Watching the Times

Final "Nightly"

2011-04-28T12:18:00.000-07:00

Another episode of “NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams” finishes out the twelve-week sequence.

BIRTH CERTIFICATE:

Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/ns/nightly_news/#42789377

This story deals with President Obama finally revealing his long-form birth certificate, putting to rest speculation and rumors from the Conservative Right. Anchor Brian Williams opens up by stating that people in Hawaii remember seeing the president’s mother pregnant and recall seeing Obama as a child. Williams mentions the ongoing controversy about Obama not revealing his birth certificate and how Donald Trump, the famous businessman and celebrity, has recently brought the issue back into the spotlight. The report shifts to reporter Savannah Guthrie at the White House. She begins by discussing how the president showed his birth certificate in order to silence the “sideshows and carnival barkers.” Guthrie reports that Obama was displeased that this issue kept creeping into the mainstream. She says that the president felt it unnecessary to dig up this document because he had provided the short-form of his birth certificate during the 2008 campaign and also had newspaper clippings about his birth. Guthrie reiterates that the “birther” debate came back into focus when Trump began to think about a presidential candidacy. At a press conference Wednesday, Trump claimed responsibility for the long-form birth certificate being revealed, Guthrie states. She talks about how Trump repeatedly requested to see the document, but then “ignored” NBC reporters saying they had the birth certificate. The report shifts back to Obama and how he has “grown tired of the issue.” He says that he has no time for this type of “silliness.” The report ends by mentioning that the president appeared on the “Oprah Winfrey Show” Wednesday afternoon.

NBC’s left slant is apparent in this report. Williams starting the story by making undocumented claims about the President’s childhood and slamming Conservatives for bringing up this controversy clearly shows what he, and his parent network, believed all along. Williams and Guthrie both seem to demonize Trump for bringing up the birth certificate as a means of garnering support for his presidential run. They obviously do not see it as an issue that riles people up and is ripe for getting potential votes. Guthrie echoes some of the president’s language by making this issue seem less than it was. Obama certainly wanted to make this matter go away and finally did that today. Guthrie makes amends for the president by saying that he already had the short-form of the document and other documentation. She explains away the question of “Well, why did he wait so long to show the long-form?” by saying that the state of Hawaii would not release the document “even to the president.” A further explanation of why Hawaii was legally not allowed to show this document is necessary. Also, the NBC reporter trying to get Trump’s attention with the long-form certificate is a bit silly and sensationalist. There was no way Trump was going to stop and look at the reporter in that crowd of people. NBC includes that bit just to cast doubt on Trump’s legitimacy and credibility as a presidential candidate.

DEFENSE SHUFFLE:

Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/ns/nightly_news/#42789398

This segment discusses the changes being made in the defense and intelligence sectors of the government. Williams begins by mentioning how there were major shifts of power on Wednesday, the same day when nine people were killed in Afghanistan. Pentagon correspondent Jim Miklaszewski takes over and explains who received new titles and new duties. He states Defense Secretary Robert Gates is retiring and that current CIA director Leon Panetta will be taking his place. The report continues by describing how General David Petraeus, commander of United States forces in Afghanistan, will replace Panetta at the CIA. Miklaszewski then gives detail on Panetta and Petraeus. He says that Panetta, after having no background in intelligence, used his political skill to make a good name for the CIA, even under intense scrutiny from Congress. Panetta also worked on the CIA’s budget, he reports. The report praises Panetta for this and talks about how he will be able to use those skills at the Pentagon, the entity with the biggest budget in Washington, D.C. Petraeus will be going into a civilian job after being at war for ten years, says Miklaszewski, but his skills in counter-intelligence and covert operations will aid him greatly at the CIA. The report drifts to a description of Wednesday’s events in Afghanistan and talks about how the deaths are still under investigation. Miklaszewski ends the story by talking about the troop drawbacks in July, saying that they will be minimal at best.

Miklaszewski does a good job of keeping this report objective. He accurately explains the changes being made. The only reason given for this shake-up is the fact that Gates is retiring. The report glazes over this fact and does not give Gates his credit. Miklaszewski is a bit heavy-handed with his praise of Panetta. He talks about Panetta’s lack of experience in intelligence like it is a good thing, which I feel is somewhat ridiculous. The report makes it seem as if political prowess is more important than knowing the field in which a person will be working. As for Petraeus, the report undermines his military success. Yes, one of the interviewees does mention the fact that Petraeus is one of the highest ranked generals in the military, but the comment that “Petraeus has been at war for 10 years” comes off negatively. Petraeus sounds like a warmonger, not a leader. There is also no discussion of how the president came to these decisions. NBC shines objectively for bringing up how much larger the Pentagon’s budget is compared to the CIA’s. Hopefully Panetta will be able to manage it well. Also, Williams’ introduction is fairly straight.

Objectivity Champion

2011-04-21T08:41:00.000-07:00

In my estimation, “NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams” provides the most objective news broadcast among the major networks. It more or less continues that trend this week.

SECURITY ALERT SYSTEM:

Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/ns/nightly_news/#42690073

This story focuses on the changes being made to the Homeland Security Advisory System and the reasons why changes were implemented. Anchor Brian Williams introduces the current system as one of the “most routinely ignored and misunderstood” policies to date. He then mentions how the system will be discontinued and then passes the report to justice correspondent Pete Williams. Williams begins with footage from late 2001 of former Homeland Security Secretary John Ashcroft announcing the Advisory System. He goes on to discuss how the system’s color coded levels were not heeded by the public and provided fodder for late-night comics. Williams next presents the changes to the system which will take effect in two weeks. Footage of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano describing the new system is shown, along with a graphic explaining the two threat levels. The first level is “Elevated” and will be used when the government has “credible information” about terrorist plots in the United States. The second tier is “Imminent,” which will be used in the event an attack could happen soon. Williams talks about how the new alerts will have more information and be more specific, allowing citizens to know which areas to avoid and how they can help out. The alerts will be more targeted to the certain threats, making sure Americans know to stay away from malls or airports, rather than to have a general sense of “awareness.” Williams reports that these alerts will also expire two weeks after issuance, unless further information is added to them. The Department of Homeland Security will let people know about these alerts in a myriad of ways, by posting to Facebook and Twitter along with traditional media sources. Williams closes by answering a question about whether or not these new alerts will be better understood and heeded by Americans. His response echoes the idea that the targeted broadcasts will let citizens know more, thus reducing panic.

