By Cassie Spodak, CNN
Tuesday night brought news that the U.S. Consulate in Libya and the U.S. Embassy in Egypt had been breached by protestors. Early Wednesday morning it was confirmed that the U.S. ambassador to Libya had been killed. Mitt Romney and Barack Obama’s campaigns quickly engaged in a war of words over the political fall-out. Romney called Obama’s first response to the attacks “disgraceful” with the Obama campaign firing back that it was inappropriate for Romney to “launch a political attack” after the death of a diplomatic officer.
Romney was attacked on both sides for “pulling the trigger” too soon, but does all the press attention to the political response overshadow the real story?
Romney is also facing criticism from conservative pundits for failing to pull ahead of Obama. Is Romney just the scapegoat?
Tuesday also brought the anniversary of 9/11 – coverage ranged from The New York Times making no mention of the event on their front page, to NBC’s Today show airing an interview with a reality TV star during the moment of silence commemorating the first plane striking the World Trade Center. But some outlets scheduled wall-to-wall anniversary coverage. 11 years after a national tragedy and terrorist attack, what kind of coverage is appropriate?
Clarence Page, of The Chicago Tribune, Ryan Lizza, of The New Yorker, and Amy Holmes, of Glenn Beck TV discuss the week in political coverage.
Paul Farhi of the Washington Post will discuss the mysterious film that incited the violent protests and how journalists have been striving to unveil the filmmaker behind all the controversy.
Media critics Gail Shister and Adam Buckman talk about Katie Couric’s new syndicated daytime show which has won strong ratings in its first week.
This Sunday at 11am ET.
Love it . I've been looking for this info . Wonderful information I will be back for information about Liquid Diet.
Yawn . . . . so another "talking point" airhead claims media bias when his narrow little world is disrupted Yawn . . .
Having already listened to Michael Lewis himself on NPR, Kurtz's piece on Deal with the Devil completely mischaracterized Lewis's tolerance for having his writing about Obama vetted by the administration - and entirely missed the point of what kind of vetting the Administration wanted to do. The facts about this unique arrangement for a journalist were already expertly covered by the amazing Terry Gross, whose piece on this was exactly the kind of insight that dispells uninformed popular belief and represents a very high standard of conduct for both the two journalists (Lewis and Gross) as well as by the Administration. So much fo Kurtz being a reliable source of critique on journalism.
just so you know there are a lot of republicans that are saying good things about what Romney did. you make it sound so bad to earn points for the current president. Media bias? I would say so. I personally think he did great....sure let me know as an american, that if he were president he would stand up for our country. by the way just because the timeline didn't match up doesn't change anything, it was put out there! Amen Romney!!!
Needlessly declaring war (YET AGAIN) is NOT standing up for our country... it's getting our people in uniform killed needlessly. Their lives may be expendable to you and other chickenhawks, but they aren't to me. IMO, we should stop trying to be the world police and take care of the people here at home instead of worrying about what everyone else is doing overseas and hypocritically barking orders at them when we ourselves would never stand to be treated that way by other countries.
Pawlenty insisted he doesn't want the VP slot eihetr, but he'd take it in a heartbeat as would Lieberman. Very rarely does a veepstakes candidate NOT say they don't want the position before the selection. It's just the way the game is played.
This is the most reliable news hour that I recomment to anyone to watch.