq war. In June 2004, President Bush said that "Zarqawi is the best evidence of connection" between Iraq and al Qaeda. Similarly, then-Secretary of State Colin Powell also cited Zarqawi in his prewar speech to the United Nations. But there is little evidence of meaningful association between Zarqawi and Saddam. A Central Intelligence Agency assessment found no conclusive evidence that Saddam harbored Zarqawi or gave him aid, according to Knight Ridder Newspapers. Robertson Repeated GOP Lies on Link with Zarqawi & Saddam CNN = “Contains No News” 1 Hour of CNN Yields Less Than 5 Minutes of News After months of observation, TVNL has discovered that after 6 minutes into any news broadcast on these networks, no more news is reported for the hour. What viewers get instead is biased speculation, in depth tabloid stories (a la the Star or the National Inquirer), stories of local or regional interest, and a great deal of infomercial content. To illustrate this point, TVNL taped and analyzed a one hour CNN news program aired on September 5th, 2003 at 7:00 PM EST, during the prime time evening news hour. Full Story: CNN = Contains No News Open Letter To CNN The wonderful thing about Truth, and the thing you folks at CNN can't seem to come to grips with, is -- the Truth is out there. It's impenetrable; indestructable, and it's not going away. And, don't bother pointing out that CNN's softer-edged barking heads and cackling pundits aren't as bad as Fox News' mean-spirited barking heads and cackling pundits. Is to be a Fox clone really what you want? Do you think this is what Ted Turner had in mind when he built your magnificent empire, brick by ethical brick? Fox News manipulates the polls in favor of George Bush -- so we'll manipulate the polls in favor of George Bush. Fox News screams and spontaneously combusts at the sight and sound of President Bill Clinton -- so we'll do the same AND throw in the rat-gnawed, demon-encrusted Hillary for extra points. Fox News hangs onto George Bush's every incoherent word. We can do that. And, because Bush is our very own charge to keep, we'll clean up the messes he inevitably leaves in his wake. Hey -- least we can do. Full Story: Open Letter to CNN Here is another example of how they edit a quote to make Bush not look so bad. Of course it is just one example, but there have been many things like this done in the past few years. And they ignore a lot of stories that make Bush look bad, or if they do report it they have a Republican on to spin it. And CNN's senior political analyst is Bill Schneider, he is a member of the far right American Enterprise Institute. If CNN has this big liberal bias how come their senior political analyst is a far right-winger, and why are they letting him doctor a quote from Chuck Hagel to make Bush look better. On the June 28 edition of CNN's Inside Politics, Bill Schneider quoted Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) to eliminate explicit references to the White House and water down Hagel's criticism of its handling of the war in Iraq. In a segment highlighting the decline in popular support for the war in Iraq, Schneider noted that even a "few of his [President Bush's] fellow Republicans are losing confidence." He then quoted Hagel: SCHNEIDER: "Things aren't getting better, they're getting worse," Sen. Chuck Hagel recently told a newsmagazine. "The reality is that we're losing in Iraq." Schneider then aired two clips of a recent CNN interview with Vice President Dick Cheney, who responded to Hagel's statement by saying the Iraq war will "be an enormous success story that will have a huge impact not only in Iraq, but throughout the region" and that Hagel was "wrong." Here is the full UNEDITED quote from Hagel: "Things aren't getting better; they're getting worse. The White House is completely disconnected from reality," he said. "It's like they're just making it up as they go along. The reality is, we're losing in Iraq." During the rigged and biased segment CNN also put the EDITED quote in an on-screen graphic that appeared as Schneider read it. This is crap I would expect from O'Reilly, or Hannity, or Scarborough, not someone at CNN. This is why people have stopped watching CNN and MSNBC, and it is why their ratings will continue to be flat or drop. -------- If CNN is so liberal why would they hire the far right nut Nancy Grace, here is an article about her. With all the porn, pajamas and Culkin-related distractions in the Michael Jackson case, it's easy to forget that his criminal trial is similar to thousands of others conducted every