Reuters: How about Obama talking points with your news, my pretty?

Reuters runs a story on Sarah Palin's campaign appearance in Clearwater, FL (not far from where I'm sitting, as a matter of fact).

The report notes that Palin continues to hammer Obama on his connection to Bill Ayers. Unlike the CNN segment I highlighted in the previous post, however, this news from Reuters serves little other purpose than to trot out Obama campaign talking points.

With the pressure on, Palin is targeting Obama's judgment and character in speeches that include the unsubstantiated charge that the Illinois senator has close ties to Bill Ayers, a former member of the 1960s-era militant Weather Underground

The group was involved in bombings in the 1960s, when Obama was 8 years old. Obama met him in the 1990s when first starting his political career in Chicago and the two served on a board together. Obama has said he knows Ayers only slightly and has denounced his actions with the Weather Underground.

Close ties to Obama an "unsubstantiated charge"? I guess that depends on how you define "close ties"--but reporter/news analyst/editorialist Jason Szep doesn't go there, not even to establish the depth of the relationship as alleged by Palin. Can you say "hole in the story"?

It gets even better!

"I am just so fearful that this is not a man who sees America the way you and I see America," Palin said of Obama at a rally of 5,000 supporters in Florida's heavily Republican city of Clearwater.

Critics say that line is especially pointed because of its potential subtext. Obama would be the first black president and his background, including part of a childhood spent in Indonesia, is different from that of most Americans.

Palin seemed to acknowledge that the race was entering a new, harsher phase. "You are going to have to hang onto your hats because from now until election day it may get kind of rough," the 44-year-old self-described "hockey mom" said.

The second paragraph is unbelievable, recycling as it does the notion that emphasizing Obama's association with political radicals is somehow racist (see the Obama campaign arm known as the Associated Press for more on that).

The third paragraph artfully uses Palin's statement to the effect that the campaigning will be rough to underscore the (unsubstantiated) racism charge.

The mask is off. There is no "objective" mainstream media any longer. The face of the American press is completing a transformation that started in the 1970s.

Reuters' McClellan video adds little to nothing

Getting McClellan on camera for comments provides the opportunity for McClellan to clarify whether or not the preliminary reviews of his book are accurate. The Reuters video fails in that respect. The video succeeds in highlighting the criticisms attributed to McClellan, however, and Reuters even takes the step of providing additional content apparently intended to buttress the claims reported from the book, as with the material featuring Richard Clarke.

If you like your news fluffy, Reuters has delivered.

Reuters covers the economy

The news media have their quirks, among them a tendency to provide weird coverage of the economy, especially where politics overlaps. A story today circulated by Reuters serves as a case in point.

The story begins by addressing the question of whether or not the nation is entering a recession and how that will affect the job of the next president. Author Emily Kaiser correctly notes that economic troubles point toward a growing budget deficit, but she refrains from taking the step of noting that Clinton and Obama have proposed big-spending government programs as part of their respective packages of campaign promises.

The Obama and Clinton campaigns might consider sending thank-you notes in appreciation for that oversight.

Kaiser, does, however note that the populist rhetoric from the left has "raised eyebrows on free-market-loving Wall Street." That's a euphemistic way of saying that their policy proposals make business interests nervous. People who know about the stock market realize nervousness and uncertainty tend to drop stock market prices (that is, the value of the companies represented on the stock market). Kaiser sticks with one example of the populism of the left: protectionism.

The most notable aspect of the story occurs as it jumps from page 1 to page 2 (Web version).

On page one, Kaiser quotes Andrew Bernard, a professor of international economics to the effect that the economy in January '09 is the key question. That leads to this:

If the U.S. economy slips into recession -- which some economists believe it already has -- that would likely strengthen the argument of those who blame global trade for U.S. workers' stagnant wages and the loss of factory jobs. Continued...
(Reuters)

Many in the investment community take a different view. With Clinton and Obama trading barbs over who would be tougher on trade, there are concerns that a Democratic administration would discourage the cross-border flow of money and goods that has helped enrich corporate America and foreign firms.

"I'm hoping that a lot of this (trade talk) is rhetoric, but I think that there are serious economic issues that, if left untackled, will rise up in the form of protectionism and anti-immigration sentiment," Bernard said.

I put the main link under the portion found on the first page. Click on "Continued..." at the end of the first paragraph to access the source of the second page material.

Kaiser goes from her main authority (Bernard) to a statement that "many" economists think the country is already in recession and goes directly from that claim to the idea that global trade is at fault.

Is the entire opinion that of "many" economists or is Kaiser responsible for the opinion that global trade is the source of America's economic ills? The construction of the paragraph suggests the latter. On the next page, we that "many in the investment community" disagree. They apparently believe adopting protectionist policies would not help the situation.

The third paragraph contains the surprise nugget. Bernard, the expert source, shares the concern of the investment community.

Apparently economists agree with the investment community, at least some of the time.

Kaiser appears to have crafted the language in her story to make it appear that her opinion is a mainstream view of economists, but her story provides no evidence in support. She should have considered using an additional expert source who agreed with what is apparently left as her own opinion, nestled in the opinion of "many" that the country is presently in a recession.

At least one loose end to tie up ... is Emily Kaiser an expert on economics?

Emily Kaiser, Economics Correspondent for the Americas, Reuters America
Emily Kaiser joined Reuters in 1996 as a commodities reporter, covering the Chicago Board of Trade grain markets. Four years later, Kaiser moved to London in order to help launch a pan-European stock market reporting team for Reuters. She returned to Chicago in 2002 and was later appointed Reuters’ economics correspondent for the Americas. Kaiser graduated from Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism and has studied Arabic and Middle Eastern History at the American University in Cairo and at the University of London.
(journalism.columbia.edu)

Short answer: No.

She's a journalist with considerable experience reporting on economic issues. Is that better than having stayed at a Holiday Inn Express?

*****

Thanks, Reuters!

clipped from news.yahoo.com

Sen. Clinton may have a legitimate beef with the mainstream media after Reuters distributed this campaign photo of the fading Democratic presidential contender.

The problem is, Clinton looks more and more like the figure on the right when she opens her mouth to complain about her press coverage.

Hat tip to Hot Air.

*****

Media continue to twist Bush's remark about Iraqi Mandelas.

Hilarious stuff--but frighteningly irresponsible journalism.

NELSON Mandela is still very much alive despite a gaffe by US President George W. Bush, who alluded to the former South African leader's death in a speech yesterday.

"It's out there," said Achmat Dangor of the Nelson Mandela Foundation of Mr Bush's comment, which received worldwide media coverage.

(news.com.au)

Apparently these Aussies want you to believe that Dangor was calling Bush's comment "out there" in the sense of being crazy.

That doesn't appear to be the case.

Former president Nelson Mandela is alive and well after comments on Iraq by US President George Bush appear to have been misunderstood, the Nelson Mandela Foundation said on Friday.

"It appears that his statement has been misunderstood and we wish to assure everyone that Mr Mandela is alive and well and enjoying some rest and relaxation at his home in Johannesburg," said Achmat Dangor, chief executive of the foundation.
(Independent Online)

But why bother representing the entirety of what Dangor said when you can twist it to make fun of Bush?
The Independent account went on:

Dangor, said, "We know that his statement was made in the context of the difficulty in finding Iraqis capable of resolving the conflict in their country."

Thanks to Reuters and a slew of other dingbats in the business of journalism, many will never get enough of the story to have Dangor's understanding of it.


*****