Few other issues seem to whip media conservatives into a frenzy of misinformation and half-baked conspiracy theories like the decennial count of Americans.

You see, for the world of "conservative journalism," the census is a manifestation of everything they fear. Put yourself in their shoes: Obama's administration is hell-bent on imposing a socialist-fascist-communist-totalitarian-Marxist police state, and now he's sending us all mail! Even worse, Obama's thugs may show up at your door to get a more accurate count.

Why wait for the third installment of the Twilight franchise when you've got these scary bloodsuckers wanting to ... gulp ... count you?

To hear Beck tell it, the Census is just part of the "modern day slave state." Hardly surprising for a man who has called President Obama a "racist" with a "deep-seated hatred for white people" and claimed Obama's policies in general are driven by little more than "reparations" and a desire to "settle old racial scores."

For government-haters like Beck, attacks such as these are as calculated as they are mean-spirited. Why would he want his audience to think highly of the once-a-decade count if it has a direct result in determining just how federal money for schools, hospitals, job training centers, senior centers, emergency services and a host of public works projects are allocated? He doesn't believe the federal government should be involved in these programs in the first place.

Bemoaning the purported ills of the Census is just one more way Beck advances his mantra that all things government, especially Obama-government, are evil.

When the Commerce Department announced this month that the Census Bureau would "develop a Supplemental Poverty Measure that will use the best new data and methodologies to obtain an improved understanding of the economic well-being of American families and of how federal policies affect those living in poverty," Beck claimed the new measure would put him "on the poverty scale" since it would "compare" him to his wealthier neighbors.

Get that? To Beck, who has made as much as $23 million a year according to some reports, poverty and the government's attempts to assist the poor are deserving of mockery. It's all part of his larger goal of souring his audience on the very idea of the Census, and this time the poor are his piñata du jour.

Of course, if you present Beck with his own words on the Census (or any other issue for that matter), he's likely to demand you "stop listening to the Internet. There's a lot of garbage out on the Internet." In a sense he just may be right. If you were to Google "Beck" and "U.S. Census" you are bound to find video and audio clips of his rants on the subject that can only be described as, well, garbage

Beck's attacks on the census fit nicely into his larger worldview, one that he's been pushing more and more of late -- his broader disdain for social justice and the religious and political actors and institutions that champion the tradition of helping the least among us. He's called it "code language for Marxism" and encouraged his audience to "run, and don't listen to anyone who is telling you differently."

To Beck, the poor should trudge their difficult path alone, and no one -- not the church, not our political institutions, and certainly not the U.S. Census -- should be there to offer a helping hand.

This type of thinking was summed up well by the words of Comedy Central's Stephen Colbert when he quipped, "I believe in pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps. I believe it is possible -- I saw this guy do it once in Cirque du Soleil. It was magical."

I don't buy it, and neither should you.

So, like generations of Americans before me, I will be counted so my community receives the help it needs.

Knowing that Glenn Beck doesn't like the census? Well, that's just icing on the cake and all the motivation I need to complete the questionnaire and drop it in the mail just as soon as it arrives at my door.

Karl Frisch is a senior fellow at Media Matters for America, a progressive media watchdog, research, and information center based in Washington, D.C. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the web as well as original commentary.  You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube or sign-up to receive his columns by email.

Another week, another wild, right-wing-media-driven conspiracy theory centered on the Obama administration.

Conservative blogs led the charge in advancing the dubious story, posting their own spin under headlines like "Obama: The Will Of The People Be Damned - I'LL Decide Who Can Go Fishing" in the case of RedState.com and "Obama's war on fishing?!?!?!" from the queen of right-wing blogging and bellyaching, Michelle Malkin. It mattered little that the story was complete bunk -- unsupported by a shred of proof.

It wasn't long before Fox News' Glenn Beck, a regular purveyor of ridiculous Obama-centric conspiracy theories, took up the yarn. In classic Beck fashion, the crew-cut host told his audience, "I told you a year ago this would happen. I'm not some prophet by any stretch of the imaginations. ... People are losing their rights. Who's more important: the fish or you?"

Beck aside, no smear of the Obama White House would be complete without an assist from Rush Limbaugh, the granddaddy of the conservative media. On back-to-back shows, El Rushbo laid it on thick, one day saying that "fishing is about to become a privilege controlled by Barack Obama," and the next, speaking as if he were Obama: "[Y]ou can't touch me. ... I can stop you from going fishing wherever you want. ... I can do whatever I want to do."

In perhaps the strangest turn of events surrounding the story, FoxNews.com ended up debunking Fox News, with the conservative outlet's reporter Joshua Rhett Miller writing that government documents didn't contain "language pertaining to a potential ban on recreational fishing, as some reports had previously asserted." Of course, some of those "reports" included the Fox Nation website, Fox Business Network, and the previously mentioned Beck.

Ultimately, an ESPNOutdoors.com editor acknowledged "errors" in the handling of the piece and its lack of "balance," but you can expect this one, like so many others, to end up in some chain email from your Fox News-loving uncle in the coming weeks.

The controversy surrounding the latest debunked, conservative-driven conspiracy theory is not the first, nor is it the strangest. Like other bogus stories from the past year, it shares a similar cast of characters, most notably Beck, all eager to tar the president, evidence and journalistic integrity be damned.

Did you know that OnStar, the popular automobile safety feature, is actually a cause for concern because Obama's liberty-killing government could use it to impose "martial law?" You can thank Beck for that one.

Then there was the absurd story that FEMA was building concentration camps for those who disagree with the Obama administration. A year ago, Beck addressed the subject on Fox & Friends stating, "We are a country that is headed towards socialism, totalitarianism, beyond your wildest imagination," later adding that he "wanted to debunk" the theory that FEMA was building camps, but he just couldn't. Beck would go on to spend weeks sowing the seeds of this bizarre conspiracy theory, noting that he would debunk the issue when and if he could, before finally hosting the editor-in-chief of Popular Mechanics to set the story straight.

The FEMA camp conspiracy dovetailed nicely with another Beck-driven tale of totalitarianism: that Obama is busy assembling a "civilian national security force," which Beck said was "what Saddam Hussein" did and "what Hitler did with the SS." Beck's relentless pursuit of this "story" was sparked by a speech in which Obama spoke of expanding the Foreign Service, AmeriCorps, and the Peace Corps. That's right, to Glenn Beck, these respected outfits are akin to Hitler's SS. Shameful.

Reporters who value truth and journalistic integrity should be on notice: Don't trust these Beck-ian right-wing conspiracy theories, the people who spread them, or the networks that offer these kooks a platform. Deeming these folks rational players in the conservative movement deserving of our attention only serves to further undermine the already fragile reputation journalists have among the American people.

It almost makes one yearn for the days when right-wing cranks prattled on about the president's birth certificate. Even Beck wouldn't touch that one.

Karl Frisch is a senior fellow at Media Matters for America, a progressive media watchdog and research and information center based in Washington, D.C. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the Web, as well as original commentary. You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, or sign up to receive his columns by email.

The fact that President Bush's DOJ also hired lawyers who represented terror suspects hasn't fazed right-wing media shills.

Fox News host Sean Hannity led the charge on the conservative network, doing his best impersonation of Sen. Joe McCarthy, saying, "If you're going to work in our Justice Department ... and you represented Al Qaeda, I want to know who you are." He later stated, "Obama is weak. He's an appeaser. Obama is making this country and every citizen vulnerable to attack."

S.E. Cupp, a Fox News contributor, said, "If what these guys are doing is so great and they're so proud of it, then why can't they tell us who they are? I think they're -- the silence is a tacit admission that they're not doing -- that they're something controversial," later adding, "These are people who specifically make their bread and butter defending terrorists." Similarly, on the network's crown jewel, The O'Reilly Factor, Cupp's fellow Fox News contributor Charles Krauthammer said, "These people chose to do, for free, defense work for people in Guantánamo, for people like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who not only was the architect of 9-11, but he boasts of slitting the throat of Daniel Pearl." He then said of Attorney General Eric Holder, "He's choosing at least nine people who chose that this is the work they are going to do on the side. That tells you there is some ideological affinity here," adding, "And that's very troubling, because it tells you why the Justice Department has ended up with some of the absurd decisions it's made in the war on terror."

Worse still, it appears Bush-nesia is highly contagious.

Copying Fox News and Investor's Business Daily, which both used headlines asking, "Department of Jihad?" CNN's The Situation Room ran a graphic with the same text and spent eight minutes asking if DOJ lawyers are "disloyal." (Wolf Blitzer continued, media gadfly Liz Cheney's Keep America Safe produced a video attacking the DOJ attorneys, which prompted former head of the Office of Legal Counsel Walter Dellinger to pen an op-ed calling the smears "shameful."

Salon's Glenn Greenwald points out that the Washington Post editorial board -- which Fred Hiatt runs -- has now denounced the video attacking the Obama administration as a "smear" that plays on "ignorance and fear" at the expense of reason. Perhaps Hiatt and the editorial board could have taken just a moment to look inward, because one of their own opinion columnists, Bill Kristol, sits with Cheney on the board of directors for Keep America Safe -- the organization responsible for the disturbingly misleading video. Hiatt, whose op-ed pages have been plagued with problems of late, praised Kristol when he hired the neocon last year, saying, "I think he's a very smart, plugged-in guy," adding, "I thought he wrote a good column" at The New York Times, which tired of Kristol after only a year.

Perhaps there are media conservatives out there looking for a cure to Bush-nesia. If you or someone you know fits that bill, please consult your physician and be sure to read Media Matters' memo to right-wing media: Bush DOJ lawyers also represented terror suspects.

Other major stories

The "reconciliation as 'nuclear option' " lie: Let's go through this one more time

The use of the "reconciliation process" is fundamentally different from the use of the so-called "nuclear option." The phrase "nuclear option" was coined by former Sen. Trent Lott (R-MS) in 2005. At the time, Lott was one of the leading advocates of a proposal to change the Senate rules on filibusters for judicial nominations. Again -- he wanted to change Senate rules, a process unto itself. After Republican strategists deemed the term a political liability, Republican senators began to attribute it to Democrats. As Media Matters noted at the time, many in the news media followed suit, repeating the Republicans' false attribution of the term to the Democrats.

By contrast, the budget reconciliation process is entirely separate. It is defined by the U.S. House Committee on Rules as "part of the congressional budget process ... utilized when Congress issues directives to legislate policy changes in mandatory spending (entitlements) or revenue programs (tax laws) to achieve the goals in spending and revenue contemplated by the budget resolution." Notice that there are no rule changes involved whatsoever.

Republicans used the budget reconciliation process to pass President George W. Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, as well as the 2005 Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act. The Senate also used the procedure to pass a bill containing a provision that would permit oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. In fact, between 1981 and 2008, Republicans used the reconciliation process no fewer than 16 times (a point made by MSNBC's Joe Scarborough -- a former GOP congressman, no less).

Has reconciliation been used solely on tax and budget bills? No. As has been noted, the process was used to pass changes to COBRA, which allows laid-off workers to keep their insurance coverage, and to the State Children's Health Insurance Program. In other words, health care reforms.

Got it? Now, please, somebody go explain it to the right-wing media.

