.
7/17/10:There are times when the world seems like a tragic comedy. Such was the case on July 5, 2010, when Arianna Huffington lashed out at PolitiFact for daring to expose some of the half-truths she tells.
Sometimes, though, the world gets a respite. Such is the case with this report, in which we hold Ms. Huffington to account for some of the false and egregiously misleading"news" stories that Huffington Post (of which she is Editor-In-Chief) has published.
Related: Beyond hypocrisy: Arianna Huffington accuses Fox of "inciting" hate
~ ~ ~
On July 5, HuffPost published the following as its screaming front page headline:
The headline image led to this screed by Ms. Huffington, in which she excoriated PolitiFact, the Pulitzer-winning fact-checking service of the St. Petersberg Times. Specifically, she went ballistic over PolitiFact for daring to suggest, in a June 9 article, that she was less than accurate in her confrontation with Liz Cheney on the June 6 episode of ABC's "This Week." She accused PolitiFact of "rhetorical tap-dancing," and claimed:
At the end of the exchange [with Cheney], I mentioned how glad I was that PolitiFact -- with its motto, 'Sorting out the truth in politics' -- would be fact-checking the show. Unfortunately, the "fact check" turned into a model of how to avoid the truth. This is a favorite trick of those in positions of power: using ambiguity and complexity as a sort of chemical dispersant on the truth. Dilute it enough and it becomes unrecognizable.She concluded with this bit of journalistic moralizing:
In the end, this is not about me, or Liz Cheney, or even Halliburton. It's about our accountability double standard. It's actually not that complex, nor is it ambiguous. It's plainly obvious and the American people know it. And the refusal of our political and media leaders to acknowledge it is contributing to the widespread anger and cynicism sweeping the country right now. [...]Casual news consumers who are unfamiliar with HuffPost may find Ms. Huffington's moral pontifications to sound very reasonable.
As long as we allow truth backed up by a mountain of evidence to be, in the name of "pious fairness," downgraded to Half True, that's the way the planet we're all living on is going to continue to operate. And that's a fact.
Those who are familiar with the reality of HuffPost, however, know that for her to make such statements is actually beyond chutzpah. ("Chutzpah" is defined as unmitigated gall; example: a man who begs a judge for mercy, because he's an orphan --- after he's been convicted of murdering his parents.)
===============
Our claim, which this article will "fact-check":
Ms. Huffington's statements are "beyond chutzpah," because:
HuffPost is arguably the Internet's largest purveyor of "news" stories containing inflammatory falsehoods and egregiously misleading half-truths, directed primarily against conservatives (including the Tea Party), the U.S. military, and Israel.
That's a pretty tough accusation. Fortunately, there is a (real) "mountain of evidence" upon which to back it up.
===============
"Fact-checking" our claim
The first two things to consider in establishing the accuracy of our claim are: (a) HuffPost's size and influence, and (b) the journalistic standards to which it claims it holds itself.
HuffPost's unrivaled size and influence:HuffPost is the #1 most-read blog on Earth, is now one of America's top ten news sites, and was recently named "the most powerful blog in the world" by The Guardian (UK).
At 13 million unique visitors per month, HuffPost has more online readers than the Washington Post (the publisher of which recently said her paper "could learn from" HuffPost).
HuffPost has received preferential treatment in presidential press conferences, and has top members of Congress as official bloggers (article writers). It is also now a reportedly disgruntled member of the White House Correspondent's Association.
HuffPost has attracted advertising from many of the biggest corporations in the world.
HuffPost's self-professed nonpartisan journalistic standards (for full documentation, see Section A here):“What we're doing is two things. We do news. I don't believe news is left wing or right wing. And then we do the group blog, which is going to be a dialogue from all viewpoints.”
- May 6, 2005
“The editorial stance of the Huffington Post is to debunk the right-left way of thinking, which has become completely obsolete."
- November 14, 2007
“[T]oo many reporters have forgotten that the highest calling of journalists is to ferret out the truth, consequences be damned.”
- July 29, 2008
"[At HuffPost] there are guidelines that have to be followed -- and they include a prohibition on conspiracy theories or inflammatory claims..."
