The Syrian Presidential elections took place on June 3rd, 2014. On the morning of that day, Al Akhbar newspaper published on pages 6 and 7 an article titled: “The Western Media Judged the Elections.. before it happened”. The article is very straight to the point accusing the western media of following the path of its political leaders considering the Syrian Presidential elections a hoax and a joke. The article is correct when it points fingers on the media for taking a political stand and participating in a political propaganda. The article may also correct mentioning that the western media is biased, and is brain washing its readers’ thoughts, but let us look at Al Akhbar’s work. On the same issue (3308), the cover title was “Al Asad elected Today” and this (to remind readers) was before the polling centers opened. Now you can defend that Al Akhbar was only stating what is predictable, but is that ethical? Isn’t it denying the right of two other political candidates the right of the same exposure and might effect the results?! Well, if we allow this to pass. What can we say about two other articles written by influential writer Sami Kleib (one in the same issue and the other a day ahead) where he states that half of the world’s population supports Al Asad and also raised a title “The 3rd Asad” implying it will be Al Asad’s third term?! How can we not see how this media institute praises one political candidate, glorifies his works and skips to mention any of the alleged corruption issues, scandals or the three years civil war happening in Syria?! Yes Al Akhbar is right when it accuses other media institutes of being biased, but they are being schizophrenic to the bones.