Latest Tweet

318
Read the report that Bernie Sanders mentions HERE.
While Big Money invades U.S. elections and stifles our democracy (thanks, Senate Republicans!), mainstream media remain silent.
From Reuters: 

This week the U.S. Senate considered a constitutional amendment that would have allowed Congress and state legislatures to limit the power of money in politics. The debate was not much covered in the media because the outcome was so predictable. But the party-line vote that killed it should not go unnoted.
A remarkable majority of the American public — 79 percent according to Gallup — want campaign finance reform. The right and left, the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street, even Jon Stewart and Bill O’Reilly agree that, left unchecked, Big Money corrupts politics and undermines democracy.


When people say democracy depends heavily on reliable media reporting, this is exactly what they’re talking about. As Republicans block efforts for campaign finance reform, Americans aren’t being informed that it’s happening — a responsibility that lies with the press. 
This is completely unacceptable. The American media is failing us.  Read the report that Bernie Sanders mentions HERE.
While Big Money invades U.S. elections and stifles our democracy (thanks, Senate Republicans!), mainstream media remain silent.
From Reuters: 

This week the U.S. Senate considered a constitutional amendment that would have allowed Congress and state legislatures to limit the power of money in politics. The debate was not much covered in the media because the outcome was so predictable. But the party-line vote that killed it should not go unnoted.
A remarkable majority of the American public — 79 percent according to Gallup — want campaign finance reform. The right and left, the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street, even Jon Stewart and Bill O’Reilly agree that, left unchecked, Big Money corrupts politics and undermines democracy.


When people say democracy depends heavily on reliable media reporting, this is exactly what they’re talking about. As Republicans block efforts for campaign finance reform, Americans aren’t being informed that it’s happening — a responsibility that lies with the press. 
This is completely unacceptable. The American media is failing us. 

Read the report that Bernie Sanders mentions HERE.

While Big Money invades U.S. elections and stifles our democracy (thanks, Senate Republicans!), mainstream media remain silent.

From Reuters: 

This week the U.S. Senate considered a constitutional amendment that would have allowed Congress and state legislatures to limit the power of money in politics. The debate was not much covered in the media because the outcome was so predictable. But the party-line vote that killed it should not go unnoted.

A remarkable majority of the American public — 79 percent according to Gallup — want campaign finance reform. The right and left, the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street, even Jon Stewart and Bill O’Reilly agree that, left unchecked, Big Money corrupts politics and undermines democracy.

When people say democracy depends heavily on reliable media reporting, this is exactly what they’re talking about. As Republicans block efforts for campaign finance reform, Americans aren’t being informed that it’s happening — a responsibility that lies with the press. 

This is completely unacceptable. The American media is failing us. 

(Source: twitter.com)

185
Ten years ago, Media Matters launched with a revolutionary mission: to systematically monitor the U.S. media for conservative misinformation every day, in real time. 
Since then, we’ve worked with our online community (that’s you!) to win real battles in the fight for a better media.
And guess what? We’re not even close to done yet.  Let’s keep this fight going strong! Help celebrate our anniversary and donate $10 for 10 more years of media accountability. Ten years ago, Media Matters launched with a revolutionary mission: to systematically monitor the U.S. media for conservative misinformation every day, in real time. 
Since then, we’ve worked with our online community (that’s you!) to win real battles in the fight for a better media.
And guess what? We’re not even close to done yet.  Let’s keep this fight going strong! Help celebrate our anniversary and donate $10 for 10 more years of media accountability.

Ten years ago, Media Matters launched with a revolutionary mission: to systematically monitor the U.S. media for conservative misinformation every day, in real time. 

Since then, we’ve worked with our online community (that’s you!) to win real battles in the fight for a better media.

And guess what? We’re not even close to done yet.  

Let’s keep this fight going strong! Help celebrate our anniversary and donate $10 for 10 more years of media accountability.