- February 1, 2010
We may now proceed to evaluate ten instances in which HuffPost decided to publish "news" stories that support our claim.
===============
Our "Top Ten" list of HuffPost "news" stories that are based on, or contain inflammatory falsehoods or egregiously misleading half-truths
The following are summaries of detailed documentation published here at HUFF-WATCH, which are linked at the conclusion of each.
The first five focus on false/misleading stories against conservatives/the Tea Party, followed by three against the U.S. military, and two against Israel.
#1: "MEMBERS OF CONGRESS CALLED 'NI**ER,' 'FA**OT,' SPAT ON BY TEA PARTY PROTESTERS" (3/20/10)
The Reality: There is no proof whatsoever that any of thesethings ever happened. Zero.
Why HuffPost knew, or should have known the story was false/misleading: In legitimate "newspapers," basic journalistic ethics demand that if one is going to smear an individual or group with a charge as incendiary as having used the "n" word, that the reporter provide one iota, one shred, one kernel of tangible proof. Not so at HuffPost. One of its Washington "reporters," Sam Stein, made the following statements in this story, as if they were fact: "Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), a hero of the civil rights movement, was called a 'ni--er.' And Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) was called a "faggot," as protesters shouted at him with deliberately lisp-y screams."
As it turns out, the only physical evidence in existence shows that these incidents never occurred. Since then, the accusers have steadfastly refused to comment further, or to be interviewed by media figures who will hold them to account. HuffPost has yet to issue a retraction.
This false headline incited a torrent of hate-filled user comments --- including open calls for violence --- against the Tea Party, which HuffPost reviewed, approved and decided to publish.
See complete documentation of this incident here, and a special report on HuffPost's "journalistic jihad" against the Tea Party, here.
#2: "THE TEA PARTY'S ANTI-IMMIGRATION AGENDA" (3/7/10)
The reality: First, this "story" is actually anopinion piece,which HuffPost featured in its "news" section, and disguised to appear as a "news" story. Second, it was written by an anti-Tea Party activist, and consisted of a continuous smear. It alleged that because one attendee at one Tea Party event was caught on video making an inflammatory statement, the entire Tea Party movement is "racist" and "anti-immigrant." Further, it turns out that the video was produced by the article writer --- and we have no idea whether it was even real, given the fact that radical leftists have made it a point of infiltrating Tea Party events to make inflammatory claims on video, etc.
Why HuffPost knew, or should have known the story was false/misleading: There was not one scintilla of proof that the one person who made this inflammatory claim is in any way representative of the Tea Party movement. And there is not one iota of proof, or even indication, that the Tea Party has a "racist" or "anti-immigrant" agenda.
This false headline incited a torrent of hate-filled user comments against the Tea Party, which HuffPost reviewed, approved and decided to publish.
See complete documentation of this incident here, and a special report on HuffPost's "journalistic jihad" against the Tea Party, here.
#3: "NRA AND PALIN: LET THOSE ON NO-FLY LIST BUY GUNS" (5/15/10)
The reality: Sarah Palin never said this.Period.
Why HuffPost knew, or should have known the story was false/misleading: Sarah Palin isn't mentioned once in either the headline or story excerpt (the original story was published by "ThinkProgress," the Soros-funded leftist attack machine).
This false headline incited a torrent of hate-filled user comments against Gov. Palin, which HuffPost reviewed, approved and decided to publish.
See complete documentation of this incident here
#4: "TEA PARTY ON THE DOLE: MANY TEA PARTY ACTIVISTS, OUT OF WORK, TURN TO GOVERNMENT FOR HELP" (3/28/10)
The Reality: "Many" Tea Partyactivists are neither out of work, nor are they "on the dole," nor are they "turning to government for help."
Why HuffPost knew, or should have known the story was false/misleading: Because there is nothing whatsoever in the New York Times source story that would lead one to conclude that "many" Tea Party activists are "on the dole." To the contrary, what the story does describe is a handful of activists who are collecting Social Security and/or unemployment --- into which all working Americans are forced to pay.
This false headline spurred a torrent of hate-filled user comments against the Tea Party, which HuffPost allowed to fill the thread.
See complete documentation of this incident here, and a special report on HuffPost's "journalistic jihad" against the Tea Party, here.