year. There were opening statements, witnesses for the prosecution and defense -- and after a few more weeks of testimony, a jury will weigh the evidence and let the world know if the singer committed the crime. Unless you're one of more than 500,000 viewers each night watching CNN Headline News, where Nancy Grace talks as though she determined the celebrity's guilt a long time ago. Since CNN earlier this year positioned "Nancy Grace" as the centerpiece of the Headline prime lineup, the channel has enjoyed a short-term ratings bonanza. But if executives in charge of the once-respected cable news station are getting a good night's rest, then they haven't been watching her bizarre coverage of the Michael Jackson trial and a dozen other sensational cases. If one looks at every page of every transcript since "Nancy Grace" debuted three months ago, the program more closely resembles a torch-bearing mob than the "legal issues" show that CNN promised. Grace has created her own parallel universe in which guests are berated for advocating due process, panelists are invited back frequently if they make ad hominem attacks and suspects are seemingly guilty until proven innocent. Full Story: CNN Hires Nancy Grace CNN.com posted misleading graph showing poll results on Schiavo case In presenting the results of a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll, CNN.com used a visually distorted graph* that falsely conveyed the impression that Democrats far outnumber Republicans and Independents in thinking the Florida state court was right to order Terri Schiavo's feeding tube removed. In fact, a majority of all three groups agrees with the court's decision, and the gap between Democrats on one hand and Republicans and Independents on the other is within the poll's margin of error. According to the poll, conducted March 18-20, when asked if they "agree[d] with the court's decision to have the feeding tube removed," 62 percent of Democratic respondents agreed, compared to 54 percent of Republicans, and 54 percent of Independents. But these results were displayed along a very narrow scale of 10 percentage points, and thus appeared to show a large gap between Democrats and Republicans/Independents: Clearly CNN tried to make the Democrats look bad, so much for CNN being liberal, if they are liberal why would they do this ? This is something I would expect from FOX not CNN. Go here and look at the chart, then look at the updated chart that is the way it should have been done: CNN Publishes Misleading & Distorted Graph More right-wing poll bias from CNN: How is it possible for any journalist to write a paragraph like this, from an AP story posted on CNN.com. Can someone tell me how a 10 point lead equals evenly divided ? "Young voters were evenly divided between Bush and Kerry in polling conducted this month by Ipsos-Public Affairs for Newsweek.com and The Associated Press. Among likely voters under age 30, Kerry led 52 percent to 42 percent." Full story: CNN Misrepresents What Evenly Divided Means CNN yanks online poll favoring Edwards, deletes results, and replaces it today Time Warner’s Cable News Network abruptly yanked a poll from the front page of their website Tuesday which was favoring Democratic vice-presidential candidate John Edwards by more than a three-to-one margin. They then replaced it in the 12 p.m EDT hour today, completely eliminating all previous results. The original poll, which asked simply, “Who do you think won the vice presidential debate?” was replaced in the eleven o’clock p.m. hour Tuesday with “Did the vice presidential debate help you decide which way you will vote?” Today, the original question was reinstated, but the results from the original poll were discounted. Some 200,000 previous responses to the poll were deleted when the new poll was posted. The previous poll can be seen here where at press time 78 percent of the vote went to Edwards, 18 percent for Cheney, and four percent declaring that the contest had been a tie. The new poll has Cheney with nearly twice as much support. CNN did not return a request for comment placed this morning. Fox News also pulled a poll from their front page asking who won the debate late Tuesday. Edwards had been leading in the Fox poll by a smaller margin. Previous poll - www.cnn.com/POLLSERVER/results/13670.exclude.html New Poll - www.cnn.com/POLLSERVER/results/13678.exclude.html Source: www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=327 Letter from David Brock to CNN: Kenneth Tucker CNN Producer Dear Kenneth, I am writing to you today regarding L. Brent