The right is attacking Media Matters because it matters

The Daily Caller's heavy-breathing "expose" is light on facts

Topics: Media Criticism, Daily Caller, Media Matters, David Brock, Editor's Picks, ,

The right is attacking Media Matters because it mattersMedia Matters' founder David Brock (Credit: Fox)

“Inside Media Matters,” declares a Daily Caller headline on an article written by right-wing icon Tucker Carlson and journalist Vince Coglianese earlier this month, which claims that “Sources, memos reveal erratic behavior close coordination with White House and news organizations.” The article launched a series aimed at attacking and undermining the popular progressive media watchdog group.

The Daily Caller paints a picture of a nefarious organization founded by an egomaniacal leader operating in the cover of darkness, working to prop up Democratic Party politicians. Boasting of their access to internal Media Matters memos and interviews with “current and former” employees of Media Matters, Carlson and Coglianese breathlessly report about some admittedly strange antics of founder David Brock and of the organization’s success in achieving “its central goal of influencing the national media.”

The Daily Caller pieces have served as a sort of a bat signal for foes of Media Matters, with attacks on the organization now coming from all direction. Fox News psychiatrist Keith Ablow claimed Brock is “dangerous” because he was adopted, and Alan Dershowitz — a hard-line supporter of Israel’s government who once advocated for bulldozing entire Palestinian villages –thoughtfully likened the group to “Neo-Nazis” who could cost Obama the election due to publishing blog posts critical of Israel.

Among the more than half-dozen articles and blog posts the Daily Caller has written in its “Inside Media Matters” series, there is little in the way of actual substance. From Carlson and Coglianese’s original piece we learn that Brock regularly staffs himself with bodyguards, even at social events. A later piece focuses on the fact that Media Matters contributor Karl Frisch once suggested hiring personal investigators to “look into the personal lives of Fox News” staff.  Yet most of the content of the articles is hardly surprising or shocking. On the contrary, it points to an important fact: Media Matters matters.

Take, for example, one admission by a former Media Matters employee that “virtually all the mainstream media was using [their] stuff.” The Daily Caller portrays this fact as shocking, evidence of a secret and ominous level of coordination between Media Matters and the mainstream media. Another former Media Matters staffer notes that certain journalists at the Huffington Post, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post and other outlets were receptive to Media Matters stories and regularly published articles based on their material.

What the Daily Caller ultimately fails to articulate about this high level of coordination between Media Matters and the mainstream press is what makes it so scandalous. It would be one thing if the group were providing secret payments to journalists in order to get its stories covered, or if journalists were shown to be intentionally fudging facts or skewing the truth to toe Media Matters’ line. The most notable omission from the Daily Caller “exposé” is that it does not allege any inaccuracies in Media Matters steady stream of denunciations and corrections.

Rather, what the interviews and memos obtained by the Daily Caller show is that it’s doing something that’s perhaps even more threatening to the right-wing: its job. Media Matters was expressly launched with the purpose of providing a response to right-wing misinformation and to reshape the mainstream media narrative in a way that benefits progressives. Readers of Media Matters don’t have to guess that its staff will regularly be in touch with major journalists to help shape the media narrative — it’s actually something the group informs people of on its website.

Since its launch, the organization has rapidly grown. In 2011, the organization spent $15 million, increasing its budget by five times since it began in 2004. Meanwhile, it employed around 90 people, nine times the size of its original staff of 10. Its comprehensive reports — like one landmark 2006 study of Sunday talk show guests that found that they overwhelmingly lean conservative – have helped reshape the media’s dialogue and empower progressive critics of the mainstream press.

The group doesn’t hide its agenda.

“Media Matters works daily to notify activists, journalists, pundits and the general public about instances of misinformation,” reads its “About Us” page, “providing them with the resources to rebut false claims and to take direct action against offending media institutions.”

That last part — the taking “direct action against offending media institutions” — is also portrayed as shocking by the Daily Caller articles. Carlson and Coglianese write about a Media Matters memo detailing how the organization pressured CNN to take Lou Dobbs’ show off the air. The memo lists tactics such as running Spanish language advertisements and working with civil rights groups to target CNN. Yet the campaign against Dobbs was far from secret — it was widely covered in the media  — and not particularly shocking, either. After all, Media Matters simply used Dobbs’ own words against him, something its massive media monitoring apparatus has perfected.

The Dobbs memo and other pressure campaign materials revealed by the Daily Caller prove little else than that Media Matters thinks and behaves the same way in private as it does in public. The organization meticulously monitors the media and highlights behavior by the press and politicians that are against progressive values. The Daily Caller published one article containing what it calls Brock’s “enemies list” – a phrase most famously used to describe President Nixon’s list of dissident Americans he vilified — yet the list maintained by Brock simply listed “targets” for research scrutiny including conservative media like Fox News and right-wing think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation.

What’s so surprising about that? Of course Media Matters is targeting right-wing figures for scrutiny and opposition research. That’s why it exists. Would it be surprising if the Media Research Center and Newsbusters — which act as right-wing equivalents to Media Matters — had research files on the Center for American Progress and the Nation?

Perhaps the most ominous tone in the Daily Caller articles is saved for reporting about meetings between Media Matters and Obama administration officials. The articles report about “regular contact” between administration officials like Anita Dunn and Media Matters. But this, too, is completely unsurprising. The Obama administration regularly invites progressive media figures  to White House meetings, and has spearheaded the Common Purpose Project to conduct meetings with allied progressive organizations. If Media Matters was portraying itself as being stridently non-ideological, this level of coordination may indeed have been problematic. But Media Matters is openly part of the progressive umbrella.