Both Brian and Pete Williams do a great job staying in the middle for this report. This Advisory System has been the target of so many jokes and continuing ridicule in the years since it was first implemented. I am glad to see that there was little mockery of the existing system. Pete Williams makes it clear that a change was needed, yet without skewing the current alerts. When he gets to the facts about the new method, he may be a bit overzealous, though. He makes it sound like this new system will make people safer when going to work or buying groceries and the simple fact is that it will not. The Bush administration had the same idea with the color code, which was not understood by the majority of Americans. Also, in terms of fairness, it would have been nice for Williams to have included an interview with someone who either supported the current system, helped shape it, or worked to fix it, rather than just including an interview with an opponent of the Advisory System. As to Brian Williams’ piece of the story, his word choice may have been a bit strong for some viewers. I feel it is appropriate for this situation. It will be interesting to see how well this new system works and whether or not history remembers it in the same way as the Homeland Security Advisory System.

OIL IN THE GULF: ONE YEAR LATER

Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/ns/nightly_news/#42690285

This feature details the anniversary of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and the ongoing clean-up efforts in the Gulf of Mexico. Williams opens this segment with a note about how the survivors and family members of victims of the oil rig explosion flew over the disaster site to commemorate the event. He mentions how the oil spill is still thought of with a “sense of grief mixed with anger.” The report then shifts to correspondent Anne Thompson in Venice, La. She begins by talking about how BP has filed suit against the makers of the faulty blowout preventer which caused the rig explosion. Thompson then explains that there is still oil in the gulf and Louisiana’s wet lands. Footage of crews cutting marsh shrubs is shown along with commentary about whether or not the efforts are actually worthwhile. Thompson interviews James Peters, a fisherman who reports still seeing “oil sheen” on the water. She highlights Cat Island, where mangroves are dying. The National Wildlife Federation’s David Muth questions if the clean-up efforts are effective without any coastal rehabilitation. The report ends with an aside about the United States government disputing an Associated Press report about 3,200 oil wells in the Gulf of Mexico not having “cement plugs.” The government assures the public that all of those wells have been inspected and are in proper operating condition.

This segment had a bit more slant, but like many other events, it is hard to give good press to one of the parties, namely BP. Thompson focused more on the environmental aspect of the oil spill than anything else, barely touching the human or economic impact. She should have mentioned how the economies of the Gulf States have tried to bounce back after last summer and examined whether or not tourism took as great a hit as was projected. She also depicts the progress in terms of clean-up to be minimal, while in fact, it is quite astounding how much has been done. Thompson does mention that there is no more oil in the gulf, but breezes past this fact, rather than highlighting it for the achievement it is. All of the recovery efforts she looks at have a negative bend: the marsh cutters find oil, the fisherman sees sheen, and Cat Island is in danger of erosion. Yes, the public understands that this was a disaster. Yes, there will be detrimental ecological effects from this spill. Why must Thompson beat this dead horse on the anniversary when she could have produced a more positive message about how BP kept its promises, how the coastal culture came together to help, and what has been done already to stem the ecological impact? Furthermore, there is only one mention of BP in this report. An interview with a spokesperson or executive of BP was in order for an anniversary story. Thompson’s own bias toward environmentalism colored this story in an unnecessary manner.

A Good "Nightly News"

2011-04-14T19:27:00.000-07:00

This week, “NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams” once again provided fair commentary and criticism.

SLEEPING CONTROLLERS

Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/ns/nightly_news/#42598831

This story covers the Wednesday morning incident in Reno, Nev. where a medevac plane had to land itself because the air traffic controller on duty had fallen asleep. Anchor Brian Williams opens up the story with remarks about how and when the event took place, stating that the sick person was in desperate need of medical attention. A sound bite of the pilot’s voice saying that he would just have to land whether or not he had clearance is then played. The report goes next to correspondent Tom Costello. He begins by talking about how the pilot repeatedly radioed the air traffic control tower to no avail. A radar station in California was listening in and called the tower but was unable to rouse the sleeping controller. The pilot then landed on his own and rushed the patient to the hospital. Costello then investigates why the controller was allowed to fall asleep on the job. The reason, he concludes, is that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has been cutting costs by understaffing towers at low volume hours. Ray LaHood, secretary of transportation, is then quoted as saying that these instances are unacceptable. Next Costello provides insight into just how many of these occurrences have happened. He cites episodes of air traffic controllers sleeping on the job, accidentally and willfully, across the country. The report concludes with the proclamation that the FAA will now make it mandatory for there to be at least two people working in the tower at all hours. This change affects a total of 27 airports, even some in major cities.

This report is a bit one-sided. No one is really going to be supporting the sleeping controllers, and the FAA comes out as the bad guy for its wish to reduce costs by cutting employees. Williams may sensationalize the story a bit by making it sound like there were other planes waiting to land and that the pilot had no experience whatsoever in landing. Costello is also a bit guilty of this when he makes note at the end of his segment that the person in the medevac is “now is stable condition.” This was a life-or-death situation though. The FAA is adequately ribbed by this report and the comments about their budget cuts are warranted. The inclusion of LaHood seems to be an almost unnecessary appeal to authority. The report is somewhat bolstered by having his statement but would have been fine without it, too. I appreciate Costello’s use of the other recent sleeping controllers. This graphic really brought the issue into a larger context.

BUDGET BATTLE

Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/ns/nightly_news/#42598831

This feature deals with the United States’ budget and how President Obama plans to reduce the national debt. Williams starts with a chart explaining how much the federal debt has grown since 1980. He reports that the debt is hovering around $14 trillion. Williams segues into correspondent Savannah Guthrie’s report by asking how the president plans to “chip away at spending.” Guthrie leads in by discussing Mr. Obama’s Wednesday press conference on spending. She highlights how he rips the Republican ideas for the budget. Obama does concede that the debt is currently out of control. The president proposed a plan to cut $4 trillion from the national debt in 12 years, Guthrie states. He plans to do so by cutting discretionary, defense, Medicare, and Medicaid funding along with some increased taxes to the highest income brackets. Guthrie then focuses on the Republican retort, showing how congressional leaders do not feel the president is willing to thoroughly execute his plan. The report ends with Guthrie discussing how Vice President Joe Biden will be meeting with Republican leaders to negotiate more on the budget.

