Please do not forget that the AP was working for McCain during the election. Not only does this force them into "Shape of Earth: Views Differ" reporting, it precludes them from stating simple facts in a forthright manner because to do so would be to undermine "their side."

Reminiscent of being faced with telling the truth and getting in trouble as an adolescent , or telling someone you lerve them as a confused person . The point being they know , they know , they know , and they scuff their feet eyes downcast , smirking , and thinking of every way to say they are sorry you feel that way .

We are talking about the AP. The AP stopped being a news organization sometime in the Bush administration. Now it is just another piece of the Republican noise machine. Think I am overstating the case--just look at the AP's officers and Wahsington Bureau Chief. The AP is a propaganda organization pretending to be a news organization. You are expecting them to tell the truth.

AP: "Some people say the moon is made of green cheese."

"Democrats refute this claim, citing as evidence the moon rocks brought back by the Apollo astronauts."

"Republicans, on the other hand, point to the fact that there is no green cheese in the Arizona desert, where the 'so-called' moon landings were filmed."

"The green cheese debate continues. . . "

Funny, because the "liberal" media never had any trouble calling Al Gore a liar, even when he wasn't. They did, however, take an interminably long time to correct their own demonstrable mistakes or misrepresentations of what he had actually said. The NY Times was furious for being caught out on the Love Canal story by a couple of high school students who heard the same speech as their reporters, but had the rudimentary good sense to check the tapes to find out what words Gore actually used.

Tapper also noticed what I found to be the most infuriating part of her statement: "And frankly, I agreed with Palin previously, when she was asking members of the media to keep her children out of any public debate."

Reminds me of her final speech as AK governor, where she ripped the media for bringing her kids into it, and then concluded with, "Todd and I, and Track, Bristol, Tripp, Willow, Piper, Trig... I think I got ‘em all..."

just think where we would be without factcheck.org. AP would simply be saying republicans say X while democrats disagree. if we had a real news outlet, we wouldn't need factcheck.

Unbiased news is not refraining from siding with either party. Unbiased news is siding with the truth. Media outlets could do well to learn this.

I nearly threw my shoe through the screen this morning . There was the Today show and the bubble head anchor. repeating the lie about with a shot of her statement from facebook. She then turns to David Gregory and says "Is that true David" AAAAARRRRGGGG. That thety would even repeat it without prefacing it as a lie shows you the decline of journalism in this country. My irony meter went off the scale as Sarah's baby would never qualify if she went out to get insurance as the baby has a "pre-existing condition.

This example is, in a nutshell, precisely what is wrong with "journalmalism" today. It's all fuzzy and not clear.

It *is* intemperate to call someone a liar if you're not certain that they don't actually believe what they're saying, but Palin clearly does NOT believe this; if she did, she would now leave the US fearing for Trig's safety (and her own, since she's hardly a "useful member of society").

But the AP wouldn't need to call her a liar in the article to improve it: they would simply need to say that a cursory review of the documents in question establishes that her claim isn't true. People, contrary to the videos of town hall meetings, aren't actually stupid. They will notice all by themselves when the phrase "claim isn't true" is used frequently, and when it's not. They can still put 2+2 together.

Benen's last sentence in this post: "The more news outlets call out politicians for bogus claims, the stronger the incentive for politicians to make fewer bogus claims," should be painted in letters six feet high in every newsroom in America.

The AP should know better. There is no moral equivalence between people who want to debate health care on its merits and the crazies who cry the sky is falling and my mom will be put to death. One group is attempting to solve a myriad of medical industry and economic woes, while the other group is flailing about with incendiary rhetoric!

If any news outlet, especially the AP, wants to help us common Americans understand what's going on, it should be culling out the hysteria from the legitimate engagement and call it what it is - change v. status quo. Then and only then will our news organizations be doing what they are protected to do - informing the public of the state of our democracy and the various players who would challenge and champion our nation's policies.

I don't think Fournier's crew is up to the task anymore! -Kevo

Americans didn't used to have a problem calling an untrue statement "a lie." The mental state of the speaker was irrelevant. Examples:

It's A Wonderful Life (1946)

Clarence: Your brother, Harry Bailey, broke through the ice and was drowned at the age of nine.

George: That's a lie!

The Quiet Man (1952)

Thornton: I said ‘good morning’ to her.

Danaher: Good morning? It was ‘good night’ you had on your mind.

Thornton: That’s a lie.

Etc. When did the burden shift off of the speaker?

And AP's corporate owner is???????? Murdoch.

Follow the money and all is understood.

How about, "No provision of the legislation proposed by democrats sanctions or even mentions euthanasia," and the republican talking point suggesting that the president's plan will result in government-ordered killing of the elderly and disabled is among the most inflammatory accusations made by republicans, who have frequently critized the plan for provisions not found in the president's propsal.

How vile does a lie have to be, for a journalist to be outraged these days?

