Media Matters for America: Unpacking the Liberal Media Watchdog – Mission, Controversies, and Impact

Media Matters for America (MMfA) stands as a prominent organization in the landscape of American media criticism. Founded in 2004 by David Brock, a figure who transitioned from conservative to liberal activism, MMfA operates as a 501(c)(3) non-profit with a self-proclaimed mission to fact-check and correct conservative media misinformation. While presenting itself as a neutral arbiter of facts, the organization frequently draws scrutiny for its overtly critical stance on conservative commentators and media outlets, leading to debates about its objectivity and influence.

In recent headlines, MMfA found itself embroiled in a legal battle with X (formerly Twitter) in November 2023. The lawsuit, initiated by X, alleges defamation following an MMfA report that claimed advertisements on the platform were placed adjacent to racist and antisemitic content. MMfA has staunchly denied these allegations, setting the stage for a potentially significant legal confrontation in the realm of online media accountability.

The Genesis of Media Matters: Countering Conservative Media

David Brock, the architect behind Media Matters for America, officially launched the organization on May 3, 2004. Brock’s own ideological journey is noteworthy; beginning his career as a conservative investigative journalist in the early 1990s, he shifted towards liberalism by the end of the decade. This transformation fueled his motivation to establish MMfA as a counterforce to the conservative media sphere he once inhabited. He aimed to challenge what he perceived as right-leaning narratives prevalent in American journalism. 1

Brock’s vision for MMfA extended beyond a mere website. He envisioned it as a cornerstone of a broader liberal media infrastructure, designed to counteract influential conservative voices such as radio personality Rush Limbaugh. He sought to position MMfA as a content provider for emerging liberal talk show hosts, with aspirations of supporting figures like Al Franken, who later became a U.S. Senator, and comedian Janeane Garofalo. 1 The establishment of MMfA was significantly aided by guidance and support from the Center for American Progress, another recently formed organization with roots in the Clinton White House, highlighting a concerted effort to build a robust liberal media presence.

From its inception, MMfA’s mission statement has explicitly targeted conservative media. As detailed in the organization’s tax filings, its core objective is: “Dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.” 2 This mission is further elaborated as an effort to identify and publicize instances of perceived bias within American media, educate the public about these occurrences, and collaborate with media professionals to foster news coverage that is both accurate and unbiased by any specific worldview. 3

The initial funding for MMfA, approximately $2 million, came from a network of prominent liberal donors, including Susie Tompkins Buell, Leo Hindery, and James Hormel. 3 This financial backing underscored the early support for MMfA’s mission within liberal circles and provided the resources necessary to launch its media monitoring and critique operations.

Inside Media Matters: Operations and Focus

Media Matters for America defines its central purpose as “comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.” 4 While the organization promotes its work as “in-depth media analysis,” its online platform also serves as a hub for liberal activism, encouraging users to engage in various calls to action. 5 This dual function of media critique and advocacy is a defining characteristic of MMfA’s operational approach.

Following Hillary Clinton’s defeat in the 2016 presidential election, MMfA strategically shifted its primary focus. Initially concentrated on challenging perceived falsehoods originating from Fox News, the organization broadened its scope to include “exposing falsehoods circulated online” by sources across the right-of-center political spectrum. 6 This pivot reflected an adaptation to the evolving media landscape and the increasing significance of online platforms in political discourse.

The MMfA website is structured into several key sections, including a blog, video content, research reports, and “Mythopedia.” Mythopedia is presented as a “Dictionary of Conservative Lies,” inviting users to search for supposed misinformation. 7 Searches for common terms like “tax” or “climate change” yield lists of “lies” juxtaposed with “truths,” complete with links to more detailed analyses. Examples of these purported lies include statements like “Progressive taxation is class warfare,” while corresponding “truths” assert that “Higher tax rates on the rich are not punishment.” 5 This feature exemplifies MMfA’s approach to framing and countering what it identifies as conservative misinformation.