#5: "DO CONDOMS HELP STOP SPREAD OF HIV? MCCAIN: 'YOU'VE STUMPED ME'" (3/16/07)
The Reality: Sen. McCain was not asked a question aboutcondoms and HIV.
Why HuffPost knew, or should have known the story was false/misleading: Because the copy in the New York Times article it cited was very clear that this was not the question that McCain was asked:Q: "So no contraception, no counseling on contraception. Just abstinence. Do you think contraceptives help stop the spread of HIV?"McCain was asked about "contraceptives," which include any of a number of things --- birth-control pills, spermicidal foams and jellies, IUDs, etc., none of which do anything to help stop the spread of HIV. Condoms, which do help to stop the spread of HIV, are also contraceptives --- but this is not what McCain was asked about.
Mr. McCain: (Long pause) "You've stumped me."
This false headline spurred a torrent of hate-filled user comments against Sen. McCain, which HuffPost allowed to flood the thread.
See complete documentation of this incident here, and more of HuffPost's false/misleading articles about Sen. McCain during the presidential campaign here and here.
#6: "WATCH: SEYMOUR HERSH SAYS U.S. TROOPS CARRYING OUT 'BATTLEFIELD EXECUTIONS' IN AFGHANISTAN" (5/13/10)
The Reality: There is not one shred ofproof that these "executions" are occurring. Zero.
Why HuffPost knew, or should have known the story was false/misleading: First, a pretty big tip off that there's absolutely no substance to this story is Hersh's admission that he's basing his allegations entirely on his claim that he's "been told this anecdotally by five or six different people, battlefield executions are taking place." He has no proof whatsoever, other than anonymous sources that may or may not exist, and may or may not be credible. Second, at the time HuffPost decided to run this inflammatory claim, numerous accounts documented the fact that Hersh is "truth-challenged," especially when it comes to his conspiracy theories against the U.S. military.
This false "news" story incited a torrent of hate-filled user comments against the U.S. military, which HuffPost reviewed, approved and decided to publish.
See complete documentation of this incident here.
#7: "WHISTLEBLOWER VIDEO EXPOSES 'COLLATERAL MURDER' IN IRAQ" (4/5/10)
The Reality: This claim is, at aminimum, extremely misleading; at worst, it is an outright lie.
Why HuffPost knew, or should have known the story was false/misleading: First, HuffPost published this story as its screaming headline almost immediately after it was released by "WikiLeaks." It either didn't do any basic fact-checking, or it refused to let the reality of what it found affect its decision to position this inflammatory headline as "fact." Second, within 24 hours, numerous military-supporting bloggers did background research and documented how and why the story was both false and misleading. Third, even Stephen Colbert, whose "Colbert Report" HuffPost covered on a near-daily basis during this period, confronted the WikiLeaks video producer with the facts about how egregiously misleading it was. Yet HuffPost chose not to run a story on that particular episode of "The Colbert Report." HuffPost has yet to issue a retraction for this story.
This false "news" story incited a torrent of hate-filled user comments against the U.S. military, which HuffPost reviewed, approved and decided to publish.
See complete documentation of this incident here.
#8: "SOLDIERS IN AFGHANISTAN GIVEN BIBLES, TOLD TO 'HUNT PEOPLE FOR JESUS" (5/4/09)
The Reality: Any normal person seeing this screaming headline (sorry, no screen cap available) would think that the U.S. military was handing out bibles to American soldiers, and ordering them to proselytize to Afghanistanis. This never happened --- period.
Why HuffPost knew, or should have known the story was false/misleading: First, the story was "broken" by the terrorist-friendly, notorious al-Jazeera network. This should have been a major tipoff to HuffPost that perhaps it should check it to ensure that its inflammatory claim is accurate. Apparently HuffPost's crack team of 53 "editors" either didn't do any basic fact-checking, or ignored what they found. This is evidenced by the fact that a small conservative blog, Sweetness & Light, conducted its own research, which it published on the same day (5/4/09). The facts, which HuffPost did not report: (a) This story is more than a year old; (b) Pashtun-language bibles were mailed to one soldier by one church, but the U.S. military prevented them from ever being distributed. HuffPost has yet to issue a retraction for this story.