Fox News hosts and guests have repeatedly pushed the falsehood that the "nuclear option" refers to the budget reconciliation process. The Fox Nation and Fox News personalities such as Sean Hannity, Greta Van Susteren, Dick Morris, Bret Baier, and Bill Sammon have all falsely called reconciliation the "nuclear option," and The Fox Nation has frequently coupled its headlines with images of a mushroom cloud from a nuclear bomb.

This past week proved to be more of the same, especially in the wake of Obama's announced willingness to use the process to pass changes to Democratic health care reform legislation if Senate Republicans refuse to allow an up-or-down vote.

"Reconciliation or the nuclear option ... people aren't calling it the nuclear option" but "it's exactly what it is," said Baier. "White House: Let's Go Nuclear..." read a Fox Nation headline. "Obama to Trigger Nuke Option on Healthcare," screeched Matt Drudge. "What used to be called the 'nuclear option' is now kind of a warm-and-fuzzy phrase called 'reconciliation,' " explained Fox News anchor Gregg Jarrett. When Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) described the possible use of the reconciliation process to pass health care reform as "an abuse of the Senate rules like I've never seen before," Van Susteren offered no challenge -- in spite of the fact that Hatch has repeatedly supported the use of the process to pass major Bush administration initiatives.

Last week, conservative media figures feverishly pushed a video montage, promoted by Andrew Breitbart, of Democrats objecting to the actual nuclear option in 2005. The clips were held up as evidence of Democratic hypocrisy, even though the lawmakers in question were not talking about the reconciliation process. This didn't stop Glenn Beck from hyping the video or Hannity from doing the same.

It's worth noting that the use of the reconciliation process was hardly worthy of mention for media outlets when it was used to pass Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy in 2003. But now, even mainstream outlets are intrigued. Politico and The Washington Post have advanced GOP attacks that using the process is "arrogant" and "an end-run around the normal legislative process." The Hill allowed Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) to claim it is a way for Democrats to "circumvent Senate rules," even though it's in the Senate rules. CNN has gotten into the misinformation mix as well.

It's clear that when it comes to Fox and its phalanx of conservative media imitators, reconciling reality with reporting is a non-starter.

With ACORN cleared in Brooklyn, Breitbart flails and Giles pleads for defense-fund dough

On Monday, the district attorney of Kings County, New York, Joe Hynes, concluded a nearly six-month investigation "into possible criminality on the part of three ACORN employees" in the organization's Brooklyn office who "had been secretly videotaped by" James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles. Announcing the investigation's completion in a statement, Hynes said that "no criminality has been found."

Andrew Breitbart, O'Keefe and Giles' right-wing mentor, took to his Twitter account with a post stating that the ACORN tapes were "less about 'criminality' than facility with which employees all knew how to work [the] system." An odd statement to be sure, especially when one considers the fact that Breitbart has been demanding criminal investigations into ACORN for months. I'd be remiss if I didn't note that Breitbart's Big Government website this week compared ACORN to the Ku Klux Klan -- so you can imagine just the type of fair-minded investigation Breitbart's seeking.

After news broke that "no criminality" was found, right-wing blogs began pushing the wacky notion that Hynes was a "member" of the Working Families Party, and that given ACORN's support of that party, the investigation was a scam. Their claim was simple: Since Hynes, a Democrat, had received the endorsement and ballot line of the Working Families Party, he was automatically a member of that party. As Media Matters' Todd Gregory noted, by that standard, Hynes is a member of four parties: the Democratic Party, the Republican Party, the Conservative Party, and the Working Families Party. See, in New York, candidates can earn the endorsement of more than one party and appear on a ballot line for each of them. And in the 2009 election, all four of those parties endorsed Hynes.

Another classic example of "conservative investigative journalism." Sigh.

Things didn't get much better for Breitbart, O'Keefe, and Giles as the week progressed. On Tuesday, the New York Post, under the headline "ACORN set up by vidiots: DA," reported that the "video that unleashed a firestorm of criticism on the activist group ACORN was a 'heavily edited' splice job," according to sources. The News Corp./Rupert Murdoch-owned Post further reported, "Many of the seemingly crime-encouraging answers were taken out of context so as to appear more sinister, sources said."

For her part, Giles isn't standing idly by as the ACORN escapade continues to unravel on a seemingly daily basis. The Washington Independent's David Weigel obtained a letter this week soliciting cash for her legal defense fund, and one thing was abundantly clear from the missive: O'Keefe's undercover ACORN video partner loves to annotate her pleas for help with plenty of pink pen -- stars, underlines, double underlines, circles, double parentheses, arrows -- you name it! Other than that, the plea for support is exactly what you'd expect -- chock full of attacks on ACORN and Obama.

How to invent a scandal with a single punctuation mark

Here's an urgent question: Is The Weekly Standard funding its operations by selling drugs to children?

As Media Matters' Jamison Foser explained earlier this week, the addition of a question mark at the end of the previous sentence allows me to suggest something entirely baseless without accepting responsibility for it. And that's exactly what occurred recently when the Standard's John McCormack suggested that Obama had appointed Scott M. Matheson Jr. to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to influence the health care vote of Matheson's brother, Rep. Jim Matheson (D-UT).

No evidence was provided to back up the claim -- but as Foser explained, "John McCormack doesn't need evidence -- he has question marks!" Remarkably, even though some conservatives quickly distanced themselves from the accusation, many others did not. The story was soon getting attention on Fox News and The Fox Nation, on the blog Hot Air, at RedState.com, from Michelle Malkin, from Hannity and Beck, and on the Drudge Report, among others.

And of course, since the right-wing media issue the marching orders for the movement these days, on the March 3 edition of CNN's Larry King Live, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) called for an investigation.

Even though plenty of countervailing evidence was soon produced -- indeed, even McCormack, the claim's originator, may have begun to walk it back -- the smear continued (especially on Fox & Friends, which must assume its early-morning viewers are too groggy to understand what they're being told).

Politico also helped hype the story, publishing an article headlined "Some Republicans criticize judge pick." But the paper could only come up with one such Republican: Bachmann. By contrast, Politico cited two Republicans who praised the nomination, including one who directly refuted the conspiracy theory. Finally, in a last-ditch effort to keep the "story" alive, media conservatives began arguing that it may now be illegal for Jim Matheson to vote in favor of health care reform legislation due to his brother's appointment. Predictably, this, too, was baseless.

As the story continues to fall apart, it's worth remembering how often the right invents scandals to tarnish Democrats. No question mark needed there.

This Week's Media Columns

This week's media columns from the Media Matters senior fellows: Eric Boehlert discusses Andrew Breitbart's confirmation that he was duped by O'Keefe and the ACORN pimp hoax; and Jamison Foser looks at how media covered the GOP's 2003 use of reconciliation -- they didn't.

Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube

Media Matters maintains active online communities on the nation's leading social networking sites. Be sure to join us on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube to take part in the discussion.

Media Matters Minute now on YouTube

For some time now, radio shows and stations throughout the country have been carrying the Media Matters Minute, a daily minute-long recap of our work topped off with the "most outrageous comment" of the day. We encourage you to subscribe (YouTube / iTunes / RSS) to the Minute's daily podcast, hosted by Media Matters' Ben Fishel.

Special thanks to John Santore, who contributed to the production of this week's wrap-up.

This weekly wrap-up was compiled and edited by Karl Frisch, a senior fellow at Media Matters for America. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the Web, as well as original commentary. You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube or sign up to receive his columns by email.

Beck's appearance cements the hold conservative media figures have on the movement. Remember, radio host Rush Limbaugh was last year's keynote speaker.

For those watching closely, it's becoming pretty clear how all of this works. Limbaugh says, "I hope Obama fails," and he's offered the plum speaking role. Beck calls Obama a "racist" who has "a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture," and he gets tapped for the honor.

Ladies and gentlemen, your modern right-wing, media-driven conservative movement.

It appears that Limbaugh and Beck have taught their followers well. This year's lineup of CPAC speakers has been as light on truth and heavy on hateful vitriol as their leaders could possibly expect.

Young America's Foundation spokesman and frequent Fox News guest Jason Mattera got things off to an interesting start. Speaking in a crowded Washington, D.C., ballroom, Mattera said to applause and laughter, "[O]ur notion of freedom doesn't consist of snorting cocaine, which is certainly one thing that separates us from Barack Obama."

I suppose it never occurred to Mattera that his words might make Beck, the center-ring attraction at this year's CPAC circus, a bit uncomfortable. After all, the Fox News host has admitted to having had a cocaine problem, saying in a 2008 DVD, "I think by 24, I was making about $300,000 a year, and most of it went directly up my nose."

Mattera went on to mock college feminism classes, describing what may be his "all-time favorite" -- an Occidental College course that "deconstructs what it means to be a feminist new black man." He advised the audience to think of "a feminist new black man" as a "crossover between RuPaul and Barney Frank." I've squared off with Mattera twice before on television, and in one instance, he deployed racially charged invective, and in the other, a homophobic slur. So I guess this was to be expected.

One thing became abundantly clear as the conference trudged on: Conservatives, like first-graders, love telling the same jokes over and over. As Media Matters' Brian Frederick rightly noted, CPAC might as well have called itself the Conservative Teleprompter Conference of 2010, given that the legacy of this year's conference is shaping up to be little more than a bunch of lame teleprompter jokes. I would be remiss if I didn't mention that many of these jokes were made from a podium equipped with ... yep, a teleprompter. Even Kathryn Lopez of the conservative National Review Online seemed to notice the bizarre fixation, posting the following to her Twitter profile: "I've heard at least three teleprompter jokes already. In front of a teleprompter. Godspeed to the man who uses the teleprompter."

Yes, this year's conference has featured as speakers both Stephen Baldwin -- who called Obama "homey" -- and some guy from 1985's The Goonies who now does voiceover work on videos about demon sheep and who said Obama was "probably" planning to use Gitmo to imprison Andrew Breitbart and Ann Coulter. But CPAC hasn't been all fun and games.

Former House Majority Leader and FreedomWorks founder Dick Armey, who, along with Fox News, is a driving force behind the Tea Party movement, mocked the idea of a "crisis in health care" and let us all in on what he considers to be the toughest issue facing the U.S. when he proclaimed that "the number one biggest problem in America is the physical size of this government."

Singing from the same songbook, George Will lent the credibility of his employers -- The Washington Post, Newsweek, and ABC News -- to the gathering for a speech riddled with misinformation, including the tired right-wing canard that the New Deal failed. Will also dabbled in the land of conspiracy theories -- popular territory for those assembled -- by suggesting the Obama administration is creating a fiscal crisis to enlarge the government.

Erick Erickson, editor-in-chief of the conservative RedState.com blog, gave a shout-out to Media Matters, calling those who work here "the guys who can't get jobs anywhere else" -- which is odd, because he and I worked together at MSNBC (heretofore known as "anywhere else") for a few days during the 2004 presidential election. However, Erickson did offer up some honesty while discussing the right wing's infrastructure when he noted, "[W]e've got Fox News." And for those wondering aloud at home: Yes, this is the same Erickson who CNN turned to for commentary on Obama's State of the Union address this year.

What right-wing gathering would truly be complete without kudos for MSNBC's resident bigot, Pat Buchanan, from Michele Bachmann, the kooky congresswoman from Minnesota? Hot Air's Ed Morrissey, who was named "Blogger of the Year" by a live-via-satellite Rush Limbaugh, praised Bachmann as "a tea party activist before the tea arrived." Bachmann, in turn, challenged the audience to convert a liberal into a "Pat Buchanan, WorldNetDaily-reading conservative," thus completing the triangle of delusion.

