If you wondered how the Swift Liars gained traction, exhibit A: The MSM

[ProSense]

Pssst. Pass It On

by digby

It doesn't matter if it's true or not. It's "out there":

Foes Use Obama's Muslim Ties to Fuel Rumors About Him

In his speeches and often on the Internet, the part of Sen. Barack Obama's biography that gets the most attention is not his race but his connections to the Muslim world.

Since declaring his candidacy for president in February, Obama, a member of a congregation of the United Church of Christ in Chicago, has had to address assertions that he is a Muslim or that he had received training in Islam in Indonesia, where he lived from ages 6 to 10. While his father was an atheist and his mother did not practice religion, Obama's stepfather did occasionally attend services at a mosque there.

Despite his denials, rumors and e-mails circulating on the Internet continue to allege that Obama (D-Ill.) is a Muslim, a "Muslim plant" in a conspiracy against America, and that, if elected president, he would take the oath of office using a Koran, rather than a Bible, as did Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), the only Muslim in Congress, when he was sworn in earlier this year.

No, those aren't the opening paragraphs of a Townhall hit piece. That's the Washington Post recycling anonymous wingnut email trash and calling it "rumors." I guess we should be grateful that the paper allowed Obama to "dispute" and "deny" the "charge" but considering that he isn't a Muslim, it might have been a teensy bit more responsible if they'd simply written that it's a lie and let it go at that. Instead, it blandly suggests this will hurt him more than the Romney since the polls show that even more people won't vote for a Muslim than a Mormon --- failing to note that while Romney is actually a Mormon and thus could be expected to suffer from these prejudices more than someone who isn't actually a Muslim!

According to the Washington Post "Republicans say Barack Obama is a Muslim and Obama says he isn't" is a legitimate story. Modern campaign journalism in all it glory.

More blog posts on the current WaPo front-page article:

Our doomed nation, part II

Washington Post: The New Drudge?

Washington Post Recycles False Obama Muslim Rumors On Front Page


The media did the same thing in 2004. The liars held one press conference in May, which was ignored because the Kerry campaign presented the facts to the MSM immediately. The liars ran three ads in August. The campaign responded to the ads in several ways. This is what the Kerry campaign did to counter the actual SBVT lies, which amounted to three ads. The problem was the more than 400 hundreds news segments in the span of a month, which amounted to free advertising for Bush/Cheney and their surrogates, the Swift Liars. That was an intentional ambush and not easily countered, especially when they were being challenged by the Kerry campaign and continued to do it anyway. The campaign also filed an FEC complaint.

Boston Globe Editorial August 27, 2004:

Here we have a group of bitter veterans who detest Kerry's leadership in opposing the war 30 years ago and are willing to say almost anything -- frequently contradicting their own earlier statements -- to hurt Kerry's candidacy. They turn to Bush's top political lawyer for advice on campaign finance laws and then to one of Bush's top campaign contributors to fund their attack ads.

MSM August 2004:

By the time the Swift Boat story had played out, CNN, chasing after ratings leader Fox News, found time to mention the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth–hereafter, Swifties–in nearly 300 separate news segments, while more than one hundred New York Times articles and columns made mention of the Swifties. And during one overheated 12-day span in late August, the Washington Post mentioned the Swifties in page-one stories on Aug. 19, 20, 21 (two separate articles), 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, and 31. It was a media monsoon that washed away Kerry’s momentum coming out of the Democratic convention.

more

Yet Giuliani's corrupt background escaped reporting. Instead, he's lauded as America's Mayor.


edited to add third blog posts, fix typos.

[gasperc]

1. a bit pricey to wipe my ass with

but that's all the Washington Post is good for these days. I'm sure WP's editors will come out and say that they are trying to "help" Obama to defend himself against these sick attacks but I'll trust WP's editors as much as I'll trust Britney Spears with my kids.

[old guy]

2. Repeat after me:

The corporate news media is an enemy of the people!

[fascisthunter]

11. Makes Me Think of the Soviet Union

and how they controlled the message, even if it's done through a different economic system.

