<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > Media Matters</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/topic/media_matters/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 00:26:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Sorry, Media Matters, no one actually wants your talking points</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/16/sorry_media_matters_no_one_actually_wants_your_talking_points/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/16/sorry_media_matters_no_one_actually_wants_your_talking_points/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 14:49:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opening Shot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department of Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David Brock]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Liberals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13300363</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What if a liberal group defended Obama and no one cared?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yesterday, Media Matters, the liberal media watchdog group, sent out to a fairly massive email list a talking points memo defending the Obama Justice Department's obtaining of Associated Press phone logs. The talking points were distributed to 3,000 "progressive talkers and influentials," <a href="http://www.buzzfeed.com/bensmith/what-media-matters-was-thinking">according to Media Matters head David Brock</a>. (But not me, for the record. I am not an influential.)</p><p><a href="http://mediamattersaction.org/message/">Like <em>all</em> talking points,</a> these talking points were dumb and full of weird weaselly language and made worse by the fact that each claim was designed to be repeated by people on TV who presumably don't believe what they say or at least don't really care that much. "For those interested in pushing back against partisan attacks while the rest of us grapple with the larger questions, here is language to guide you," the memo said. The rest of us will be back here, grappling, while you engage in your semi-scripted verbal combat, with some guy who has different talking points.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/05/16/sorry_media_matters_no_one_actually_wants_your_talking_points/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/16/sorry_media_matters_no_one_actually_wants_your_talking_points/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>39</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Freedom&#8217;s biggest army&#8221;: Scenes from the NRA convention 2013</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/08/scenes_from_arizona_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/08/scenes_from_arizona_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 18:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wayne LaPierre]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gun Control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[First Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Second Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13292919</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fear, paranoia and loathing at the "most spectacular display of firearms in the world"]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>HOUSTON -- To swing the door on a National Rifle Association annual meeting is to enter a world where Freedom comes from a gun. The gun's purpose is not important. It doesn't have to be American made. It can be any number of shapes, so long as it has a grip, a trigger, and a barrel. But only from a gun barrel can Freedom flow. In the words of multiple NRA members who confronted protestors this past weekend, "The Second Amendment is the one thing protecting the First."</p><p>Last May in St. Louis, NRA leaders <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/04/18/standing-its-ground-the-nra-announces-all-in-at/184952">pounded away at this idea</a> in a torrent of Apocalyptic warnings about the consequences of failure in the November elections. A year later, gathering two weeks after helping defeat the biggest effort to strengthen gun laws in a generation, the same men delivered the NRA's Second Amendment gospel with a newfound swagger. Unchanged was the primacy of guns and gun rights in the NRA's understanding of the world and everything in it. In his opening speech, Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre <a href="http://www.nranews.com/home/video/2013-nra-annual-meetings-wayne-lapierre/list/2013-annual-meetings">described the gun enthusiasts</a> before him as "Freedom's biggest army, greatest hope, and brightest future." The group's chief lobbyist-strategist, the boyish Tennessean Chris Cox, <a href="http://www.nranews.com/home/video/2013-nra-annual-meetings-nra-ila-exec-dir-chris-w-cox/list/2013-annual-meetings">celebrated the convention</a> as "the biggest celebration ever of American values," whose <a href="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05/06/nra-has-record-conference-turnout-new-president/">86,000-plus attendees</a> embodied "the essence of participation in American democracy."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/05/08/scenes_from_arizona_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/08/scenes_from_arizona_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>109</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Right-wing media push new Benghazi myths</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/08/right_wing_media_push_new_benghazi_myths_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/08/right_wing_media_push_new_benghazi_myths_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 13:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benghazi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fox & friends]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brian Kilmeade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Whistleblowers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13292618</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fox News and company have been ramping up the rhetoric in advance of the House committee open hearings Wednesday]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Right-wing media are using </em><em>a congressional hearing to push new myths about the </em><em>Obama administration's response to the </em><em>September 11, 2012 attacks on a U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya. In fact, these myths are discredited by previous congressional reports and testimony, which show that the politicized nature of the hearings come from right-wing media and Congress</em><em>ional Republicans</em><em>, that the military could not have </em><em>rescued personnel from the </em><em>second attack, that the administration was in constant communication at all levels during the attacks, and that the intelligence community believed there was a link to an anti-Islam video at the time of the attacks.