Former Vice President Darth Cheney and his daughter Liz made an appearance as well. Liz, who for months now has been on what can be described only as the Bush/Cheney-legacy-repair media tour, used her turn on the podium to promote the creaky right-wing narrative that Obama is an America apologist, saying the president needs to "stop apologizing for this great nation and start defending her." I can think of a few things for which her father might wish to apologize.

CPAC is also home to many media conservative you've probably never heard of, like XPAC outreach leader and gay-hating bigot Kevin McCullough. XPAC is for the young CPAC attendees, because as we all know, adding an "X" to your name makes you hip and totally xool. McCullough, a radio host and Townhall.com blogger, has made a career out of bashing gays for their "perverse" lifestyle of "nihilism, narcissism and compulsive sexual addiction." As CPAC speaker, McCullough said he was "not that terribly disturbed" that his birther friend, former Rep. J.D. Hayworth, is challenging Sen. John McCain in the Arizona GOP Senate primary. In a failed attempt to channel civil-rights icon Rosa Parks, he went on to say that young conservative activists "will not sit at the back of the bus." And in a slap in the face to the greatest generation, he said "saving freedom" from academia and government is the "greatest task" asked of a generation, except "perhaps" the World War II generation.

Anyone who has followed CPAC over the years likely isn't surprised by the antics on display at its 2010 incarnation -- CPAC has always been a welcoming venue for the far-right fringe.

With one day left in the gathering, including Beck's keynote, the crazy is sure to continue. You can keep up to speed by checking out Media Matters' ongoing live coverage or by following @MMFA and @KarlFrisch on Twitter.

Other major stories

Happy birthday to Glenn Beck's crazy-talk chalkboard!

A year ago, Beck rolled out the first in a long series of increasingly bizarre blackboard scrawls and graphics intended to link Obama and the progressive movement to extremists and dictators and otherwise illustrate Beck's conspiratorial worldview. Throughout the year, he has used chalk, markers, and Fox News' graphics department to bring his theories to life in vivid detail. To help celebrate the blackboard's first birthday, Media Matters has reviewed Beck's charts and detailed them in a special report you won't want to miss.

Award-winning journalist Will Bunch joins Media Matters

This week, Media Matters announced that award-winning journalist Will Bunch will be joining the organization as a senior fellow. A senior writer for the Philadelphia Daily News and author of its popular blog Attytood, Bunch was named the city's best blogger by Philadelphia Magazine in 2008 and best columnist by the same publication in 2009.

He is the author of a forthcoming book tentatively titled The Backlash (Harper, August 2010) which looks at the conservative media's role in driving the Tea Party movement. Bunch is also the author of 2009's Tear Down This Myth: The Right-Wing Distortion of the Reagan Legacy (Free Press, February 2009), which examined the calculated effort by the modern conservative movement to canonize the 40th president and its harmful effect on everything from runaway debt to failed energy policies to unchecked greed on Wall Street.

"After three decades as a highly respected journalist, Will Bunch brings to Media Matters a knowledge of media and politics that is unmatched," Media Matters president Eric Burns said in announcing the news. "I am delighted that he will be joining us in the fight for a more honest, accurate media."

Bunch has won numerous journalism awards, including a share of the 1992 Pulitzer Prize for spot-news reporting when he worked for New York Newsday. His articles have appeared in the New York Times Magazine, Mother Jones, American Prospect, American Journalism Review and numerous other publications.

"I'm thrilled to work with Media Matters in support of my new book, The Backlash," Bunch said. "I'm also excited Media Matters is offering me a wider platform to push for better journalism, which in turn will lead to better democracy."

This week's media columns

This week's media columns from the Media Matters senior fellows: Eric Boehlert looks at James O'Keefe and the myth of the ACORN pimp, and Jamison Foser takes on another myth, that of the "liberal" Washington Post opinion pages.

Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube

Media Matters maintains active online communities on the nation's leading social networking sites. Be sure to join us on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube to take part in the discussion.

Media Matters Minute now on YouTube

For some time now, radio shows and stations throughout the country have been carrying the Media Matters Minute, a daily minute-long recap of our work topped off with the "most outrageous comment" of the day. We encourage you to subscribe (YouTube / iTunes / RSS) to the Minute's daily podcast, hosted by Media Matters' Ben Fishel.

This weekly wrap-up was compiled and edited by Karl Frisch, a senior fellow at Media Matters for America. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the Web, as well as original commentary. You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube or sign up to receive his columns by email.

Don't get me wrong, the calm quiet brought to my neighborhood by several feet of fresh powder blanketing the streets and sidewalks made for some amazing photos and an impromptu snowball fight or two.

It's the right-wing media that have spoiled the Media Matters for America, a progressive media watchdog and research and information center based in Washington, D.C. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the Web, as well as original commentary. You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, or sign up to receive his columns by email.

Special thanks to John Santore, who contributed to the production of this week's wrap-up.

This weekly wrap-up was compiled and edited by Karl Frisch, a senior fellow at Media Matters for America. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the web as well as original commentary. You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube or sign-up to receive his columns by email.

That just may happen.

According to an affidavit from the FBI, O'Keefe and three others were arrested on Monday in connection with an alleged plot to "interfer[e]" with the phone system in Sen. Mary Landrieu's New Orleans office. O'Keefe is perhaps best known for the heavily edited and misleading undercover videos he and Hannah Giles shot of low-level ACORN employees while the right-wing duo were dressed as a pimp and prostitute, an escapade that itself may have violated state criminal statutes.

The New York Times reports that "the four men, two of whom were dressed as telephone repairmen, were charged with entering a federal property on false pretenses with the purpose of committing a felony. The crime charged is itself a felony that carries a penalty of up to 10 years in prison."

As Media Matters' Eric Hananoki noted, O'Keefe's three alleged accomplices -- Joseph Basel, Robert Flanagan, and Stan Dai -- are right-wing activists as well. Basel was the founder of a conservative campus publication at the University of Minnesota-Morris, which, like the campus publication started by O'Keefe at Rutgers University, received funding from the conservative Leadership Institute's "Balance in Media" grant. Flanagan, the son of acting U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Louisiana William Flanagan, reportedly works at the conservative Pelican Institute in New Orleans, just half a block from Landrieu's office. Dai received $5,000 from the right-wing Phillips Foundation's Ronald Reagan Future Leaders Scholarship Program. Additionally, during his time as a campus conservative, Dai reportedly co-wrote "a satirical work entitled The Penis Monologues, apparently a takeoff on the Vagina Monologues."

News of the four's arrest spread quickly Tuesday.

Because Fox News had showered O'Keefe's undercover video work targeting ACORN with near wall-to-wall coverage, one would have hoped the conservative network would provide comparable coverage of the arrest -- it did not. In fact, a Media Matters study comparing coverage of the day following the release of O'Keefe and Giles' first ACORN tape and the day news of O'Keefe's arrest broke found that Fox News provided 13 times more coverage to the video.

Fox News' first segment on O'Keefe's arrest was as funny as it was disappointing (view it here). During the report, assignment manager Tim Gaughan called the news a "very weird story that probably needs a lot of context and a lot of looking into." Sage advice -- too bad the network often didn't offer ACORN the same deference.

It really shouldn't be much of a surprise that Fox News handled the O'Keefe arrest with such kid gloves. After the release of his ACORN videos, Fox and other media conservatives lavished praise on O'Keefe. Beck called him "courageous." Andrew Breitbart -- more on him in a bit -- said that O'Keefe "is already well on his way to being one of the great journalists" and that he deserved a Pulitzer Prize. Sean Hannity applauded him as a "pioneer in journalism." Bill O'Reilly said he deserved a "congressional medal." Right-wing author Ann Coulter said O'Keefe was "so magnificent." National Review editor Rich Lowry said he deserved an "award for impactful guerilla journalism." On Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace featured O'Keefe as "Power Player of the Week." And when news came that O'Keefe might be sued by ACORN or its staffers over the videos, Hannity and Breitbart led the conservative media fundraising campaign for his defense.

The fact that the right-wing media were so smitten with O'Keefe no doubt accounts for their skittish, measured response to the arrest. The Fox News website Fox Nation even posted a headline that read " 'There's Much More to This Story.' "

Perhaps no one in the conservative media has more to lose over this story than the previously mentioned Breitbart, a protégé of Internet gossip Matt Drudge and proprietor of a variety of right-wing websites including BigGovernment.com. After all, he was first to champion the undercover ACORN videos O'Keefe and Giles shot last year.

Breitbart claimed that he was "out of the loop on this" and released a public statement to some in the press saying he had "no knowledge" "or connection to" O'Keefe's actions. Breitbart also admitted during an interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt that he pays O'Keefe a "fair salary" so that "when he puts a story out there, it's on the Breitbart sites, the Big sites, that he can tell people what transpired." He reiterated during that interview that he was not connected with O'Keefe's actions in Landrieu's office.

It's been entertaining watching Breitbart lecture others on journalistic ethics when he's shown such little regard for truth in his own work. In fact, according to a report released this week by Media Matters, Breitbart's "Big" websites -- Big Hollywood, Big Government, and Big Journalism -- as well as his Breitbart.tv website, have in recent months laid claim to many "exclusives," touting controversial and sensationalist storylines that have been picked up by other conservative media outlets, from Fox News on down. However, a closer examination reveals that many of Breitbart's "scoops" have been based on speculation, gross distortions, and outright falsehoods.

Later in the week, Breitbart brought his ACORN video lies and full-throated defense of O'Keefe to MSNBC, where he was subjected to a grilling by David Shuster that was followed up by an interview with Media Matters' Eric Boehlert, who said Breitbart's type of journalism produces "the kind of Johnny Knoxville situation we get down in New Orleans."

Ultimately, Breitbart predicted "there will be tape to vindicate these four pranksters." Yep, the man who previously said O'Keefe deserved a Pulitzer is now calling him a "prankster." How's that for spin?

Breitbart continued to function as O'Keefe's de facto public relations flack as the week came to an end, posting a statement that "[o]n reflection, I could have used a different approach to this investigation" on his websites. Of course, Fox News is doing its part, trumpeting news of an exclusive O'Keefe interview with Hannity coming next week.

So, how on earth could James O'Keefe think for even a minute that these types of actions might be a good idea? The answer to that question can be found in his own words from just two weeks ago.

During an interview with Adam Weinberg of The Centurion -- the right-wing student publication at Rutgers University that claims O'Keefe as a "founding editor" -- Breitbart's protégé said, "The more bold you are, the more opportunities will be open to you. The less bold you are, the less opportunities in life will be open to you." He went on: "[T]he more you put yourself out there and you take those calculated risks -- the contrary of what people actually think is going to happen -- you're actually going to get opportunities."

That's the life lesson O'Keefe learned from his relationship with Andrew Breitbart -- the man who made him a right-wing star and Fox News celebrity.

Ultimately, a jury of O'Keefe's peers may decide his fate, but it should be lost on no one that Breitbart and his allies at Fox News share in the responsibility for what has been alleged to have transpired.