This false "news" story incited a torrent of hate-filled user comments against the U.S. military and Christians, which HuffPost reviewed, approved and decided to publish.
See complete documentation of this incident here.
#9: "SWEDISH ARTICLE SUGGESTS ISRAELI TROOPS KILL PALESTINIANS, HARVEST ORGANS" (8/19/09)
The Reality: This "news" story was false on a multitude of levels.
Why HuffPost knew, or should have known the story was false/misleading: First, the story itself revealed that the "reporter" admitted he had "no idea, no clue" if the allegations in his "story" are true. Turns out the Palestinian family at the root of the story denied making these claims --- and basic fact-checking reveals that what is alleged is medically impossible. Did HuffPost's crack team of 53 "editors" fail to do any basic fact-checking into this age-old blood libel against Jews --- or did they ignore what they found? Whichever was the case, it didn't prevent them from matching this inflammatory claim with a picture of grinning Israeli soldiers, marching towards the photographer --- as if they're proud of committing the barbarity that the Swedish "article" (and HuffPost) accused them of.
This false "news" story incited a torrent of hate-filled user comments against Israel and Jews, which HuffPost reviewed, approved and decided to publish.
See complete documentation of this incident here.
#10: "ISRAELI ASSAULT TARGETS SYMBOLS OF HAMAS POWER" (12/29/08)
The Reality: The little girl depicted in the photo HuffPostchose to run across its front page was killed accidentally --- not because Israel targeted her, as implied by the incendiary copy in this headline that HuffPost ran. (Screen cap of front page is not available, but PDFs taken at the time of the thread, right, prove its existence and content).
Why HuffPost knew, or should have known the story was false/misleading: The commonly-known facts among credible newspapers are as follows: (1) Israel entered Gaza in late 2008 to put a stop to Hamas's constant acts of terrorism against its civilians and military; (2) As in all past incidents, Israel went to extraordinary measures to avoid civilian casualties in its efforts to strike Hamas targets; (3) Hamas is notorious for forcing Palestinian civilians to act as human shields, while it fires its weapons at Israel and its soldiers, from within residential areas.
Yet HuffPost turned all these facts on their heads, and ran as its screaming headline the claim, "Israeli Assaults Target Symbols Of Hamas Power" --- which it matched with a picture of a (presumably) dead four year old Muslim girl. The unmistakable implication: that this little girl was "a symbol of Hamas Power," and that Israel mercilessly and maliciously struck her with deadly force. This was the single most egregiously misleading and inflammatory headline and image that HuffPost employed throughout Cast Lead.
For unknown reasons (perhaps because this was such a grievous, anti-Semitic libel), at some point after February 1, 2009, HuffPost changed the headline image of this thread. It could not, however, change the URL, which contains the original headline wording.
This false "news" story incited a torrent of hate-filled user comments against Israel and Jews, which HuffPost reviewed, approved and decided to publish.
See complete documentation of this incident and others during Cast Lead in Section 4 of this report.
See more examples of HuffPost's false, misleading stories, and bias against conservative individuals and organizations, the U.S. military, and Israel/Jews.
Want to make your voice known on all this?
If you believe that the concerns expressed in this article are legitimate, and would like to make your voice known to HuffPost management (politely, please), here's how.
If you'd like to express your views on this matter to the producers of ABC's "This Week," here's how.
To contact PolitiFact, write here.
=============
Trackbacks: IsraPundit
.
Posts
(b) Pashtun-language bibles were mailed to one soldier by one church, but the U.S. military prevented them from ever being distributed. HuffPost has yet to issue a retraction for this story.
ReplyDelete..............................
I don't see what would be the problem if U.S. troops were actually proselytizing.
Looks like you nailed Zsa Zsa...again!
ReplyDelete@ Anonymous 1 (11:37p):
ReplyDeleteYou may not, but the U.S. military has a strict prohibition on it. And we have to respect that. I do. I don't want our soldiers trying to convert anyone, while they're wearing our uniform. If they want to do that on their own time, and in their own clothes, that's their business.
@ Anonymous 2 (10:39p):
Thanks. :)