Author Topic: When the villain is Obama, not Trump, news suddenly becomes not worth reporting  (Read 159 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Wingnut

  • That is the problem with everything. They try and make it better without realizing the old is fine.
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26,791
  • Gender: Male
 Just points out how media sources manipulate facts and what they report pursuing an agenda. Josef Goebbels would be envious.


By Kyle SmithNovember 20, 2019 | 2:48pm


So the United States has “the world’s highest rate of children in detention.” Is this worth reporting? Maybe, maybe not. Nevertheless, Agence France-Presse, or AFP, and Reuters did report it, attributing the information to a “United Nations study” on migrant children detained at the US-Mexico border.

Then the two agencies retracted the story. Deleted, withdrew, demolished. If they could have used one of those Men in Black memory-zappers on us, they would have. Sheepishly, the two news organizations explained that, you see, the UN data was from 2015 — part of a border crackdown that had begun years earlier.

We all know who the president was in 2015. It wasn’t evil, child-caging monster President Trump. It was that nice, compassionate, child-caging monster President Barack Obama.

Zap. The story made Obama look bad. Hence the story was removed. Not updated or corrected, removed.

I know it’s a heavy news environment. Who can keep up? But try to remember this one, because it’s instructive. People think news organizations flat-out fabricate stories. That isn’t often the case. Fake news is a problem that pops up here and there, but the much more systematic and deeply entrenched attack on truth is the casual, everyday bias of reporters.

AFP and Reuters deleted a story that was, in a narrow sense, true — that a UN study claimed the United States had some 100,000 children in migrant-related detention. The United Nations is horribly biased against America and the West. Still, on the level of lazy, news-release-driven journalism, the locked-up-kids story was minimally valid.

At any rate, what the agencies didn’t seem to like was the story’s changed implication: That Obama, rather than Trump, locked up a lot of children. This is what’s important: Not that AFP and Reuters deleted a story, but that the implication of the story meant everything to them.

https://nypost.com/2019/11/20/when-the-villain-is-obama-not-trump-news-suddenly-becomes-not-worth-reporting/?
I am just a Technicolor Dream Cat riding this kaleidoscope of life.