Other major stories

Right-wing media and the State of Dis-Union

President Obama's first State of the Union address provided a wonderful opportunity to assess the state of conservative media. The result? It's not looking good.

Following up on a host of assertions that Obama had little to show for his first year in office, Hannity kicked things off by offering a pre-buttal on Monday and Tuesday, referring to the upcoming speech as "propaganda" not once, but twice. On Wednesday, Beck promised his audience that he would watch the address, even though he said that the thought made him "want to hang" himself. John Stossel, also now part of the Fox family, helpfully suggested that the president use his time to apologize for his arrogance, while Neil Cavuto (yes, he's with Fox too -- spot a trend?) predicted that Obama might deliver the longest State of the Union in history. Soon, right-wing comedian Dennis Miller had accused Democrats of acting like the Menendez brothers. Newly minted Fox News contributor Sarah Palin was even beamed in live from Wasilla, Alaska, to tweeting that "Pelosi's got a really weird, glassy-eyed, Bride of Chucky thing going." NRO's blog The Corner also objected to Joe Biden's behavior after the vice president had the audacity to clap while other people were clapping. "It's not about you," wrote John Hood. "It will never be about you. Just relax and try not to distract attention from your boss by whispering under your breath or mugging for the camera." Appropriately, a short time later, the president chided "TV pundits" for "reduc[ing] serious debates to silly arguments."

As soon as Obama had concluded, the thoughtful reviews came pouring in. "The president looks like a jerk tonight," opined Hood. Stossel said Obama "certainly didn't sound humbled," as he should have. RedState's Erick Erickson thought that Obama's jokes during the speech "were cocky and snide," adding that the remarks constituted a "declaration of war on the free market." CNN hosted Erickson to discuss Obama's address. Fortunately, Roland Martin was there to offer a fact-check for Erickson's words -- the kind of balance Fox couldn't bring itself to entertain when assembling its guest lists.

The next day, conservative media figures were, in a word, grumpy. Beck revisited the theme of Obama's arrogance (a common refrain) and accused him of lying, as did many on the right. He compared Obama's relationship with the America people to that of a husband cheating on his wife (he doesn't respect us, in case you were wondering). He even called the president a "punk" for his criticism of a recent Supreme Court decision lifting limits on corporations' ability to make certain election-related expenses (Bill O'Reilly, Megyn Kelly, and Matt Drudge also attacked Obama's Supreme Court criticism, even though Obama's comments were in line with the views of four justices). Beck derided Obama's "enemies list" and suggested that the chiding of TV pundits was all about him. (Who's arrogant now, Glenn?) Then, feeling guilty, he toned it back and tried to be the bigger person, inquiring as to "how many children could be fed" with the money "in plastic surgery" between Pelosi and Biden.

Rush Limbaugh compared the remarks to "a speech by Hugo Chavez or Fidel Castro" and likened Pelosi, who also clapped during the speech, to "a trained seal at Sea World." He accused Obama of dividing the country by bringing up equal pay for women and said that passing legislation with a majority of votes in Congress is "what dictators do." And finally, not to be outdone, America's Mayor, Rudy Giuliani, voiced his dismay about the fact that Obama never said "war" during his remarks. (The claim was false, and Fox News' Steve Doocy had to offer a correction.)

It's worth noting that one significant problem persisted even outside of the conservative media constellation. Despite reports that "don't ask, don't tell" would be tackled in Obama's State of the Union address, the initial lineup of cable and broadcast network hosts and commentators offering analysis immediately following the speech included only one openly LGBT figure, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow.

The state of the media is, well, not very good.

This week's media columns

This week's media columns from the Media Matters senior fellows: Eric Boehlert asks if Fox News' coverage equals a GOP campaign contribution; Jamison Foser looks at Sally Quinn's Washington (it isn't pretty); and Karl Frisch discusses the shadowy world of corporate media policy governing political and issue-advocacy commercials.

Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube

Media Matters maintains active online communities on the nation's leading social networking sites. Be sure to join us on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube to join in on the discussion.

Media Matters Minute now on YouTube

For some time now, radio shows and stations throughout the country have been carrying the Media Matters Minute, a daily, minute-long recap of our work topped off with the "most outrageous comment" of the day. We encourage you to subscribe (YouTube / iTunes / RSS) to the daily Minute podcast, hosted by Media Matters' Ben Fishel.

Special thanks to John Santore, who contributed to the production of this week's wrap-up.

This weekly wrap-up was compiled and edited by Karl Frisch, a senior fellow at Media Matters for America. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the Web, as well as original commentary. You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube or sign up to receive his columns by email.

"Jesus didn't turn people away" was the ad's tagline, but CBS did, turning down the commercial which was intended for broadcast during that year's Super Bowl. The 30-second spot apparently violated the network's policy of "prohibiting advocacy ads, even ones that carry an 'implicit' endorsement for a side in a public debate."

Now, six years later, CBS has agreed to run an ad by the notoriously anti-reproductive rights, anti-gay organization Focus on the Family, featuring college football star and anti-choice crusader Tim Tebow.

The network's blatantly hypocritical decision has sparked intense controversy and brought new light to the shadowy world of corporate media policy governing political or issue-advocacy commercials.

These cable and broadcast outlets seem to make the argument that only certain entities can make certain political arguments against certain figures on certain issues during certain programs. It's difficult to follow -- and perhaps that is the point. Lack of specificity provides ample wiggle room.

We do, however, know for sure that these major networks don't respond well to criticism in the form of advertising. Last year alone, CNN rejected at least two commercials critical of its own network brass and Lou Dobbs, its former immigrant-bashing host.

Then, of course, there was Glenn Beck, who last year cost his network, Fox News, at least 80 advertisers after he called President Obama a "racist." Consequently, after filling the newly available ad time with commercials more commonly seen during a 2 a.m. rerun of Golden Girls, the conservative network was forced to respond to controversy surrounding Beck's promotion of gold investments on his program while he was also serving as a spokesman for gold investment companies that advertised during his broadcasts.

The murky subject of who can and cannot advertise could be further complicated by a recent Supreme Court decision on corporate political speech.

Last week in Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission, the highest court in the land rejected long-established precedent, sending shockwaves throughout the political landscape when it ruled that corporations should be able to spend freely supporting or opposing candidates for office.

Corporations already run thinly veiled political advertisements designed to protect their bottom line. These ads abound, particularly on the major cable news networks and the all-important Sunday morning network political chat shows. To name but a few, big oil companies like Exxon brag about how great they are for the environment while Wal-Mart tells anyone who will listen that they really do treat their employees well. These ads, without a hint of irony, serve one purpose: sway public opinion on issues sensitive to their corporate interests in Washington and elsewhere.

How the Supreme Court's decision will affect the corporate media's policy governing corporate political advocacy remains unclear, which is precisely why I contacted the major cable and broadcast networks -- ABC, CBS, NBC/MSNBC, CNN, and Fox News -- with a few simple questions. First, will the networks announce clear policies for corporate political advertising? Second, and of equal if not greater importance, do the networks' corporate parent companies plan on taking advantage of the high court's decision by spending money for and against candidates for office?

It is no longer out of the realm of possibilities that we could one day see News Corp., Fox News' parent company, spending mountains of cash against a candidate it opposes, say President Obama in 2012, for example.

Only CNN responded to my request for comment, saying that the network is still "reviewing" the court's decision and that it was "too early" to determine the impact it may have on its advertising guidelines.

The media love to talk about transparency and accountability when it comes to politicians and the government -- they should, it's an important subject. They, too, have an obligation of transparency to the American people.

It is long past time these powerful corporate media institutions make their policies surrounding political and issue-advocacy ads readily available, publicly transparent, clear, and, most importantly, consistent.

Karl Frisch is a senior fellow at Media Matters for America, a progressive media watchdog, research, and information center based in Washington, D.C. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the web as well as original commentary. You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube or sign-up to receive his columns by email.

Palin's appearances on Fox News this week are worth looking at, if only for the bizarre, false claims she made and her creative use of the English language.

In her debut as contributor, Palin sat down with Bill O'Reilly for an interview on The O'Reilly Factor. If Bill-O's softball sit-down is a sign of things to come for Palin, we're in for an ... interesting ride. As Media Matters' Simon Maloy noted after the broadcast, "the financial terms of Palin's agreement with Fox News have not been disclosed, but it's safe to assume that she isn't working for peanuts. With that in mind, it's worth pointing out that Palin spent much of her Fox News debut defending her own record and reputation, hawking the biography she pretended to write, and promoting the Tea Party convention at which she is being paid to speak (though she claimed that the money she makes from the event will go towards campaign donations). She was essentially paid by Fox News to put on an infomercial for herself."

During her debut on The Factor, Palin said she was looking forward "to providing the fair and the balanced reporting and analysis that voters in this country deserve." Apparently speaking directly from network talking points, Palin also claimed that Americans are "turning into Fox News" because they oppose "biased journalism." Believe it or not, Palin also admitted that in 2008 -- yes, 2008 -- she asked "questions" about whether there were ties between Saddam Hussein and 9-11.

Perhaps no one at Fox anticipated Palin's arrival -- which Andrew Breitbart's Big Journalism called "an awful shrinking feeling in the groin" for Fox's competitors -- like Glenn Beck. Leading up to his hour-long interview with Palin, the network's resident conspiracy theorist:

• teased the interview at the top of his program the day before;

• revealed that he's talked to Palin "for quite a while," but this would be their first face-to-face meeting;

• said that the interview would happen unless Palin "come[s] to her senses and realizes this isn't a good idea at all" (she didn't); and

• perhaps hoping Palin wasn't listening, told his radio audience that she won't get the Republican nomination in 2012.

When they finally sat down together in a room with a view of the Statue of Liberty -- as The Daily Show's Jon Stewart said, "she's from Alaska, she's not an immigrant" -- things got off to a rather awkward start as Beck proceeded to read to Palin from what appeared to be his personal diary in which he called her "one of the only people ... that can possibly lead us out of where we are." He went on to note that a list of his similarities with Palin "goes on and on."

It wasn't all a drool-fest. Beck did manage to ask Palin a few tough questions. Tough for Palin anyway. For instance, asked to name her "favorite" founding father, Palin took a page from her infamous campaign interview with CBS' Katie Couric and told Beck, "all of them" without a hint of irony. Apparently Palin likes her founders like she likes her newspapers. Pressed by Beck, Palin would eventually cite George Washington as her fav.

Oddly enough, Beck criticized John McCain as a "progressive" for his support of bank bailouts without noting that both he and Palin expressed support for the 2009 Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). Beck also attacked those who support windfall profit taxes on oil companies but ignore the Federal Reserve's "record profits." Again, what he didn't say is that Palin, while Alaska governor, increased taxes on oil companies operating in Alaska.

The interview really was stupid in stereo.

Of Palin's founding fathers answer, MSNBC's Chris Matthews later asked, "how come she can't answer the most simple questions?"

