Big Hollywood | Media Matters for America

Big Hollywood

Tags ››› Big Hollywood
  • Breitbart's Big Hollywood attacks Media Matters as "lotion boys"

    Blog ››› ››› MEDIA MATTERS STAFF

    In a November 2 blog post about controversial remarks made by Bill Maher, Andrew Breitbart's Big Hollywood site wrote:

    We're not sure anyone but Bill Maher could get away with telling these truths without losing their job due to a Soros-funded jihad launched by those blacklisters over at Media Matters. That's what they did to Juan Williams, and we are curious as to why Eric Boehlert and the rest of his lotion boys have been so quiet over this.

    Not to mention CAIR.

    And what about Jon -- meet my fatwa-loving pal Cat Stevens but can't we all just get along -- Stewart?

    We don't want to encourage any attacks on Maher, but consider this Exhibit 11,412 in the open and shut case proving their stunning but always predictable lack of principle.


    The most bizarre attack on Media Matters EVER

    Fox News' Gutfeld tells "scummy," "creepy" Media Matters it needs a shrink for producing Haiti-Fox coverage study

    Red Eye continues its obsession with Media Matters and lotion

    Fox's Red Eye on story, "Man Arrested with 75 Bottles of Lotion in Pants": "Are things that bad at Media Matters?"

  • Breitbart and Daily Caller contributor's past "victim-blaming" date rape claim

    Blog ››› ››› ERIC HANANOKI

    Alex Knepper's biography on Andrew Breitbart's BigHollywood and Tucker Carlson's Daily Caller websites boasts that he's been "featured by the CBS Early Show, National Public Radio, the New York Times, and other media outlets." What it doesn't say is why he's been "featured" on outlets like CBS and NPR: because he ignited a firestorm of controversy when he penned a column arguing, as ABC News put it, "that some women who survive date rape invited it."

    In March 2010, undergrad student Knepper wrote a column for American University's The Eagle which argued of date rape:

    Let's get this straight: any woman who heads to an EI [frat] party as an anonymous onlooker, drinks five cups of the jungle juice, and walks back to a boy's room with him is indicating that she wants sex, OK? To cry "date rape" after you sober up the next morning and regret the incident is the equivalent of pulling a gun to someone's head and then later claiming that you didn't ever actually intend to pull the trigger.

    "Date rape" is an incoherent concept. There's rape and there's not-rape, and we need a line of demarcation. It's not clear enough to merely speak of consent, because the lines of consent in sex -- especially anonymous sex -- can become very blurry. If that bothers you, then stick with Pat Robertson and his brigade of anti-sex cavemen! Don't jump into the sexual arena if you can't handle the volatility of its practice!

    As the Washington Post noted days later, the "column sparked angry online responses from scores of students, and a handful of students demonstrated outside the newspaper's offices." Director of The Women's Initiative Sarah Brown wrote a letter to the editor stating that this "is not a fun argument about an abstract concept between Alex Knepper and the crazy feminists. Real people, both women and men, hurt physically and emotionally because someone took control of their body without their permission."

    Jezebel's Ann North cited Knepper's column as another "victim-blaming crap," adding that an "alarming number of jerks have come out of the woodwork to claim that attending a frat party is equivalent to consenting to any and all forms of sex. This claim is especially damaging because assault is so disturbingly common on college campuses, because it frequently goes unpunished, and because college students are young and especially vulnerable to bullshit rhetoric."

  • BigHypocrisy: Breitbart's BigHollywood criticizes 9-11 Truther while featuring 9-11 Truther contributor

    Blog ››› ››› ERIC HANANOKI

    In a post today on Andrew Breitbart's BigHollywood, editor in chief John Nolte writes of "9/11 Truther James Brolin": "For those of you who don't know, James Brolin's Indian name is Creepy Truther Who Mocks 9/11 ... And here [sic] here's Creepy Truther Who Mocks 9/11 referring the 'View' audience to a Creepy Truther website, which I'm sure fellow Creepy Truther, Rosie - fire can't melt steel - O'Donnell, bookmarked immediately."

