<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FAIR Blog &#187; Gender</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fair.org/blog/category/gender/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fair.org/blog</link>
	<description>The national media watch group</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 21:08:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Bill O&#039;Reilly vs. Reality on Planned Parenthood</title>
		<link>http://www.fair.org/blog/2012/02/06/bill-oreilly-vs-reality-on-planned-parenthood/</link>
		<comments>http://www.fair.org/blog/2012/02/06/bill-oreilly-vs-reality-on-planned-parenthood/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 18:54:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter Hart</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill O'Reilly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Leslie Marshall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Planned Parenthood]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=20414</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It was inevitable that Fox host Bill O'Reilly would weigh in on the Planned Parenthood/Komen Foundation controversy. And perhaps just as inevitable that he'd mangle the facts along the way.

Here he is, on Friday night (2/3/12):
Last year the Komen Foundation gave Planned Parenthood $680,000. Now, that is the source of controversy because as you know, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was inevitable that <strong>Fox</strong> host Bill O'Reilly would weigh in on the Planned Parenthood/Komen Foundation controversy. And perhaps just as <a title="Extra!: The Oh Really? Factor" href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1108" target="_self">inevitable</a> that he'd mangle the facts along the way.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img class="center aligncenter" src="http://www.fair.org/images/oreilly-pp.jpg" alt="" hspace="20" width="403" height="257" /></p>
<p>Here he is, on Friday night (<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/oreilly/2012/02/06/bill-oreilly-victory-secular-forces-america#ixzz1lcSAAIGl">2/3/12</a>):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Last year the Komen Foundation gave Planned Parenthood $680,000. Now, that is the source of controversy <strong>because as you know, Planned Parenthood is primarily in business to provide abortions</strong>, more than 300,000 each year.</p>
<p>Later he added:</p>
<blockquote><p>Planned Parenthood does not give women who visit its clinics the other side of the abortion story because again PP is in business for abortion.</p></blockquote>
<p>Here is Planned Parenthood's breakdown of medical services (<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/what-planned-parenthood-actually-does/2011/04/06/AFhBPa2C_blog.html?tid=pm_business_pop">h/t Ezra Klein</a>):<!--preview-break--></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img class="aligncenter" src="http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/WashingtonPost/Content/Blogs/ezra-klein/StandingArt/plannedparenthood.jpg?uuid=QJyyvGIBEeCV6ZMHpLzxXw" alt="" width="453" height="285" /></p>
<p>O'Reilly was fortunate enough to book an opposing guest--talk radio host Leslie Marshall--who wasn't prepared to argue this point:</p>
<blockquote><p><strong>O'REILLY:</strong> OK their big business, Planned Parenthood is abortion. And lobbying for abortion, would you concede that?</p>
<p><strong>MARSHALL:</strong> I would concede that they perform abortions and they are politically --</p>
<p>(CROSSTALK)</p>
<p><strong>O'REILLY:</strong> No the largest part of their business, the most things that they get involved in concerns abortion, would you concede that.</p>
<p><strong>MARSHALL:</strong> I can't because I've heard a good argument on both sides and information on both sides.</p>
<p>(CROSSTALK)</p>
<p><strong>O'REILLY:</strong> OK, well, all right, there is no good argument. The absolute truth is PP is in business for abortion; 300,000 a year and they make tons of money from it.</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fair.org/blog/2012/02/06/bill-oreilly-vs-reality-on-planned-parenthood/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Diallo Speaks: Are There Holes in the &#039;DSK Case Crumbles&#039; Narrative?</title>
		<link>http://www.fair.org/blog/2011/07/25/diallo-speaks-are-there-holes-in-the-dsk-case-crumbles-narrative/</link>
		<comments>http://www.fair.org/blog/2011/07/25/diallo-speaks-are-there-holes-in-the-dsk-case-crumbles-narrative/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jul 2011 20:42:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter Hart</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Gender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York Times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Newsweek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dominique Strauss-Kahn]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=18853</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nafissatou Diallo, the hotel maid who has accused Dominique Strauss-Kahn,  is now speaking out publicly--weeks after press coverage took a turn against her, based on the notion that something about her made her allegations less credible.