</em></p><h2>MYTH: Latest Benghazi Hearing Is Apolitical</h2><p><strong>Fox News' Brian Kilmeade Attacks The Claim That Benghazi Hearings Are "Politically Driven." </strong>On <em>Fox &amp; Friends</em>, co-host Brian Kilmeade claimed that because self-identified whistleblowers are testifying at congressional hearings on Benghazi at a time that elections are not being held, the hearings can't be politically driven, saying "politics is out, and whistleblowers are in":</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/05/08/right_wing_media_push_new_benghazi_myths_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/08/right_wing_media_push_new_benghazi_myths_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>58</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>UN passes historic arms trade treaty to U.S. media silence</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/03/un_passes_historic_arms_trade_treaty_to_u_s_media_silence_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/03/un_passes_historic_arms_trade_treaty_to_u_s_media_silence_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2013 22:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington Post]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wall Street Journal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13260711</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[No major broadcast network has made even passing mention of a treaty that curtails trafficking to war-torn nations]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>THE UNITED NATIONS -- On the day the Arms Trade Treaty was scheduled to face a consensus vote by 193 countries, ending the years-long process to establish an international agreement to curtail arms trafficking to nations torn by conflict, I listened to a member of the Liberian delegation explain his country's concerns. "We wanted a much tighter treaty," he said, referring the large group of African countries most affected by the global black market arms trade. "Those of us who live in countries devastated by civil war very clearly understand the need for a strong regulatory framework to deter non-state actors from getting weapons. This is why we wanted a mechanism for risk-assessment, and why we wanted penalties."</p><p>Without the view from Liberia, it's hard to understand yesterday's headlines about the General Assembly's approval of the treaty. Which is why during two weeks of negotiations last month, African delegations could often be seen chatting with media from around the world. On the last day of the conference especially, the North Lawn building buzzed with reporters seeking perspectives. There were Russian and Arab TV crews, Japanese magazine journalists, and writers from at least half a dozen African publications. The U.S. media presence, hailing from the world's largest arms exporter, was harder to find. Which is to say, it was nearly impossible to find.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/03/un_passes_historic_arms_trade_treaty_to_u_s_media_silence_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/03/un_passes_historic_arms_trade_treaty_to_u_s_media_silence_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>When Anthony Lewis took on the GOP &#8212; and the New York Times</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/27/when_anthony_lewis_stood_up_to_the_new_york_times_and_the_gop_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/27/when_anthony_lewis_stood_up_to_the_new_york_times_and_the_gop_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Mar 2013 21:03:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Anthony Lewis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York Times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CNN]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13253927</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Absent from the obituaries is his noble defense of Bill Clinton during the impeachment witch-hunt of the 1990s]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With the passing of legendary <em>New York Times</em> newsman Anthony Lewis this week, observers <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/03/the-life-and-death-of-anthony-lewis-a-tribune-of-the-law/274332/">have noted</a> that his lasting legacy will likely be his clarion insights and logical, lucid writing style that helped make the courts and the law more accessible for everyday news consumers. From his two Pulitzer Prizes for reporting, to his opinion column which he wrote for more than three decades, Lewis' imprint on the <em>Times </em>was vast.</p><p>What may be getting overlooked in the remembrances though, and what the <em>Times </em>itself neglected to mention in its otherwise <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/26/us/anthony-lewis-pulitzer-prize-winning-columnist-dies-at-85.html">thorough Lewis obituary</a>, was the pivotal role Lewis played during the 1990s when he stood up to his own newspaper, as well as to an army of Republican partisans waging war against President Bill Clinton. Lewis <a href="http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1996-04-02/news/9604010230_1_clintons-james-mcdougal-madison-guaranty">wrote passionately</a> about the mindless pursuit of the Whitewater story and the Clinton impeachment saga. As a legal scholar, Lewis was utterly appalled by the conduct of Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr and his office of "<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/1999/03/06/opinion/abroad-at-home-monica-s-real-story.html?pagewanted=print&amp;src=pm">thuggish deputies</a>."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/27/when_anthony_lewis_stood_up_to_the_new_york_times_and_the_gop_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/27/when_anthony_lewis_stood_up_to_the_new_york_times_and_the_gop_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is Roger Ailes the GOP&#8217;s worst enemy?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/22/gop_rebranding_doesnt_apply_to_roger_ailes_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/22/gop_rebranding_doesnt_apply_to_roger_ailes_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Mar 2013 18:49:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Roger Ailes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Growth & Opportunity Project]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reince Priebus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13249237</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Despite the party's rebranding efforts, Fox News seemingly has no interest in moderating its attack programming]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A question for Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, who this week unveiled a nearly 100-page "autopsy" <a href="http://growthopp.gop.com/RNC_Growth_Opportunity_Book_2013.pdf">report</a> on the GOP's recent electoral failings that urged the party to soften its image and become more inclusive: Do you think Roger Ailes is more concerned with his new biography hitting the top ten on the best-seller list, or with the Republican Party successfully appealing to more minority voters?