There may indeed be a real problem that progressive groups may be too cozy to the Obama White House, muzzling themselves about Obama’s progressive failings in order to win access. Yet the Daily Caller isn’t concerned about co-optation. Rather, it is criticizing Media Matters for doing what all political groups on all parts of the ideological spectrum try to do: successfully influence policymakers and the media.

Ultimately, Media Matters is being targeted for what it has accomplished. In just the eight short years of its existence, the organization has created a powerful watchdog hub for countering right-wing misinformation and pushing the progressive message to the press and policymakers. The group is ultimately being attacked for doing the very things that it publicly set out to do, and that is likely making the right wing much angrier than David Brock’s eccentricities.

Zaid Jilani is a Syracuse University graduate student and freelance writer. Follow him @zaidjilani.

More Related Stories

Featured Slide Shows

  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook
  • 1 of 14
  • Close
  • Fullscreen
  • Thumbnails

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and Adam, "Pilot"

    One of our first exposures to uncomfortable “Girls” sex comes early, in the pilot episode, when Hannah and Adam “get feisty” (a phrase Hannah hates) on the couch. The pair is about to go at it doggy-style when Adam nearly inserts his penis in “the wrong hole,” and after Hannah corrects him, she awkwardly explains her lack of desire to have anal sex in too many words. “Hey, let’s play the quiet game,” Adam says, thrusting. And so the romance begins.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Marnie and Elijah, "It's About Time"

    In an act of “betrayal” that messes up each of their relationships with Hannah, Marnie and Elijah open Season 2 with some more couch sex, which is almost unbearable to watch. Elijah, who is trying to explore the “hetero side” of his bisexuality, can’t maintain his erection, and the entire affair ends in very uncomfortable silence.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Marnie and Charlie, "Vagina Panic"

    Poor Charlie. While he and Marnie have their fair share of uncomfortable sex over the course of their relationship, one of the saddest moments (aside from Marnie breaking up with him during intercourse) is when Marnie encourages him to penetrate her from behind so she doesn’t have to look at him. “This feels so good,” Charlie says. “We have to go slow.” Poor sucker.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Shoshanna and camp friend Matt, "Hannah's Diary"

    We’d be remiss not to mention Shoshanna’s effort to lose her virginity to an old camp friend, who tells her how “weird” it is that he “loves to eat pussy” moments before she admits she’s never “done it” before. At least it paves the way for the uncomfortable sex we later get to watch her have with Ray?

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and Adam, "Hard Being Easy"

    On the heels of trying (unsuccessfully) to determine the status of her early relationship with Adam, Hannah walks by her future boyfriend’s bedroom to find him masturbating alone, in one of the strangest scenes of the first season. As Adam jerks off and refuses to let Hannah participate beyond telling him how much she likes watching, we see some serious (and odd) character development ... which ends with Hannah taking a hundred-dollar bill from Adam’s wallet, for cab fare and pizza (as well as her services).

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Marnie and Booth Jonathan, "Bad Friend"

    Oh, Booth Jonathan -- the little man who “knows how to do things.” After he turns Marnie on enough to make her masturbate in the bathroom at the gallery where she works, Booth finally seals the deal in a mortifying and nearly painful to watch sex scene that tells us pretty much everything we need to know about how much Marnie is willing to fake it.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Tad and Loreen, "The Return"

    The only sex scene in the series not to feature one of the main characters, Hannah’s parents’ showertime anniversary celebration is easily one of the most cringe-worthy moments of the show’s first season. Even Hannah’s mother, Loreen, observes how embarrassing the situation is, which ends with her husband, Tad, slipping out of the shower and falling naked and unconscious on the bathroom floor.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and the pharmacist, "The Return"

    Tad and Loreen aren’t the only ones to get some during Hannah’s first season trip home to Michigan. The show’s protagonist finds herself in bed with a former high school classmate, who doesn’t exactly enjoy it when Hannah puts one of her fingers near his anus. “I’m tight like a baby, right?” Hannah asks at one point. Time to press pause.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and Adam, "Role-Play"

    While it’s not quite a full-on, all-out sex scene, Hannah and Adam’s attempt at role play in Season 3 is certainly an intimate encounter to behold (or not). Hannah dons a blond wig and gets a little too into her role, giving a melodramatic performance that ends with a passerby punching Adam in the face. So there’s that.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Shoshanna and Ray, "Together"

    As Shoshanna and Ray near the end of their relationship, we can see their sexual chemistry getting worse and worse. It’s no more evident than when Ray is penetrating a clothed and visibly horrified Shoshanna from behind, who ends the encounter by asking if her partner will just “get out of me.”

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and Frank, "Video Games"

    Hannah, Jessa’s 19-year-old stepbrother, a graveyard and too much chatting. Need we say more about how uncomfortable this sex is to watch?

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Marnie and Desi, "Iowa"

    Who gets her butt motorboated? Is this a real thing? Aside from the questionable logistics and reality of Marnie and Desi’s analingus scene, there’s also the awkward moment when Marnie confuses her partner’s declaration of love for licking her butthole with love for her. Oh, Marnie.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and Adam, "Vagina Panic"

    There is too much in this scene to dissect: fantasies of an 11-year-old girl with a Cabbage Patch lunchbox, excessive references to that little girl as a “slut” and Adam ripping off a condom to ejaculate on Hannah’s chest. No wonder it ends with Hannah saying she almost came.

  • Recent Slide Shows



Comment Preview

Your name will appear as username ( settings | log out )

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href=""> <b> <em> <strong> <i> <blockquote>