So Jan Crawford Is a Liberal Hack, Huh? Part 3: Newsbusters Says Crawford Was Somehow the Only Big Media Reporter to Provide Context Showing Obama Gaffe Similar to Romney’s
On Tuesday’s CBS This Morning, Jan Crawford stood out as the only Big Three network journalist to play a clip of Barack Obama’s infamous “cling to guns and religion” barb at conservatives, as she covered the recently-released secret recordings of Mitt Romney remarking about the “47 percent of the country who are dependent on government.”
Crawford remarked that Obama “spurred similar controversy” with the 2008 comment, but neither ABC’s Good Morning America nor NBC’s Today mentioned it in their coverage of the Romney video recordings, which were released by the left-wing magazine Mother Jones.
Weird, huh? Who independently thought to make the connection to Obama’s 2008 gaffe? Allahpundit did. And I did. The liberal media didn’t — but Jan Crawford did.
It’s almost like she’s being . . . fair to conservatives!
One day, all of you are going to see I was right about Jan Crawford.
It might take weeks, months, or even years — but you’ll see.
And I predict you’re going to rub your eyes in amazement that this is the person you once chose to attack as the premier example of liberal bias in Big Media.
In the meantime, when I notice stories like this about her coverage, I’m going to bring them up. Like this one.
It feels like the beginning of a semi-regular series, in fact. Hence the title.
Parts one and two of the series were my initial defense of Crawford.
Now, not every critic of hers has taken the position that she’s a liberal hack. And this series of posts is NOT directed at people who have not taken that position.
I am aiming solely at the people who are holding up Jan as the epitome of left-wing journalism.
Y’all are just wrong. You didn’t look at her record and you didn’t fairly evaluate my evidence.
And I’m going to keep making the point until you finally admit it. And then I’m going to keep making it, because sometimes I’m a jerk.
Patterico (83033d) — 9/18/2012 @ 6:17 pmSo, for example, DRJ and Beldar are emphatically NOT the targets of my criticism here. I want that to be very, very clear.
Patterico (83033d) — 9/18/2012 @ 6:18 pmThe more she is critiqued, the more she works for our side.
As far as I am concerned, she is a pinko commie.
Rodney King's Spirit (aeda60) — 9/18/2012 @ 6:19 pm#3, now that is funny!
Patterico, you must admit that all journalists have been tarred by the actions of most of the MSM. So you are doing her—and those rare fair minded journalists—a favor by demonstrating the fairness that we reflexively (based on past experience) do not expect to see.
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 9/18/2012 @ 6:25 pmaand the proverbial cement life preserver is thrown to the drowning man sticking to his principals/principles,,,,,,
EPWJ (d84fb0) — 9/18/2012 @ 6:32 pmThat was strange.
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 9/18/2012 @ 6:41 pmThis is how it was edited for CBS News on the radio this AM:
This was a week when Romney was really trying to get his campaign back on message.
His main message: jobs and the economy –andinsteadthisvideo, which was secretly filmed at a Romney fundraiser,is proving to be a big distractionin a very tight presidential race.that’s it.
Colonel Haiku (d5aaff) — 9/18/2012 @ 6:41 pmIf she’s the same lady – the only reporter that I recall – who wouldn’t let go of the Fast and Furious story when it first broke, in fact, held on like a terrier with a rat, I recant my condemnation.
Is she?
Colonel Haiku (d5aaff) — 9/18/2012 @ 6:44 pmThat was Sharyl Attkisson
Icy (84c440) — 9/18/2012 @ 6:48 pmJan Crawford is a news trollop!
Colonel Haiku (d5aaff) — 9/18/2012 @ 7:06 pmDoes it occur to you, Dr. Frankenstein, that your inability to convince your own readers that one uncharitably interpreted incident does not a partisan hack make may not be an accident?
leo marvin (45619c) — 9/18/2012 @ 7:15 pmOh, look, it’s … leo marvin.
Yay.
By the way, I think I did convince quite a few people.