</p><p>The answer to that question might go a long way in determining whether the GOP has any luck rebranding itself in the coming years. Early indications are Ailes and Fox News have no interest in moderating their form of attack programming, the bare-knuckle brand celebrated in Zev Chafets' new bio of the Fox News president,  <em>Roger Ailes: Off Camera</em>.</p><p>Dubbed the "Growth &amp; Opportunity Project," the RNC's laundry list of campaign failures urges the party to become more inclusive, tolerant and able to engage and persuade non-believers. Or to at least be able to not turn them off entirely with angry, absolutist rhetoric. "On messaging, we must change our tone," the report concluded.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/22/gop_rebranding_doesnt_apply_to_roger_ailes_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/22/gop_rebranding_doesnt_apply_to_roger_ailes_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>33</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Could Twitter have prevented the Iraq War?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/18/could_twitter_have_prevented_the_iraq_war_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/18/could_twitter_have_prevented_the_iraq_war_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2013 15:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iraq]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iraq war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York Times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George W. Bush]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13244555</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The conflict might not have become a fait accompli if the mainstream media was forced to answer for its mistakes]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Responding to a barrage of criticism he received for a <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/03/04/bill-keller-vs-bill-keller-on-obamas-balanced-d/192895">factually inaccurate and flawed</a> column he wrote this month about the sequestration battle, <em>New York Times</em> columnist Bill Keller wrote a follow-up <a href="http://keller.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/05/the-bullying-pulpit/">blog post</a> to detail how critics had hounded him online, especially via Twitter.</p><p>Denouncing the social media tool's tendency to produce what he called mean and shallow commentary, Keller lamented Twitter's suddenly pervasive power. "It is always on, and it gets inside your head," he wrote, adding, "there is no escape." Indeed, within days of writing his column, Keller felt compelled to pen a lengthy piece about his Twitter encounter.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/18/could_twitter_have_prevented_the_iraq_war_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/18/could_twitter_have_prevented_the_iraq_war_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>10 biggest lies spewed by Sean Hannity</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/28/10_biggest_lies_spewed_by_sean_hannity/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/28/10_biggest_lies_spewed_by_sean_hannity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 23:18:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sean Hannity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Keith Ellison]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13215225</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On Tuesday, Rep. Keith Ellison accused the Fox News host of telling "mistruths." He was speaking euphemistically  ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On the Feb. 27 edition of Hannity, host Sean Hannity replayed part of his Feb. 26 interview with Rep. Keith Ellison. During the exchange, Ellison responded to Hannity's question about the federal debt being "immoral" by saying, "You are immoral for telling lies." Hannity asked, "I'm immoral? What did I do that's immoral?" Ellison responded, "You tell mistruths. You say things that aren't true." Speaking before the clip was aired, Hannity said Ellison "at times, seemed incoherent" and "really started grasping at straws." After the clip was aired, Hannity said to guest J.C. Watts, "I just gave him the rope and said, go. Here you go, rant away."</p><p>10. <strong>Hannity Hyped RNC's Doctored Audio of Supreme Court Arguments.</strong> Hannity uncritically aired a Republican National Committee (RNC) ad that used audio from Supreme Court oral arguments to attack health care reform -- but the audio used in the ad was dishonestly edited. [Media Matters,  <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/03/30/fox-hypes-rncs-doctored-audio-of-supreme-court/186318">3/30/12</a>]</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/28/10_biggest_lies_spewed_by_sean_hannity/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/28/10_biggest_lies_spewed_by_sean_hannity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>23</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hey, Sean Hannity, here&#8217;s what a &#8220;lapdog&#8221; press really looks like</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/24/what_a_lapdog_press_really_looks_like_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/24/what_a_lapdog_press_really_looks_like_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Feb 2013 14:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George W. Bush]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iraq war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13209201</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Fox talker whines about the media's leftist bias. Has he forgotten the Bush years?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Perpetually fuming about President Obama, Sean Hannity widened his rant Wednesday night on Fox News and condemned the "lapdog, kiss ass media" that allegedly lets Obama have his way. Echoing the same attack, Karl Rove <a href="http://www.rove.com/articles/450">wrote</a> in the <em>Wall Street Journal</em> this week that <strong>"</strong>Mr. Obama is a once-in-a-generation demagogue with a compliant press corps," while the anti-Obama <em>Daily Caller</em> pushed <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/19/lapdog-media-seeking-lap-to-lay-on/">the headline</a>, "Lapdog Media Seeking Lap To Lie In."</p><p>Complaining about the "liberal media" has been a running, four-decade story for conservative activists. But what we're hearing more of lately is the specific allegation that the press has purposefully laid down for the Democratic president, and that it's all part of a master media plan to help Democrats foil Republicans.