CyberAlert -- 08/13/2001 -- Scientists Disappointed
Scientists Disappointed; Bush's Speech Was "Clintonian"; An Authority on Stem Cells: An 11-Year-Old Actor; PBS's Liberal Chief 8) Job Opening at the Media Research Center: Assistant Archivist for Media Conversion. 1 On the August 10 CBS Evening News John Roberts noted how "the first barrage came from the right, conservatives denouncing the plan to fund embryonic stem cell research as wrong -- morally, scientifically and politically." He soon cautioned: "There are deep concerns among scientists tonight that the strict limits on funding may forever damage the research." CBS then ran a full story from Elizabeth Kaledin about the disappointed scientific community. Over on the NBC Nightly News, Robert Bazell began by implying cures are right around the corner: "To understand the potential for stem cells, you can visit the lab of Dr. Evan Snyder at Children's Hospital in Boston. The cures so far with mice, only but amazing nonetheless. These animals, called shiverers, born with a nerve cell defect in their brain that causes them to shake constantly." After showing a video how stem cell
implantation improve the mice, Bazell declared: "These results
indicate stem cells might cure many nerve diseases like Parkinson's or
Alzheimer's. What effect will President Bush's new regulations have on the
effort to translate these and similar animal results to humans? Dr. John
Gearhart, a pioneer in the field, fears they will be severe."
(Robertson showed he can insult conservatives as well as any journalist, responding: "I'm not in the camp with the Luddites on the so-called right who want to shut this whole thing down...") Schieffer had concluded the August 5 Face the Nation by opining: "Finally today, some thoughts as the President decides whether or not the government should back stem cell research. History's longest argument has been over what to do about the mountain. One group has always wanted to cross the mountain, to explore and see what is on the other side. The other group, no less sincere, has always been willing to let well enough alone. That group worries there might be things on the other side of the mountain we didn't want to know. They were the ones who refused to look through Galileo's telescope. They already knew all they needed to know about the moon and the sun and the stars." For the rest of the commentary, in which
Schieffer argued, that if Bush "reads history he will know that
history remembers those who climbed the mountain, not those who stayed
home in fear of the unknown," refer back to: This isn't the first time Schieffer has
transformed his personal opinion expressed one week into what
"some" think a week later. As noted in the July 23 CyberAlert:
"A week after he made the suggestion, Bob Schieffer cited how 'some
people' back a McCain presidential bid. Just after the House failed to
vote on a 'campaign finance reform' bill, Schieffer had asked:
'Doesn't this give him the perfect excuse?' Yesterday on Face the
Nation he told Trent Lott that 'some people' are pushing the idea that
the House defeat justifies a McCain run." For details, go to:
On PBS's Washington Week on Friday night she
expounded: But no one has parsed his words to derive the opposite policy implication from what it appeared they meant.
On Inside Washington, Time magazine national correspondent Jack White argued: "Any decision that leaves Jerry Falwell feeling pleased and happy is a decision that you need to be skeptical about and he was very happy with this decision." Thursday night on MSNBC's post-speech Hardball, Newsweek's top political reporter, Howard Fineman, betrayed his feeling: "This was a political catscan of George W. Bush's mind, both the decision-making process and the result. And it shows him to be a true-blue conservative. We keep forgetting this guy is a conservative. I thought he was going to go farther than this." And in his Friday Washington Post piece, TV reviewer Tom Shales, the MRC's Tim Jones pointed out to me, contended: "When he said human life is 'something special to be protected,' he invited the scorn of critics who would castigate him for having presided over so many executions while governor of Texas." Of course, those executed were not "innocent" human life. Shales added: "Bush's speech seemed like something people might look back on in 50 or 100 years as a quaint sign of simpler times, before cloning became common and stem cell research had helped cure many of humanity's most pernicious diseases." Unable to let go of his anger over who assumed the presidential office, Shales opened the August 10 review: "A man purporting to be President of the United States appeared on national television last night to announce and discuss his decision on human embryonic research. Yes, the man was none other than George W. Bush, who is indeed the President of record, but this chief executive has used television so little during his first seven months in office that he could hardly be called a familiar sight to viewers. Some may have thought they were looking at Dick Cavett, to whom Mr. Bush bears a certain facial and physical resemblance." To read the entire Shales "Style"
section piece, go to:
