1. Networks Spend 27 Minutes on Climate Change, Just 15 Seconds on Lois Lerner Contempt Vote
Not even a full vote by the House of Representatives to hold Lois Lerner in contempt can shake the broadcast networks out of their slumber in covering the IRS scandal. On Wednesday the House voted 231-178 (all Republicans voted yes with six Democrats) to hold Lerner in contempt for refusing to testify about the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups. Total coverage by ABC, CBS and NBC? Just a 15 second brief on Thursday’s edition of ABC’s Good Morning America. However the Big Three networks did find the 110x more time this week to tout the “dire” and “alarming” findings from the White House climate change report. In total ABC, CBS and NBC (from Tuesday morning through Wednesday morning) spent a whopping 27 minutes and 37 seconds on the Obama administration’s climate change scare-mongering. http://www.mrc.org/biasalerts/networks-spend-27-minutes-climate-change-just-15-seconds-lois-lerner-contempt-vote

2. ABC Ignores House Voting for Special Investigation of Benghazi; CBS Focuses on Democratic Uproar
Soon after the House voted to create a special select committe to investigate the Benghazi attacks, ABC ignored the story on Thursday evening. NBC spent just 27 seconds on the development, and CBS focused its report on Democratic disgust with the “partisan” move. ABC’s World News instead spent over two minutes reporting on former teen star Jason Patric’s custody battle and another two minutes on how online stores vary their prices for different customers. “That argument is being complicated by a fund raising plea on the website of the National Republican Congressional Committee. ‘You can become a Benghazi watchdog right now,’ it says for a minimum suggested donation of $25,” Cordes reported. http://www.mrc.org/biasalerts/abc-ignores-house-voting-special-investigation-benghazi-cbs-focuses-democratic-uproar

3. Fawning Robin Roberts Tosses Softballs to Hillary: ‘Are You Satisfied With’ Benghazi Investigation?
ABC on Thursday morning highlighted more of Robin Roberts’ fawning interview with Hillary Clinton. On the issue of Benghazi and the revelation that the White House had a direct hand in creating false talking points about the 2012 terrorist attack, Roberts could only manage this lame effort: “Benghazi. The new investigation. Are you satisfied with the answers and are you content with what you know what [sic] happened?” That was it. No follow-up. No interrogation about Clinton’s handling of the incident that left four Americans dead, including a U.S. ambassador. Instead, Roberts moved right on to this 2016 gossip: “And the question I took straight from the audience, were you to run for president in 2016, would you consider Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren or San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro as a running mate?” Continuing the softball questions, the Good Morning America host wondered, “You’re going to be a grandma?” http://www.mrc.org/biasalerts/fawning-robin-roberts-tosses-softballs-hillary-are-you-satisfied-benghazi-investigation

4. Chris Matthews Warns GOP’s ‘Nasty’ and ‘Insidious’ Politics on Benghazi Could Backfire Like ‘Watergate’
MSNBC’s Chris Matthews slammed Republican policies like voter ID laws and a special investigation of the Benghazi attacks as an “insidious plan” that could backfire like “Watergate.” “Let me finish tonight with this insidious plan to scare up right-wing voters and scare off the votes the of those who tend to vote Democratic,” Matthews ranted at the end of Thursday’s Hardball. “The trouble with nasty politics like the kind we’re getting from the House leadership is it makes you look nasty,” he continued. http://www.mrc.org/biasalerts/chris-matthews-warns-gops-nasty-and-insidious-politics-benghazi-could-backfire-watergate

5. MSNBC Host on ‘Today’: ‘Every Time Lewinsky is Mentioned, It is Good for Hillary Clinton’
During a report on Thursday’s NBC Today about Monic Lewinsky’s article in Vanity Fair magazine, correspondent Peter Alexander touted liberal spin that the former Bill Clinton mistress speaking out would actually help Hillary Clinton’s political prospects: “Clinton watcher Ruth Marcus argues Lewinsky has done Hillary a big favor.” A soundbite followed of the Washington Post columnist proclaiming: “Now if there’s a Hillary Clinton campaign for president in 2016, we can move on from the Lewinsky scandal of yore.” In a discussion segment that followed Alexander’s report, co-host Matt Lauer wondered to MSNBC host Alex Wagner: “How does this article, this essay, impact Hillary Clinton should she run for office in 2016?” Wagner argued: “Every time Lewinsky is mentioned, it is good for Hillary Clinton. It reminds everybody of her major accomplishments on the world stage. And people tend to be more sympathetic to Hillary Clinton than Monica Lewinsky because she is the woman scorned.” http://www.mrc.org/biasalerts/msnbc-host-today-every-time-lewinsky-mentioned-it-good-hillary-clinton