    Nolte's criticism is a tad hypocritical since his own website frequently features the rantings of actor and BigHollywood "contributor" Michael Moriarty -- who himself is a "Creepy Truther":

    Appearing on the radio program Deadline Live in February 2007, Michael Moriarty, who played assistant district attorney Ben Stone on Law and Order, was asked by host Jack Blood if he believes "that 9-11 had fingerprints of [an] inside job." Moriarty responded with his "theory" that before 9-11, President "Bush talked to the Bin Laden family in Riyadh" and said he needed "probable cause" to invade Iraq; the "Bin Ladens," in turn, told Bush that "we'll give you probable cause." When asked if he had any doubt that the Oklahoma City bombing was an "inside job," Moriarty replied: "None! There were two seismic reports of explosions, there were no federal -- there were no children of federal employees in the building at the time in the daycare center, and the ATF were nowhere to be found."


    In 2007, Blood issued a press release about Moriarty's appearance headlined "Michael Morarty, Emmy/Tony Award Winning Actor says OKC and 9/11 are 'Inside Jobs,'" which was subsequently posted to several 9-11 Truth websites.

    "Creepy Truther" Moriarty's last post for Nolte and Breitbart -- about the "New World Order" -- was the site's "featured" post. Then again, consistency on conspiracy theories has never been a strong point for Breitbart's "Big" websites.

  • Breitbart still featuring the rants of 9-11 Truther and Oklahoma City conspiracy theorist Michael Moriarty

    Blog ››› ››› ERIC HANANOKI

    A few weeks ago, I wrote about the extreme views of former Law & Order actor and current Andrew Breitbart blogger Michael Moriarty. Among Moriarty's stated beliefs: the September 11 attacks and the Oklahoma City bombing were inside jobs; Presidents Clinton and George H.W. Bush were running illegal guns and drugs, and laundering money out of Arkansas; and Islam is "evil" and a "Gestapo."

    Moriarty has also pushed extreme views on Andrew Breitbart's "Big" websites, where he's suggested he'll feel "comfort" when President Obama is killed, claimed "Red Islam" has "literally invaded our Holy of Holies!!" through "evil" Obama and, while discussing politicians and abortions, wrote that Roe v. Wade "is worldwide suicide. Legalizing murder ultimately means legalizing your own assassination."

    Breitbart and his "Big" websites have castigated 9-11 Truthers, and criticized those associating with them. Yet Breitbart is still hosting Moriarty as a valuable contributor. Breitbart's Big Hollywood website posted another bizarre Moriarty post, this time claiming -- well, I'm not really sure what it's claiming:

  • Big Hollywood blames "Marxist political correctness" for condemnation of "good-natured" Minstrel shows

    Blog ››› ››› MEDIA MATTERS STAFF

    In a July 4th Big Hollywood post, Gary Graham wrote of the movie "Yankee Doodle Dandy," based on the life of early 20th-century entertainer George M. Cohan:

    Watching it again, lo these many years later, I was struck by several new observations. First - what a patriot George M. Cohan was! (And, as is common knowledge, so was Cagney.) Though Cohan maintained, "I was a good Democrat even [as a child]"... he didn't feel the modern leftist compulsion to extend the sympathetic lilt of empathy towards one's avowed enemies. He knew which side he was on - and said so, in no unequivocal terms.

    Cohan wasn't politically correct -- he and his family put on Minstrel shows! Innocent, good-natured entertainment back then, offending no one, delighting all; black, white or variegated paisley. It wasn't until the class-envy of Marxist political correctness that we insisted on being horrified by such a thing.

  • Big Hollywood's Hudnall cooks up silly attack: Michelle Obama's appearance "sullied the garden" at Food Network

    Blog ››› ››› MEDIA MATTERS STAFF

    From Hudnall's November 9 post:

    by James Hudnall

    I have a confession to make. I hate politics. That's why I write about it, because I enjoy making fun of it. And one of the reasons I write for Big Hollywood is I am sick of other people's politics being jammed down my throat through alleged "entertainment."