I diaried on exactly this story on Kos yesterday:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/8/8/763872/-A-Little-Journalism-101-for-the-AP

This is simply maddening and terrible journalism. AP's story uses Palin's lie as the headline and adds three more paragraphs of her statements before finally admitting it is all crap as verified by a third-part fact checking organization. So the reader scanning through their paper gets fed the lie and more comments and in many cases never gets as far as the buried fact that the whole thing is a pile of steaming horse excretions.

As I said in my conclusion....If a story is a lie....THAT's the story and not the lie. The headline should have been something like, "Palin's Claims About Health Care Reform Debunked."

Domage - one of the AP honchos was working for McCain, any more scoop?

BTW, the media don't even have to say "lie" - they used to ask, "what do the facts support" and actually answer that question. What would Cronkite do ...

BTW, a lot of this is from: conservative leaders put out the call to buy into/join into the media (not the obvious ones, the SCLM) and many did just that.
Link to Love Canal tape?

john r: so what did David Gregory say about the Palin fib?

weird owl: Gregory's response was:
"The White House says it isn't true."

Then he started discussing the cost control panels. It left one with the impression that it _might_ be true.

I nearly threw my shoe at the television as well.

What drives me especially nuts is how easy it would be to do the story right AND include the "balance" of both sides' spin. It is just so damned easy.

First, the journalist addresses the claim factually, on the merits (since, after all, the bill says what it says):

"Palin's reference to 'death panels' is based on recent Republican claims that a provision of the house democrats' bill requiring Medicare to pay for 'end of life counseling' requested by terminally ill patients would result in government-sponsored euthanasia of the elderly. However, the bill limits such counseling to basic services such as counseling for depression and advice regarding basic legal protections, such as living wills and health care proxies. Under the bill, the counseling would be available free of cost to Medicare patients who request the services."

[Huge issue, IMO: it is really important for bloggers and journalists to identify the true "roots" of the rumor (e.g. the actual text the conspiracy theory is based on), rather than calling the claim crazy or false. Your average reader realizes Palin's claim must have come from *somewhere*, so it is essential to trace the claim to its roots and analyze the proposed language. A link to the actual language is even better.]

Having addressed the factual accuracy of the claim, the journalist then addresses each side's spin to achieve "balance":

"Democrats claim the 'death panel' rumor is the latest of a serious of falsehoods circulated by conservatives in an effort to frighten the elderly, a group already receiving government coverage through Medicare, and whose coverage would be largely unaffected by the reform bills proposed by Democrats. Republicans counter that 'end of life counseling' could encourage terminally ill patients to end their own lives rather than seek further treatment. However, even most critics of 'end of life' services to terminally ill patients admit that it would have no impact on parents of disabled children such as Palin's son, Trig, who suffers from Down's Syndrome."

Properly presenting the story requires a higher word count, obviously, but is otherwise rather easy to do. First, address the truth of the claim on the merits. Then insert "balance" by including each side's spin. Finally, conclude by explaining that Palin's version of the rumor - which associates "end of life counseling" with retarded children - is not even supported by the conspiracy theorists.

And AP's corporate owner is???????? Murdoch.

The AP certainly sucks, but it's not "owned" by Murdoch. It's a coop owned by member media outlets, far too many of which are or have been owned by Murdoch. Murdoch used to sit on the AP board, but I don't think he does anymore.

My opinion is the media is in the controversy and fear business and has a stake in keeping things unclear. This requires someone to come on and be quoted to refute the lies or pay to run ads to attempt to clarify the misinformation.

During campaigns, stiring the pot means more coverage and more ads.

Lather, rinse, repeat

Why not take them up on their claims and demand a constitutional amendment so our health care can't be taken away.

The problem with the media's refusal to take a position is that authoritarian leaders can look at the claim in the article and train their followers to discount anything believed by Democrats and organizations like the Annenberg center they label "liberal."

The result is that the media let's itself off the hook because they reported both sides, and the conservative base remains uninformed about the truth because they "know" what the "truth" is.

chas_m: "But the AP wouldn't need to call her a liar in the article to improve it: they would simply need to say that a cursory review of the documents in question establishes that her claim isn't true."

This is basically how I reported the story. I expanded on Palin's reference to Ezekiel Emanuel, by way of explaining why she thinks reform is evil. From that context, my audience can conclude that Palin is crackers.

Mark Thiessen? The Mark Thiessen who was Donald Rumsfeld's speechwriter from 2001-2004 and then worked in the White House from 2004-2008 under Bush?

That's an unbiased source, AP. Awesome. And if it's not the same Mark Theissen, than they're probably related, so still unbiased. Right.

Ugh.

AP. Awful.

It only took thirty years, but the Republicans finally have the MSM so frightened about false accusations of "bias" that they are afraid to report facts.
To be fair, if the media accurately reported what Republicans said (which they still occasionally do) and also accurately reported that the Republican statement was false (which the media NEVER does anymore) we would hear unending screams about "bias". I guess those gentle souls representing the 4th Estate just couldn't handle the stress.