"Strauss-Kahn Prosecution Said to Be Near Collapse" was the July 1 New York Times headline. One of the strongest bits [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nafissatou Diallo, the hotel maid who has accused Dominique Strauss-Kahn,  is now speaking out publicly--weeks after press coverage took a turn against her, based on the notion that something about her made her allegations less credible.</p>
<p>"<strong>Strauss-Kahn Prosecution Said to Be Near Collapse</strong>" was the <a title="NYT: Strauss-Kahn Prosecution Said to Be Near Collapse" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/01/nyregion/strauss-kahn-case-seen-as-in-jeopardy.html" target="_self">July 1</a> <strong>New York Times</strong> headline. One of the strongest bits of evidence was the claim that Diallo spoke to a friend, in prison on a drug charge, about Strauss-Kahn's wealth--the implication was that she and a criminal associate were plotting out how to profit from the assault.</p>
<p><strong>Newsweek</strong>'s <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/2011/07/24/dsk-maid-tells-of-her-alleged-rape-by-strauss-kahn-exclusive.print.html">cover story</a> this week is based on an interview with her is a compelling read. The magazine points out that one part of the <strong>Times</strong>' <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/02/nyregion/one-revelation-after-another-undercut-strauss-kahn-accusers-credibility.html">account </a> might not be what the paper suggested it was:<!--preview-break--></p>
<blockquote><p>On July 1, the <strong>New York Times</strong> reported the existence of a taped conversation between Diallo and Tarawally. The article said they talked the day after the incident at the Sofitel and quoted a "well-placed law enforcement official": "She says words to the effect of: 'Don't worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I’m doing.'" But at the time, prosecutors did not have a full transcript of the call, which had been conducted in a dialect of Fulani, Diallo’s language. The quote was a paraphrase from a translator’s summary of the tape, and the actual words are somewhat different, sources told <strong>Newsweek</strong>.</p>
<p>In July, <strong>Newsweek</strong> talked to Tarawally in Arizona. He insisted that the quotation must refer to a later conversation and in any case was taken out of context. Diallo said she no longer talks to Tarawally. He used her bank account to move tens of thousands of dollars around the country without informing her, she said. She denied he ever gave her money to spend. "Like I say, he was my friend," Diallo told us. "I used to trust him."</p></blockquote>
<p>Strauss-Kahn has millions of dollars to defend himself against serious criminal charges. Part of how one does that is by discrediting one's accusers, and one of the best tools to do that is the press. To take negative information about Diallo appearing in news articles at face value-- even when that information is said to be coming from the prosecution's side-- would be naive in the extreme.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fair.org/blog/2011/07/25/diallo-speaks-are-there-holes-in-the-dsk-case-crumbles-narrative/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MSNBC Misogyny</title>
		<link>http://www.fair.org/blog/2011/05/26/msnbc-misogyny/</link>
		<comments>http://www.fair.org/blog/2011/05/26/msnbc-misogyny/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2011 15:22:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter Hart</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Gender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MSNBC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ed Schultz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Keith Olbermann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Laura Ingraham]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michelle Malkin]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=18376</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[MSNBC host Ed Schultz has been suspended without pay for a week for calling right-wing pundit Laura Ingraham a "right-wing slut" on his radio show. Schultz apologized on MSNBC last night, calling his words "terribly vile."