629
"How can you be so poor and have all this stuff?" -Bill O’Reilly
Each of these screenshots is from a different Fox show attacking poor Americans for having amenities, trying to make the point (pretty much) that “when I was a kid, poor people had a lot less than this.”
Of course, this is all based on one thoroughly-debunked Heritage Foundation report that conservative media have been parroting for years.
Breaking news for Fox: We’re not in the 1950’s anymore. As technology advances, each year older technology gets less and less expensive, and therefore more working class Americans are able to access it. 
Matt Yglesias elaborates: 

A serious person would follow this up with a discussion of relative prices. Over the past 50 years, televisions have gotten a lot cheaper and college has gotten a lot more expensive. Consequently, even a low income person can reliably obtain a level of television-based entertainment that would blow the mind of a millionaire from 1961. At the same time, if you’re looking to live in a safe neighborhood with good public schools in a metropolitan area with decent job opportunities you’re going to find that this is quite expensive. Health care has become incredibly expensive. The federal poverty line for a family of three is $18,530 a year. I wonder how many Heritage Foundation policy analysts are deciding they want to cut back and work part time because it’d be super easy to raise two kids in DC on less than $20k in salary? Perhaps just an outfit full of workaholics.


While Fox is so busy pointing out how many people have access to microwaves and refrigerators, they conveniently forget to mention how many people have poor access to quality education, health care, and affordable housing. Because really, what good is an A/C if you can’t even afford to keep living in your house?  "How can you be so poor and have all this stuff?" -Bill O’Reilly
Each of these screenshots is from a different Fox show attacking poor Americans for having amenities, trying to make the point (pretty much) that “when I was a kid, poor people had a lot less than this.”
Of course, this is all based on one thoroughly-debunked Heritage Foundation report that conservative media have been parroting for years.
Breaking news for Fox: We’re not in the 1950’s anymore. As technology advances, each year older technology gets less and less expensive, and therefore more working class Americans are able to access it. 
Matt Yglesias elaborates: 

A serious person would follow this up with a discussion of relative prices. Over the past 50 years, televisions have gotten a lot cheaper and college has gotten a lot more expensive. Consequently, even a low income person can reliably obtain a level of television-based entertainment that would blow the mind of a millionaire from 1961. At the same time, if you’re looking to live in a safe neighborhood with good public schools in a metropolitan area with decent job opportunities you’re going to find that this is quite expensive. Health care has become incredibly expensive. The federal poverty line for a family of three is $18,530 a year. I wonder how many Heritage Foundation policy analysts are deciding they want to cut back and work part time because it’d be super easy to raise two kids in DC on less than $20k in salary? Perhaps just an outfit full of workaholics.


While Fox is so busy pointing out how many people have access to microwaves and refrigerators, they conveniently forget to mention how many people have poor access to quality education, health care, and affordable housing. Because really, what good is an A/C if you can’t even afford to keep living in your house?  "How can you be so poor and have all this stuff?" -Bill O’Reilly
Each of these screenshots is from a different Fox show attacking poor Americans for having amenities, trying to make the point (pretty much) that “when I was a kid, poor people had a lot less than this.”
Of course, this is all based on one thoroughly-debunked Heritage Foundation report that conservative media have been parroting for years.
Breaking news for Fox: We’re not in the 1950’s anymore. As technology advances, each year older technology gets less and less expensive, and therefore more working class Americans are able to access it. 
Matt Yglesias elaborates: 

A serious person would follow this up with a discussion of relative prices. Over the past 50 years, televisions have gotten a lot cheaper and college has gotten a lot more expensive. Consequently, even a low income person can reliably obtain a level of television-based entertainment that would blow the mind of a millionaire from 1961. At the same time, if you’re looking to live in a safe neighborhood with good public schools in a metropolitan area with decent job opportunities you’re going to find that this is quite expensive. Health care has become incredibly expensive. The federal poverty line for a family of three is $18,530 a year. I wonder how many Heritage Foundation policy analysts are deciding they want to cut back and work part time because it’d be super easy to raise two kids in DC on less than $20k in salary? Perhaps just an outfit full of workaholics.


While Fox is so busy pointing out how many people have access to microwaves and refrigerators, they conveniently forget to mention how many people have poor access to quality education, health care, and affordable housing. Because really, what good is an A/C if you can’t even afford to keep living in your house? 

"How can you be so poor and have all this stuff?" -Bill O’Reilly

Each of these screenshots is from a different Fox show attacking poor Americans for having amenities, trying to make the point (pretty much) that “when I was a kid, poor people had a lot less than this.”

Of course, this is all based on one thoroughly-debunked Heritage Foundation report that conservative media have been parroting for years.

Breaking news for Fox: We’re not in the 1950’s anymore. As technology advances, each year older technology gets less and less expensive, and therefore more working class Americans are able to access it. 