This report keeps things fairly balanced. Williams controls himself when discussing the rising debt and how it relates historically. I would have liked to know more about how the debt grew almost one trillion dollars between 2010 and 2011, though. That, however, is probably better suited for another report at another time. Guthrie could have taken this report in a direction that utterly bashed the Republicans’ ideas, but instead goes with a more balanced approach, letting the president make his points and then allowing the Republicans to fire back. This style prevents partisanship and makes for a better newscast. The president’s plan to cut funding and raise taxes was discussed very quickly though. More analysis would have provided a better understanding of what Obama plans to do and why the Republicans are so frustrated. I like how Guthrie points out how Obama invited Congressman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., to attend the event. It was necessary for her to include this detail, and it highlights the antagonism between the parties. This was a quality story on a hot issue.

A Mixed "Evening"

2011-04-06T15:03:00.000-07:00

This week, “CBS Evening News with Katie Couric” has its final shot at winning the objectivity competition.

Link: http://www.cbs.com/cbs_evening_news/video/?pid=kdht2K7aYAHYKBRyHM3QNST_5j18qKig&vs=Full%20Episodes&play=true

SOUTHWEST AIRLINES:

This story deals with the recent incident in which a tear in the metal of a Boeing 737 opened up during a Southwest Airlines flight and the reactions by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Boeing, and Southwest. Anchor Katie Couric begins this report by reminding the viewer of the events of Southwest flight 812. She speaks of how the FAA will be conducting more stringent checks on 737s. Southwest is currently inspecting its fleet of 737s and has found cracks in three other planes, while “57 of the 79 grounded have passed inspection.” Reporter Don Teague then takes over the report. Teague begins his portion by giving a harrowing account of the tear in the fuselage of Flight 812. He speaks of how the passengers heard what sounded like a “gunshot” and then had to make use of the plane’s oxygen masks. Teague makes note of how the pilots had to dive from 36,000 feet to a more steady elevation of 11,000 feet in a matter of four minutes and thirty seconds. The altitude caused two people to faint. Teague then speaks of why the flight may have experienced this tear. He talks about “metal fatigue” in the lap joints of planes with more than 30,000 takeoffs and landings. The fatigue is caused by the constant changes in air pressure. Teague closes his report by mentioning past Southwest plane failures and commenting on how Boeing and Southwest will continue testing to avoid further problems.

Couric and Teague keep this report fairly objective. Nowhere do they place blame or even speculate as to why this event happened, beyond the scientific explanation. This stance is a welcome change to the usually polarizing placements of culpability. Couric points out that the FAA mandated the inspections and that Southwest and Boeing have been more than willing to comply. It is good to see that the structure in place is working. Teague reports mainly straight facts, with very little opinion or any coloring. He does include some sound bites from experts and transportation officials on why the hole was formed and also interviews one of the passengers, but beyond those doses of outside influence, Teague provides a crystal clear description of why the incident happened and how the pilots reacted. My only criticism would be that the main focus is on Southwest, yet Boeing is the company that made the plane. I feel that they should be receiving equal scrutiny. However, Southwest grounding flights makes for a better story.

GUANTANAMO TRIALS:

This report is about how the Obama administration has changed its mind on where 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other detainees will be tried. Couric begins the story by saying that “a lot of people thought it was a bad idea” to hold trials of the five terrorists in New York City. She mentions how security could have cost over one billion dollars. Couric sends the report off to justice correspondent Bob Orr with the statement that the Obama administration has decided to hold the court proceedings in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, with a military tribunal. Orr starts by saying that Attorney General Eric Holder is the person most displeased by this decision. A sound bite of Holder expressing his discontent follows. Orr then mentions how Congress, “bowing to public pressure,” barred transfer of the prisoners to the United States. The impact this decision has on families of 9/11 victims is then mentioned. Next, Orr focuses on how Mohammed has been treated while at Guantanamo Bay. A graphic of waterboarding is shown along with statistics about how many times Mohammed went through this process. The report ends with Orr mentioning how Mohammed has expressed a desire for the death penalty in the past. No word on whether or not the tribunal will seek the death penalty has been given.

There is a striking amount of bias in this report. First, the comment about a “lot of people” thinking the location of the trials to be a bad idea somewhat underplays the drama that took place when Holder announced the plans to try Mohammed in New York. This statement seems to be CBS wishing to sweep that unsavory tidbit under the rug in order to push out a more favorable look for the Obama administration. Second, the graphic about waterboarding is totally irrelevant to the story. This report deals with a trial of confessed terrorists, not with the legitimacy of torture as an interrogation technique or even the question of whether or not waterboarding is torture. That segment is meant to distract from the White House’s policy switch and stir emotions which are not connected to the matter at hand. On the good side of things, Orr does mention why Mohammed wants to be put to death: in order to be a martyr for Al Qaeda. Hopefully, the tribunal realizes this and will give appropriate punishment. I found balance in the report when Orr includes the fact that this reversal almost cements the continuation of operations at Guantanamo Bay, further hindering (or negating) President Obama’s promise to close down the detention facility.

A "World"'s Worth of Quality Stories

2011-04-01T06:51:00.000-07:00

We now begin the final lap of the networks. “ABC World News with Diane Sawyer” has its last chance to prove it is the most objective of the three.

Link: http://abcnews.go.com/watch/world-news-with-diane-sawyer/SH5585921/VD55120098/world-news-330-us-unprepared-for-earthquake

EARTHQUAKE PREPAREDNESS?:

This story deals with how the United States is gravely unprepared to deal with a major earthquake of the same magnitude as Japan’s recent quake. Anchor Diane Sawyer begins the piece by saying that the United States is not ready for a catastrophic earthquake. This rhetoric is continued throughout the rest of the feature. Sawyer then hands off the report to Steve Osunsami, on location in Memphis, Tenn. Osunsami talks about how Memphis is situated on the New Madrid Fault, one of the most volatile fault lines in the country. He also says that the New Madrid line is due for a big quake, as the last big tremor from it was in the late nineteenth century. The report is supplemented with quotes from various experts and professors, all saying that the middle of the United States would be the worst place for an earthquake to hit and yet the easiest place for it to do major damage. Gary Patterson from the Center of Earthquake Research talks about how the earth is flatter in the middle of America, allowing the shockwaves to travel faster and for longer periods of time. This type of geological feature is contrasted against the earth in California where the ground is fragmented and does not transmit waves as well. Osunsami talks about how Memphis would suffer massive damage in both economic and human terms, as many of the buildings there were not built in a time of strict building codes which protect against earthquakes. Osunsami ends the report by saying that preparedness is key and that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will be conducting drills across the country in the coming weeks.

