NBC 'News' morphs into NBC Propaganda (updated)

The levels of bias and ideological commitment demonstrated by NBC "News" rose to new heights over the past weekend. The Media Research Center has done its customary excellent job covering the media treatment of Live Earth concerts:

Appearing with Today news reader and Dateline anchor Ann Curry during NBC's prime time coverage Saturday of Al Gore's "Live Earth" concerts, Gore gave a shout out to the network for its donation to his global warming cause, as Gore told Curry: "Thanks for what NBC has been doing." Curry didn't exactly deliver a hard-hitting interview. When he declared the concerts "the largest global entertainment event in all of history," she congratulated him before pressing him about running for President, suggesting that "without you there will not be the political will in the White House to fight global warming." She pleaded: "A lot of people want me to ask you tonight if you're running for President. And I know what you're answer is gonna be, believe me. I gotta ask you though. After fueling this grass roots movement, if you become convinced that without you there will not be the political will in the White House to fight global warming to the level that is required, because the clock is ticking, would you answer the call? Would you answer the call, yes or no?"
This cheerleading for presidential candidacy certainly demonstrates that NBC has chosen sides in one of the major political issues of our day, and is taking a political position. But of course, there are alleged "news correspondents" who don't see it that way. The MRC continues:
Howard Kurtz asked NBC about the perception of imbalance created by their massive promotion of the Live Earth concerts on seven of their channels throughout the day Saturday, but an NBC corporate Senior VP insisted: "I really don't think climate change is a political issue."
Why would anyone trust "news" coming from a source that is so delusional?

Hat tip: Ed Lasky

Update: Ashlee N. Titus adds:

A couple of days ago, The Today Show ran a story about Al Gore's son's arrest.  The story morphed into a piece about the children of political figures in general, and made the case that the public generally doesn't punish politicians for the sins of their children.  They included Patty Davis and the Bush twins as examples.  To contrast, they portrayed Chelsea Clinton as the glue that the Clintons together during the Monica Lewinsky fiasco.  At the end, they queried whether children would pose a problem for politicians in the future, and flashed a photo of Rudy, but didn't say his name or elaborate any further.

Seemed like a Giuliani hit piece to me.
 
And Alex Ensley adds:

In the interview in the now-famous New York Magazine article, Katie Couric is quick to blame others for the dropping of the ratings, intimating that if she were allowed to do more of what she did on The Today Show everything would be fine. Perhaps she's forgotten (and CBS never knew) that viewers were growing increasingly disenchanted with Couric's blatant use of her NBC position as a conduit to the rich and famous. It appeared that her ultimate goal was to become one of them.
The problem is that so many viewers resent the rich and famous, seeing them as highly hypocritical. The public has even more disdain for journalists who have become rich and famous...living in the protected bubble brought by wealth. The fact that they reinforce one another's views creates an intensive disconnect between their views and those of their audiences.

The public has made it clear. They want the news delivered from those who can neutrally deliver the facts without injecting their opinions or their personalities. Journalists who yearn to BE a story are not true journalists. One who wants so much attention will do anything for it, including embellishing and altering... a person not to be trusted.
The levels of bias and ideological commitment demonstrated by NBC "News" rose to new heights over the past weekend. The Media Research Center has done its customary excellent job covering the media treatment of Live Earth concerts:

Appearing with Today news reader and Dateline anchor Ann Curry during NBC's prime time coverage Saturday of Al Gore's "Live Earth" concerts, Gore gave a shout out to the network for its donation to his global warming cause, as Gore told Curry: "Thanks for what NBC has been doing." Curry didn't exactly deliver a hard-hitting interview. When he declared the concerts "the largest global entertainment event in all of history," she congratulated him before pressing him about running for President, suggesting that "without you there will not be the political will in the White House to fight global warming." She pleaded: "A lot of people want me to ask you tonight if you're running for President. And I know what you're answer is gonna be, believe me. I gotta ask you though. After fueling this grass roots movement, if you become convinced that without you there will not be the political will in the White House to fight global warming to the level that is required, because the clock is ticking, would you answer the call? Would you answer the call, yes or no?"
This cheerleading for presidential candidacy certainly demonstrates that NBC has chosen sides in one of the major political issues of our day, and is taking a political position. But of course, there are alleged "news correspondents" who don't see it that way. The MRC continues:
Howard Kurtz asked NBC about the perception of imbalance created by their massive promotion of the Live Earth concerts on seven of their channels throughout the day Saturday, but an NBC corporate Senior VP insisted: "I really don't think climate change is a political issue."
Why would anyone trust "news" coming from a source that is so delusional?

Hat tip: Ed Lasky

Update: Ashlee N. Titus adds:

A couple of days ago, The Today Show ran a story about Al Gore's son's arrest.  The story morphed into a piece about the children of political figures in general, and made the case that the public generally doesn't punish politicians for the sins of their children.  They included Patty Davis and the Bush twins as examples.  To contrast, they portrayed Chelsea Clinton as the glue that the Clintons together during the Monica Lewinsky fiasco.  At the end, they queried whether children would pose a problem for politicians in the future, and flashed a photo of Rudy, but didn't say his name or elaborate any further.

Seemed like a Giuliani hit piece to me.
 
And Alex Ensley adds:

In the interview in the now-famous New York Magazine article, Katie Couric is quick to blame others for the dropping of the ratings, intimating that if she were allowed to do more of what she did on The Today Show everything would be fine. Perhaps she's forgotten (and CBS never knew) that viewers were growing increasingly disenchanted with Couric's blatant use of her NBC position as a conduit to the rich and famous. It appeared that her ultimate goal was to become one of them.
The problem is that so many viewers resent the rich and famous, seeing them as highly hypocritical. The public has even more disdain for journalists who have become rich and famous...living in the protected bubble brought by wealth. The fact that they reinforce one another's views creates an intensive disconnect between their views and those of their audiences.

The public has made it clear. They want the news delivered from those who can neutrally deliver the facts without injecting their opinions or their personalities. Journalists who yearn to BE a story are not true journalists. One who wants so much attention will do anything for it, including embellishing and altering... a person not to be trusted.