The Fox & Friends crew wasn't nearly as critical as Matthews. In fact, the interview led Gretchen Carlson to advance the possibility of a Beck-Palin presidential ticket. Yes Virginia, there really is a Santa Claus. Then again, the wacky morning show seems to be one of Palin's biggest boosters. As Media Matters' Julie Millican noted, they "spent a good chunk of their show ... discussing Palin's appearance and her 'common sense conservatism,' but there was one part of Palin's interview that really struck a chord with them -- when she declared that the negative stories about her in the recently released book on the 2008 elections, Game Change, were 'a bunch of B.S.'" It was a claim the co-hosts were quick to advance. Of course, "prior to Palin's remarks, Fox & Friends had spent a considerable amount of time breathlessly reporting on numerous thinly sourced rumors that appear in Game Change with nary a hint of skepticism ...so long as the rumors related to Democratic politicians."

If you thought Palin's verbal gymnastics couldn't get any more confusing, you'd be wrong. Appearing on Hannity on Thursday, the former governor claimed that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is, and this is a direct quote, "driving a bus that is headed towards a train wreck." I'm not going to even try to decode that one.

Yes, it was quite a week for Fox News' newest contributor. Heck, even hosts of the National Tea Party Convention, which Palin is being paid to keynote next month, announced a ban on press at the event, except of course for Palin's employer Fox News, The Wall Street Journal, which, like Fox, is owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp, and a few fringe right-wing blogs. Now she can peddle lies to a few thousand people without those pesky fact-checkers getting in the way.

It's like former McCain aide Mark McKinnon said of Palin's new gig: "It's an easy job with very little accountability."

Other major stories

Haitian disaster brings out best in world community, worst in Robertson, Limbaugh

This week, while the world community responded to news of the massive earthquake in Haiti in the only appropriate way, doing whatever is necessary to help, conservative leader Rush Limbaugh and Christian Broadcasting Network televangelist Pat Robertson were an entirely different story.

Following the devastating quake, Limbaugh, among other things: claimed that Haiti produces "zilch, zero, nada"; predicted that President Obama will use Haiti to boost credibility with the "light-skinned and dark-skinned black community in this country"; noted that Obama discussed the Haitian earthquake sooner than the attempted Christmas bombing -- a claim echoed by Fox Nation; asked of Obama, "Did he apologize for America?"; "[W]e've already donated to Haiti. It's called the U.S. income tax"; and asserted that the Haiti earthquake was "made to order" for Obama."

After all of that, and more, Limbaugh had the temerity to claim that his comments about the earthquake were an attempt to "play the media like a violin" -- an... interesting reaction to the deaths of thousands. Then again, Limbaugh has a history of politicizing tragedies while accusing others of doing the same. When a caller asked him about his comments from the week, Limbaugh actually defended them, calling her a "blockhead" who has "tampons" in her ears.

El Rushbo wasn't alone in the "sad," "pathetic," "deplorable," "shocking," "indefensible" commentary department, as the folks at Morning Joe put it.

Pat Robertson told his audience in the wake of the earthquake the "true story" that Haiti "swore a pact to the devil" to get "free from the French" and "ever since, they have been cursed." You heard that right. According to Robertson, the Haitian people are cursed and were hit by this horrible disaster because they made a pact with the devil for their freedom.

Robertson's comments were quickly ridiculed throughout the media -- even at Fox News where anchor Shepard Smith somberly critiqued them saying, "[the Haitian people] don't need that." MSNBC's Chris Matthews called the comment "weird hostility from a churchman" while ABC reported on the "stunned silence" from ministers and evangelist Franklin Graham's disagreement with the comments.

As the week wore on, criticism from media figures mounted. On Fox News, Rev. Jonathan Morris called the comments "loony" and "out of line." Over on MSNBC, Ed Schultz labeled the Robertson's remarks "Psycho Talk" while Rachel Maddow hosted the Haitian ambassador, who assailed the televangelist and one-time Republican presidential candidate. On ABC's The View, Elizabeth Hasselbeck said he was casting, "sin on somebody else, and how dare he," adding that the comments were "deplorable."

Asked to comment on Robertson's comments, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs described them as "utterly stupid." He went on to call Limbaugh's tirades "sad," and "really stupid."

How would Robertson respond on the following day's broadcast? Silence.

We shouldn't be too surprised by Robertson's latest outburst. His comments follow a pattern in which he has assigned blame for tragedies and disasters like the 9-11 terrorist attacks and Hurricane Katrina.

Robertson and Limbaugh are far from the only conservative media figures to fail in their coverage of the Haitian disaster. According to a special report released by Media Matters this week: "On January 13, Fox News' three top-rated programs for 2009 -- The O'Reilly Factor, Hannity, and Glenn Beck -- devoted a combined total of less than 7 minutes of coverage to the earthquake in Haiti, instead choosing to air such things as Beck's hour-long interview with Sarah Palin, Bill O'Reilly's discussion of Comedy Central host Jon Stewart, and Sean Hannity's advocacy for Massachusetts candidate Scott Brown's Senate campaign. By contrast, the content of MSNBC's three top-rated shows underscored the significance of the Haiti disaster; Countdown, The Rachel Maddow Show, and Hardball devoted a total of more than two hours to the earthquake."

O'Reilly responded to viewer criticism of his coverage by saying, "I did my job."

Sorry, Bill, you guys didn't.

Mass. assistance: Fox News jumps head-first into race for Kennedy Senate seat

It's down to the wire in the Massachusetts special election for the Senate seat previously held by the late Ted Kennedy -- and that means the conservative media machine has ramped up its "Free Press Express" in the hope that it can help put GOP candidate Scott Brown over the top.

The Wall Street Journal started the week off by parroting some of Brown's deceptive attacks against his Democratic opponent, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley. Soon, Greta Van Susteren had turned her Fox News program into a "Brown for Senate!" campaign event, while Matt Drudge and the Fox Nation rolled out the red carpet for the conservative candidate. Indeed, at Fox, the fund-race was on, as the network repeatedly allowed both Brown and Fox News contributor Dick Morris to appeal for donations on air in support of the GOP candidate (a fact Bret Baier's Special Report ignored). Not content to allow Fox to be the only conservative network misrepresenting Coakley's record, numerous right-wing blogs and papers did the same.

But by far the most exciting anti-Coakley canard of the week involved Weekly Standard reporter John McCormack, who fell to the ground while pursuing the candidate in Washington. (In case you were worried, he's fine.) Soon, the conservative press was reporting that McCormack had been "rough[ed] up" by a "Coakley thug." Apparently, that's the Left's new way of dealing with people it doesn't like. Who could forget the saga of Kenneth Gladney, the noble and innocent man who was so savagely beaten by SEIU hitmen in a coordinated operation with the White House? (After all, that's just what unions do.) Lucky, Sean Hannity was following the race closely, and he wanted the facts, and only the facts. He hosted McCormack to discuss the incident -- misspelling his name in the process (after, for extra irony, mocking the Coakley campaign for a spelling error of its own).

For the record, as Media Matters' Dianna Parker noted, "it's not entirely clear what happened, but shaky video shows McCormack following Coakley, losing his balance after some contact with Meehan, and falling over a metal gate. There's also a photo of McCormack splayed on the ground, with Meehan leaning over to help him up. Meehan issued an apology for the incident, saying he was "a little too aggressive in the confusion of trying to help the Attorney General get to her car," but that he "clearly did not intend to cause John McCormack to trip and fall over that low fence." McCormack even said that he thinks Meehan "didn't intend to knock me into a fence and for me to go down."

 Yes, it seems that when elections are involved, Fox asks the few fact-checkers it has on staff to take the rest of the week off. And so, it was a real shock to see a Fox reporter correcting one of the network's most blatant falsehoods concerning the race: that Democrats in the state were "trying to change Massachusetts law" in order to delay the certification of votes. Unlike Fox's crack fact-checking staff, Fox reporter Molly Line actually showed up for work on Thursday, just in time to debunk the claim.

With a few days to go, don't expect anything to change. There's still time for the Fox Nation and others to continue claiming that Coakley said Catholics shouldn't work in emergency rooms because of abortions (false), and for National Review's Kathryn Jean Lopez to echo the attack (still false), and for Glenn Beck to tell his audience that Coakley isn't that interested in protecting children because of her abortion stance. But who knows what will happen on Tuesday. Either way, things are looking good for Scott Brown, who might soon be following in the footsteps of new Fox hire Sarah Palin. "If this doesn't work out," said Fox's Brian Kilmeade, "he could probably do a morning show."

I wonder which network would host it? 

This week's media columns

This week's media columns from the Media Matters senior fellows: Eric Boehlert looks at how the press let Palin and Cheney rig the system; Jamison Foser analyzes the right-wing media reaction to Haiti; and Karl Frisch discusses the Proposition 8 federal trial and right-wing media homophobia.

Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, MySpace and Digg

Media Matters maintains active online communities on the nation's leading social networking sites. Be sure to join us on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, MySpace and Digg and join in on the discussion.

Media Matters Minute now on YouTube

For some time now, radio shows and stations throughout the country have been carrying the Media Matters Minute, a daily minute-long recap of our work topped off with the "most outrageous comment" of the day. We encourage you to subscribe (YouTube / iTunes / RSS) to the Minute's daily podcast hosted by Media Matters' Ben Fishel.

Vote for Media Matters in the Shorty Awards

Media Matters has been nominated as the top nonprofit in the Shorty Awards honoring the best producers of short, real-time content on Twitter. Cast your vote by clicking here, and be sure to let your friends know why you think Media Matters deserves to win!

Special thanks to John Santore, who contributed to the production of this week's wrap-up.

This weekly wrap-up was compiled and edited by Karl Frisch, a senior fellow at Media Matters for America. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the web as well as original commentary. You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube or sign-up to receive his columns by email.

Regardless of which side prevails, experts agree the case is likely to be appealed all the way to the highest court in the land.

Cue right-wing media hysteria and homophobia.

Few other issues whip the conservative media chattering class into a frenzy like the equality of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender Americans. This unprecedented federal legal challenge is unlikely to be any different.

With hardly an exception, the folks at Fox News have been party to one homophobic attack on the gay community after another -- oddly hypocritical behavior for a network that sponsored the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association's annual conference just a few short months ago.

The network's highest-rated host, Bill O'Reilly, has repeatedly attacked marriage equality, claiming that the simple act of two people in love making it official could open the door to people to marry "a turtle," "a goat," "a duck," or "a dolphin." This coming from a man who once famously quacked, "I think everybody's got to relax on all this gay stuff." Relax, indeed -- O'Reilly has even baselessly fearmongered that legal protections for LGBT people could, in fact, protect pedophiles. A dated, demonstrably false, and hateful charge to be sure.

He's hardly alone at the conservative cable outlet.

Fox News' conspiracy-theorist-in-chief Glenn Beck, playing with dolls to make his point, inexplicably argued that marriage equality could lead to "triad" marriages, and the factually challenged morning crew at Fox & Friends hammered home the same erroneous point. They also claimed that increased support for marriage equality in public polls was due not to softening attitudes on gays and lesbians by the American people, but to "being politically correct."

Then there's Sean Hannity who once allowed right-wing pundit Ann Coulter to go unchallenged on his nationally syndicated radio program when she declared, "I don't think there's anything offensive about any variation of faggy, faggotry, faggot, fag."

Radio host Rush Limbaugh, despite having been married three times, is a steadfast defender of what the right calls "traditional marriage." El Rushbo once compared the Iowa Supreme Court decision granting marriage equality to "the Soviets," and while discussing President Obama and the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, he has routinely littered his screeds with juvenile anti-LGBT innuendo.

