Let me start this off with two disclaimers. First, I very rarely do diaries (altho I do comment. A lot). I just happen to think that there are those who can put diaries together much better than I so, unless there is a matter that I may have a unique perspective on, I prefer to read other people's diaries and comment on, and in, them. Second, I happen to like Media Matters a lot. I think that it has done yeoman work in pointing out media bias and, just recently, its pieces on Malvaux's and CNN's piling on Pelosi and its piece on Imus and the Rutgers' woman's B'ball team spurred action by the MSM and by the blogosphere that might not have occurred otherwise.
It is specifically BECAUSE of this influence that I feel it necessary to point out an egregious omission in MM's coverage of the media that occurred yesterday. That is, its lack of coverage of Lauer and The Today Show's hit piece on Pelosi that took place yesterday morning. To get a better feel of why I'm pissed off, follow me below the fold.
At approximately 5 pm on Thursday, MM posted an action item requeston its site entitled "Tell CNN to get the facts right on Pelosi trip", which was the culmination of days of exposure of CNN's biased coverage of the Speaker's trip to Syria. This request was both linked to and repeated in its entirety by, among others Atrios and Firedoglake. This, I'm sure, led to a number of emails sent to CNN. It probably also led to MSM types being made very aware of the fact that we were on to their crap.
So, my mouth nearly fell to the floor when I tuned into 'Today' Friday morning and saw the piece (documented very well by Think Progress in my first link, above the fold) wherein Lauer just goes to town on Pelosi, even brushing off Timmeh's halfhearted attempt to try to get the truth into the discussion. By 7:20 I had dashed an e-mail off to 'Today'; by 7:25 I (and, I'm sure, many others) had alerted MM to the piece.
Think Progress posted a story on the piece at approximately 10:55. Atrios linked to it at 11:46. By noon, Clammyc had posted what became a Rec'd diary on the subject (and to which I commented, here). McJoan posted a FP diary on the piece at about 3:50 PM and Devilstower linked to it in a FP diary at about 5 PM. Still not a word from MM on the subject.
Finally, at 5:02, they rantheir item. However, they did NOT take Lauer to task for his piece, in fact they didn't even think that anything he said (to glean from their piece) warranted criticism at all. No, their story, from the same exact excerpt that all of the other sources above had linked to and discussed at length, was that "Russert baselessly asserted that Democrats have had difficulty being competitive" on foreign policy issues". Now I grant you, Timmeh did say that IN PASSING, and were this any other time, it would be a valid criticism to lead with. However, regarding this 'Today' segment it was the equivalent of reporting on McCain's Baghdad trip and leading with "Lindsay Graham Cheats Merchant on Rug Buy".
So look, I know MM hates Timmeh, hell, who doesn't. I know that when the subject is brought up on MTP this Sunday, MM will be all over it. But c'mon, Lauer's hit piece was actually shocking in its bias and he gets a pass? I mean, even Foser,in his weekly column, ignores the piece (and I thought that the column might have been written on Thursday, owing to Good Friday, but no such luck. He refers to CNN's Friday morning coverage in it). While I certainly applaud MM's smackdown of CNN and Timmeh, let's look at some numbers, shall we? CNN's average viewership at any one time might generously be pegged at 350K, MTP's latest ratings put its viewership at 4.1 million, most of whom will be familiar with Pelosi's trip and will have formed their own opinions on it. Today's viewership is 5.3 million, most of whom are uninformed viewers, those who are on their way to work or school or spouses and children or parents thereof, and whose opinions Today might help to form. For MM to ignore a hit piece like this is, frankly, bizarre at best and suspicious at worst. They owe us an explanation.
Finally, I don't mean this piece to lessen the impact of the diarists and bloggers who DID pick up the piece. The reason I single out MM on this is, for better or worse, it somehow has a rep in the MSM as a 'Media Watchdog Site' without any partisan attachment (well, except for Fox, but c'mon). Hell, this NY Timespiece practically has MM singlehandedly bringing down Imus. It is read by media types constantly and a rebuttal to Today could have, perhaps, brought some sort of response. I just don't get it. I love you guys at MM, but you blew it big time on this.