In 2007, MMfA released a study examining 1,377 U.S. newspapers and 201 syndicated political columnists, asserting that conservative viewpoints received disproportionately more coverage than liberal perspectives. 8 However, this study faced methodological criticisms, notably from reporter John Diaz, who argued that the classification of reporters as “conservative” was overly broad and failed to account for the nuanced range of opinions within journalism. 8 This critique highlights ongoing debates about the methodologies and objectivity of media bias assessments.

Criticisms Targeting Right-of-Center Media: MMfA’s Campaigns

Republican Party Alignment and Right-Wing Media

Matt Gertz, a senior fellow at Media Matters for America, argues that a growing alignment between the Republican Party and right-wing media outlets has solidified since the mid-2000s. By the 2020s, he posits that right-of-center media had become “a bedrock part of the institutional Republican Party.” Gertz attributes this trend to figures like Roger Ailes, a former Fox News executive, particularly during Barack Obama’s presidency when mainstream media was often perceived as leaning left. 9

According to Gertz, this media-party convergence has contributed to the Republican Party’s increasing polarization. He suggests that elected officials within the party are increasingly catering to the preferences of right-wing media consumers, who are drawn to more extreme commentary available on these platforms. 9 This analysis frames right-wing media not just as a reflection of conservative ideology but as an active force shaping and radicalizing the Republican political agenda.

Critical Race Theory (CRT)

Media Matters for America has been a vocal critic of right-of-center media’s coverage of critical race theory (CRT). MMfA accuses these media outlets of “fearmongering” regarding the presence and impact of CRT in K-12 education. MMfA characterizes CRT as an “academic framework” primarily applied in higher education for understanding systemic racism within the United States. 10

MMfA contends that right-of-center media intentionally misrepresents CRT, conflating it with broader efforts to educate students about racism. They argue that this media strategy aims to “bash any discussion of systemic racism and racial justice efforts” and propagate false narratives about anti-white sentiment within left-leaning political circles. 10 MMfA suggests this media-driven discourse is politically motivated, designed to mobilize white voters against the Democratic Party and improve electoral outcomes for Republicans.

Federal Election Commission Complaint

On March 3, 2023, MMfA escalated its media criticism into direct political action by filing a complaint with the U.S. Federal Election Commission (FEC). The complaint targeted Rupert Murdoch, alleging that the right-wing media magnate improperly shared confidential information with Donald Trump’s 2020 presidential campaign. 11

MMfA specifically claimed that Murdoch’s Fox Corporation provided Jared Kushner, then an advisor to President Trump, with campaign advertisements for Joe Biden. MMfA argued that this action violated regulations pertaining to Fox’s status as a news organization. 11 This FEC complaint represents a direct challenge to the operational boundaries between media ownership, political campaigning, and regulatory compliance, as perceived by Media Matters.

COVID-19 Pandemic Misinformation

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Media Matters for America actively monitored and criticized what it identified as misinformation within right-wing media. On November 17, 2021, MMfA submitted testimony to the U.S. House Oversight and Reform Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis, focusing on “Combating Coronavirus Cons and the Monetization of Misinformation.” 12

In its testimony, MMfA asserted that “the right-wing media have been a pivotal force in pushing lies about COVID-19 and the vaccines do not work or are dangerous.” The organization specifically singled out Fox News for its extensive reach and impact in disseminating such narratives. Additionally, One America News Network (OANN) was criticized for allegedly “[spreading] dangerous and bizarre conspiracy theories about the coronavirus and vaccines.” 12 MMfA’s engagement in this context highlights its role in attempting to hold media outlets accountable for public health messaging during a crisis.

Fox News Protest

In March 2019, Media Matters for America organized a public protest directed at Fox News. The protest took place in front of Fox News headquarters in Manhattan, coinciding with a meeting of over one hundred advertising executives inside the building. 13 MMfA deployed box trucks displaying signs with slogans like “FOX NEWS IS BIGOTED,” which circled the block throughout the day. 13 This demonstration was a direct attempt to publicly pressure Fox News and potentially influence advertisers’ perceptions of the network, underscoring MMfA’s willingness to engage in direct action to advance its media critique.