This report does a good job of keeping things balanced, but really, who likes earthquakes? In a way, this may be a bit of fear mongering on the part of ABC. Along with the radiation scare from Japan, does the public really need to be worrying about when the New Madrid Fault is going to rupture? Contrarily, ABC does provide good information, especially the bits about how FEMA will be conducting drills and generally raising awareness of this often overthought natural problem. Osunsami is a bit overzealous when he talks of how the New Madrid Fault’s next quake is “not a matter of if, but when.” His tone is just a tad too dramatic for an evening broadcast. He can leave the drama to the History Channel’s “How the World Will End!” specials. Overall, ABC conducts good research and provides solid facts on this issue.

LIBYA REBELS:

This feature dealt with America’s involvement in Libya and compared the current conflict with the Soviet-Afghan war. Sawyer begins by giving an update on the current movements of the rebels and pro-Gaddafi forces and then sends the report to senior White House correspondent Jake Tapper. Tapper takes over and describes the “new step” the United States is taking in the Middle East. He reports of a “secret Presidential finding” concerning “covert aid” being sent to the rebels within Libya. While this finding does not directly arm the rebels, it does pave the way for such action. Tapper then recalls the actions of the late Rep. Charlie Wilson, D-Texas. He recounts how in the 1980s America armed Afghan rebels in order to fight off the Soviets. Those rebels later became the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. Tapper then segued into an analysis of how much the administration knows about the rebels. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is quoted as saying that there is less information available than would be preferred. Tapper then reveals that a study conducted by West Point indicated 19 percent of all foreign fighters in Iraq have come from Libya. Tapper concludes by highlighting how the coming days could have many unintended consequences. The report ends with a note that President Obama has not yet approved arming of Libyan rebels.

To be honest, I liked this report. Tapper does a job of explaining what the administration is doing currently, while contrasting that against how little information is known about the people America is helping. The White House and ABC have finally admitted that this ambiguity within the Libyan rebels is troubling. This admission is long overdue. Granted, Tapper is a bit vague in his description of the “Secret Presidential Finding,” but it is secret, after all. My question with that is, “Where’s the transparency, Mr. President?” However, Tapper fantastically draws comparisons between this conflict and the Soviet-Afghan war. This is a fair criticism of, and warning to, the administration, without being biased. Tapper is sure to not condemn the administration but instead shows the history available. He provides a solid, smart report that is both objective and entertaining. I praise ABC for this excellent story.

Another "Nightly News"

2011-03-24T11:50:00.000-07:00

This week I return to “NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams.”

DOWNED FIGHTER JET IN LIBYA:

Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/ns/nightly_news/#42220498

This story focuses on a downed United States fighter jet in Libya and the local reaction. Anchor Brian Williams begins this section dryly by talking about how none of the bombing runs have killed Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi. Gaddafi is quoted as saying that he will be ultimately victorious. Williams also makes clear that the no-fly zone and bombing raids are currently being led by the United States. Williams then sends the report off to Jim Miklaszewksi, NBC’s Pentagon correspondent.

Miklaszewski gives a brief description of the mechanical failure that caused the crash. He speaks of how both pilots ejected, and how one pilot was found near the wreckage shortly after the incident. The other pilot, however, was taken in by the “rebels” and welcomed kindly. Miklaszewski makes note that the jet did drop a few bombs and fire bullets on its way downward, injuring some civilians. He also mentions how the civilians who were injured were not mad at the Americans. The report then shifts focus to the large statecraft issues. Miklaszewski talks about a meeting between Russian officials and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. The Russians “lectured Gates” on the apparent killing of civilians by Americans. Gates retorts that Gaddafi is the one killing civilians. The report ends with a note about wanting to meet a deadline for ending United States bombing action. At that point America would provide surveillance and support. No date was given.

The objectivity here is murky, and the wording overall is vague. Williams’ share of the piece is straight and to the point, as an anchor’s portion should be. Miklaszewski’s part is marred by his own feelings though. It is unnecessary for him to mention that the person who is injured by a stray bullet is not angry at the American pilot. He is clearly trying to rile up feelings of dissent similar to those caused by the bombings of Baghdad in the current war in Iraq. This is unprofessional and slanted. Also, the language is unclear. As I have previously mentioned, the media needs to clarify who are the “rebels/opposition.” Also, seeing as the uprising is civilian based, is it even possible to say there are “civilian casualties”? It makes more sense to just say “rebel casualties” or even “friendly fire”! NBC fails at clarifying who was hurt in these exchanges. Instead, the network only casts a negative light on the American troops by saying they have caused civilian casualties.

JAPAN RADIATION AND SHELTERS:

Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/ns/nightly_news/#42220638

This feature discusses the current radiation threat to Japan and the services being provided to the citizens. Williams begins by almost enthusiastically saying that radiation detectors within the United States have picked up trace elements of radiation from Japan’s broken reactors. He mentions that there is no threat at the moment in the United States. Williams then shows some statistics about the effects of radiation in Japan. Science correspondent Robert Bazell then takes over on location in Japan. He is broadcast from the Saitama Super Arena. This former sporting venue has been converted into a refugee and distribution center for victims of the earthquake, tsunami, and radiation. He reports that around 2,300 people are currently residing in the arena. Local organizations and individuals are bringing donations to help the people with everyday necessities. Bazell interviews a woman whose husband works at the Fukushima nuclear plant. She is worried for, yet proud of him. The report is then sent back to Williams. He ends the story by saying that the FDA has stopped all shipments of produce and food from the affected region of Japan.