[MBS]

3. yup, this is truly disgusting

. . and, sadly, as you pointed out, continues a pattern of journalistic irresponsibility that robbed us of two first-rate presidents (Al Gore and John Kerry) and gave us the worst president in American history instead. Do these people have no shame?

[ProSense]

6. No, they obviously have none!

Most of the GOP presidential candidates wouldn't be running if the MSM had reported the truth about them instead of rumors about Democrats.

[pdxmom]

4. I believe that CNN is going to carry a "special" by Campbell Brown on

attack ads, using their "Keeping them honest" theme as cover, which is going to give publicity to some of the anti-Hillary groups out there. If they left it alone, these groups, like the not-so-Swifts, would languish in obscurity.

[spanone]

9. it was on after the debates last night. the swiftboaters are a proud bunch

they have no shame. and it's all legal.

[ProSense]

12. CNN’s Brown calls MoveOn.org ‘American insurgents.’

CNN’s Brown calls MoveOn.org ‘American insurgents.’

Media Matters reports that during last night’s CNN special Campaign Killers: Why Do Negative Ads Work?, anchor Campbell Brown said: “General David Petraeus made his reputation taking on insurgents in Iraq. But when he came to Capitol Hill in September, he was confronted by American insurgents, a liberal anti-war group called MoveOn.org.”

It wasn't a special to "keep them honest" or expose the liars, it was a special to perpetuate the lies and attack organizations on the left. It's their way of giving legitimacy to the liars by portraying them as a RW version of MoveOn.




Oops, edited typo.

[pansypoo53219]

5. DUH,

time we took out the teevee gnews.

[blm]

7. Oh now - the media was NOT complicit in this - many here have explained that it was ALL

Kerry's fault that the media continued to lie even after they were consistently handed the records and the truth, and even after he made a speech where he personally challenged Bush to stop hiding behind the swifts and come out publicly to debate their services back then.

But no - - the media made NO extraordinary moves. And Dan Rather must be lying when he states that corporate media NEEDED Bush protected for the legislation they wanted from him.

Yep - corporate media wouldn't target Kerry just because he wanted to stop the growth of their empires, would they?

Kerry Seeks to Reverse FCC's "Wrongheaded Vote"


Commission Decision May Violate Laws Protecting Small Businesses; Kerry to File Resolution of Disapproval

Monday, June 2, 2003

WASHINGTON - Senator John Kerry today announced plans to file a "Resolution of Disapproval" as a means to overturn today's decision by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to raise media ownership caps and loosen various media cross-ownership rules.

Kerry will soon introduce the resolution seeking to reverse this action under the Congressional Review Act and Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act on the grounds that the decision may violate the laws intended to protect America's small businesses and allow them an opportunity to compete.

As Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Kerry expressed concern that the FCC's decision will hurt localism, reduce diversity, and will allow media monopolies to flourish. This raises significant concerns about the potential negative impacts the decision will have on small businesses and their ability to compete in today's media marketplace.

In a statement released earlier today regarding the FCC's decision, Kerry said:

"Nothing is more important in a democracy than public access to debates and information, which lift up our discourse and give Americans an opportunity to make honest informed choices. Today's wrongheaded vote by the Republican members of the FCC to loosen media ownership rules shows a dangerous indifference to the consolidation of power in the hands of a few large entities rather than promoting diversity and independence at the local level. The FCC should do more than rubber stamp the business plans of narrow economic interests.

"Today's vote is a complete dereliction of duty. The Commissioners are well aware that these rules greatly influence the competitive structure of the industry and protect the public's access to multiple sources of information and media. It is the Commission's responsibility to ensure that the rules serve our national goals of diversity, competition, and localism in media. With today's vote, they shirked that responsibility and have dismissed any serious discussion about the impact of media consolidation on our own democracy."

[ProSense]

8. CBS jumps into the gutter

Picks up WaPo article.

[w4rma]

10. right-wing editors and owners push their own political agendas through their outlets. (nt)