<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>

<rss version="2.0"
 xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule"
>

<channel>
<title>Media Matters - Howard Kurtz</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/tools/syndication/tag_rss/howard_kurtz</link>
<description>This link is for use by RSS-enabled software to retrieve Media Matters items matching the term: Howard Kurtz</description>
<language>en-US</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2008, Media Matters for America</copyright>

<item>
<title>Kurtz and Mason falsely suggested it was &#x22;new information&#x22; that McCain &#x22;acknowledged&#x22; his responsibility for failed first marriage</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200808180006</link>
<description>On &#x3C;em&#x3E;Reliable Sources&#x3C;/em&#x3E;, the &#x3C;em&#x3E;Houston Chronicle&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x27;s Julie Mason said of Sen. John McCain&#x27;s statement that his &#x22;greatest moral failing&#x22; was &#x22;the failure of my first marriage&#x22;: &#x22;I think McCain really did something extraordinary when -- the way he answered that question. ... So he put it out there, he acknowledged it. And he sort of inoculated himself against it.&#x22; Howard Kurtz similarly said: &#x22;McCain has acknowledged that he was not faithful in his first marriage, but not necessarily before a national television audience.&#x22; In fact, McCain has repeatedly &#x22;acknowledged&#x22; his responsibility for the breakup of his first marriage in his memoir, in interviews, and &#x22;before a national television audience.&#x22;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200808180006</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:47:47 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Kurtz reported that McCain&#x27;s ad attacking Obama on Afghanistan hearings is &#x22;accurate&#x22; but did not note McCain&#x27;s record  </title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200807190001</link>
<description>&#x3C;em&#x3E;&#x3C;em&#x3E;The Washington Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x27;s Howard Kurtz wrote that an ad by Sen. John McCain &#x22;is accurate in saying that [Sen. Barack] Obama, who has spent most of the past two years campaigning, has not held a hearing on Afghanistan in the Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee he chairs.&#x22; But Kurtz failed to note that McCain -- a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee -- reportedly has not attended a single hearing of that committee related to Afghanistan in 2007-08.  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200807190001</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2008 15:56:35 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>On CNN, Kurtz again falsely claimed Clark &#x22;strafed&#x22; McCain  </title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200807070003</link>
<description>On &#x3C;em&#x3E;Reliable Sources&#x3C;/em&#x3E;, Howard Kurtz again falsely claimed that, as Kurtz worded it this time, Sen. John McCain got &#x22;strafed by [retired Gen.] Wes Clark over his Vietnam service&#x22; during Clark&#x27;s appearance on &#x3C;em&#x3E;&#x3C;em&#x3E;Face the Nation&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x3C;/em&#x3E;, and also said: &#x22;I would have bet a sizable sum of money that of all the possible attacks against John McCain, the Democrats would not have gone after his Vietnam War record, which, of course, includes his capture and torture in Hanoi. Well, I was wrong.&#x22; But Clark neither &#x22;strafed&#x22; McCain&#x27;s Vietnam service, nor went &#x22;after his Vietnam War record.&#x22;  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200807070003</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 7 Jul 2008 14:50:42 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Media continue to falsely claim Clark criticized McCain&#x27;s service  </title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200807010005</link>
<description>Several media reports falsely claimed that Wesley Clark criticized Sen. John McCain&#x27;s military service during a June 29 appearance on CBS&#x27; &#x3C;em&#x3E;Face the Nation&#x3C;/em&#x3E;, including CNN anchor John Roberts, who said that &#x22;Clark took a weekend hit at McCain, targeting his history as a war hero and his possible future as president.&#x22; In fact, Clark praised McCain as &#x22;a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands of millions of others in the Armed Forces as a prisoner of war.&#x22;  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200807010005</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 Jul 2008 16:42:51 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>On &#x3C;em&#x3E;Reliable Sources&#x3C;/em&#x3E;, Kurtz said &#x22;press is cutting [Obama] a break&#x22; over public finance decision, but Kurtz has yet to discuss McCain&#x27;s loan on the show  </title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200806260003</link>