Patterico (4a5875) — 9/18/2012 @ 7:24 pmNo doubt. Obviously those aren’t the ones I’m referring to.
leo marvin (45619c) — 9/18/2012 @ 7:30 pm… nor the ones you’re referring to when you say:
“One day, all of you are going to see I was right about Jan Crawford.”
leo marvin (45619c) — 9/18/2012 @ 7:35 pmMeh. She provided the Obama context after being called out for her alleged bias?
I don’t have a dog in this fight but that’s not the most compelling argument, is it?
landshark (e2ea3d) — 9/18/2012 @ 7:51 pmNo, the most compelling argument is her long history of fairness to conservatives PREDATING being called out for alleged bias.
I guess you missed my post on that?
Patterico (83033d) — 9/18/2012 @ 7:58 pmIf so, it was part one. It’s linked in the post.
Patterico (83033d) — 9/18/2012 @ 7:58 pmI like patterico guyhe’s got a track record…
pdbuttons (0b4b1b) — 9/18/2012 @ 7:59 pmmy momma had tracks
So she’s moderately fair until it’s time to get her guy re-elected.
Color me unimpressed Patrick.
kinlaw (2fb87c) — 9/18/2012 @ 9:22 pmLOL. Brian Williams once had a brain. Then the MSM sucked it out like the bug in Starship Troopers.
pat (0833d4) — 9/18/2012 @ 9:49 pmpersonally, i blame Bush for all this rancor…
redc1c4 (403dff) — 9/18/2012 @ 9:51 pmThe liberal media didn’t — but Jan Crawford did.
National Soros Radio worked this angle too – mostly to explain how president food stamp’s comments were amazingly empathetic in contrast to Romney’s, just in case anyone were silly enough as to find the remarks of the two to be in any way similar in nature.
happyfeet (5e4920) — 9/18/2012 @ 10:41 pmIt was so empathetic it almost brought tears to my eyes. What love, what concern and what understanding he showed for those bitter clingers.
elissa (0718a3) — 9/18/2012 @ 10:46 pmWhat is your evidence that Obama is “her guy”? It flies in the face of her books supporting Clarence Thomas, her praise for Sarah Palin, etc. You’re just making assumptions you can’t possibly know to be true.
Patterico (83033d) — 9/18/2012 @ 10:59 pmMeanwhile, our special friend Matt Yglesias has struck again:
The concept of “redistribution” falsely implies that the existence of property is prior to the existence of the state.
— Yes folks, he actually said “You don’t own that.”
Icy (84c440) — 9/18/2012 @ 11:22 pmObama has prevented anybody from secretly taping his remarks to donors this year.
Sammy Finkelman (eb1481) — 9/18/2012 @ 11:23 pmPatterico, you wrote, “I predict you’re going to rub your eyes in amazement that this is the person you once chose to attack as the premier example of liberal bias in Big Media.”
And you’re right that some people are doing that.
But a lot of people — myself included — still find it troubling that she was involved in the coordination of questioning by the Romney press pool.
She has done a lot of good things, and will do many others. I still think this was a troublesome thing — a thing that on its face and taken in isolation looks very bad, and a thing that she still hasn’t explained or apologized for to my knowledge.
So good luck to you in your campaign. But showing other good works she may have embraced doesn’t put this issue to bed, nor will a campaign of doing so.
Beldar (e25f85) — 9/18/2012 @ 11:33 pmHaving read her book on the Court, I knew better than to attack her as a liberal.
Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 9/19/2012 @ 12:09 amI’ll bet a $100.00 she voted for Mr. Prompter in 2008.
mg (44de53) — 9/19/2012 @ 2:04 amAnd another $100.00 she votes for dope again.
the dope again. Sorry- Have not had my first cup of Kenyan yet.
mg (44de53) — 9/19/2012 @ 2:07 am“The concept of “redistribution” falsely implies that the existence of property is prior to the existence of the state.”
That whole rights of man, we hold these truths to be self-evident,all that Bill of Rights munbo jumbo, forget it.
Bugg (6cf7f9) — 9/19/2012 @ 4:15 amNo, I read the first post, so you can ease off on the snark.
