Some of you know my background is in journalism and other forms of human communications. So, I enjoy Marvin Olasky's take on the New York Times, with a "three strikes - you're out" metaphor.
Strike one. NYT headline: BOLTON'S REQUEST TO COUNTER IRAN ALARMS PENTAGON. Olasky says the article was designed to make readers believe they were taking in fact.
The article: "Senior Pentagon officials...Defense Dept. and senior American officials...a senior American official...a senior administration official... the senior American official...a former senior administration official...the senior American official...the senior American official...these officials...a senior administration official." (Who's on first?)
Strike two. NYT headline: TRUMP FACES NONSTOP WAR FOR SURVIVAL.
The lead: "So it has come to this: The president of the United States was asked over the weekend whether he is a Russian agent. And he refused to directly answer."
On the same day's editorial page, his direct answer: "Not only did I never work for Russia, I think it's a disgrace that you asked that question because it's a whole big fat hoax."
Strike three. NYT reporting about the U.S.-Mexico border contradicted its previous stories.
The article: "Poor, sick immigrants released from government detention are overwhelming local governments and charities." (A crisis?)
Previous NYT reporting made Trump's border concerns sound as though he was "manufacturing" a crisis. The Times also reported that California was doing little to help...but previously portrayed California as heroic for its sanctuary cities.
We don't have to believe everything we read in the papers
or whatever appears in someone's blog.
😏
Jimmy
No comments:
Post a Comment