Recent examples of liberal bias from mainstream news sources....
mrc.org
The broadcast networks followed the liberal script Thursday night in characterizing how the Bush administration’s new rules on power plant emissions, especially CBS. Dan Rather twice referred to a “rollback,” asserting that "President Bush today approved a rollback in clean air regulations” and promised that John Roberts would report “on the impact of this rollback.” But at least NBC’s Tom Brokaw properly attributed the spin Rather treated as fact: “Environmental groups and some Democrats were furious about the decision of the administration, calling the move a huge rollback of the Clean Air Act.”
CBS’s Roberts used the “rollback” verbiage at the start of his story, but least attributed it: "Critics charge the plan is the most dramatic rollback of the Clean Air Act in history, a give back to an industry that pledged more than $4 million to President Bush and Republicans in recent years.” Roberts aired soundbites of Bush and the EPA’s Christine Whitman as well as of a liberal environmentalist, but also highlighted a disgruntled former EPA staffer: “Eric Schaeffer, who left the EPA this year over differences with the White House, says the whole idea is disgraceful." Roberts, who attributed the Bush policy move to political motivation, concluded by noting, without identifying him as a liberal Democrat, that New York’s Attorney General plans to sue to “stop the White House from gutting the Clean Air Act."
On ABC’s World News Tonight on June 13 anchor Peter Jennings read this short item which avoided the substance and followed the liberal line about a payoff to supporters: “The Environmental Protection Agency proposes changing air pollution rules to make it easier for energy companies to expand coal-burning power plants. It is a victory for utilities who successfully lobbied the Bush administration hard to weaken clear air standards.”
Over on the NBC Nightly News, Tom Brokaw announced: "The Bush administration said today it is relaxing air pollution rules for utilities when their plants are expanded. The power industry had complained the rules, which require them to install equipment to control smog and soot, were complicated and expensive. Environmental groups and some Democrats were furious about the decision of the administration, calling the move a huge rollback of the Clean Air Act. And New York state's Attorney General announced late today he will be suing the Bush administration to try to reverse that decision."
Only cable viewers got any real idea of the substance of the problem the Bush administration was trying to fix.
On FNC’s Special Report with Brit Hume, Carl Cameron explained, leading into a soundbite from Tom Daschle: “Industry under current rules must install costly pollution controls when they modernize or expand, so a lot of them don't. The Bush administration argues that easing pollution rules will provide an incentive to modernize, which will improve energy efficiency and cut pollution. The nation's top Democrat is not buying it.”
Cameron also clued viewers in to the hyped-up, over the top vitriol of some liberal Democrats as he played this soundbite from New Jersey Senator Robert Torricelli who basically accused the Bush team of murder: “Listen to me carefully. People's lives will be lost because of what was decided today. Young people and the elderly will get asthma, lakes will be destroyed, forests will be destroyed.”
Earlier, on CNN’s Inside Politics, John King gave the views of liberal environmentalists and then outlined how the White House is “making the case that what it is doing here is simply going back to what the rule was in the earliest days of the Clinton administration. It's a very technical issue, Candy. It's called 'new source review’ -- one of those labels only Washington could put on something. But the White House is saying is the Clinton administration went too far and over-interpreted the rules, so that if a coal producing plant already in place wanted to make technological improvements, it would then automatically have to put in as well very expensive anti-pollution controls. The White House says that ends up being counterproductive. That most plants won't do even the most basic repairs because they would turn out to be so costly. And the administration says because of that, some coal plants are putting out more pollution, more emissions, than they would if they could make these simple repairs.”
King also suggested a White House motivation not as sexy to the networks as a payoff to donors. He told anchor Candy Crowley: “It is also, Candy, a reminder, as Democrats say, Mr. Bush is doing this because of states like West Virginia and states like Pennsylvania. Had tiny West Virginia gone Democratic last time, as it had for so many years, Al Gore would be President, not George W. Bush.”
Back to the June 13 CBS Evening News polemic in the guise of a news story, Rather set it up: "President Bush today approved a rollback in clean air regulations that would have required utilities to improve pollution controls when they boost production. CBS's John Roberts reports on the impact of this rollback -- environmental and political."
Roberts began, as taken down by MRC analyst Brad Wilmouth: "The nation's oldest and dirtiest power plants will get a pass under the new rules, but today the Bush administration argued the move would ultimately encourage emissions reductions."
Christie Whitman, EPA Administrator: "Our reforms are designed to remove unintended obstacles to investment in newer, cleaner, more efficient production processes."
Roberts: "Environmental groups didn't see it that way, complaining the new regulations will allow many of the nation's most polluting power plants to install new equipment and increase output without doing a thing to curb emissions."
Phil Clapp, National Environmental Trust: "The proposal is actually much worse than anyone expected. Essentially what it does is say to the utility industry, 'You will never have to clean up your oldest and dirtiest power plants."
Roberts: "Critics charge the plan is the most dramatic rollback of the Clean Air Act in history, a give back to an industry that pledged more than $4 million to President Bush and Republicans in recent years.”
As Roberts spoke, viewers saw a chart on screen with campaign contributions for 2000 and 2002 listed under “Utility Contributions.” Those listed: Southern Company, Dominion, Cinergy, Duke, American Electric and Edison Electric for a total of $4,198,916.
Roberts noted: “Not so, said President Bush today."
George W. Bush: "They're absolutely wrong. This administration is committed to clean air, and we're gonna work vigorously to achieve clean air."
Roberts countered: "The President has proposed to reduce pollution on a national level, but local communities could still get hurt. The oldest and dirtiest plants could continue to operate without changes by buying pollution credits from newer, cleaner-burning plants. Eric Schaeffer, who left the EPA this year over differences with the White House, says the whole idea is disgraceful."
Eric Schaeffer, former EPA official: "My question is where is the EPA? I mean, we don't have an EPA anymore. We just have the White House and the energy lobby."
Roberts concluded: “Almost as soon as the new regulations were rolled out, the state of New York -- which lies in the fallout zone from older Midwestern power plants, announced it was going to court to, as the state's attorney general put it, 'stop the White House from gutting the Clean Air Act.’"
For the EPA’s view of its new ruling, see “EPA Announces Steps to Increase Energy Efficiency, Encourage Emissions Reductions,” at: epa.gov |
