The liberal mind is something to behold. I liken this specimen to a maze subsumed with mold and around every corner lurks a racist boogeyman. It’s a hemisphere where logic and reason run into dead end synapses while the spectre of Obvious laughs and mocks its stupidity.
My favorite petri dish is the editorial board at the Charlotte Observer. This culture is a microcosm of a broader groupthink that infest the mainstream media. This specimen published an example of how the board arrived at one of their opinions. The object was James Comey and the hacked DNC emails. Let’s pull out a microscope and examine the contents.
Bailey: “The point is more about guarding ourselves against being unwittingly used by a hostile actor in the future. Russia, through WikiLeaks, purposefully put its stamp on our democracy by helping one side. It did that with a drip drip over the final few weeks, and media went along with that timeline by publishing several individual pieces. We have to ask our industry if we are OK with playing that kind of a role in elections, or is there a way we can think of to still do our jobs well without being used by hackers trying to undermine our democracy.”
Batten: “I have some concerns with the editorial because it suggests that the media ran incorrect or unverified information when I don’t know of it doing so. And it raises questions about the media’s performance not only on Russian leaks but on Comey’s email announcement in late October. What was the media to do about that? Not cover the FBI director announcing the FBI is reopening an investigation into one of the candidates? That would be irresponsible and look like the media is covering for her. No doubt the Russians/Wikileaks savvily trickled things out and the media went along. I can see the media mulling what to do about that. But if they are running true, verified information, I’m not sure how much criticism and second-guessing they deserve.
Notice how they are under the presumption that Russia is Wikileaks source despite denials by Julian Assange. The Observer’s editorial board never contemplated the idea that all those leaks could have been an inside job. As a matter of fact, a murdered DNC staffer shared over 44,000 emails with Wikileaks; but they won’t allow that to disrupt their Russian narrative.
Get a load of this next section. The specimen is worried about being used as a tool.
Bailey: “And that’s the quandary. We are either willing to say we did everything in this well, or that we should rethink things. Our handling of Russia and Comey created an incredible imbalance in the transparency of the two final candidates, which did a disservice to the public, even if none of the news was fake. How does it serve our readers to be an unwitting tool in that kind of process? Are we really OK with saying that’s how things should be going forward?
“On Comey, we had to report, but the way we reported should be rethought. Many of the stories we ran speculated about the impact on the election – with very little context that it did not mean Clinton did anything wrong. In essence, by treating Comey as we did, we did publish unverified info – because those emails were neither new nor relevant. But by the time we found out, the die had been cast.”
Isn’t that precious? The specimen is worried about publishing unverified information. Well apparently they don’t have any qualms publishing stories riddled with unverified and unnamed sources when it comes to President Donald Trump and his administration.
But look at this! The specimen has had a revelation.
Bailey (responding to Batten’s earlier note): “Also, even if we believe media just did its job the way we’ve long believed we should, it still means that we were used by those with ill intent, and it worked. Shouldn’t that bother us? Shouldn’t that convince us to make sure no stone is unturned, even if that means rethinking/revamping how we do what we do? Given the ability of hackers, this issue will only grow larger.”
Can the specimen make the logical leap that it’s being used to derail the Trump administration? I think I see a dead end synapses ahead.
Source:
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/editorials/article151095762.html
No comments:
Post a Comment