My point is that I just don’t think that this subsequent revelation really strengthens your argument and I’m surprised that you would invest so much in the fact that she showed even-handedness while being scrutinized. Your initial post was the best argument – why diminish it?
landshark (daf028) — 9/19/2012 @ 7:46 amPatterico:
You wrote in pertinent part:
It’s almost like she’s being . . . fair to conservatives!
One day, all of you are going to see I was right about Jan Crawford.
It might take weeks, months, or even years — but you’ll see.
And I predict you’re going to rub your eyes in amazement that this is the person you once chose to attack as the premier example of liberal bias in Big Media.
In the meantime, when I notice stories like this about her coverage, I’m going to bring them up. Like this one.
______________________
Almost? Being fair? Weeks? Months? Years? If Ms. Crawford’s reporting was in fact objective, you would not have to plead her case like a starry eyed adolescent boy with his first puppy love crush.
I’m surprised your wife hasn’t slapped you back into reality yet. Please try to stop your fawning. You look foolish.
I had thought your work was better than this. Could you attempt to prove me correct?
gzerman (86e3e2) — 9/19/2012 @ 8:24 amI’m not seeing your argument, gzerman. I’m just seeing bashing.
OK, you don’t agree with Pat. Why, though? Let’s see your argument.
—-
I think Beldar makes a great point. Journalism as a profession is largely corrupt. For someone to recognize that and yet not blow the whistle makes a lot of sense from a career POV, but it is basically a betrayal of the idea of informing her audience.
Journalist coordinating and largely taking a side is the story here. It seems that Crawford went out of her way to be fair to Mitt Romney and I think she should find a way to resolve this conflict between her honesty and the dishonesty of the journalists she works around. Can she keep her career if she does so? Probably not at CBS.
Dustin (73fead) — 9/19/2012 @ 8:31 amAND THEN WE’LL SEE WHO STOLE THE STRAWBERRIES!!!!
Rob Crawford (c55962) — 9/19/2012 @ 8:43 amI, for one, did not attacker her as a “liberal”, but as a journalist.
Rob Crawford (c55962) — 9/19/2012 @ 8:45 amI think that’s exactly the right tack.
Dustin (73fead) — 9/19/2012 @ 8:46 amI maintain that it is improper and unprofessional, if mildly so, for journalists to cooperate in advance about what questions will be asked of a public official, unless the cooperators work for the same firm.
Patrick is, however, making pretty clear that Crawford is doing no WORSE than that relatively petty transgression. For example, there is no reason to believe that she would not similarly cooperate to try to ensure that a LIBERAL pol got asked a particular question.
Mitch (341ca0) — 9/19/2012 @ 8:53 amExcept that her profession is biased in favor of liberals. Agreeing to this coordination is, in and of itself, promoting that bias. It would be different (still pretty lousy), if they just did this coordination to everyone to get the juiciest stories about all politicians. But it’s not like that.
Dustin (73fead) — 9/19/2012 @ 8:59 amWell, Jan’s social calendar has just opened up dramatically until after the election.
AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 9/19/2012 @ 12:47 pmNone of those pesky Georgetown parties for her.
In particular, I doubt if she’ll be invited over to Andrea’s for a long time.
Of course this is aimed at me and Beldar, as well as anyone else who questioned Crawford’s actions. It doesn’t offend me that you want to convince us your analysis is correct but please don’t act like you aren’t including us, unless Beldar and I convinced you that Crawford owes the public an explanation regarding why she coordinated these questions. Given what you’ve written and her failure to respond here, I don’t think we did.
Has Crawford come forward anywhere to explain why it’s neutral for her to coordinate the questions the media asks Romney, and specifically why it’s neutral for virtually every reporter at Romney’s press conference to repeatedly ask him variations on the same coordinated question (about whether he regrets his tone or timing)?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/19/2012 @ 3:04 pm“Conservatives have criticized Mitt Romney…”
“…he is running a timid campaign…”
“…he pulls his punches…”
“…doesn’t have the fire in his gut to win.”
During the press conference he also “deflected questions…”
Directly from her story on CBS.com. This is not neutral language.
Birdbath (716828) — 9/19/2012 @ 3:25 pmWill she cover the President’s deception on Letterman?
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 9/19/2012 @ 3:51 pm