FAKE NEWS EXPOSED: A Service of PoliticalChat.com

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

For example of a speculative news item with an editorial spin in the headline: "Mueller report — and a new political firestorm — may be imminent". Is the report imminent? Who knows? Will it create a "political firestorm"? Maybe. Is it a story worthy of front page, leading story treatment? Don't think so, but apparently WaPo and CNN do. Is it a factual story that would demand that the paper write a retraction if it turns out that the facts are wrong? It should, but WaPo / CNN probably won't bother.

The Russia investigation happens to be the single most important story of the past two years, and possibly in the history of the American presidency. And yes, the WashPost runs corrections prominently on page A-2 whenever necessary, instead of doubling down on lies like your beloved MAGAMedia. Here are the first several paragraphs of your cited story. Tell me exactly how this story is biased.

Justice Department officials are preparing for the end of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s nearly two-year investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and believe a confidential report could be issued in coming days, according to people familiar with the discussions.

The special counsel’s investigation has consumed Washington since it began in May 2017, and it increasingly appears to be nearing its end, which would send fresh shock waves through the political system. Mueller could deliver his report to Attorney General William P. Barr next week, according to a person familiar with the matter who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive deliberations.

Regulations call for Mueller to submit to the attorney general a confidential explanation as to why he decided to charge certain individuals, as well as who else he investigated and why he decided not to charge those people. The regulations then call for the attorney general to report to Congress about the investigation.

An adviser to President Trump said there is palpable concern among the president’s inner circle that the report might contain information about Trump and his team that is politically damaging, but not criminal conduct.

[bobabode]

It's a well established fact that our friend Whell only reads the headlines.
Poor thing...

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

The Russia investigation happens to be the single most important story of the past two years, and possibly in the history of the American presidency[/I]

Sorry, but a speculative report from anonymous sources about something that might happen might be news, but it ain't front page news. By comparison, slightly less rabid news outlets such as CBS, NBC and others would tend to agree, not giving it front page treatment.

Again, this was an item for comparison: to note how differently various news sources treat certain news items. What CNN is doing is obvious. Their bias is so over the top by any objective assessment.

Wapo, maybe less so, but their treatment of the Covington HS kids story was flawed, and it exposed a bias that I think is pretty obvious.

We can agree to disagree , but the evidence is certainly there.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Sorry, but a speculative report from anonymous sources about something that might happen might be news, but it ain't front page news...

The Russia probe has been the number one story in the US for two years and the nation has been waiting with bated breath for the release of the report and now several news sources are reporting that the report is imminent. Like it or not, the WashPost is one of the premier sources of national political news in the country and it would malpractice to not report on the imminent release of this widely anticipated report if they have insight on its release.

I challenged you to read the article you cited and point out any obvious bias and you demurred. BTW, Fox News reported the same thing yesterday.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

The Russia probe has been the number one story in the US for two years and the nation has been waiting with bated breath for the release of the report and now several news sources are reporting that the report is imminent. Like it or not, the WashPost is one of the premier sources of national political news in the country and it would malpractice to not report on the imminent release of this widely anticipated report if they have insight on its release.

I challenged you to read the article you cited and point out any obvious bias and you demurred. BTW, Fox News reported the same thing yesterday.

You still don't get the point, or you're being purposefully obtuse. I'll state it again:

A speculative report from anonymous sources about something that might happen might be news, but it ain't front page news. By comparison, slightly less rabid news outlets such as CBS, NBC and others would tend to agree, not giving it front page treatment.

The fact that it was "reported" isn't relevant to my point. The point is placement. News sources have always determined the weight or gravity of a news item by placement. This was THE lead, TOP story on CNN this morning. WaPo didn't have it as THE top story, but it was one of the top three stories.

By comparison NBC, CBS - nowhere to be found on the FRONT page.

Get it now?

[Chicks]

Originally Posted by whell

The fact that it was "reported" isn't relevant to my point. The point is placement. News sources have always determined the weight or gravity of a news item by placement. This was THE lead, TOP story on CNN this morning. WaPo didn't have it as THE top story, but it was one of the top three stories.

Online news is fundamentally different than print. The story order changes throughout the day, as news breaks. If it was a slow news day, this could easily have made it to the top, then pushed down as more sad revelations about this most corrupt of all administrations takes the lead.

CNN also has to compete more directly with Faux "News" for eyeballs. It costs a lot to stay on the air. Faux does it because millions of morons like you love the taste of the puke spewing from insHannity and Fuc*er Carlson.

But, being a right wingnut, you probably aren't up on how things work these days, lol.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

You still don't get the point, or you're being purposefully obtuse. I'll state it again:

A speculative report from anonymous sources about something that might happen might be news, but it ain't front page news....

So what? If you don't like it, stay inside your MAGAMedia fantasy world. OTOH, if you actually want to be informed about what's actually going on as the Great Ship Trump hits the iceberg, read the Post and the Times.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

So what? If you don't like it, stay inside your MAGAMedia fantasy world. OTOH, if you actually want to be informed about what's actually going on as the Great Ship Trump hits the iceberg, read the Post and the Times.

WaPo and CNN proven wrong yet again. Nothing new here. Move along...

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/02/22/...-week-nbc.html

There you go again adding straw to your straw man. Didn’t even say that I liked it or didn’t like it. It was simply a statement of fact that news outlets convey their estimation of the weight of a story by where the choose to place it. It’s a point that’s not arguable, but you can argue it all you want. You're a guy that likes news sources that post inaccurate and half baked news stories above the fold on page one, after all.