Opinion: Putting Media Matters For America in perspective…
The Boston Phoenix’s Mark Jurkowitz takes an in depth look at Media Matters For America and David Brock…(via Romenesko)
Given his own history, Brock knows plenty about conservative pressure. But he’s also aware that questions continue to dog him in his new incarnation. Who is the real David Brock, and why should we trust him?
…
“In terms of accuracy, they’re generally pretty good as far as they go,” says Bryan Keefer, assistant manager editor of CJRDaily.org, an online media-monitoring site created by the Columbia Journalism Review. But they are “self-consciously lefty…. They’re really only looking for things where liberals have been treated unfairly or where conservatives have gotten away with things.”
Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Washington, DC–based Project for Excellence in Journalism, says, “I don’t have a lot of patience for any media criticism that is based in ideology. Frankly, [for] reporters who cover the news business, it makes our lives more complicated.”
ICN thinks it is about time someone did a proper in perspective look at Media Matters. They’ve gotten too much of a free pass from the media for too long in as much as nobody has called the spade a spade. Media Matters is about as unbiased as the Media Research Council and Brock is about as credible as Brent Bozell. Both should be soundly dismissed for what they are…partisan hacks.
You said: “Both should be soundly dismissed for what they are…partisan hacks.”
And your not???
Comment by mickh — July 28, 2005 @ 6:41 pm
In as much as I don’t advocate for or against any single network or ideology, no I’m not. I do have opinions and I express them though. If that’s your definition of a “partisan hack” then I happily plead guilty…
Comment by Spud — July 28, 2005 @ 7:16 pm
I saw this same article posted on the cable game and they pretty much agreed with ICN’s take on Media Matters getting a free pass.
Comment by MrTony — July 29, 2005 @ 12:25 pm