Donate to NRO Today


NRO BLOG ROW | THE CORNER |  ARCHIVES    SEARCH    E-MAIL    PRINT    RSS




Thursday, November 01, 2007


But Media Matters Doesn't Shill For Hillary   [Jonah Goldberg]

Karl Frisch, Director of Media Relations at Media Matters (aka Brockville) has sent out an email with clips from a whole bunch of sources to back up this note at the top of the email:

Subject: Russert: Clinton's "third toughest opponent on the stage." 

After the October 30 Democratic presidential debate, numerous media figures commented that co-moderator Tim Russert had acted as, in the words of The New York Times, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's (NY) "third toughest opponent on the stage." During the debate, Russert asked a total of 30 distinct questions (not including follow-up questions). Fourteen were either questions directed to Clinton or questions directed to other candidates about Clinton. Many media outlets took note of Russert's focus on Clinton. Russert has received media attention for his conduct toward Clinton in previous debates as well, including criticism following a debate he moderated in 2000, when Clinton was running for Senate against then-Rep. Rick Lazio (R-NY)

So here's the question. The M&Mers insist they aren't a mouthpiece for Hillary, but a "progressive" non-profit something or other. So why are they constantly carrying water for Hillary? This email doesn't advance progressive causes. Indeed, by most accountings these days, Hillary's the least progressive candidate on that stage (I'm not persuaded by those arguments, but that is the message the Clintonites want out there and it's the one MM peddles whenever Hillary is dubbed too leftwing). Wouldn't a truly progressive organization, not interested in partisan politics or advancing Hillary's campaign, be more interested in pressing Hillary to answer the questions asked of her? Couldn't a progressive truth-squad salute Russert for holding Hillary's feet to the fire? The answer is, of course. But the reality is that Media Matters is a Hillary pitbull first, a Democratic mouthpiece second, a vanity project for Brock third and somewhere past that it might be something like a watchdog group.   




 





 

© National Review Online 2009. All Rights Reserved.

Home | Search | NR / Digital | Donate | Media Kit | Contact Us