Concluding a story on celebrities who support embryonic stem cell research, such as Michael J. Fox, Mary Tyler Moore, Christopher Reeve, Jason Alexander, David Hyde Pierce, Billy Baldwin, Richard Kind, Lyle MacLachlan and Michael Boatman, ET co-host Bob Goen wrapped up the August 10 item: "Other celebrities who have come out publicly to support stem cell research are Kevin Kline and young Jonathan Lipnicki." Jonathan Lipnicki? He's a lot closer to being an embryo than most actors since he was born on October 22, 1990, making him not even quite 11. According to the Internet Movie Database, Lipnicki had roles in the movies Stuart Little 2, Stuart Little, Doctor Doolittle and Jerry Maguire, in which as a five-year-old he played the role of "Ray Boyd." He's also made several guest appearances on WB's Dawson's Creek. For more on him, go to: For pictures of him to see if you recognize
Entertainment Tonight's expert authority, go to:
The liberal advocacy from Pat Mitchell came on Friday's Greenfield at Large on CNN after Jeff Greenfield asked his three quests to suggest "stories that we should have covered better, or more of, or that may have lasting impact." Mitchell, who has worked for several networks and moved to PBS from CNN, responded: "Well, certainly the weather has been the headline, but what's troubled me is that the press hasn't gone beyond the headline very much. This was such a great opportunity to talk about global warming and climate change. I mean, it couldn't have been on our minds more as we were perspiring through the heat, and no one, at least I didn't see it mentioned, of the fact that this is the fifth hottest year, decade since the 15th century. You know, there have been five hottest decades, and this last decade, five hottest years in this last decade, and that would have been the starting point to talk about why we are in this place, why do we have 100 degree temperatures and what can we do about it?" Like it wasn't ever hot 200 or 300 hundred years ago. And what about the colder than usual temperatures earlier this summer? Her liberal assumptions about the hottest years have been debunked by many scientists, though I don't have immediate access to that analysis now, and don't even take into consideration that we only have solid temperature readings for a small fraction of Earth's history. Mitchell is not, however, just some bureaucrat
overseeing PBS. She's a veteran on-air reporter and off-air producer for
other networks. Her bio posted at pbs.org summarized her career: Imagine the howls if a network made a founder of a conservative group its chief. For a photo of her as shown in the PBS annual
report, go to:
In the August 7 "Style" section
profile, in the same portion of the piece in which Leiby cited the
"centrism" of Edwards, the Post reporter acknowledged the
Senator's fawning media coverage (ellipses as in Post): Well he fooled the Washington Post into portraying him as something he's not. He's no centrist. In 2000, he earned an 85 percent rating from the liberal Americans for Democratic Action. That year Boxer got the same rating and Kennedy earned 90 percent approval. In 1999, Edwards matched Kennedy with a 90 percent rating for the freshman Senator's rookie year. The American Conservative Union assessed Edwards at 12 percent in 2000 and 8 percent in 1999 for a 10 percent career average. Compare that to a nearly identical careen 9 percent for Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa, a well-established liberal. On the conservative side, Senator Conrad Burns of Montana, at 89 percent lifetime, and Senator Bob Smith of New Hampshire, at 92 percent over his career, are about as conservative as Edwards is liberal. Can you imagine the Washington Post ever referring to the "centrism" of Smith or Burns? The above ratings numbers were culled from
these Web pages from which you can link to descriptions of the votes the
liberal and conservative groups assessed: For the entire Washington Post profile, go to:
The media archive is the basis for all the Media Research Center's research and publications. Therefore, candidates must have an exacting eye for detail, be organized, able to maintain meticulous logs, and keep dependable hours. Familiarity with the news media a plus. This project is cutting-edge, so experience with computers is a must and an interest in technology is preferred. Candidates must work at the MRC's Alexandria, Virginia, offices eight blocks from the King Street Metro stop on the Yellow and Blue lines. This is an entry-level type of position. Approved flex hours are possible with a weekend day included. Salary: Low $20s. To apply, fax your resume to the attention of Kristina Sewell, the MRC's Research Associate: (703) 683-9736. Or, e-mail your resume to ksewell@mediaresearch.org Get this job and you can watch 14 years' worth of Dan Rather and Bryant Gumbel. What could be more enticing than that? -- Brent Baker >>>
Support the MRC, an educational foundation dependent upon contributions
which make CyberAlert possible, by providing a tax-deductible
donation. Use the secure donations page set up for CyberAlert
readers and subscribers: >>>To subscribe to CyberAlert, send a
blank e-mail to:
mrccyberalert-subscribe >>>You
can learn what has been posted each day on the MRC's Web site by
subscribing to the "MRC Web Site News" distributed every weekday
afternoon. To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to: cybercomment@mrc.org.
Or, go to: http://www.mrc.org/newsletters.<<< |