Tucker Carlson’s Coverage

Media Matters for America has maintained a sustained critical focus on Tucker Carlson, a former Fox News pundit. In October 2018, MMfA published a timeline titled “Tucker Carlson’s descent into white supremacy.” This timeline purported to document Carlson’s evolution from “thinly veiled racism into full-throated white supremacy” over a 14-year period. 14

The timeline was actively updated after its initial release, continuing through April 2023. 14 This prolonged and detailed focus on Carlson’s rhetoric exemplifies MMfA’s strategy of in-depth, longitudinal monitoring of specific media figures to highlight and critique perceived biases or problematic content over time.

Testimony Against 21st Century Fox

In October 2017, Media Matters for America extended its media criticism internationally by submitting testimony to the United Kingdom Competition and Markets Authority. This testimony concerned 21st Century Fox’s attempted acquisition of Sky PLC, the parent company of Sky News. 15 Rupert Murdoch, a media mogul associated with right-of-center media, was at the center of this acquisition attempt.

MMfA argued against the acquisition, asserting that Fox suffered from “poor corporate governance” and failed to adhere to standards outlined in the Communications Act of 2003, specifically concerning “impartiality, accuracy, and the exclusion of offensive and harmful material.” 15 While Fox ultimately completed the purchase of Sky PLC, albeit with conditions for independent oversight of Sky News, this intervention by MMfA demonstrates its willingness to engage in regulatory processes to challenge media consolidation and perceived ethical lapses in media ownership. Subsequently, 21st Century Fox itself was acquired by Disney.

Controversies Surrounding Media Matters: Scrutiny and Legal Challenges

Twitter/X Defamation Lawsuit

In November 2023, Media Matters for America released a report alleging that X, formerly known as Twitter, was placing advertisements from major brands alongside “pro-Hitler, Holocaust denial, white nationalist, pro-violence, and neo-Nazi accounts.” 16 This report directly contradicted assurances from X’s CEO, Linda Yaccarino, who had stated that platform algorithms prevented advertiser content from appearing near inappropriate material. 16

X responded swiftly and aggressively, filing a defamation lawsuit against MMfA. The lawsuit claimed that MMfA had “manufactured” the report’s findings by manipulating platform algorithms. 17 The controversy, compounded by the re-platforming of previously banned accounts and concerns over owner Elon Musk’s own expressions, led to a significant exodus of advertisers from X, including major corporations like IBM, Apple, Disney, and Paramount Global. 17

X’s head of business operations, Joe Benarroch, argued that MMfA created a contrived scenario by using a small number of accounts to aggressively refresh timelines, artificially increasing ad impressions and creating a false impression of ad placement adjacency to harmful content. 18, 19 Independent journalist Michael Shellenberger reportedly attempted to replicate MMfA’s findings but was unsuccessful, further fueling the dispute. 20 Angelo Carusone, president of MMfA, dismissed the lawsuit as “frivolous” and intended to silence critics, reaffirming the organization’s commitment to its report. 17 This legal battle underscores the high stakes and intense scrutiny surrounding media watchdog activities in the digital age.

Sexual Misconduct Allegation

In June 2022, Timothy Johnson, a senior writer at MMfA, announced his departure after a decade with the organization, alluding to misconduct within the company. Johnson’s implications included an accusation that editorial director Ben Dimiero had “covered up for a man who [sexually] preyed on our colleagues.” 21

In response, MMfA president Angelo Carusone issued an internal memo defending the organization’s management, stating that the incident had occurred seven years prior and that the offender was promptly terminated. 21 Following Johnson’s resignation, MMfA reportedly threatened legal action against him, alleging breaches of his resignation agreement. 21 This internal controversy raised questions about workplace conduct and transparency within Media Matters itself, contrasting with its external role as a media critic.