<description>On CNN&#x27;s &#x3C;em&#x3E;Reliable Sources&#x3C;/em&#x3E;, Howard Kurtz asserted that &#x22;the press is cutting&#x22; Sen. Barack Obama &#x22;a break&#x22; on his decision to forgo public financing for the general election. But at no point during the show did Kurtz question whether Sen. John McCain has received &#x22;a break&#x22; from the press regarding the loan agreement McCain signed during the primary, which could have forced him to remain in the race -- even if he had no chance of winning -- in order to be eligible for public matching funds to repay the loan. Further, a &#x3C;em&#x3E;Media Matters for America &#x3C;/em&#x3E;review found that Kurtz has never mentioned McCain&#x27;s loan on &#x3C;em&#x3E;Reliable Sources&#x3C;/em&#x3E;.  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200806260003</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 12:55:28 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Kurtz: Fellow &#x3C;em&#x3E;Wash. Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E; reporter&#x27;s anonymous quote of White House official praising Bush &#x22;probably wasn&#x27;t worth a grant of anonymity&#x22;  </title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200805060008</link>
<description>In a washingtonpost.com discussion, Howard Kurtz said that a &#x3C;em&#x3E;Washington Post &#x3C;/em&#x3E;reporter&#x27;s grant of anonymity to a &#x22;senior White House official&#x22; -- who expressed the belief that there are &#x22;a number of things that will get done&#x22; in the remainder of President Bush&#x27;s term in office -- &#x22;probably wasn&#x27;t worth&#x22; it.  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200805060008</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 6 May 2008 19:33:19 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>  Kurtz falsely claimed that &#x22;[u]nlike in 2000,&#x22; McCain is &#x22;now us[ing]&#x22; POW experience &#x22;in some of his TV advertising&#x22;  </title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200803310012</link>
<description>During a washingtonpost.com online discussion, Howard Kurtz falsely claimed that Sen. John McCain did not use his military service in television advertising during his failed 2000 presidential campaign. In fact, Kurtz&#x27;s own reporting during the 2000 Republican presidential primary campaign contradicts his statement.  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200803310012</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2008 19:45:24 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Kurtz continues to cover Wright comments while giving short shrift to Hagee, Parsley comments  </title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200803250005</link>
<description>On CNN&#x27;s &#x3C;em&#x3E;Reliable Sources&#x3C;/em&#x3E;, Howard Kurtz has devoted a total of approximately 18 minutes to the controversy surrounding remarks made by Sen. Barack Obama&#x27;s former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright. In contrast, Kurtz has led only brief discussions on two religious figures who have endorsed Sen. John McCain and who have made controversial comments -- a single two-minute discussion on Rev. John Hagee and only seven seconds on Rev. Rod Parsley.  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200803250005</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:55:53 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Smerconish, Wilkes -- and Matthews himself -- describe Kurtz&#x27;s profile of Matthews as a valentine  </title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200802150005</link>
<description>Referring to Howard Kurtz&#x27;s profile of him published in &#x3C;em&#x3E;The Washington Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E;, Chris Matthews asked on MSNBC&#x27;s &#x3C;em&#x3E;Hardball&#x3C;/em&#x3E;, &#x22;Was that a Valentine&#x27;s Day message?&#x22; Radio host Michael Smerconish said, &#x22;[Y]ou two are valentines, you and Kurtz,&#x22; and Sybil Wilkes of &#x3C;em&#x3E;The Tom Joyner Morning Show&#x3C;/em&#x3E; remarked, &#x22;It was a love letter, yes.&#x3C;strong&#x3E;&#x22;&#x3C;/strong&#x3E;  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200802150005</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:28:46 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>In &#x3C;em&#x3E;Wash. Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E;, Kurtz failed to note &#x22;neutral&#x22;  Bennett&#x27;s campaign contributions to McCain,  Romney  </title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200802050006</link>
<description>In a &#x3C;em&#x3E;Washington Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E; article  about conservative radio hosts&#x27; opposition to Sen. John McCain&#x27;s presidential  bid, Howard Kurtz reported that Bill Bennett, &#x22;who is neutral in the race,&#x22; has  not &#x22;climb[ed] aboard the stop-McCain bandwagon.&#x22; But Kurtz did not mention, as  he did on his CNN program, that Bennett reportedly contributed more than $2,000  to McCain&#x27;s campaign in December 2007  and to Mitt Romney&#x27;s campaign in January, which raises questions  about &#x22;whether Bennett can act as a neutral analyst in a race that still  includes Gov. Mike Huckabee and Rep. Ron Paul,&#x22; according to The Huffington  Post.  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200802050006</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 5 Feb 2008 14:10:14 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Kurtz  misrepresented Obama&#x27;s 2004 remark on Iraq war  stance  </title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200801140002</link>