There is perhaps no voice more homophobic in the media today than that of Michael Savage (née Weiner), the Number 3 radio host in America, who was fired by MSNBC in 2003 for describing a caller as a "sodomite" and telling him to "get AIDS and die." Savage also lost his contract with Creative Artists Agency (two days after the exclusive talent firm announced it had signed him) in the wake of a rant over singer Melissa Etheridge in which he declared, "I don't like a woman married to a woman. It makes me want to puke. ... I want to vomit when I hear it. I think it's child abuse." For Savage, these comments are par for the course, all part of his almost-daily homophobic hate speech.

It's no better online, where writers for WorldNetDaily have endorsed a proposed Uganda law that would permit the death penalty simply for being gay and Townhall.com has led a perplexing anti-gay which hunt -- the later being a pet cause of a man who once called a judge a "crooked, slimy Jew, who has a history of lying and thieving common to members of his race."

The list could go on ad infinitum, and perhaps that is the point. Without fail, conservatives in the media will savagely attack the LGBT community whenever given the opening, and this is just such an opening.

With this week's federal case to decide the constitutionality of Proposition 8 already garnering worldwide media attention, the mainstream press will have ample opportunity to counter the malicious, hateful rhetoric spewed by right-wing outlets and personalities big and small with a healthy dose of reality-based journalism.

Should they fail in that endeavor, it will not be forgotten.

Karl Frisch is a senior fellow at Media Matters for America, a progressive media watchdog, research, and information center based in Washington, D.C. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the web as well as original commentary. You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube or sign up to receive his columns by email.

Media Matters has been nominated as the top nonprofit in the Shorty Awards honoring the best producers of short, real-time content on Twitter. Be sure to cast your vote by clicking here, and let your friends know why you think Media Matters deserves to win!

Are You Smarter Than a Fifth-Grader?: Climate Change Edition

Cold weather has come to almost inevitably yield reflexively mindless right-wing media attacks on the scientific consensus about global climate change. Yes, when it's chilly outside, particularly if it happens to snow, media conservatives go into hysterical fits -- declaring the idea that global climate change actually exists and is at least in part caused by humans a complete farce.

Before we get into the worst examples of Are You Smarter than a Fifth Grader?: Climate Change Edition, it bears noting that there is a very real difference between weather (what we feel outside on any given day) and climate (the study of weather over a long period of time). Now that we've got that out of the way, on with the show.

Perhaps no one delights in cold weather more than Steve Doocy. On Tuesday, the Fox & Friends co-host said, "That global warming thing is really kicking into high gear, isn't it?" The same day, Doocy took to Twitter and Facebook to further muddy the scientific waters, writing, "News flash, it's FREEZING in NYC, I wonder if Al Gore is shivering somewhere," and later, "I was writing ... I wonder if Al Gore is shivering somewhere ... this global warming thing is really starting to kick in." Over the following two days, Doocy declared, "It's not global warming, I'll tell you that," and agreed with a misinformed guest who claimed, "There is no global warming going on."

Doocy was hardly alone.

Internet gossip Matt Drudge was predictably back to his old tricks -- hyping news of cold weather, and Fox News' Sean Hannity again falsely claimed that 2009 was the "coldest year on record" (it's actually among the warmest) before touting later in the week an Al Gore ice sculpture in Sarah Palin's home state that just wouldn't melt to claim that global warming "hasn't exactly reached Alaska."

Other right-wing hacks got in on the fun too, baselessly claiming that under President Obama, the CIA has "diverted" resources to climate research, or "spying on icebergs instead of terrorists," as the Fox & Friends folks put it while passing along an Exxon-funded front group's press release. Heaven knows this isn't a national security issue the agency has been looking at since at least the Bush years. Oh wait, it is.

Funny, we never seem to hear much from media conservatives about warm weather in relation to global climate change. Perhaps their collective scientific sensibilities are like migrating birds -- they only return during warm weather.

Other major stories

America's Mayor? More like Amnesia's Mayor

It's a new year, but conservative media figures are up to their old tricks. And that, of course, means politicizing terrorism.

You might remember that former White House spokeswoman Dana Perino was once forced to admit that she didn't know anything about the Cuban missile crisis. More recently (last November), she conveniently forgot that 9-11 occurred while George W. Bush was president.

It's no wonder why. For the right, terrorism is a political tool to be used against progressives, whom they work to portray as weak, vacillating, and incompetent on national security. That tendency has been on stark display since December 25, when Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, a 23-year-old Nigerian, allegedly attempted to bomb a Northwest Airlines jet using explosives hidden under his clothes.

Since then, numerous conservatives both in and outside of the right-wing media have been hard at work rewriting history, blaming Bill Clinton and Barack Obama for any and all acts of terrorism committed against the United States, all while ignoring the presidency of Bush. It was Mary Matalin who claimed on CNN that Bush "inherited the most tragic attack on our own soil in our nation's history." Similarly, on January 3, the Las Vegas Review-Journal's Sherman Frederick wrote that "in the wake of fierce criticism, Obama now talks tough about keeping America safe. But in the two cases of domestic terrorism since 9/11 -- both on Obama's watch -- red flags flew aplenty."

Frederick's argument was a perfect encapsulation of the willful amnesia of the right, which has chosen to ignore some or all of the six attempted (and in some tragic cases, successful) incidents of terrorism that occurred during Bush's watch. Indeed, the conservative figure to do so most recently was none other than America's Mayor himself, Rudy Giuliani, who on Friday took a page from Perino's history book. "We had no domestic attacks under Bush," he told George Stephanopoulos on ABC's Good Morning America. "We've had one under Obama."

Unfortunately, statements such as these are just the tip of the iceberg. Conservatives have been pushing numerous falsehoods and distortions concerning terrorism and national security, among them: the idea that trying Abdulmutallab will endanger U.S. security (as Dick Morris and Sarah Palin claimed); that Obama was too slow (three days) to publicly respond to the Abdulmutallab attack (according to Karl Rove, who must have forgotten it took Bush more time to publicly respond to the attempted "shoe bomber" Richard Reid); and that racial profiling will enhance national security (Giuliani again and numerous Fox News personalities). As usual, the right-wing media have been in lockstep, as Fox's Doocy, Brian Kilmeade, and Bill Kristol, among others, have all advanced similar fictions.

Indeed, the media have a crucial role to play in all of this, and since conservative outlets have no interest in delivering honest analysis of national security issues to the public, that responsibility falls to more respectable and responsible journalists. For that reason, Stephanopoulos' failure to correct Giuliani's statement on GMA was particularly disappointing. Much to Stephanopoulos' credit, he quickly apologized for the error, whereas a spokesman for Giuliani offered only the excuse that he misspoke. Regardless, the public is counting on reporters of integrity to cut through the baseless accusations peddled by the right -- especially on an issue as pivotal as this one.

Limbaugh loves "socialized" medicine and unionized hospitals?

Over the holiday, Rush Limbaugh was rushed to the hospital with chest pains while on vacation in Hawaii. Predictably, he used the event to espouse his vision of how America's health care system should function -- and it's even more far-right than you might imagine. Rush isn't just against government health insurance plans. He's against all health insurance plans. It turns out that Rush isn't insured, and he doesn't think anybody else should be, either. He explained that he had "opt[ed] out" of the insurance system, and that by doing so, he was "providing leadership" for the rest of America's tens of millions of uninsured individuals, who presumably also have $400 million, 10-year radio contracts. According to El Rushbo, health insurance isn't that expensive after all. In fact, he said, his hospital stay cost less than half of what an average SUV costs. In his view, everyone should simply pay out of pocket for their health care bills, like he does. This laughable analysis was roundly criticized on Howard Kurtz's CNN program Reliable Sources and by MSNBC's Chris Matthews.

Rush also said that he considered himself lucky that he had gone into the hospital before 2013, after which the Democratic health care reform measures will have taken effect -- an observation replayed with a smile by Fox's Greta Van Susteren. What's more, he claimed the treatment he received was so good that it proved that there isn't "one thing wrong with the American health care system. It is working just fine, just dandy." Ironically enough, Hawaii is so progressive when it comes to health care that the Senate bill excludes the state from some provisions -- how absolutely socialist! Additionally, Hawaii has among the highest percentages of unionized workers in the country. In fact, all nurses at the Queens Medical Center where Limbaugh received treatment are members of the Hawaii Nurses Association. "On behalf of the labor movement and health reform advocates everywhere," wrote SEIU blogger Jessica Kutch, "THANKS FOR YOUR SUPPORT, Rush!"

This week's media columns

This week's media columns from the Media Matters senior fellows: Jamison Foser writes that Time's Mark Halperin wants a prom king, not a president; and Karl Frisch offers up some potential New Year's resolutions for the right-wing media machine.

Do you listen to podcasts? Try the Media Matters Minute

For months, radio shows and stations throughout the country have been carrying the Media Matters Minute, a daily minute-long recap of our work topped off with the "most outrageous comment" of the day. We encourage you to subscribe (iTunes / RSS) to the Minute's daily podcast, hosted by Media Matters' Ben Fishel.

Special thanks to John Santore, who contributed to the production of this week's wrap-up.

This weekly wrap-up was compiled and edited by Karl Frisch, a senior fellow at Media Matters for America. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the Web, as well as original commentary. You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, or sign up to receive his columns by email.

Yes, many Americans have made their New Year's resolutions. Perhaps the conservative media establishment should do the same.

Fox News' tear-shedding golden boy Glenn Beck should give up the infamous chalkboard he's used to illustrate wild conspiracy theories and invest the money saved -- he must spend a bundle on chalk -- on a team of full-time fact-checkers. After all, he's become notorious over the past year for letting facts fall by the wayside in his non-stop campaign to tear down the Obama presidency. Such a resolution might even bring back at least some of the 80 advertisers Beck's program lost in 2009 after he called the president a "racist."

Noted sexist (and radio host) Rush Limbaugh should learn from his embarrassing failed attempt to purchase the NFL's St. Louis Rams and pull himself out of the Miss America pageant that he's slated to judge later this year. Limbaugh can use the time he would have devoted to the pageant on some long-needed sensitivity seminars. Yes, 2010 could be a banner year for a reformed El Rushbo if he can manage to string together a few months of abstinence from further racially charged, misogynistic, homophobic, anti-Muslim and otherwise hateful remarks.

Serial misinformer Betsy McCaughey -- who has been caught making patently false claims against health care reform time and again -- should take some time off from "policy analysis" and enroll in a Learning Annex class to improve reading comprehension. I'm sure a medical company or the tobacco industry would be happy to foot the bill -- it wouldn't be the first time she's lined her pockets with their cash. In no time at all McCaughey could nip her dirty little habit of making crazy claims about health care reform in the bud. Imagine what she could accomplish by focusing on what's actually written in the legislation being considered -- gone would be claims of "socialized medicine," euthanasia for grandma, and rationed care.

Andrew Breitbart, fedora-wearing internet gossip Matt Drudge's protégé, should launch BigBreitbart.com to monitor his other online efforts -- BigGovernment.com, BigHollywood.com and the soon-to-be-launched BigJournalism.com. This new website would serve as a one-stop-shop for correcting the factually challenged claims Breitbart and his minions regularly promote. From homophobic attacks on a gay Department of Education official to his shoddy attempts at undercover "investigations" targeting the community group ACORN, it wouldn't take too long for such a venture to quickly publish volumes of material exposing his half-baked brand of pseudo-journalism.