Jussie Smollett “Hate Crime” Hoax

When Jussie Smollett, an actor from the TV series Empire, staged a false hate crime incident in January 2019, Media Matters for America initially defended Smollett’s account. Despite early inconsistencies in Smollett’s narrative, MMfA characterized skepticism as a “right-wing smear” just a day after the reported event. 22 MMfA also accused platforms like Twitter and YouTube of promoting content that questioned Smollett’s story. 22

However, MMfA later updated its reporting on February 21st, following Smollett’s arrest for filing a false police report. 22 This episode highlighted the challenges of rapid response in media reporting and the potential for even media watchdogs to be drawn into misinformation cycles before full facts are established.

Support for Clinton’s 2016 Campaign and Partisan Bias

In August 2020, the conservative non-profit Patriots Foundation initiated legal action against the Federal Election Commission (FEC). The lawsuit alleged FEC inaction on complaints filed in April against David Brock and several of his organizations, including Media Matters for America, for allegedly illegally supporting Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign. 23, 24, 25 The core accusation was that these organizations, including American Bridge 21st Century PAC, American Bridge 21st Century Foundation, and Correct the Record, had illegally coordinated with the Clinton campaign, violating FEC regulations. 25

The Patriots Foundation argued that Media Matters operated as an “arm of the Hillary Clinton campaign” during the 2016 election cycle. 26 Echoing this sentiment, The New Republic reported in December 2016 that “[Media Matters] had long ceased to be a mere watchdog, having positioned itself at the center of a group of public relations and advocacy outfits whose mission was to help put Clinton in the White House.” 27 A former MMfA staffer was quoted as saying, “The closer we got to the 2016 election the less it became about actually debunking conservative misinformation and more it became about just defending Hillary Clinton from every blogger in their mother’s basement.” 27

Further illustrating this perceived bias, reports emerged of internal pressure within MMfA to align coverage with pro-Clinton narratives. In 2014, staff members reportedly resisted requests to critique a “Fresh Air” interview with Hillary Clinton, deeming the interviewer’s questions fair. 23 Ultimately, MMfA’s research director reportedly had to write the critical piece himself. Data cited by The New Republic indicated a significant disparity in coverage, with 1,468 posts tagged “Hillary Clinton” on the MMfA site compared to only 26 tagged “Bernie Sanders.” 23

WikiLeaks releases further revealed coordination between Clinton’s 2016 campaign and Media Matters, suggesting that the campaign viewed MMfA as a surrogate to “muddy the waters” on potentially vulnerable issues by questioning media coverage of Republicans. 23 Journalists at The Atlantic described MMfA as part of David Brock’s “three-pronged empire” designed to boost Clinton’s campaign, noting “the ferocity with which Media Matters has defended Clinton can verge on the absurd.” 28 These accounts collectively raise substantial questions about MMfA’s impartiality and its role as a partisan actor rather than a purely objective media watchdog. Many within MMfA itself reportedly believed that the organization’s overt support for Clinton compromised its credibility. 6

Funding and Financial Transparency: Liberal Donors and Labor Unions

Despite Media Matters for America’s scrutiny of conservative and libertarian donors, the organization’s own donor base is not explicitly disclosed on its website. However, publicly available records and media reports reveal significant funding from various sources, primarily aligned with liberal and progressive interests.

MMfA’s initial funding of $2 million originated from wealthy progressive donors, channeled through the Tides Foundation, with additional contributions from MoveOn.org and the New Democrat Network. 29 Endorsement from the Democracy Alliance, a prominent left-of-center donor network, in 2004 reportedly triggered a surge in donations. In 2010, George Soros, a well-known philanthropist often targeted by conservative media, donated $1 million to MMfA. 30 Labor unions, particularly the National Education Association (NEA), have also been substantial financial contributors. 31

Major contributors to MMfA, based on 2014 tax and fiscal year data, include:

• Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston: $400,000
• Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund: $500,000
• Bohemian Foundation: $200,000
• Community Foundation of the United Jewish Federation of San Diego: $200,000
• National Education Association: $200,000
• Marin Community Foundation: $150,000
• Glaser Progress Foundation: $100,284
• Joseph and Marie Field Foundation: $100,000
• Orange County Community Foundation: $75,000
• Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program: $68,200
• Jewish Communal Fund: $62,000
• New York Community Trust: $54,250
• Rebecca and Nathan Milikowsky Family Foundation: $50,000
• Small Change Foundation: $50,000
• Lizzie and Jonathan Tisch Family Foundation: $50,000
• Fairfield County Community Foundation: $50,000
• Phoebe Snow Foundation: $50,000

Note: Contributors in italics are donor-advised funds, which can obscure the original source of donations, a practice often criticized as “dark money” by liberal groups themselves.