<description>On &#x3C;em&#x3E;Reliable Sources&#x3C;/em&#x3E;, Howard Kurtz claimed that in  a 2004 &#x3C;em&#x3E;Chicago Tribune &#x3C;/em&#x3E;article,  Sen. Barack Obama &#x22;said there wasn&#x27;t much difference between his position and  George Bush&#x27;s position on the [Iraq] war.&#x22; But Kurtz left out three key words from  Obama&#x27;s quote in the &#x3C;em&#x3E;Tribune&#x3C;/em&#x3E; --  &#x22;at this stage&#x22; --  as well as the context of the remarks,  both of which indicate that Obama was discussing how best to  stabilize Iraq from mid-2004 onward, not claiming agreement with Bush on the war itself.  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200801140002</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:49:06 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Kurtz  asserted  little media attention to &#x3C;em&#x3E;Wash.  Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E;  report on Obama&#x27;s PAC, but  he omitted reported problem with article</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200712200001</link>
<description>&#x3C;em&#x3E;Washington Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E; media critic Howard Kurtz asserted that Obama&#x27;s 
&#x22;fundraising receives far less press attention than Clinton&#x27;s,&#x22; citing as 
evidence a November 30 &#x3C;em&#x3E;Post 
&#x3C;/em&#x3E;article claiming that &#x22;Obama&#x27;s Hopefund Inc. distributed more than 
$180,000 in donations to political groups and candidates in the early 
presidential voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.&#x22; But Kurtz 
did not note that the retired Federal 
Election Commission chief counsel quoted in the article said he was quoted &#x22;out 
of context&#x22; and that the &#x22;facts as played out in the Washington Post piece are 
not exactly what I was told. ... I was assuming there was 
more.&#x22;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200712200001</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:05:10 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>In Giuliani ad  fact-check, Kurtz asserted &#x22;fierce dispute among economists&#x22; on tax cuts and  revenues, but cited only one economist</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200712040012</link>
<description>In an analysis of Rudy Giuliani&#x27;s new campaign ad, Howard Kurtz asserted that 
Giuliani&#x27;s claim that &#x22;reducing taxes produces more revenues&#x22; is &#x22;a matter of 
fierce dispute among economists.&#x22; As evidence of this dispute, Kurtz provided 
the opinion of only one economist, Larry Kudlow, who agreed with Giuliani&#x27;s 
assertion. But a day before Kurtz&#x27;s analysis appeared in print, a &#x3C;em&#x3E;Washington Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E; editorial had quoted 
Edward Lazear, chairman of President Bush&#x27;s Council of Economic Advisers, 
stating, &#x22;I certainly would not claim that tax cuts pay for themselves.&#x22; Several other current or 
former Bush administration officials have also disagreed with the assertion that 
tax cuts produce more revenue.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200712040012</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 4 Dec 2007 18:34:52 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>&#x3C;em&#x3E;Reliable  Sources&#x3C;/em&#x3E; guest dismissed criticism of  Russert debate questions, but Kurtz  still hasn&#x27;t noted questions based on false  information</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200711190003</link>
<description>On CNN&#x27;s &#x3C;em&#x3E;Reliable Sources&#x3C;/em&#x3E;, while 
discussing the November 15 Democratic presidential debate, Howard Kurtz did not 
challenge university professor Steve Roberts&#x27; dismissal of criticism of Tim Russert&#x27;s questions to 
Sen. Hillary Clinton at the October 30 debate, even though at least two of the 
questions Russert posed included falsehoods.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200711190003</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:56:53 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>&#x3C;em&#x3E;Wash&#x3C;/em&#x3E;.&#x3C;em&#x3E; Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x27;s Kurtz pointed  out &#x22;liberal bloggers[&#x27;]&#x22; criticism of Russert debate performance, but not  Russert&#x27;s faulty questions</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200711130007</link>
<description>&#x3C;em&#x3E;Washington&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x3C;em&#x3E; Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E; media critic Howard Kurtz wrote that 
NBC Washington bureau chief Tim Russert &#x22;was ripped by liberal bloggers&#x22; after 
&#x22;he repeatedly pressed Hillary Clinton during a presidential debate.&#x22; But Kurtz 
did not note that at least two of the questions Russert posed to Clinton included 
falsehoods.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200711130007</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 Nov 2007 18:24:57 EST</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>