The reigning king of prime-time cable news, Bill O'Reilly, should unleash his ambush-addicted producer goons on his employer, Fox News. Rather than waste time trying to find new progressive targets, O'Reilly can turn inward and dispatch his team to confront the Fox News producer who was caught on film rallying a crowd during the Fox News promoted 9/12 protests; Sean Hannity and various other Fox News personalities for repeatedly airing doctored video to undermine President Obama and other progressives; his boss Rupert Murdoch for claiming the president made a "very racist comment"; and the Fox News graphics department for one failure after another -- remember that climate change poll trumpeted by the network in which the respondents added up to an astonishing and mathematically impossible 120 percent? Make no mistake, O'Reilly's staff would be busy for months ambushing their conservative co-workers.

Perhaps he's ingested one too many of his son's Rockstar energy drinks, but Michael Savage (née Weiner), the number three radio host in America, could very well heal his inner child with some good group therapy and a few chill pills. The often-screaming, always outrageous radio talker has a penchant for offensive tirades targeting the gay community (he once said a popular gay blogger "hates women so much that he won't have sex with them"), Muslims (he wants an "outright ban on Muslim immigration"), President Obama (he said "Obama hates" and "is raping America") -- even autistic children (he claimed autism was "a fraud, a racket. ... In 99 percent of the cases, it's a brat who hasn't been told to cut the act out"). If he works hard in 2010, his radio program may just have a glint of sanity.

Perhaps I'm too optimistic to expect that these integral cogs of the right-wing media machine will take it upon themselves to change for the better in 2010. I guess I could always blame my New Year's resolution to hope for the best when confronted with perplexing, stubborn absurdity.

Karl Frisch is a senior fellow at Media Matters for America, a progressive media watchdog, research, and information center based in Washington, D.C. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the web as well as original commentary.  You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube or sign-up to receive his columns by email.

For anyone watching Fox News in the weeks leading up to this year's off-year election, it should have been apparent what was afoot on the conservative network.

In the two weeks leading up to their November 3 elections, Conservative Party congressional candidate Doug Hoffman (NY-23), New Jersey Republican gubernatorial candidate Chris Christie, and Virginia Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell appeared on Fox News and its personalities' radio shows at least 16 times for live interviews lasting a total of 114 minutes and 36 seconds.

As leading Republican politicians and activists celebrated Fox News' role in pushing just the right message and helping their electoral chances, two Fox News employees spent time fundraising and recruiting volunteers in support of GOP-backed candidates. Fox News host Mike Huckabee used network airtime to collect email addresses for his PAC, which in turn used the addresses to recruit volunteers for GOP candidates on Tuesday's ballot, including McDonnell and Hoffman. Meanwhile, Fox News contributor Karl Rove was shilling for the Republican Governors' Association to help Christie's bid in New Jersey. All the while, Fox continued to feature his spin of that same election.

So, Fox News gave Republican candidates a huge platform to communicate with conservative activists and voters while Fox News employees recruited volunteers and raised money for them.

What else did Fox need to check off the list before Election Day? How about telling people how to vote and pre-spinning Democratic Party losses before a single ballot had been counted? Check.

One Fox News graphic actually stated that if the GOP were to win the gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey -- races with no direct influence over congressional efforts to reform health care -- it would mean "no gov't-run option" in health care reform.

Sean Hannity, Fox News' apparent GOP get-out-the-vote captain, went all out advising his radio listeners how to cast their votes, telling one caller to his radio show, "Don't forget -- go vote for Christie tomorrow in New Jersey. All right?" and his New Jersey audience in general, "get to the polls" and "stop Obama-care in its tracks." On his Fox News program, Hannity told Hoffman, "I hope I'm on the air this time tomorrow night and I'll be able to declare you the winner." Marching to Hannity's tune, CNN's Lou Dobbs declared Hoffman was "change [he] can believe in" while Fox News' Bill O'Reilly piled on predicting a Hoffman win.

But what if -- right-wing media fear of fears! -- Democrats were to pull off a victory in New Jersey? Well, there'd be just one thing to explain it -- cue the ominous music -- Voter Fraud.

Rush Limbaugh warned his audience that "fraudsters" at ACORN, SEIU, and the New Black Panthers would try to affect elections on Tuesday and that "tomorrow's going to be a dry run for Democrat mischief and malfeasance, getting ready for 2010 and 2012." Andrew Breitbart's BigGovernment.com took the bait, baselessly -- and predictably -- accusing progressives of trying to "steal" the New Jersey governor's seat. As did Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund who fabricated evidence of voter fraud in New Jersey and anonymously sourced voter fraud innuendo. Completing the circle, Limbaugh echoed Fund's baseless accusation warning of an "ACORN factor" and a "vote fraud factor."

Fox News hosts and political analysts capped off Election Day celebrating and shilling for conservative and GOP candidates. When the dust settled, Republicans had won the Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial contests while Democrats had won the open New York congressional seat -- a seat targeted by tea-partiers and not held by a Democrat in nearly 150 years.

While Fox News' Brit Hume acknowledged that "Barack Obama was not a central issue" in New Jersey -- exit polls decisively showed he wasn't an issue in any of the targeted races -- others in the conservative media were blind to the readily available exit polls. Hume's Fox colleague O'Reilly said the New Jersey governor's race was a referendum on Obama. El Rushbo dismissed the exit polls entirely, saying the governors' races were all "about Obama" and that the election results show "[t]here is no question this is an anti-Obama vote."

Fox & Friends graphics described the election results as "shockwaves," "winds of change," a "Republican revival," and a "blueprint for success." In a truly odd attempt at spin, Fox News declared that the results meant "Obamacare" was dead, while its sister network, Fox Business, claimed the markets "like[d]" "Big GOP Wins In NJ & VA."

So, exit polls said Obama had nothing to do with Democratic losses in New Jersey and Virginia, where, incidentally, the GOP nominees downplayed their right-wing positions -- and this is good news for Republicans?

What about Hoffman, the unambiguously right-wing Conservative party candidate in New York who conservative media types spent weeks hyping? How would Fox News and company spin his loss of a seat, again, not held by a Democrat in far more than 100 years?

In an attempt to paint Democratic Party victor Owens as a conservative, thus explaining away his win in a historically GOP district, right-wing bloggers sought to highlight the "under-reported fact" that he "campaigned against the public option" even though Owens had expressed support for a public option since September.

Limbaugh blamed "party bosses and these big thinkers like Newt [Gingrich]," who "screwed the whole thing up," while leaping to the defense of Sarah Palin, who had championed Hoffman. Limbaugh asserted that Palin "is not damaged at all" by the loss of her candidate. And in an about-face only fitting for someone of Limbaugh's ego - err ... stature -- the conservative talker switched his stance on "moral" victories, which he'd lambasted Democrats for in 2006, declaring Hoffman had a "good showing."

So, yes, if one thing is clear after the 2009 off-year election, it's this: Conservative media figures haven't a clue when it comes to election analysis.

Oh and one last note on Tuesday's election, did you hear the nasty anti-Obama election night story that Fox News concocted out of thin air? The conservative cable outlet reported, remember this is not true, that President Obama watched an HBO documentary about himself, rather than following the election results. A story so grand -- gosh the president is such a narcissist! -- that the fact-challenged liberal media bias hunters at Newsbusters wet themselves over it before eventually conceding that Fox News had "misreported" the incident -- a nice way of saying "made it up."

I guess, in addition to the analysis, they haven't a clue when it comes to reporting either.

This Week's Media Columns

This week's media columns from the Media Matters senior fellows: Eric Boehlert looks at the myth of Fox News' ratings spike; and Jamison Foser takes on Howard Kurtz's bogus conflict-of-interest defense.

Greg Lewis notes that for conservatives, $400 million buys them defeat at the ballot box in The Friday Rush, a review of Limbaugh's radio shows over the past week.

Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and MySpace

Media Matters maintains active online communities on the nation's leading social networking sites. Be sure to join us on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and MySpace, and join in the discussion.

Do you listen to podcasts? Try the Media Matters Minute

For months, radio shows and stations across the country have been carrying the Media Matters Minute, a daily minute-long recap of our work topped off with the "most outrageous comment" of the day. We encourage you to subscribe (iTunes / RSS) to the Minute's daily podcast, hosted by Media Matters' Ben Fishel.

This weekly wrap-up was compiled and edited by Karl Frisch, a senior fellow at Media Matters for America. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the web as well as original commentary. You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, or sign-up to receive his columns by email.

A statement released by Dave Checketts -- a member of the group seeking to buy the Rams and the chairman of the NHL's St. Louis Blues -- said Limbaugh was dropped because his "involvement ... has become a complication ... endangering our bid."

"Complication" sure is a nice way of putting what transpired this week.

In the week since El Rushbo confirmed his intention to help buy the Rams: the executive director of the NFL players union came out against Limbaugh's bid, saying football "overcomes division and rejects discrimination"; Indianapolis Colts owner Jim Irsay said he "couldn't even think of" supporting Limbaugh's Rams bid due to his divisive rhetoric; NFL players reportedly said they "wouldn't play for" a Limbaugh-owned team due to his "flat-out racist" comments; NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said Limbaugh's "divisive comments are not what the N.F.L. is all about"; and a host of sports media figures blasted the very notion of the right-wing talker being an NFL owner based on his controversial statements.

As you might imagine, Limbaugh didn't take the controversy surrounding the bid or his ultimate exclusion from the group seeking to buy the Rams lying down.

Attempting to defend himself from mounting criticism, Limbaugh said -- with a straight face, no less -- "I'm colorblind. ... I treat everybody equally." Of course, such a statement ignores his "colorblind" history of racially charged comments. Who could forget these gems?

• "We are being told that we have to hope [President Obama] succeeds, that we have to bend over, grab the ankles ... because his father was black." [1/21/09]

• "I do believe" Obama is an "angry black guy." [7/27/09]

• "Obama's entire economic program is reparations." [7/22/09]

• Obama is "Halfrican-American." [7/24/07]

Or my personal favorite: the time Limbaugh invented a "racial component" to Iraq war vet Paul Hackett's decision to withdraw from a Democratic primary campaign for U.S. Senate in Ohio. Yep, after Hackett's departure from the race against then-Rep. Sherrod Brown, Rush said, "And don't forget, Sherrod Brown is black. There's a racial component here, too." In fact, Brown is white.

One needn't dig too far back -- Rush was happy to offer more racially charged statements this week. For starters, he whined that the NFL was an "outpost of racism and liberalism," apparently missing last month's report by the Center for Responsive Politics that showed that since 1989, NFL teams, owners, players and personnel gave overwhelmingly to the GOP.

In what can only be described as an odd attempt to beat back criticism for his past remarks, Limbaugh turned to basketball, complaining that rappers "own parts of NBA teams" and "[t]hey're celebrated -- 'Cool, daddy, cool!' " He even said that acclaimed sportscaster "Bob Costas is a ... very unhappy little diva." Is it any wonder that the world of professional athletics resoundingly rejected El Rushbo, dashing his dream of team ownership?