MMfA also directs funding to other left-leaning organizations. In 2014, it provided $930,000 to the Franklin Education Forum, a progressive media training group within the Brock network, and $150,000 to The American Independent, a Brock-linked investigative outlet. 32

Independent journalist Andy Ngo has accused MMfA of laundering “writings of Antifa propagandists into the mainstream” through substantial donations. 33 MMfA has previously labeled Ngo as a “far-right grifter.” 34

A leaked donor list obtained by the Washington Free Beacon in January 2024, reportedly accidentally released by MMfA in a public filing, revealed further details about its funding sources. Donors listed include Democratic megadonor Deborah Simon ($4 million), the Gill Foundation, Joshua and Anita Bekenstein ($1.75 million), the Stephen Silberstein Foundation, and the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation (STBF). 35 This leaked list reinforces the perception of MMfA’s financial reliance on a network of wealthy Democratic and progressive donors.

Leadership and Key Figures: From Brock to Carusone

President and CEO

Angelo Carusone currently serves as the president and CEO of Media Matters for America, succeeding Bradley Beychok in late 2016. Prior to joining MMfA, Carusone was involved with the 2016 Democratic National Convention committee. 36 Beychok remains within the broader Brock network, serving as David Brock’s chief of staff and an advisor to MMfA, indicating continuity in the organization’s leadership structure and strategic direction. 36

Founder

David Brock, the founder of MMfA, previously chaired the organization’s board. In November 2022, Brock announced his resignation as Chair of the Board for MMfA, as well as from the MMfA Action Network and American Bridge 21st Century. 37 Despite stepping down from these formal leadership roles, Brock’s continued influence within the constellation of liberal media and political organizations he has founded remains significant.

Other notable figures associated with MMfA include Eric Boehlert, a controversial senior fellow who has faced criticism for factual inaccuracies in his reporting. 38

Board of Directors

As of 2022, Media Matters for America’s Board of Directors comprised: 39

• Angelo Carusone, Chair
• Will Lippincott, Secretary
• Tom Castro, Treasurer
• Cecile Richards
• Karen White
• Oliver Willis
• Michael Pollack
• Bonnie Turner
• Tom Perez
• Pilar Martinez

Other Staff

Talia Lavin, formerly a researcher at MMfA focused on “far-right extremism,” has also written for left-leaning publications such as the Washington Post. 40 Lavin resigned from the New Yorker in 2018 after falsely identifying an ICE agent’s U.S. Marine tattoo as a neo-Nazi symbol. 41 She has also defended George Soros against conservative criticism, labeling it anti-Semitic. 42 Lavin reportedly left MMfA in 2019. 43

Pilar Martinez, MMfA’s chief financial officer since 2008, has a long career in left-wing non-profits. 44 Cynthia Padera, the chief operating officer, previously worked at the United Nations Foundation and the League of Women Voters. 44 The staff and leadership profiles underscore MMfA’s deep roots within the broader network of liberal and progressive organizations and activism.

Associations and Affiliations: Labor Unions and Political Networks

Media Matters Action Network is the 501(c)(4) political advocacy arm of Media Matters for America, allowing for more direct engagement in political activities. 45

In 2014, MMfA employees voted to unionize with the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Initially, MMfA management reportedly opposed unionization, drawing criticism from employees and labor advocates, particularly given MMfA’s public support for union-friendly legislation like the Employee Free Choice Act. 46 This internal labor dispute highlighted a tension between MMfA’s external advocacy and its internal organizational practices.

References