Representative Press Blog

At the "Oh. That Liberal Media" web site they try once again to make a case of "liberal bias"
Their problem is they really don't know what a bias is and don't know how to read clearly.

The make this claim about a NYT article:
From the start, the article embraces the criticisms of Bush's policies as fact, by allowing them to go unchallenged:
"It is a characterization of Mr. Bush's foreign policy style often heard around the world: bullying, unreceptive, brazen. The result, critics of this administration contend, has been a disastrous loss of international support, damage to American credibility, the sullying of America's image and a devastating war that has already taken more than 1,000 American lives. In the first presidential debate, Senator John Kerry argued that only with a change of presidents could the damage be undone."

Guys that is not bias. This is the problem, you don't understnd what bias even is. "the article embraces the criticisms of Bush's policies as fact" NO it doesn't, you have a distorted reading of that the acticle says. READ it.
"It is a characterization of Mr. Bush's foreign policy style often heard around the world: bullying, unreceptive, brazen. The result, critics of this administration contend, has been a disastrous loss of international support, damage to American credibility, the sullying of America's image and a devastating war that has already taken more than 1,000 American lives. In the first presidential debate, Senator John Kerry argued that only with a change of presidents could the damage be undone."
That is NOT "embracing the criticisms of Bush's policies as fact", it says Kerry argues the point, it doesn't state the point is fact. You are reading into it what isn't there. The context makes it very clear, the things I bolded. Also, do you realize how weirdly constructed the sentence about Kerry would have to be to satisfy you contrived standard? It would be incorrect to write "the alleged damage" in the sentence since Kerry isn't alleging it, Kerry is the one saying it is fact, not the writers of the article. It is what a critic contends, the article is not saying that it is fact, it says Kerry argued it. Not that it is.