I Busted Newsbusters!

A little while back, I decided to check out the "other side" of media criticism and settled on Newsbusters, the blog most like Media Matters (my fave) in content and style. Not "as good" or even "nearly as good", just "most like."

This morning, i read this item about the unfair reporting of Bush's crappy poll numbers.

Posting as "Howard Beale," I was able to respond immediately to a whopping error that they included in their transcripts but didn't notice. Namely, the supposedly liberally biased reporter claimed that Clinton's ratings had fallen to 41% during the impeachment scandal.

It's not true. As I noted (with citation), Clinton's job approval rating during this period were the highest of his presidency.

Okay, maybe I wussed out when I said the reporter was probably citing Clinton's "Favorabilty Rating," which is a different poll that's supposed to measure a person's personal like or dislike of someone. But I like getting my facts straight.

This doesn't mean the report was accurate. That the two types of ratings can be so wildly different is a prime reason why the two types of polls (Bush's job approvals and Clinton's personal favorability) should not be conflated. And even so, the reporter should have made it clear what type of poll she was citing.

And job approvals polls are the ones that count. They're done far more frequently and are cited more often.

Of course, no one cared except one guy who made a post that wasn't even worth responding to.