This story highlights the fact that the international community is not doing enough for Japan. In Bazell’s report, there is not one mention of international aid. The supplies given to the refugees come from their countrymen. When comparing this disaster to the earthquake in Haiti last year, almost every story mentioned the face that international entities were helping provide from the affected peoples. Japan is being left to help itself because it can help itself. This is wrong. If the international community will help people who have no way to recover, then it must send aid to a country that can get itself back on its feet and begin being a productive, necessary power.

The media seems to be too focused on the nuclear issue. Yes, this is a problem, and people like to hear it because they do not understand it. However, even the Japanese government has been criticized for paying too much attention to the Fukushima reactors than to the thousands of people impacted by the tsunami. For Williams to talk about how America is showing trace elements of radiation is ridiculous. Information like that is not helpful and only causes unrest. One redeeming factor of this report is the interviews with the people in the refugee center. For a woman to be proud of her husband to risk his life is laudable in itself. This sentiment is shared by the general Japanese public, too. Those citizens are truly amazing, and it was nice to see NBC highlighting them.

Un-"Evening News"

2011-03-11T10:27:00.000-08:00

This week, I tuned back in to the “CBS Evening News with Katie Couric.” While her wardrobe was questionable, the lack of objectivity was undeniable.

Link to the episode: http://www.cbs.com/cbs_evening_news/video/?pid=glIWhJKGkZmrpRl7OEJck0XbcIRlStFX&vs=Full%20Episodes&play=true

MUSLIMS IN AMERICA:

This segment covered Thursday’s Congressional hearings on the potential radicalization of America’s Muslim population. Anchor Katie Couric opened up the package with a generalized statement about how Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., called this hearing to discuss recent terror plots and how they relate to the United States’ Islamic faithful. Reporter Nancy Cordes then took over, reporting that some Democrats said King was “demonizing an entire religion” with these hearings. Cordes also stated that King ignored calls for the hearings to be canceled. She then described the room in which the meeting was held, making note of the new “fiery imagery from 9/11.” The witnesses are depicted as people who all share King’s exact view on the subject of American Muslim extremism. Cordes said that Democrats were calling this hearing a blatant abuse of power. King felt it justified due to the increased number of domestic terror plots from radical Islam. Cordes ended her report by saying that King thought this to be his “happiest day.”

This report made King look like a monster who had no knowledge of the first amendment and who wanted to see Muslims expelled from the country. The mention of how the room had imagery from 9/11 was totally irrelevant to the report, but only served to slam those people who feel it appropriate to use images to remember that horrible day. However, I will grant Cordes the fact that having pictures of a terrorist attack in a room for hearings on homeland security is somewhat crafty rhetoric. Furthermore, Cordes just kept making King seem like he was the only one who wanted these hearings. Other Republicans were there, as were Democrats. As to the Democrats, if they really had a problem, why did they not actually do something rather than just sit and moan like Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas? Cordes also attacks the witnesses. This just is not right. Some of those men have lost family members to Islamic jihad. They should be looked upon with sympathy, not spite. This report was typical CBS attacking Republicans.

WISCONSIN LABOR WOES:

This story dealt with how the Wisconsin state government used interesting tactics in order to pass labor reform and how protestors are vehemently opposed to said changes. Couric began this section by discussing how budget battles were being waged across the nation. She then sent it off to correspondent Cynthia Bowers in Madison, Wis. Bowers started her report with images of the police and protestors struggling against each other. She also mentioned that even some members of the state senate were barred entry by the police. Bowers then explained the tactics used by the Republicans to pass this bill. They realized that the bill would be unable to pass as written with the language of budgets. The 14 democrats who fled the state would have to be present for that vote to take place. Instead, the Republicans changed the wording to be about labor rights and benefits. Bowers spoke of how the remaining Democrats could only fight against their eventual defeat. The bill passed. The reported ended with a threat from Democrats that they would challenge the legality of the bill, questioning the methods by which it was passed.

Bowers does a good job of keeping things even here. She does somewhat criticize the Republicans for trying to get their bill passed by any means necessary, but that is their job. The Democrats obviously did not see the Republicans using the gambit of changing the bill’s language. I find it interesting that Bowers mentions the clashes between the protestors and police. Interestingly, police have a union and will probably be impacted just as much by this legislation. Frankly, this issue is being blown out of proportion. Only 11.9 percent of workers are actually part of a union*. The issue of union rights has hit the national stage, but for what reason? Is the government forgetting the benefit of the whole in order to secure the benefits of a little over a tenth of the working population? Once again, the media has conflagrated an issue that would have otherwise stayed in a state government into a full-blown national problem.

*http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm <--Bureau of Labor Statistics Report of Unions

Second Time Round the "World News"

2011-03-04T13:52:00.000-08:00

This week, I return to ABC’s “World News with Diane Sawyer.” I think I will repeat the cycle of the networks and at the end of the 12 weeks give my verdict on which one is the most objective.

View the episode here: http://abcnews.go.com/watch/world-news-with-diane-sawyer/SH5585921/VD55116285/world-news-303-bill-gates-tells-america-to-take-lead-on-education

BILL GATES AND EDUCATION:

The top story for this broadcast was about how Bill Gates, the chairman of Microsoft, wants to dramatically change the way education is done in the United States. Anchor Diane Sawyer began the package by describing how federal spending on education has been mishandled and is detrimental to students, teachers and schools. Reporter Ron Claiborne then took over and discussed how Gates and his foundation are inserting themselves into a “very political issue.” Claiborne spoke of how the “generally soft-spoken” Gates has “radical ideas and sharp criticism” for the current education system. A rundown of Gates’ current initiatives and future ideas followed. Currently Gates is conducting research on how good teachers teach by using video recordings. Claiborne pointed out that this research is taking place in mainly urban education districts, like Memphis, Tenn. Gates questioned how salaries are being paid, especially when it comes to teacher seniority and teachers with advanced degrees. He found that teachers that have been at a school longer or have an advanced degree rarely show better results from their students. Highlighting the other side of the issue, Claiborne featured a quote from President of the National Education Association, Dennis von Roekel. Von Roekel disagreed with Gates, saying that higher degrees make a distinct difference in teaching ability. Claiborne speaks of Gates’ most interesting proposition: that better teachers should take on more students and that the smaller class-size model may not work. Gates feels that a better teacher taking on “five or six more students” would allow more students to achieve.