Bozell's Live From... interview with anchor Miles O'Brien on July 27. Although I am concerned that O'Brien did not inform CNN viewers that Bozell, like the organization that he runs, is staunchly conservative, I am more interested in the issue of CNN providing comparable air time to groups with different views on the media than those of Bozell. One of the reasons that conservatives dominate the debate over the politics of the media in our country is that, all too often, organizations like Bozell's are given the stage to themselves while progressives are sidelined. Unlike your cable competition, I will be the first to recognize CNN's largely successful attempts at presenting both sides of an issue. But this effort should extend to media watch dog groups as well. Bozell's Media Research Center, according to the Washington Post (6/28/04) has raised $2.8 million to counter what he sees as a liberal jihad against President Bush. I would request that my organization, Media Matters for America -- a progressive, Web-based, not-for-profit research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the media -- be given equal air time, beginning with CNN's coverage of the Republican National Convention. I look forward to hearing from you on this matter. I thank you for your time. Sincerely, David Brock President and CEO Media Matters for America Link: Brock Letter to CNN If there is television news programming that operates independently of the White House spin-of-the-day, please let us know. Let's just look at a few recent examples of the Karl Rove television news media stenographic pool at work. After David Letterman aired a videotape of Tyler Crotty, 13 and the son of a Bush $100,000 plus "Pioneer" fundraiser, fighting to stay awake as George droned on and on, CNN host Daryn Kagan dismissed the videotape with the following on-air comment: "We're being told by the White House that the kid, as funny as he was, was edited into that video, which would explain why the people around him weren't really reacting." CNN anchor Kyra Phillips later reran the tape but cautioned viewers: "We're told that the kid was there at that event, but not necessarily standing behind the president." Accused of misleading his viewers, Letterman called the White House a bunch of liars. (Hey, Dave, we've been doing that for four years. So, don't think you're breaking any new ground here.) And what do you know? CNN did a sudden turnabout, claiming that the Bush propaganda machine never really called them at all. They vaguely attributed the unfounded allegation to news staff error. "This whole thing just smells. Doesn't it smell a little bit?" Letterman remarked on his show after the CNN retreat. Does anyone really believe that the CNN staff ACCIDENTALLY made up a story about the White House calling and telling CNN that the bored boy was spliced in? Come on now. Full Story: Letterman Exposes a CNN Lie CNN's Reliably Narrow Sources Airing weekly for more than a decade, Reliable Sources is hosted by Washington Post media reporter Howard Kurtz. Built around guest interviews, with an average of three or four guests each week, the show also features a weekly commentary by its original anchor, journalist and former Reagan administration spokesperson Bernard Kalb. Covering one year of weekly programs (12/1/2001=11/30/2002) with 203 guests, the FAIR study found Reliable Sources' guestlist strongly favored mainstream media insiders and right-leaning pundits. In addition, female critics were significantly underrepresented, ethnic minority voices were almost non-existent and progressive voices were far outnumbered by their conservative counterparts. Reliable Sources' conservative guests not only appeared more often than their progressive counterparts, they tended to be more staunchly ideological; many are avowed activists and campaigners for the conservative movement, like talkshow host Rush Limbaugh or Jay Nordlinger and Byron York of the National Review. New York Times columnist Frank Rich and internet blogger Joshua Micah Marshall of www.talkingpointsmemo.com were the most frequent left-of-center guests with three spots each. No other left-leaning guest appeared more than once in the year studied. Reliable Sources drew no guests from National Review's progressive counterparts--magazines like In These Times, The Progressive or The Nation. Full Story: 4-16-03 -- CNN's Reliably Narrow Sources 2-10-03 -- Wolf Blitzer for the Defense (Department) 8-15-01 -- New CNN Chief Trying to Please GOP Elite 11-1-01 -- CNN Says Focus on Civilian Casualties Would Be "Perverse"