Braininvat » June 15th, 2017, 4:10 pm wrote:
If you want spin-free news, try Reuters, Omaha World-Herald, Houston Chronicle, Washington Post,
Do you regard WaPo as an impartial outlet? Really? I couldn't disagree more. WaPo is flagrantly anti-Trump and has been running one false story after another lately based on anonymous sources.
As a "radical independent" (meaning I'd gladly drop both major parties and everyone in Congress off a cliff) I'm appalled at what's happened to the NYT but especially WaPo.
ps -- This just popped up. This is from WaPo. It's shocking.
Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III is investigating the finances and business dealings of Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law and adviser, as part of the investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election, according to officials familiar with the matter.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... 03b585f461
Well. That really is something. The whole Trump family will soon be behind bars.
Except ... my practiced, cynical news-reading eye was drawn to this: "...according to officials familiar with the matter."
What do you think that means? Here is what I think it means. Someone who refuses to allow their name to be printed in the paper as the source, calls a reporter and tells a story. If the source has actual information about an FBI investigation, leaking it to the press is a firing offense and probably a felony. They have an agenda. At worse they're just making something up. It might be true. It might be false.
You'll remember that the NYC in February ran a story that an unnamed source said Comey would refute that he told Trump that Trump was not under investigation. When Comey testified, he said that he DID tell that to Trump and that the NYT story was flat out false.
So these lies from anonymous sources who have an agenda take months to play out, and sometimes nobody ever finds out what's true.
WaPo has been printing crap like this for months. This is not journalism. Printing unconfirmed stories from agenda-promoting anonymous sources is not journalism. You'll remember that in Watergate, Woodward and Bernstein had a rule that everything they printed had to have at least two independent confirmations. That's how WaPo used to do business. Not any more.