Honestly, I am predisposed to agree with anything Bill Gates says because he is an icon of mine. However, ABC does a good job of not taking all of Gates’ arguments at face value. While never demeaning or bashing Gates, ABC is able to put his ideas into the public forum in an unbiased way. The addition of the quote from Von Roekel made the piece much more balanced. Gates does have some “radical” ideas about how education should be done, but it may be good for the education community to hear them. I am curious, however, why Claiborne felt it necessary to mention that Memphis, Tenn., was one of the areas being monitored by Gates. The piece would have been fine without this addition and could have stood without the clarification of a city. Perhaps Claiborne thought he should at least focus the audience’s perception of “urban.” All in all, this is a good report.

CRISIS IN LIBYA:

The problems in Libya rage on, and ABC was there to cover the conflict. This story covered the president’s recent actions, the rebel defensive against the Libyan air force and the feasibility of a no-fly zone. Sawyer began this package by discussing how President Obama has called for Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi to step down from power. Interestingly, both Obama and Sawyer use Gaddafi’s military title when referring to him. This may be a formality on their part, or possibly an attempt at objectivity. Sawyer mentioned that Obama left the option of a no-fly zone open in his speech Wednesday.

Sawyer then sent the package over to Tripoli, Libya, where correspondent Lama Hasan provided updates on the Libyan rebels. Hasan discussed how the people of Libya want a no-fly zone established in order to protect them from Gaddafi’s fighter jets. Hasan mentions the oil-rich town of Brega, where Gaddafi’s fighters had struck hard. The rebels managed to ward them off and avoided more casualties. Hasan questioned whether or not the rebels “have the firepower” needed to continue the fighting.

Before going on to the second part of this segment, I want to critique Hasan’s report. Firstly, in ethical terms, is firepower what is necessary to win this struggle? Should there be more talks going on within the Libyan government and country about how to resolve this issue before any other country gets involved. Also, the people need to realize that fighting back could possibly make things harder for them down the line and that the small gains will be worth nothing, should Gaddafi regain control. Journalistically, Hasan needs to clarify who is who. She starts off the segment by saying, “The opposition here is in favor of a no-fly zone.” This statement clearly indicates that “opposition” is the people who are fighting for freedom from Gaddafi. Later in the piece, when describing the conflict at Brega, Hasan reports, “Brega is a powerful oil-town that has fallen under the control of the opposition.” Now who is the opposition? The use of “fallen under” leads this viewer to think that the Libyan government has seized Brega, as the government and Gadaffi supporters are generally considered the “bad guys.” Based on her previous statement, the opposition is the team the audience should be cheering for, though. Hasan never clarifies whether or not Brega fell to the government or the people. Hasan needs to realize that she misused terms and confused her audience. Also, as I discussed in my last post, the media seems to be spurring on this and other conflicts in the Middle East by highlighting the need for more “firepower” and by showing the general violence that encapsulates the region. ABC may want to choose its words a bit more carefully when reporting this event.

Getting back to the story, Sawyer then sends it off to Martha Raddatz, the ABC Pentagon reporter. Raddatz reported that for the United States to help with a no-fly zone, it would require 24 fighter jets, an aircraft carrier, a tanker, and a radar-equipped plane called an “ARACS.” Raddatz also expressed doubt at how much money the proposed operation would cost. She reported that in order for an internationally-aided no-fly zone to be put into effect, the United Nations would have to agree to it, or NATO would have to be on-board. Raddatz expressed more concern for the project by saying that the United States had neither of these two approvals at the current time. In addition, she raises the question of whether or not the no-fly zone is a good idea for America.

Raddatz was clearly not objective. She did not necessarily consider the pros and cons of the no-fly zone from Libyan and American perspectives. Yes, for the United States this would cost a ton of money and only further the perception that American is the world’s policeman. For Libya, the no-fly zone would only help the people. Raddatz does, however, do a good job of presenting these stumbling blocks in the way of getting the no-fly zone up and running. These hard facts are good for the media to deal with and the American public to hear.

K"Nightly News": Objectivity on NBC?

2011-02-24T12:40:00.000-08:00

This week we turn our attention to NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams. On the whole, this program does a good job keeping objective, but I find fault in some areas.

REBELLION IN LIBYA:

Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/ns/nightly_news/#41725259

This story focuses on the current rebellion in Libya, President Muammar Gaddafi and the military’s reaction to the chaos. Anchor Brian Williams begins the piece by describing how Libya has fallen into a state of civil war. He then details a speech given by Gaddafi on Tuesday. Williams says that the speech, “sounded as bizarre as it looked,” referring to the bombed out residence at which the address took place. Before sending the report over to Richard Engel, Williams pointed out that the situation is “violently slipping away” from Gaddafi.

As far as Williams’ part goes, it seems as if he is playing into the mystique of Gaddafi, a leader known to be a bit bombastic. The media likes to dismiss him, but now may be the time to listen to what the leader is saying, as his words can drastically and quickly alter the lives of the Libyan people. Williams does a good job of making the situation in Libya seem dire. This is not the revolution that happened in Egypt, nor should it be treated as such. Whereas Egypt’s protests were peaceful (for the most part), Libya is bleeding. NBC makes this clear.

The danger of the revolt is solidified by Richard Engel’s report via video-phone. Engel starts by reiterating the idea that Gaddafi’s control of the country is “tenuous.” Reporting from eastern Libya, Engel details his journey from the Egyptian border to Tobruk, Libya. He describes how no one, not even the military, is supporting Gaddafi. Engel visits a military barracks and watches the soldiers distribute heavy weaponry to the citizens. The army refuses to “fire on their brothers and sisters,” and believes that they are one with the citizenry. Engel also speaks of how there is an idea that Gaddafi has brought in foreign mercenaries to commit atrocities on the citizens. He is quick to note that these claims are unproven. Engel ends his report by noting that 30 percent of all Libya is rebelling and not following Gaddafi now.

Engel provides a good look at the situation in eastern Libya. His use of video interspersed in the package punctuates the point about the military and the citizens fighting together. It was quite scary, actually, to see the military just handing out grenade launchers. If that is how they plan to win freedom, it will be a long road. Engel also is smart to point out that this is no Egypt. The people are militant. However, it is clear, once again, that NBC is siding with the citizens. Whether this is because a rebelling nation makes a good story or whether NBC has a vested interest in whether or not the rebellion succeeds cannot be known. There is that bias, though.

