Right-wing Pundits Use Mainstream Media to Smear Muslims

Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR), the national media watchdog group, released a first-of-its-kind report today profiling 12 of the leading Islamophobic pundits and media figures and examining the ways they’ve negatively influenced media coverage in the U.S. The report, “Smearcasting: How Islamophobes Spread Fear, Bigotry and Misinformation,” describes a loose network of right-wing, anti-Muslim partisans who regularly use innuendo, questionable ... Full Story »

Posted by Dwight Rousu
Tags Help
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Dwight Rousu - Oct 9, 2008 - 12:19 AM PDT
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Dwight Rousu - Oct 9, 2008 - 12:19 AM PDT

To:


Separate email addresses with commas.
25 recipients max.

Note:

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Biopic-portrait-sm_thumb
3.4
by Kelly Garrett - Oct. 9, 2008

See the full report here: http://www.smearcasting.com/

See Full Review » (10 answers)
Member_photo_thumb
4.9
by Dwight Rousu - Oct. 9, 2008

The special report shows initiative and detailed investigative reporting on racism and religious prejudice that has infected our big corporate media, particularly the white right rich bigots who have taken control over much of the airwaves.

See Full Review » (12 answers)
Seattle_020_thumb
4.4
by Gregory Kruse - Oct. 10, 2008

Its main quality is that it addresses an unpopular but crucial subject and the story has implications beyond the subject of Islamophobia. I believe the courage of the reporter, organization, or news source should be considered as part of the quality. Democracy and decency have their enemies. They should be identified and neutralized, in a decent way, of course.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
Silhouette_sml
1.0
by Roland F. Hirsch - Oct. 9, 2008

This is a press release from an advocacy group, so it is not journalism and should not have been posted on NewsTrust.

See Full Review » (11 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

3.4

Average
from 4 reviews (40% confidence)
Quality
3.4
Information
3.0
Insight
3.5
Style
3.5
Context
3.5
Enterprise
3.3
Expertise
2.3
Originality
3.3
Relevance
3.0
Popularity
3.3
Recommendation
3.5
Credibility
3.3
# Reviews
2.0
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!