Matt Yglesias elaborates

A serious person would follow this up with a discussion of relative prices. Over the past 50 years, televisions have gotten a lot cheaper and college has gotten a lot more expensive. Consequently, even a low income person can reliably obtain a level of television-based entertainment that would blow the mind of a millionaire from 1961. At the same time, if you’re looking to live in a safe neighborhood with good public schools in a metropolitan area with decent job opportunities you’re going to find that this is quite expensive. Health care has become incredibly expensive. The federal poverty line for a family of three is $18,530 a year. I wonder how many Heritage Foundation policy analysts are deciding they want to cut back and work part time because it’d be super easy to raise two kids in DC on less than $20k in salary? Perhaps just an outfit full of workaholics.

While Fox is so busy pointing out how many people have access to microwaves and refrigerators, they conveniently forget to mention how many people have poor access to quality education, health care, and affordable housing. Because really, what good is an A/C if you can’t even afford to keep living in your house? 

545
As the Texas state board of education chooses textbooks for schools, we’re noticing an alarming trend:

A recent review by the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) found that several textbooks under consideration by the Texas Board of Education, which includes numerous members who deny global warming, cast doubt on the basic fact that carbon pollution is driving climate change. National Journal explained that since “Texas is the second-largest market in the U.S. for textbooks after California,” the textbooks chosen by the board could affect what publishers sell to states across the country.

According to the National Center for Science Education, here are some concerns that the appointed anti-science textbook reviewers  have raised: 

“I feel very firmly that ‘creation science’ based on Biblical principles should be incorporated into every Biology book that is up for adoption.”
“Text neglects to tell students that no transitional fossils have been discovered. The fossil record can be interpreted in other ways than evolutionary with equal justification.”
“evolutionary theory is challenged by science, reason and mathematics.”
“Presentation fails to include metaphysics (not a pseudoscience) as a limitation to scientific inquiry.”
“Modern evolutionary biology is based on comparisons of DNA sequence information, not fossil records.”
“CO2 levels have been much higher in the past and life survived just fine.”
“Plants always grow better with higher CO2 levels.”
“No mention is made of the benefit to plants of higher CO2 concentrations.”
“The earth has not warmed now for 16 years and the sun spot cycle is approaching a long minimum that willreduce [sic] temperatures.”


In November the Texas board of education will be voting on which textbooks they’ll adopt. In the meantime, NCSE and the Texas Freedom Network are gathering signatures to ask publishers to “remove climate change denial from Texas social studies textbooks.” As the Texas state board of education chooses textbooks for schools, we’re noticing an alarming trend:

A recent review by the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) found that several textbooks under consideration by the Texas Board of Education, which includes numerous members who deny global warming, cast doubt on the basic fact that carbon pollution is driving climate change. National Journal explained that since “Texas is the second-largest market in the U.S. for textbooks after California,” the textbooks chosen by the board could affect what publishers sell to states across the country.

According to the National Center for Science Education, here are some concerns that the appointed anti-science textbook reviewers  have raised: 

“I feel very firmly that ‘creation science’ based on Biblical principles should be incorporated into every Biology book that is up for adoption.”
“Text neglects to tell students that no transitional fossils have been discovered. The fossil record can be interpreted in other ways than evolutionary with equal justification.”
“evolutionary theory is challenged by science, reason and mathematics.”
“Presentation fails to include metaphysics (not a pseudoscience) as a limitation to scientific inquiry.”
“Modern evolutionary biology is based on comparisons of DNA sequence information, not fossil records.”
“CO2 levels have been much higher in the past and life survived just fine.”
“Plants always grow better with higher CO2 levels.”
“No mention is made of the benefit to plants of higher CO2 concentrations.”
“The earth has not warmed now for 16 years and the sun spot cycle is approaching a long minimum that willreduce [sic] temperatures.”


In November the Texas board of education will be voting on which textbooks they’ll adopt. In the meantime, NCSE and the Texas Freedom Network are gathering signatures to ask publishers to “remove climate change denial from Texas social studies textbooks.”

As the Texas state board of education chooses textbooks for schools, we’re noticing an alarming trend:

A recent review by the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) found that several textbooks under consideration by the Texas Board of Education, which includes numerous members who deny global warming, cast doubt on the basic fact that carbon pollution is driving climate change. National Journal explained that since “Texas is the second-largest market in the U.S. for textbooks after California,” the textbooks chosen by the board could affect what publishers sell to states across the country.

