Media Mistakes In The Trump Era (1 Viewer)

[viktor]

Media Errors during the Trump Era: A Comprehensive List | Sharyl Attkisson

Discover a comprehensive list of media errors made during the Trump era. Explore notable mistakes and missteps in reporting.

sharylattkisson.com

 

[SamAndreas]

Media Errors during the Trump Era: A Comprehensive List | Sharyl Attkisson

Discover a comprehensive list of media errors made during the Trump era. Explore notable mistakes and missteps in reporting.

sharylattkisson.com

That's quite a list that alleges that the press failed to give Trump his do.

It's a Sharyl Attkisson thing. She likes to pretend to be independent of left or right, being neutral. But I do recall that she was doing a thing back then where what she was alleging was that the press wasn't being hard enough on Obama. Oh' no, especially not being hard enough on him about that Benhgazi attack, which was in my mind the exact opposite of the reality of it.

The press pushed the Benhgazi attack far beyond what it was, which was not all that big a deal considering what a President can do about situations like that.

"Things just happen, what the hell." -- Didactylos

 

[xpuma20x]

It seems she's just making assertions without any actual proof. The very first thing on the list was proven correct by Mark Meadows' own book and recounting of the event itself. He literally stated that it was all Ivanka's idea and that they originally wanted to clear the area and then take pics inside, but that it was boarded up already.

 

[viktor]

It seems she's just making assertions without any actual proof. The very first thing on the list was proven correct by Mark Meadows' own book and recounting of the event itself. He literally stated that it was all Ivanka's idea and that they originally wanted to clear the area and then take pics inside, but that it was boarded up already.

You can't read

 

[xpuma20x]

You can't read

Care to elaborate further than that?

 

[SamAndreas]

You can't read

I can read.

I read the media (NBC News) story in the link Sharyl Attkisson used and labeled as "found" in her report where it said "The Inspector general "found"... . To back up her assertion that the park was cleared because... .

Read the article's subtitle: "But the report did find that Attorney General Barr urged officials to speed up the process once Trump had decided to walk through the area."

Trump photo op not why police chased protesters from park, report says

But the report did find that Attorney General Barr urged officials to speed up the process once Trump had decided to walk through the area.

www.nbcnews.com

The media article that Attkisson used to prove her assertion shows that her assertion was only a half truth. That the earlier media narrative was shall we say simplified, not wrong. Perhaps at the time that narrative was published it wasn't known that there were additional factors. What is true is that one of the factors was that Trump wanted to walk through there, and that factor was at least a part of the reason why that area was cleared of human beings by using force to clear it.

 

[viktor]

That's quite a list that alleges that the press failed to give Trump his do.

It's a Sharyl Attkisson thing. She likes to pretend to be independent of left or right, being neutral. But I do recall that she was doing a thing back then where what she was alleging was that the press wasn't being hard enough on Obama. Oh' no, especially not being hard enough on him about that Benhgazi attack, which was in my mind the exact opposite of the reality of it.

The press pushed the Benhgazi attack far beyond what it was, which was not all that big a deal considering what a President can do about situations like that.

"Things just happen, what the hell." -- Didactylos

She documented 154 lies told by the media about Trump. You got a reading problem???

 

[viktor]

Care to elaborate further than that?

No. It is not my job to teach you how to read. If you are lying, I cannot help with that, either.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

No. It is not my job to teach you how to read. If you are lying, I cannot help with that, either.

Yeah, you're gonna last... lol

 

[MT15]

So, you’re going to pretend that this list consists of important items that were incorrect? I’m not going to read the whole list, because after reading the first 10 or so they are mostly trivial. All were corrected by the news agencies or media themselves as more facts emerged. Some are just copy errors, such as getting Melania’s name wrong, listing Trump’s wife as Ivanka. This was committed by ”graphics” people, so not even reporters.

Some are still open for debate, as Sam pointed out about the tear gas incident. The whole point of the Washington Park incident is that the protestors were given a time to clear the park, and then police came out and gassed them before that deadline with no warning. This has been said by the pastors of the church at the time. It’s not wrong, and the fact that they did that without warning was because Trump decided to do his photo op. So Attkisson is not really telling the entire story when she says that the gassing of peaceful protestors had nothing to do with Trump.