MUTINY IN MADISON:
Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/ns/nightly_news/#41725391

This feature is about the proposed legislation in Wisconsin to cut union benefits and the effect it is having within the state and across the nation. Williams opens the package by stating that the legislation will “strip workers of their collective bargaining rights.” This seems like too harsh of language for the opening line of a news story. He could have worded it better, as to not stir the fires of controversy so early in the piece.

The report then goes to correspondent Mike Taibbi. He describes the scene at the state senate where once again no vote was made on the bill. The sponsor of the act is Governor Scott Walker, R-Wis. Walker appeared on MSNBC earlier this week and stated that “Wisconsin is broke.” Tiabbi shows video of hundreds of protestors within the state capitol, chanting and demanding their benefits stay intact. He also discusses other protests around the country. Tiabbi talks about how the idea to cut union benefits is a common one and is being considered by many states. These other states’ senators have used the same tactic employed in Wisconsin: they leave the capitol in order not to vote and extend debate. The report ends with Tiabbi citing Walker as saying that if the legislation does not go through, layoffs will happen next week.

I take issue with the fact that NBC never considers the benefit of making the union cuts. Walker says that the cuts are needed in order to bring Wisconsin out from under a financial rock, but his comments are taken out of context. NBC makes Walker look like a bad man for wanting to take away benefits for some in order to help the whole. The objectivity of the network declines by doing this. As far as good things, Tiabbi’s use of the video of the protestors is stunning. There were tons of people in the capitol. That video serves as a stirring image of American democracy.

Even-keeled "Evening News"

2011-02-17T13:05:00.000-08:00

Keeping with the networks, this week I viewed the “CBS Evening News with Katie Couric.” Here is the link: http://www.cbs.com/cbs_evening_news/video/?pid=eejQN0qzmiPJSAe9Kd1Yqy5YT2pjzqAk&vs=Full%20Episodes&play=true

Here are my thoughts:

PRESIDENT OBAMA'S S BUDGET:

This feature dealt with President Obama’s speech on the 2011 budget and the deficit, along with other comments made at Tuesday’s news conference. The story began with anchor Katie Couric reading off poll results which show over half of the American public believing the recession to be ongoing. Other polls revealed that Americans think fixing the deficit will require taking money out of their pockets. A final poll acknowledged the feeling that people earning six-figure incomes will be taxed more. Couric also reported Obama’s current approval rating, which stands at 48 percent. Correspondent Chip Reid then began speaking of how the president feels that his budget cuts are needed, but not too drastic. This was compared to Republican sentiment that more reductions are needed. Reid reported that Obama wants to make meaningful reductions which will not endanger the economic recovery. Once again, this was contrasted against Sen. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., talking about his view of the 2011 budget. Reid was swift to note that the Republicans as a whole have not responded to the budget. The story concluded with a quote from Obama detailing how America dealt with Egypt correctly. This opinion was seemingly mirrored by CBS, as poll results showing 50 percent of Americans agree with the actions of the United States during the crisis.

On the whole, this was an objective report. There was no unnecessary lauding of the president for revealing his budget, nor was there any unwarranted commentary on the Republican response. Reid did a good job creating a balanced package which brought in both sides.

WOES OF THE ITALIAN PRIME MINISTER:

This story focused on Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi’s recent corruption charges revolving an underage prostitute. Couric opened the package by giving an brief overview of Berlusconi’s past dealings with the law and calling him a “Teflon politician.” Reporter Mark Phillips provided detail to the story by giving some background on the underage girl in question. He reports that she is Karima El Mahroug, known professionally as “Ruby Heartstealer.” This Moroccan-born girl was in Italy to attend one of the prime minister’s all night "bunga bunga" parties. A record of the prime minister’s past corruption charges was provided for reference and context. Phillips then brought up the current charges against Berlusconi: abuse of power and “paying for sex with an underage prostitute.” Integral to this story is the fact that Berlusconi gave $8,000 to Heartstealer. Whether this was a gift or payment is what is in question. The story ended with Phillips saying that time will tell whether or not Berlusconi escapes prosecution, as he will be tried by “three female judges” in April.

CBS was not objective here. They portrayed Berlusconi as a man of poor judgment who went around having sex indiscriminately. CBS also cast doubt on the prime minister’s credibility by making his arguments seem weak. Rather than use a translator, Phillips summarized Berlusconi’s statement about the charges, thus making Burlusconi's defense sound bad. In doing so, Phillips added his own inflections and opinions into the prime minister’s words. Also, CBS showed a women’s group protesting against Berlusconi, but did not mention any efforts to refine or support the prime minister’s image.

Viewing the "World News"

2011-02-10T15:01:00.000-08:00

Shifting away from the cable news networks, this week I critique ABC’s "World News with Diane Sawyer." Watch the episode here: http://abcnews.go.com/watch/world-news-with-diane-sawyer/SH5585921/VD55110565/world-news-208-runaway-toyotas-no-flaws-in-electronic-system

TOYOTA:

The top story from the broadcast I viewed focused on the Toyota auto-acceleration debacle which scared drivers last year. The report began with an overview of the issue, detailing the accidents and injuries caused by accelerating Toyota vehicles. It was then revealed that the “mystery” behind the acceleration had been solved. Citing a ten month survey of nine Toyota cars, Transportation Secretary Raymond LaHood declared that there was no electronic cause for the malfunctions. Instead, the survey revealed that the involuntary acceleration was caused by floor mats which pinned down the accelerator and “sticky pedals.” Both anchor Diane Sawyer and reporter Brian Ross made a big deal out of the fact that NASA scientists were asked to help with this survey. While it is interesting that NASA did aid in the investigation, Toyota had already figured out that floor mats were causing the trouble and recalled millions of cars to fix this problem. Sawyer and Ross’s awe for the NASA engineers discounted Toyota’s initial findings and subsequent actions. As to the “sticky pedals,” Toyota has already been fined heavily by the federal government for not revealing this danger sooner. Ross mentioned how Toyota may be facing more lawsuits about the “sticky pedal” issue beyond the federal fines. By highlighting how badly the company was fined and how it may be sued in the future casts Toyota in a bad light. This is a good story for the Japanese automaker, yet ABC portrays the company unnecessarily negatively. On the whole, the story sticks to the facts and reports the new findings in an objective manner. The remainder of the piece is tainted, probably due to the negative reporting which took place over the past year. Old habits die hard.