According to the National Center for Science Education, here are some concerns that the appointed anti-science textbook reviewers  have raised: 

“I feel very firmly that ‘creation science’ based on Biblical principles should be incorporated into every Biology book that is up for adoption.”

“Text neglects to tell students that no transitional fossils have been discovered. The fossil record can be interpreted in other ways than evolutionary with equal justification.”

“evolutionary theory is challenged by science, reason and mathematics.”

“Presentation fails to include metaphysics (not a pseudoscience) as a limitation to scientific inquiry.”

“Modern evolutionary biology is based on comparisons of DNA sequence information, not fossil records.”

“CO2 levels have been much higher in the past and life survived just fine.”

“Plants always grow better with higher CO2 levels.”

“No mention is made of the benefit to plants of higher CO2 concentrations.”

“The earth has not warmed now for 16 years and the sun spot cycle is approaching a long minimum that willreduce [sic] temperatures.”

In November the Texas board of education will be voting on which textbooks they’ll adopt. In the meantime, NCSE and the Texas Freedom Network are gathering signatures to ask publishers to “remove climate change denial from Texas social studies textbooks.”

89
Fox News' Anti-Scientific Attack On Meatless Monday "Propaganda"
58

"How do those words come out of your mouth?"

Great to see USA TODAY's Christine Brennan use her interview on Fox to call out a Fox host's “take the stairs” remark following the Ray Rice assault.

142

CBS host James Brown’s brilliant commentary on domestic abuse comes on the heels of the 20th anniversary of the Violence Against Women Act:

…this problem is bigger than football. There has been, appropriately so, intense and widespread outrage following the release of the video showing what happened inside the elevator at the casino. But wouldn’t it be productive if this collective outrage, as my colleagues have said, could be channelled to truly hear and address the long-suffering cries for help by so many women? And as they said, do something about it? Like an on-going education of men about what healthy, respectful manhood is all about.

And it starts with how we view women. Our language is important. For instance, when a guy says, ‘you throw the ball like a girl’ or ‘you’re a little sissy,’ it reflects an attitude that devalues women and attitudes will eventually manifest in some fashion. Women have been at the forefront in the domestic violence awareness and prevention arena. And whether Janay Rice considers herself a victim or not, millions of women in this country are.

Consider this: According to domestic violence experts, more than three women per day lose their lives at the hands of their partners. That means that since the night February 15th in Atlantic City [when the elevator incident occurred] more than 600 women have died.

Related: 8 facts about violence against women everyone should know (via Vox)

The right-wing media is outraged over a D.C. teacher’s bizarre request for students to compare George W. Bush to Hitler. 
Funny thing, we don’t remember this level of anger from conservative media outlets when major conservative figures repeatedly compared Obama to Hitler in front of audiences far larger than a classroom full of kids. 
A few case studies:
Former SNL star Victoria Jackson: 

Obama legally kills babies and now he can legally kill Grandmas!
Hitler did this. He killed the weak, the sick, the old, and babies and races/religions he didn’t like.

Rush Limbaugh: 

Adolf Hitler, like Barack Obama, also ruled by dictate.

Ann Coulter:

[Obama is] a dime store Mein Kampf.

Ted Nugent: 

If you can’t see through the dishonesty and the scamming of this president with that scenario fresh in your mind, then that’s literally like, I guess that would be like, I don’t know, a German in 1938 pretending to respect the Jews and then going home and putting on his brown shirt and forcing his neighbors onto a train to be burned to death.

Then there was that time that a Fox News radio host aired a “side-by-side comparison” of speeches by Hitler and Obama, and right-wing radio host Michael Savage took things even further by claiming that the U.S. is “50 leagues below the degeneracy” of Germany under Hitler. 
Bottom line: Conservatives take up arms when people compare U.S. presidents to Hitler, unless that president happens to be Obama. In reality, Nazi analogies are rarely appropriate, regardless of what part of the political spectrum one identifies with.
If you need further clarification on this topic, here’s a handy flowchart.  The right-wing media is outraged over a D.C. teacher’s bizarre request for students to compare George W. Bush to Hitler. 
Funny thing, we don’t remember this level of anger from conservative media outlets when major conservative figures repeatedly compared Obama to Hitler in front of audiences far larger than a classroom full of kids. 
A few case studies:
Former SNL star Victoria Jackson: 

Obama legally kills babies and now he can legally kill Grandmas!
Hitler did this. He killed the weak, the sick, the old, and babies and races/religions he didn’t like.

