A particularly revealing case of media bias (or incompetence) - Wolfowitz

Is the media biased ... or just incompetent and lazy? You decide.

clipped from opinionjournal.com Needless to say, none of this context has appeared in the media smears suggesting that Mr. Wolfowitz pulled a fast one to pad the pay of Ms. Riza. Yet the record clearly shows he acted only after he had tried to recuse himself but then wasn't allowed to do so by the ethics committee. And he acted only after that same committee advised him to compensate Ms. Riza for the damage to her career from a "conflict of interest" that was no fault of her own. Based on this paper trail, Mr. Wolfowitz's only real mistake was in assuming that everyone else was acting in good faith. Yet when some of these details leaked to the media, nearly everyone else at the bank dodged responsibility and let Mr. Wolfowitz twist in the wind. Mr. Melkert, a Dutch politician now at the U.N., seems to have played an especially cowardly role.

Global Warming - follow the money indeed

How "scientific consensus" is obtained - cut off funding for inconvenient views.

clipped from www.businessandmedia.org      Something of a renegade indeed. According to the March 28, 2006, Washington Post, Gray’s view of global warming is almost heresy compared to what the networks preach. “I am of the opinion that this is one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American people,” the paper quoted Gray.      The Post even described him as “often called the World’s Most Famous Hurricane Expert.” Daring to disagree with the mainstream media and Al Gore supporters has meant losing “most of his government funding,” and he has had to put up more than $100,000 of his own money to continue his research.      In fact, the Post reported that Gray thinks “in just three, five, maybe eight years, he says, the world will begin to cool again.”