    So for many years I found escape on TV in the Food Network, because aside from the fact I like food and cooking, I loved that it was a politics-free zone. There was no angry Bush bashing, no digs at Cheney and Rumsfeld. No moral equivalency. No screaming about the 2000 election. It was all about the joy of food and cooking and how it brings people together.

    In a world so divided, it was a reminder that we can all get along if we can find some common ground.

    I'm sure the chefs and personalities on the network have their political views. The fact that so many of them are based in New York would suggest most lean Democrat. But the beauty of that network is never, ever does anyone let on where their politics lie. We don't need to know who they voted for because that has nothing to do with food. It's not relevant. And that made it a refreshing place to be.

    Notice I say "made." Someone has sullied the garden and brought their politics in, and turned a popular show into an infomercial for one of her causes.

    Michelle Obama, perhaps jealous of her husband's constant face time on TV, has decided to start injecting herself in other people's shows. First it was the Biggest Loser which aired the night Dems got their teeth kicked in in some major races. (irony ahoy)

    Now she's about to appear on the Food Network. And not just any show, the most popular show. Iron Chef America. And not just appear, nope. I'll let the NY Times explain it.

    In a collision of politics, cooking and popular culture, Michelle Obama will reveal the secret ingredient that the chefs must use in their televised cook-off: anything that grows in the White House garden (no further spoilers here, though). Mrs. Obama will also talk about her crusade to reduce childhood obesity through better school lunches, community gardens, farmers' markets and exercise, which around the White House has the working title Healthy Kids Initiative.

    The first lady's cameo on "Iron Chef" is the latest example of her willingness to get her message across to the public in ways few of her predecessors would have considered.

    Now, I can understand how she might want to be first ladylike and push her pet agenda, just as previous first ladies tackled such things as literacy and drug abuse. I also can't blame the Food Network for wanting to have the First Lady on their show. It has to be good for ratings (or maybe it would have been six months ago, this airs in January. Oops!). The problem is, the Food Network is the last place I expected to see scolds talking about taking away snack [sic] from kids and making them broccoli. This is the place that celebrates pork fat, butter and sugar. It's a haven from the Food Nazis who want us all to live on a diet of rice cakes and rain water.

    The Obama Administration has been hostile to agriculture. From refusing to send water to California's San Joaquin valley farmers to bills that would limit your rights as a home gardener. This while they are promoting "organic gardening."

    The Obamas love to stick their face everywhere, I'm sure the Cartoon Network and the Fishing Channel are next. The one place we probably won't see them is the Military Channel. He'll probably need more time to think about that.

    Anyway, as a citizen I am lodging my protest. I don't want the Food Network politicized. I don't want the Obama administration starting to dictate diets to people there. What's next, they put Paula Dean on a soy and rice milk diet? Enough!

  • Writer at Breitbart's Big Hollywood: "why, in 2009 America, are mulattoes invariably identified as blacks?"

    Blog ››› ››› MEDIA MATTERS STAFF

    From an Oct. 22 post by Burt Prelutsky at Andrew Breitbart's Big Hollywood blog:

    My final question is, why, in 2009 America, are mulattoes invariably identified as blacks? Surely there is nothing wrong with being a mulatto. There is no stigma attached, as once there was. It merely refers to those who have one white parent and one black. There are many notable individuals who are mulattoes, including Halle Berry, Derek Jeter, Lisa Bonet and Barack Obama. Tiger Woods, on the other hand, is a true amalgamation, being one-quarter Chinese, one-quarter Thai, one-quarter black, one-eighth Native American and one-eighth Dutch. And, yet, with the possible exception of the New York Yankee shortstop, we insist on identifying all of them as black.

    It's as if there is something shameful about their being half or even one-eighth white. If there is, I'd sure like to know what it is. If, on the other hand, there isn't, why do we insist on acting as if there were?


    Breitbart's Big Hollywood: Same old birtherism, comparisons of Obama to Hitler

    Conservative media unleash violent, revolutionary rhetoric