Rush Limbaugh: 

Adolf Hitler, like Barack Obama, also ruled by dictate.

Ann Coulter:

[Obama is] a dime store Mein Kampf.

Ted Nugent: 

If you can’t see through the dishonesty and the scamming of this president with that scenario fresh in your mind, then that’s literally like, I guess that would be like, I don’t know, a German in 1938 pretending to respect the Jews and then going home and putting on his brown shirt and forcing his neighbors onto a train to be burned to death.

Then there was that time that a Fox News radio host aired a “side-by-side comparison” of speeches by Hitler and Obama, and right-wing radio host Michael Savage took things even further by claiming that the U.S. is “50 leagues below the degeneracy” of Germany under Hitler. 
Bottom line: Conservatives take up arms when people compare U.S. presidents to Hitler, unless that president happens to be Obama. In reality, Nazi analogies are rarely appropriate, regardless of what part of the political spectrum one identifies with.
If you need further clarification on this topic, here’s a handy flowchart.  The right-wing media is outraged over a D.C. teacher’s bizarre request for students to compare George W. Bush to Hitler. 
Funny thing, we don’t remember this level of anger from conservative media outlets when major conservative figures repeatedly compared Obama to Hitler in front of audiences far larger than a classroom full of kids. 
A few case studies:
Former SNL star Victoria Jackson: 

Obama legally kills babies and now he can legally kill Grandmas!
Hitler did this. He killed the weak, the sick, the old, and babies and races/religions he didn’t like.

Rush Limbaugh: 

Adolf Hitler, like Barack Obama, also ruled by dictate.

Ann Coulter:

[Obama is] a dime store Mein Kampf.

Ted Nugent: 

If you can’t see through the dishonesty and the scamming of this president with that scenario fresh in your mind, then that’s literally like, I guess that would be like, I don’t know, a German in 1938 pretending to respect the Jews and then going home and putting on his brown shirt and forcing his neighbors onto a train to be burned to death.

Then there was that time that a Fox News radio host aired a “side-by-side comparison” of speeches by Hitler and Obama, and right-wing radio host Michael Savage took things even further by claiming that the U.S. is “50 leagues below the degeneracy” of Germany under Hitler. 
Bottom line: Conservatives take up arms when people compare U.S. presidents to Hitler, unless that president happens to be Obama. In reality, Nazi analogies are rarely appropriate, regardless of what part of the political spectrum one identifies with.
If you need further clarification on this topic, here’s a handy flowchart. 

The right-wing media is outraged over a D.C. teacher’s bizarre request for students to compare George W. Bush to Hitler. 

Funny thing, we don’t remember this level of anger from conservative media outlets when major conservative figures repeatedly compared Obama to Hitler in front of audiences far larger than a classroom full of kids.

A few case studies:

Former SNL star Victoria Jackson

Obama legally kills babies and now he can legally kill Grandmas!

Hitler did this. He killed the weak, the sick, the old, and babies and races/religions he didn’t like.

Rush Limbaugh: 

Adolf Hitler, like Barack Obama, also ruled by dictate.

Ann Coulter:

[Obama is] a dime store Mein Kampf.

Ted Nugent: 

If you can’t see through the dishonesty and the scamming of this president with that scenario fresh in your mind, then that’s literally like, I guess that would be like, I don’t know, a German in 1938 pretending to respect the Jews and then going home and putting on his brown shirt and forcing his neighbors onto a train to be burned to death.

Then there was that time that a Fox News radio host aired a “side-by-side comparison” of speeches by Hitler and Obama, and right-wing radio host Michael Savage took things even further by claiming that the U.S. is “50 leagues below the degeneracy” of Germany under Hitler. 

Bottom line: Conservatives take up arms when people compare U.S. presidents to Hitler, unless that president happens to be Obama. In reality, Nazi analogies are rarely appropriate, regardless of what part of the political spectrum one identifies with.

If you need further clarification on this topic, here’s a handy flowchart.