PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: acrogimp on November 06, 2015, 10:17:24 PM
-
I am assuming most with any interest in the upcoming primaries and eventual election have been keeping up with the story about the story on Politico about Ben Carson.
Curious to see who thinks what - was it a hit piece, lazy reporting, or good journalism?
After a day full of questions about the origin and tone of the story, Politico has since quietly updated the story and the lede, without any editorial remarks (just an 'updated' with a new time stamp).
To clarify, I am not a fan of Dr. Carson's with respect to his candidacy as he has taken too many positions counter to my own, but I do believe he is a good and decent man and as such is undeserving of what I believe to have been a deliberate, partisan hatchet piece (par for the course from Politico IMO).
Given the way the 24-hr news cycle works, and the way stories spread primarily by lede line (The Drudge Report effect) - the damage may have already been done (I contend that was the intent).
You say?
'Gimp
-
It was a hit piece. And you're right; I'm not sure what Politico changed in the body of the story, but they removed the word "Fabricated" from the headline. Interesting.
To his credit, Carson has faced this head on, and addressed it in multiple venues, including a press conference.
The Daily Caller addresses his campaign response pretty well:
http://dailycaller.com/2015/11/06/team-carson-politico-story-is-an-outright-lie/
Some may say that this "vetting" is necessary. Yes, sometimes. But making a federal case about one word - "scholarship" - in a book written 25 years ago, about his recollections from the age if 17, is over-the-top "gotcha" journalism.
But I'm sure Politico is going to be running a piece soon about how young, aggressive attorney Hillary Rodham was fired from the staff of the Watergate committee.
And that's the hypocrisy of the left media.
-
The progressive concept of fair play.
Our black (half black) lousy college lecturer, community agitator, who barely showed up for his day job as a state and US senator, candidate is off limits because he's half black, or you are racist.
Your black, highly accomplished candidate is the scum of the earth because he refuses to be subservient to the Democratic political machine, and if you point that out, you are racist.
End of story.
-
I am assuming most with any interest in the upcoming primaries and eventual election have been keeping up with the story about the story on Politico about Ben Carson.
Curious to see who thinks what - was it a hit piece, lazy reporting, or good journalism?
After a day full of questions about the origin and tone of the story, Politico has since quietly updated the story and the lede, without any editorial remarks (just an 'updated' with a new time stamp).
To clarify, I am not a fan of Dr. Carson's with respect to his candidacy as he has taken too many positions counter to my own, but I do believe he is a good and decent man and as such is undeserving of what I believe to have been a deliberate, partisan hatchet piece (par for the course from Politico IMO).
Given the way the 24-hr news cycle works, and the way stories spread primarily by lede line (The Drudge Report effect) - the damage may have already been done (I contend that was the intent).
You say?
'Gimp
I have no problem with the press vetting our candidates. If the story is true then it needs to be told. If it isn't true, then a thorough and honest vetting by the rest of the media will bring that out.
But the problem is that there is no "thorough and honeste" vetting going on. Except for FOX, the vetting is all one sided, and is not disputed. That makes it a hit piece.
-
Vetting works both ways, or not at all.
What we have for the last thirty years, is a press corps that seems to take orders from the DNC, and then do everything in their power to obey. Those press corps members also engage in flat out lies to damage conservatives and pump up progressives, which is why so few people actually trust them anymore.
-
Vetting works both ways, or not at all.
What we have for the last thirty years, is a press corps that seems to take orders from the DNC, and then do everything in their power to obey. Those press corps members also engage in flat out lies to damage conservatives and pump up progressives, which is why so few people actually trust them anymore.
That is the entire problem. They are no longer a "press corps". They are the propoganda tool of the DNC, and progressive movement. It makes them feel like they are making a difference. It makes them feel important. In reality they are just POLITICAL HACKS. It has been more than thirty years. Cronkite was an admitted progressive, and would regularly slant the news, but back then even some Democrats weren't progressive like they are now, so they would get the shaft. Now the Dems are as far left as the media, so its easier.
-
Vetting works both ways, or not at all.
What we have for the last thirty years, is a press corps that seems to take orders from the DNC, and then do everything in their power to obey. Those press corps members also engage in flat out lies to damage conservatives and pump up progressives, which is why so few people actually trust them anymore.
My distrust of Republicans has nothing to do with the news cycle and everything to do with them not adhering to conservative values.