</p><p>The rolling accusation caught my attention since I wrote a book called <em><a href="http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/891886.Lapdogs">Lapdogs</a></em>, which documented the Beltway media's chronic timidity during the previous Republican administration, and particularly with regards to the Iraq War. I found it curious that Hannity and friends are now trying to turn the rhetorical tables with a Democrat in the White House, and I was interested in what proof they had to lodge that accusation against today's press.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/24/what_a_lapdog_press_really_looks_like_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/24/what_a_lapdog_press_really_looks_like_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>72</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rush: Feminism shrinks penises</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/09/21/rush_feminism_shrinks_penises/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/09/21/rush_feminism_shrinks_penises/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 2012 11:57:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Feminism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Radio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Genitalia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13017856</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A study finds male genitalia has gotten smaller and the radio host knows who to blame]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rush Limbaugh characteristically stressed the power and importance of feminism on his Thursday show. The firebrand host attributed to feminists ("feminazis" as he puts it) the power to determine the size of male genitalia.</p><p>An Italian study found that penises are on average around 10 percent smaller today than 50 years ago. The study cited weight gain, pollution, stress and smoking as possible factors in the shrinkage, but Rush suggests otherwise.</p><p>Scoffing at the idea that air pollution might influence our physical constitution, he stated, “I think it’s feminism... it’s tied to the last 50 years — the average size of [a male's] member is 10 percent smaller than 50 years — it has to be the feminazis, the chickification and everything else.”</p><p>Listen to the audio, via Media Matters:</p><p><iframe src="http://mediamatters.org/embed/190034" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" width="480" height="360"></iframe></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/09/21/rush_feminism_shrinks_penises/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/09/21/rush_feminism_shrinks_penises/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>91</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Underwhelming Daily Caller &#8220;scoops&#8221;: A recent history</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/09/05/underwhelming_daily_caller_scoops_a_recent_history/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/09/05/underwhelming_daily_caller_scoops_a_recent_history/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Sep 2012 16:57:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Daily Caller]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mortgage Crisis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13001070</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson's outlet often fails to impress]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When is a scoop probably not a scoop? When it's published by <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/04/26/tucker_carlsons_downward_spiral/">Tucker Carlson</a>'s conservative news site the Daily Caller. Here is a recent, and incomplete, history of its biggest flops:</p><p>* This week, the conservative site <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/03/with-landmark-lawsuit-barack-obama-pushed-banks-to-give-subprime-loans-to-chicagos-african-americans/?print=1">put out</a> a four-part series on a 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank that trumps up Obama's role defending 186 African-American clients, when he was an associate at a law firm in the '90s. Most of the plaintiffs in the case were ultimately foreclosed on, the Caller reported. <span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;">The Caller, in other words, wants the takeaway to be that </span>Obama was totally responsible for precipitating the mortgage bubble. But then it admits that maybe Obama was ultimately <a href="https://twitter.com/Talkmaster/status/242928445418520576">not very involved</a> after all. From the Caller, emphasis ours: "The Chicago Sun-Times reported in 1998 that Obama claimed $23,000 in billable hours for his role in the lawsuit. <strong>That role was limited, partly because he was networking his way toward his 1996 election to the Illinois Senate. </strong>But he stayed with the firm until 2004, and it was his lawsuit."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/09/05/underwhelming_daily_caller_scoops_a_recent_history/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/09/05/underwhelming_daily_caller_scoops_a_recent_history/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The right is attacking Media Matters because it matters</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/16/the_right_is_attacking_media_matters_because_it_matters/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/16/the_right_is_attacking_media_matters_because_it_matters/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 16:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Daily Caller]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David Brock]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12370081</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Daily Caller's heavy-breathing "expose" is light on facts]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>"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 <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/12/inside-media-matters-sources-memos-reveal-erratic-behavior-close-coordination-with-white-house-and-news-organizations/)">series</a> aimed at attacking and undermining the popular progressive media watchdog group.</p><p>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 <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/12/inside-media-matters-sources-memos-reveal-erratic-behavior-close-coordination-with-white-house-and-news-organizations">central goal</a> of influencing the national media."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/02/16/the_right_is_attacking_media_matters_because_it_matters/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/16/the_right_is_attacking_media_matters_because_it_matters/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>94</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