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

The biggest mistake the media made regarding Trump was giving him a free ride. In their effort to be "fair", the media foolishly tried to "normalize" this mentally ill corrupt imbecile with a 4th grade education.

The media should have reported the truth from the very beginning -- that Trump is evil, crazy, and dumber than dirt. If Trump wasn't born wealthy and didn't have people taking care of him his whole pathetic life, he would be in jail right now or wandering the streets homeless.

 

[xpuma20x]

No. It is not my job to teach you how to read. If you are lying, I cannot help with that, either.

Ah, I see what the problem is here. Since I didn't fall for the propaganda, I obviously can't read. See, here are the mistakes you made. First, you assumed people would just skim the article. On that one, you were right, because I did. It wasn't worth reading after the first few "points" the author was making. When the whole thing is based on assumptions, petty arguments, and twisting the truth to fit an agenda, I realized I didn't need to go any further. Second, you assumed people would just blindly agree with the article because it would be something they desperately wanted to agree with. The problem here is that this board is filled with highly educated people that actually know how to process information, compare it to actual events and real news, and sort out when something is full of fluff and something is legit. I wish you the best during your time here in this community, but you're going to get eaten alive if this is your planned course of action.

 

[Saintman2884]

I can read.

I read the media (NBC News) story in the link Sharyl Attkisson used and labeled as "found" in her report where it said "The Inspector general "found"... . To back up her assertion that the park was cleared because... .

Read the article's subtitle: "But the report did find that Attorney General Barr urged officials to speed up the process once Trump had decided to walk through the area."

Trump photo op not why police chased protesters from park, report says

But the report did find that Attorney General Barr urged officials to speed up the process once Trump had decided to walk through the area.

www.nbcnews.com

The media article that Attkisson used to prove her assertion shows that her assertion was only a half truth. That the earlier media narrative was shall we say simplified, not wrong. Perhaps at the time that narrative was published it wasn't known that there were additional factors. What is true is that one of the factors was that Trump wanted to walk through there, and that factor was at least a part of the reason why that area was cleared of human beings by using force to clear it.

Do you think maybe her assertion the MSM likes to rush to judgement and call out stories as facts first without maybe vetting them and then sort of leave them hanging, without clarification, might a bit of a stingy accusation unto itself?

The controversy over Benghazi was that someone forked up and wasnt there when they should've been there to save the life of one of our ambassadors to Libya and that instead of coming clean to media and American people during an election year, Hillary did a very complete, effective job in covering it up but doing it in such a way that her particular fingerprints werent going to be seen in investigation. This tragedy also occured during a contentious, closer-than-expected 2012 Presidential race and GOP conservatives have long had it in for the Clintons and especially Hillary. Sometimes, like with Bill's sexual infedility and lying it about to a Congressional inquiry with a White House intern, they've kind of asked for it. Other times, its just hatred or bitterness they never really could nail their arses on something illegal, even if there might've been some circumstantial evidence pointing in that direction .

 

[brandon]

You can't read

I can read.

No. It is not my job to teach you how to read.

Keep this up and you’ll put me on ignore by the weekend.

 

[samiam5211]

No. It is not my job to teach you how to read. If you are lying, I cannot help with that, either.

How is the weather in St. Petersburg?

 

[SamAndreas]

Do you think maybe her assertion the MSM likes to rush to judgement and call out stories as facts first without maybe vetting them and then sort of leave them hanging, without clarification, might a bit of a stingy accusation unto itself?

Just in trying to deal with that one part of your post. I think that might be an interesting thought, if I was sure that I was understanding it correctly

Are you asking me if I think Attkisson understates her criticisms of the other media, rather than indulges in pressing her conservative bias while pretending to be academically above it all?

I think the answer to your question can be read in the subtext of the way I phrased and loaded that question I asked of you in my quest to have clarification of yours.

I found had to by-pass that load and reach into the subtext of your question in my attempt to clarify what it was that your were asking me.

I guess what I'm trying to say is loading a question tends to obscure rather than be enlightening. The light it gives off is invariably of that "gas light" flickering type of light.