Limbaugh's defensive line was quick to come to his aid. Right-wing pundit Ann Coulter said NFL players would pick Rush over "Nazi collaborator" George Soros because "a lot of them" are "real Christians" -- as opposed to fake ones? MSNBC's resident cranky uncle and in-house bigot Pat Buchanan played defense, as well, which unsurprisingly resulted in more bigotry.

The Wall Street Journal came to Rush's defense with an op-ed making a ... I'll just say it -- stupid false comparison between Limbaugh and Keith Olbermann's work on NBC's Football Night in America. The Journal claimed not to have "heard anyone on the right say Mr. Olbermann's nightly ad-hominem rants should disqualify him from hanging around the NFL." Perhaps the Journal could use a hearing test, because various right-wing media figures and bloggers have done just that.

So, no, El Rushbo won't be purchasing a pro football team any time soon. He could always try his "formerly nicotine-stained" hand (or "fingers," as he would say) at owning a fantasy football team.

Then again, he's got the 2010 Miss America pageant to look forward to, where he'll be serving as a judge.

Other major stories this week

Fox News vs. The White House

Be sure to check out the latest from Media Matters' Eric Boehlert, who offers up a compelling "memo to the media," which reads, in part:

Fox News has changed the rules. Now the press needs to change the way it covers Fox News.

Rupert Murdoch's cable cabal is now, first and foremost, a political entity. Fox News has transformed itself into the Opposition Party of the Obama White House, which, of course, is unprecedented for a media company in modern-day America. That partisan embrace means the news media have to expand beyond typing up Fox News-ratings-are-up and the White-House-is-angry stories, and it needs to start treating the cable channel for what it is: a partisan animal.

The press needs to drop its longstanding gentleman's agreement not to write about other news outlets as news players -- not to get bogged down in criticizing the competition -- because those newsroom rules no longer apply. Fox News has exited the journalism community this year. It's a purely political player, and journalists ought to start covering it that way.

I understand Fox News still wants to enjoy the benefits of being seen as a news operation. It still wants the trappings and the professional protections that go with it. But it no longer functions as a news outlet, so why does the rest of the press naively treat it that way?

Fox News is now at the forefront of a political movement.

[...]

Completely detached from traditional newsroom standards, Fox News has become a political institution, and the press needs to start treating it that way. The press needs to treat Fox News the same way it treats the Republican National Committee, even though, frankly, the RNC probably can't match the in-your-face partisanship that Fox News flaunts 24/7. Think about it: Murdoch's "news" channel now out-flanks the Republican Party when it comes to ceaseless partisan attacks on the White House.

Truth is, in recent years the RNC used to use Fox news to help amplify the partisan raids that national Republicans launched against Democrats. It was within the RNC that the partisan strategy was mapped out and initiated. (i.e. it was the RNC that first pushed the Al-Gore-invented-the-Internet smear). But it was on talk radio and Fox News where the partisan bombs got dropped. Today, that relationship has, for the most part, been inversed. Now it's within Fox News that the partisan witch hunts are plotted and launched, and it's the RNC that plays catch-up to Glenn Beck and company.

And I'm sorry, but the Fox News defense that it's a just a few on-air pundits who (relentlessly) attack the White House and that the news team still plays it straight is, at this point, a joke. What kind of "news" team, in the span of five days, airs 22 clips of health reform forums featuring only people who oppose reform? What kind of "news" team tries to pass off a GOP press release as its own research -- typo and all? What kind of "news" team promotes a partisan political rally? (Or did I miss the 100-plus free ads that CNN aired in 2003 promoting an anti-war rally?)

[...]

It's clear that in 2009, Fox News is no longer in the business of journalism. Fox News isn't trying to inform people, it's trying to misinform them. That's not journalism. It's propaganda. But as long as the press continues to hold up the façade of journalism, Fox News will try to hide behind it.

Boehlert's takedown of Fox News can be read in its entirety here.

We're through Dobbs' foggy looking glass (or camera lens)

CNN's Lou Dobbs is none too pleased with his critics. At issue is a new television commercial from Media Matters and America's Voice that was to air during CNN's broadcast of its upcoming Latino in America special. In what appeared to be talking points prepared in the style of Mad Libs, Dobbs denounced the ad, claiming it was created by "George Soros attack groups" as "propaganda."

CNN, for its part, refused to run the ad -- skipping out on yet another opportunity to provide some accountability and distance itself from its ongoing Dobbs problem. In August, Media Matters bought a week of ad time on CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News in Washington, D.C., New York, and Atlanta to air an ad calling on CNN to address Dobbs' repeated promotion of birther conspiracy theories. As The Huffington Post reported at the time, "[F]ive of the six cable providers contracted for the project have informed the group that they are declining to put the spot on CNN."

Dobbs was in rare form this week in going after his critics. He decried the "mad propaganda emanating ... from the extreme left, the Media Matters folks, all of them funded by George Soros" and complained to Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) that "left-wing ethnocentric interest groups" are "calling for my firing from CNN." You know what happens when you point a finger, right, Lou? That's right: Three are pointing back at you.

Firing or reining in Dobbs may be a moot point anyway. According to recent reports, Dobbs met with Fox News president Roger Ailes over dinner last month. Could Dobbs be taking his immigrant-smearing hysteria and loony quest for Obama's already-available birth certificate to Fox Business Network?

We do agree with this one, perhaps Freudian, comment Dobbs made this week: "It's getting so you can't trust cable networks anymore."

EXCLUSIVE: CNN's Castellanos on the take from insurance industry

This week, Media Matters exclusively obtained evidence that CNN contributor Alex Castellanos' political consulting firm, National Media, is the ad buyer for the new ad blitz by the insurance industry group America's Health Insurance Plan (AHIP) that attacks Democratic health care reform plans.

According to the detailed ad buy information obtained by Media Matters, Castellanos is responsible for placing, beginning October 11, more than $1 million of AHIP advertising in five states. A review of National Media's client list indicates that Castellanos' work for AHIP isn't his only conflict with regard to health care reform. National Media has done work for the Federation of American Hospitals, the pharmaceutical industry group PhRMA, and the HCA Sunrise Hospital. Castellanos last appeared on CNN September 30; during a debate with Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) on The Situation Room, Castellanos defended Republican health care proposals.

After noting CNN's responsibility to properly identify Castellanos' industry ties and ensure that his obvious conflict of interest does not tarnish the network's future coverage of the health care debate, Washington Post Co.'s Greg Sargent reported that CNN admitted that Castellanos worked for the health insurance industry and promised full disclosure in the future.

This week's media columns

This week's media columns from the Media Matters senior fellows: in a message to the media, Eric Boehlert says Fox News is now the opposition party, Jamison Foser discusses if Dr. Fox-enstein -- errr ... Roger Ailes is building another monster.

Simon Maloy notes Rush Limbaugh's fantasy football conspiracy in The Friday Rush, a review of Limbaugh's radio shows over the past week.

Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, MySpace, and Digg

Media Matters maintains active online communities on the nation's leading social networking sites. Be sure to join us on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, MySpace, and Digg and join in the discussion.

Do you listen to podcasts? Try the Media Matters Minute

For months now, radio shows and stations throughout the country have been carrying the Media Matters Minute, a daily minute-long recap of our work topped off with the "most outrageous comment" of the day. We encourage you to subscribe (iTunes/RSS) to the Minute's daily podcast hosted by Media Matters' Ben Fishel.

This weekly wrap-up was compiled and edited by Karl Frisch, a senior fellow at Media Matters for America. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the Web, as well as original commentary. You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube or sign up to receive his columns by email.

With Halloween just around the corner, Fox News president Roger Ailes -- a former Republican communications guru -- is looking more and more like the news industry's Dr. Frankenstein. For months now, he has been putting the finishing touches on his first monster, Fox News Channel, just as its bride, Fox Business Network, is showing signs of life.

His main tactic has been all too apparent: steal conservative media figures from real news networks like CNN, MSNBC, and ABC in order to build something new from the pieces -- something that only superficially resembles a legitimate news outlet.

Last spring, conspiracy-loving crybaby Glenn Beck claimed that Ailes wooed him over to Fox News from CNN Headline News by stressing the conservative network's opposition to the president. Beck even told one newspaper that Ailes had likened Fox News' battle against Obama to the Alamo.

Then there was Tucker Carlson in May. Fresh off yet another canceled show -- first with CNN and then with MSNBC -- and a brief stint on ABC's Dancing With The Stars, the conservative man-boy cable host known for his bow-tie fetish landed with a bang at Fox News, declaring, "I've waited a long time to get here."

Luring two big right-wing names to Fox News Channel's roster allowed Ailes to focus on Fox Business Network, his answer to NBC Universal's successful business news outlet, CNBC.

Since its launch in late 2007, Fox Business has been plagued with horrible ratings. In fact, CNBC sometimes outperformed the new conservative business outlet by a margin of 10-to-1. It's hardly surprising, then, that Ailes has turned his focus to the struggling network.

Just last month, Fox Business announced that it would begin carrying a weekday simulcast of Don Imus' radio program. Imus is, of course, far better known for his long history of outrageous and at times racist and sexist comments than for his business-reporting chops. In fact, he'll likely represent the word "business" in his new employer's name about as well as his new colleagues represent the word "news" in Fox News Channel.

Imus comes to Fox Business from the little-known and little-watched RFD-TV, his television home following his high-profile firing from MSNBC and CBS radio in 2007 for referring to the Rutgers University women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos."

September would prove to be a barn burner of a month for Ailes. In addition to Imus, John Stossel, a correspondent for the ABC newsmagazine 20/20, also announced his intention to join Fox Business. Stossel will no doubt feel right at home -- he has a long history of denying the scientific reality of global climate change and promoting a cornucopia of right-wing myths and distortions. So much so that Fox's Chris Wallace described Stossel as a "very natural fit at Fox because he is a contrarian, and he's a conservative."

So what's next for Fox Business? Well, according to recent reports, CNN's immigrant-bashing conspiracy theorist Lou Dobbs met with Ailes over dinner last month. Could Dobbs be taking his loony quest for President Obama's already-available birth certificate to Fox Business? It seems plausible. Years before CNN turned over its airwaves to Dobbs for his nightly broadcasts of immigrant-smearing hysteria and right-wing fringe causes of the day, Dobbs was something of a respected financial news anchor.

Surely, Imus, Stossel, and Dobbs won't be enough to breathe new life into Ailes' monster bride of a network. He's going to need a few more high-profile names before he's able to shout "It's alive!" from the rooftops. But who?

Perhaps Ailes could sign Michael Savage, the third-highest-rated radio host in America, who was fired by MSNBC in 2003 for describing a caller as "a sodomite" and telling him to "get AIDS and die." While he's at it, he could also snatch up Pat Buchanan, the former CNN and MSNBC host who currently serves as resident cranky uncle and political commentator for the latter. Surely, they could use someone with his decades-long history of racism, sexism, xenophobia, homophobia, defending of Hitler, and whitewashing of the Holocaust.

We might as well refer to Ailes as Dr. Fox-enstein at this point. After all, his relentless abuse of the journalistic form is just as frightening as Shelley's chilling fictional tale of scientific experimentation run amok -- perhaps more so.

Karl Frisch is a senior fellow at Media Matters for America, a progressive media watchdog and research and information center based in Washington, D.C. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the Web, as well as original commentary. You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube or sign up to receive his columns by email.