This is not a new thing at MSNBC.  In 2006, Keith Olbermann did a bit about Paris Hilton being assaulted--joking [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>MSNBC </strong>host <a title="FAIR Blog: The Curious Case of the CIA Whistleblower" href="http://www.fair.org/blog/2011/03/22/libya-lockerbie-and-the-foxmsnbc-convergence/" target="_self">Ed Schultz</a> has been <a href="http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/ed-schultz-suspended-for-slut-comment-directed-at-laura-ingraham_b68342">suspended without pay for a week</a> for calling right-wing pundit Laura Ingraham a "right-wing slut" on his radio show. Schultz <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/onmedia/0511/Ed_Schultz_apologizes_to_Laura_Ingraham.html">apologized</a> on <strong>MSNBC</strong> last night, calling his words "terribly vile."</p>
<p>This is not a new thing at <strong>MSNBC</strong>.  In 2006, <a title="Extra!: Olbermann's Countdown Reaches Zero" href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4263" target="_self">Keith Olbermann</a> did <a title="Meda Bistro: Olbermann: Paris Hilton’s ‘Had Worse Things Happen To Her Face’ Than Being Punched" href="http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlny/olbermann-paris-hiltons-had-worse-things-happen-to-her-face-than-being-punched_b3461" target="_blank">a bit</a> about Paris Hilton being assaulted--joking that she has "had worse things happen to her face."  The on-screen graphic was "A Slut and Battery." In 2009 he <a title="AlterNet: http://www.alternet.org/reproductivejustice/143640/why_we_shouldn%27t_call_women_conservatives_%27whores%27" href="http://www.alternet.org/reproductivejustice/143640/why_we_shouldn%27t_call_women_conservatives_%27whores%27" target="_blank">called</a> right-wing pundit Michelle Malkin a "big mashed-up bag of meat with lipstick on it."<!--preview-break--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fair.org/blog/2011/05/26/msnbc-misogyny/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>33</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Newsweek Bravely Highlights the Plight of the Beached White Male</title>
		<link>http://www.fair.org/blog/2011/04/21/newsweek-bravely-highlights-the-plight-of-the-beached-white-male/</link>
		<comments>http://www.fair.org/blog/2011/04/21/newsweek-bravely-highlights-the-plight-of-the-beached-white-male/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2011 15:16:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Julie Hollar</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Newsweek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Race]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=17993</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Newsweek's cover story this week is on the plight of college-educated white men  aged 35-64. The magazine laments that "this hitherto privileged demo isn't just on its knees, it's flat  on on its face." The subhead of the piece asks, "Can manhood survive the lost decade?"
Now, I have much sympathy for all who [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Newsweek</strong>'s <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/2011/04/17/dead-suit-walking.html">cover story</a> this week is on the plight of college-educated white men  aged 35-64. The magazine laments that "this hitherto privileged demo isn't just on its knees, it's flat  on on its face." The subhead of the piece asks, "Can manhood survive the lost decade?"</p>
<p>Now, I have much sympathy for all who are struggling with  unemployment. But are middle-aged,  college-educated white males flat on their face and worthy  of a trend cover story? It's hard to square that with the piece's own admission that their jobless rate is just above 5 percent. Most demographic groups would give anything for that kind of unemployment rate; black male  college grads last year had an unemployment rate of <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/10/21/inam.economic.tsunami/index.html">7.8 percent</a>, and for  blacks as a whole it was a whopping 16 percent. (Notice, too, that the  subhead assumes manhood is white.) A search of the Nexis database turns up no <strong>Newsweek </strong>cover stories on the epidemic of black male  unemployment in the last five years.</p>
<p>I would also point out to <strong>Newsweek </strong>that single white men have a median wealth of nearly $44,000, and married white households have a median wealth of $167,500.  Black married households, by comparison, stand at $31,500, single black men at $7,900, and single black women at $100 (<strong>Extra!</strong>, <a href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4078">6/10</a>).  When their Beached White Males lose their jobs, they have much more of a safety net to fall back on than pretty much any other demographic. No doubt <strong>Newsweek </strong>is at least vaguely aware of this--though they're probably more acutely aware that Beached White Males and their employed counterparts also have more money to waste on magazines that feed into their anxieties.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fair.org/blog/2011/04/21/newsweek-bravely-highlights-the-plight-of-the-beached-white-male/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