EGYPT:

Egypt continues to be in a state of upheaval. After being told to stop protesting and go back to work, the demonstrators have “caught their second wind.” This was another day of Egyptian revolt in the saga which has gripped the world. Thousands of protestors filled Liberation Square to express their sentiments about the government under President Hosni Mubarak. Nevertheless, the positive slant toward the protestors remained in this report by ABC News correspondent Terry Moran. Moran said that Mubarak “staged” another press conference and that the people are the “real power.” Frankly, the real power lies with whomever the military sides, but this point was overlooked. Moran constantly depicted the revolutionaries as great people who only want to escape an evil regime. He also focused on Wael Ghonim, a Google executive who had organized many of the protests. The story featured Ghonim’s release from detainment and the Egyptian people’s reaction to his return. ABC did not stay objective here. Yes, everyone loves to have clear-cut good guys and bad guys, but to choose for the public which side to agree with is bordering on unethical journalism. Also, using words like “staged” to describe Mubarak’s actions portrays him as a dictator who wants to hide from the spotlight.

I was happy that ABC covered the economic aspect of this uprising. Since the protests began on Jan. 25, 2011, tourism has shut down. The pyramids at Giza are under military guard, and no tourists may enter the area. Egypt’s economy depends on the tourism industry. Only time will tell how long the economy can survive with its workers on strike and no tourists pumping money into the country. The economic consequences are not well covered elsewhere, so kudos to ABC for finding this story beneath the larger Egyptian issue and for staying objective in this section.

Going "On the Record"

2011-02-03T14:55:00.000-08:00

Greetings. This week I look at the Fox News Channel program “On the Record with Greta Van Susteren.” I have included any video of the program which was available online.

EGYPT:

Miss Van Susteren began her program with a story about the situation in Egypt. Recent student riots calling for the overthrow of current President Hosni Mubarak have thrown the Middle Eastern country into political chaos. The show started with a phone interview of Fox News reporter Dominic Di-Natale and live video of the ongoing protests in Cairo, Egypt’s capital. Beginning in this manner allowed the viewer to instantly be immersed in the story. As to the nature of the reporting, Di-Natale seemed to follow the recently espoused view of the American government: that the students are correct and President Mubarak should leave office. Di-Natale characterized the pro-government supporters as militaristic, aggressive, and focused only on how they were harming the students. Not once did he or Van Susteren mention the plight of the pro-Mubarak demonstrators. Also, the anti-government group was depicted as the “good guys.” Here, Fox News fell from its goal to be “fair and balanced.” Even if President Obama sympathizes with the students, the media should cover the viewpoint of the pro-Mubarak demonstrators. Doing so would make the newscast more objective.

INTERVIEWS ON EGYPT:

Van Susteren’s program continued with the Egypt story by speaking with John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, and Mike Huckabee, former governor of Arkansas. The interview with Bolton centered on how the Egyptian military should react and how the United States should play a part, while Huckabee’s interview was focused on what the situation in Egypt means for Israel. I always like hearing from John Bolton, as he provides keen insight that is usually free of bias. Bolton continued to be neutral as he pondered whether or not the Egyptian military will side with President Mubarak or the students. As far as U. S. foreign policy goes, Bolton felt that President Obama should not have said as much as he did. While it was good to break America’s silence on the Egyptian issue, Bolton thinks siding with the students could put the United States in a tough position with its other allies in the region. Bolton’s sentiments were shared by Huckabee, who had met with Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu early on Wednesday. It was good to see the Israeli component of the story covered, yet “On the Record” paid more attention to how President Obama may have made a mistake in his remarks. This angle would probably not have been covered with such fervor on other networks. Huckabee mentioned how Israeli leaders are worried that the United States may treat their country in the same way as Egypt, another ally of America. Huckabee let some of his own feelings about the Egyptian situation seep into his reporting, as he inflated the potential spread of revolt throughout the Middle East. On the whole though, Bolton and Huckabee did a fine job addressing key points of the greater Egyptian revolt. Van Susteren maintained a fairly neutral attitude for the duration of the Egypt story. Her demeanor was a good counter to those of Di-Natale and Huckabee. I enjoyed hearing how the American response could affect the situation. One piece of the story that was not covered was the economic aspect, but I am sure “On the Record” and Fox have examined that angle elsewhere.

Ambassador Bolton interview: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-the-record/index.html#/v/4522416/deadly-day-in-cairo/?playlist_id=86925

HEALTH CARE REPEAL:

Another key story of “On the Record” was on the progress of the potential repeal of the health care bill passed last year. The Senate voted Wednesday along party lines, failing a proposed repeal movement. Van Susteren spoke with Senator John Thune, R-S.D., about the push for repeal and the vote. Much of their conversation was about how there would have been no drive to repeal had the members of Congress and the President read the bill before passing it. While making sense, statements such as these are considered to be more right-wing or conservative. This Republican slant dominated the interview. Van Susteren many times made allowances for the Republicans, saying that they cannot be blamed for wanting to repeal the health care bill. Both Thune and Van Susteren expressed the idea that Democrats wanted to force the bill through Congress without much thought just so they could have something to say they did. Fox News once again did not remain “fair and balanced,” as no Democratic senator was interviewed about the decision. On the bright side, Van Susteren and Thune spoke of how the American public wants reform in the health care system. Mentioning this generalized sentiment showed a glimmer of bi-partisanship and goodwill for the benefit of all U.S. citizens. Also, the matter of the individual mandate’s constitutionality was discussed. The individual mandate is one of the main arguments for why the health care bill is unconstitutional, so it was helpful for “On the Record” to provide evidence as to why judges across the country are finding fault with the bill. This allows the viewer to go do his/her own research into whether or not the bill should remain a law.

-Zach Brown

Beginnings

2011-01-26T12:37:00.000-08:00

We venture into a new realm of serious criticism of the media. I will try to keep snarky comments at stickmenwithmartinis.com. I will update as to which source will be brutally criticized later this week.

With the name of this blog, might as well be NYT...

-Zach Brown