On Monday night's CBS Evening News (January 13) Dan Rather introduced a story by focusing not on the ethics of Democrats but on how Republicans are guilty of trying to change topics:
"On Capitol Hill the House today was supposed to begin making full disclosure of House Speaker Newt Gingrich's ethical violations and tax problems. It didn't. And what's more, now there's an added ethics allegation based on what Gingrich said, in what he thought was a secret telephone call, which Democrats say is proof that Gingrich violated a promise to the House ethics committee not to mount a political damage control effort. But Republicans tried to shift the focus today away from what Gingrich actually said. Bob Schieffer has the latest."

The next night, on the January 14 CBS Evening News, reporter Wyatt Andrews demonstrated how easy it is to tune in a cellular call and reviewed how the Martins claimed they caught the call, then concluded his piece:
"...So now the Martins could be charged with a crime. Congressman James McDermott, who leaked the tape, could be charged with a crime and ironically, in the ways of Washington, mini-tapegate has for five days sidetracked substantive ethics charges against the Speaker of the House."

Wednesday night coverage of tapegate? Not a word on ABC's World News Tonight, CBS Evening News or NBC Nightly News.

The Supreme Court heard arguments in the case on Monday. That night on the CBS Evening News Rita Braver reviewed the history of the case:

Braver began: "It was the women's vote that clinched the presidency for Bill Clinton and he prides himself on being a committed feminist. So the charges made by Paula Corbin Jones go straight to the heart of who Bill Clinton is. Because she claims he is the kind of man who would take advantage of a young woman, who would sexually harass her..."

Question: If this long-scheduled case goes "straight to the heart of who Bill Clinton is" then why didn't CBS explore this subject last fall, BEFORE the election?

Braver continued: "...But last fall, in a groundbreaking article, respected law reporter Stuart Taylor tracked down several new witnesses whose testimony persuaded him that Jones was probably telling the truth. And he noticed something else: women's groups who like Bill Clinton's policies had failed to rally to Jones's cause."

Taylor's story, with the new witness accounts, came out in late October. If the article was so "groundbreaking" why did CBS wait over ten weeks to report anything about it?

On Monday's NBC Nightly News Jim Miklaszewski noted in his overview of the case that when Jones first made her charges "Most mainstream media barely touched it. Others, like Newsweek's Evan Thomas, fell for the White House spin."
Following a soundbite from Thomas, the Mik continued: "But an investigation by American Lawyer magazine showed that Paula Jones appeared to have a strong case for sexual harassment, even stronger than Anita Hill's claim against Justice Clarence Thomas. Reporter Stuart Taylor blames the media's initial negative reaction to Jones on political and cultural bias."
Taylor: "She was widely dismissed in the back rooms of the press conversations as Southern trailer park trash. Why should we listen to her."
Miklaszewski: "And by the time Jones' case hit the Supreme Court she made the cover of Newsweek."
Thomas: "If you really look at the facts of the case she is worth taking seriously."
Miklaszewski: "Paula Jones's attorneys say there's still time to cut a deal and avoid a trial if President Clinton would apologize. The President's lawyers had no comment."

As with CBS, Taylor (who was on Meet the Press Sunday) made his first Nightly News appearance two and a half months after his article appeared. It's nice that some in the media are acknowledging their bias, at least with this issue, but may I suggest that their failure to report anything about Taylor's story reflects a continuation of that bias more than two years after Jones filed her suit in May 1994.

Network coverage for this admission of earlier false statements? A full story by Brooks Jackson on CNN, but no mention on the Tuesday or Wednesday ABC, CBS and NBC evening news shows.

How will this "resonate" with the American people when the story Mitchell claims she's "been working on" has yet to be reported by her? The Washington Post revealed the Motel 6 arrangements in a front page story on Sunday, December 15. Today show that morning and the next: no mention. There was no NBC Nightly News Sunday night on the east coast, but the next night NBC did run a Mitchell piece on Clinton's defense fund returning donations. On December 17 Mitchell contributed another story on the defense fund. She didn't do another political story until January 3, but still no mention of the Lincoln Bedroom.

Examining the same papers, in a front page USA Today story on December 30, reporter Tom Squitieri relayed:
"The documents also show that Democrats were ready in case questions arose about the strategy [of coordinating DNC, White House and Clinton-Gore campaign activities to maximize fundraising.] For example, those caught in scandals were advised 'don't lie' in one DNC memo. Next they were to 'announce an internal investigation, independent investigation or white paper to examine the matter' in order to buy time. Finally, they were to 'impugn the source,' the DNC advised."

Network coverage of this cynical and divisive plan? Zilch.

Good to hear that after 15 years as anchor Rather has finally noticed that the "public is picking up" on media bias.

Back in 1989 PBS re-ran an anti-Reagan 1982 CBS Reports special narrated by Moyers. After the show, Moyers announced: "The documentary has held up as both true and sadly prophetic. While Congress restored some of the cuts made in those first Reagan budgets, in the years since, the poor and the working poor have born the brunt of the cost of the Reagan Revolution. The hardest hit programs have been welfare, housing and other anti- poverty measures...Meanwhile, rich people got big tax breaks. And the middle class kept most of its subsidies intact. As a result, the Reagan years brought on a wider gap between rich and poor."

Even Larry King realizes that's liberal.