When the villain is Obama, not Trump, news suddenly becomes not worth reporting

  
Via:  jasper2529  •  3 weeks ago  •  47 comments

By:   Kyle Smith

When the villain is Obama, not Trump, news suddenly becomes not worth reporting
Using, or ignoring, facts in accordance with whether they create the desired impression is the principal agenda of today’s media.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


So the United States has “the world’s highest rate of children in detention.” Is this worth reporting? Maybe, maybe not. Nevertheless, Agence France-Presse, or AFP, and Reuters did report it, attributing the information to a “United Nations study” on migrant children detained at the US-Mexico border.

Then the two agencies retracted the story. Deleted, withdrew, demolished. If they could have used one of those Men in Black memory-zappers on us, they would have. Sheepishly, the two news organizations explained that, you see, the UN data was from 2015 — part of a border crackdown that had begun years earlier.

We all know who the president was in 2015. It wasn’t evil, child-caging monster President Trump. It was that nice, compassionate, child-caging monster President Barack Obama.

Zap. The story made Obama look bad. Hence the story was removed. Not updated or corrected, removed.

I know it’s a heavy news environment. Who can keep up? But try to remember this one, because it’s instructive. People think news organizations flat-out fabricate stories. That isn’t often the case. Fake news is a problem that pops up here and there, but the much more systematic and deeply entrenched attack on truth is the casual, everyday bias of reporters.

AFP and Reuters deleted a story that was, in a narrow sense, true — that a UN study claimed the United States had some 100,000 children in migrant-related detention. The United Nations is horribly biased against America and the West. Still, on the level of lazy, news-release-driven journalism, the locked-up-kids story was minimally valid.

At any rate, what the agencies didn’t seem to like was the story’s changed implication: That Obama, rather than Trump, locked up a lot of children. This is what’s important: Not that AFP and Reuters deleted a story, but that the implication of the story meant everything to them.

Full article here .

Article is Locked

smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
Find text within the comments Find 
 
Jasper2529
1  seeder  Jasper2529    3 weeks ago
Every time you read something from AFP and Reuters (and CNN and the Washington Post), you should be thinking not “This is fake news” but: “What’s the agenda?” To paraphrase Chuck Schumer’s infamous, and instructive, comment on the CIA, news outlets have six ways from Sunday of getting you to think what they want you to think, none of which involve making up stuff.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
2  seeder  Jasper2529    3 weeks ago

Media Bias Fact Check rates both AFP and Reuters as "Least Biased".

These sources have minimal bias and use very few loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes).  The reporting is factual and usually sourced.  These are the most credible media sources.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/afp-agence-france-presse/

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/reuters/

 
 
 
Heartland American
2.1  Heartland American  replied to  Jasper2529 @2    3 weeks ago

No surprise there!  They are simply a muzzle on the right to sooth the weak minds on the left.  

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
3  Sean Treacy    3 weeks ago

 should be thinking not “This is fake news” but: “What’s the agenda?”

100%. There's always a narrative driving what stories, and what aspect of those stories are emphasized and reported  by the  MSM. 

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
4  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh    3 weeks ago

The level of fake news promoted by the msm is out of control. They got popped on this one and some actually retracted. Actually most just sneakily removed the article without saying a word.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
5  seeder  Jasper2529    3 weeks ago
CNN did a massive story this week involving the talents of five reporters after someone at Syracuse University  sent out a white supremacist manifesto to “several” cellphones  and racist graffiti was discovered in a residence hall. Previously, similar outbreaks of campus fear turned out to be based on hoaxes. Yet if this story dissolves, CNN can accurately claim, hey, we were just reporting that students were scared.
 
 
 
JohnRussell
6  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

The premise of this article is beyond stupid. 

The news agency was writing a story about 2019.  When they realized they were using data from 2015 they aborted the article. Perfectly logical and perfectly reasonable. 

The right wing opinion columnist at the conservative NY Post tried to make a "thing" out of it. 

He looks like a dumb ass. 

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
6.1  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  JohnRussell @6    3 weeks ago

No one expected you to think it was an issue. We all remember the sourceless fake news you seeded from several of the mentioned sites.

 
 
 
Heartland American
6.1.1  Heartland American  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @6.1    3 weeks ago

MBFC is fake news. 

 
 
 
Jasper2529
6.1.2  seeder  Jasper2529  replied to  Heartland American @6.1.1    3 weeks ago
MBFC is fake news.

That's what I pointed out in comment 2 .

 
 
 
Heartland American
6.1.3  Heartland American  replied to  Jasper2529 @6.1.2    3 weeks ago

Almost all of us here on the right completely agree.  

 
 
 
MrFrost
6.1.4  MrFrost  replied to  Heartland American @6.1.1    3 weeks ago

MBFC is fake news. 

Weird that you would say that given how many times you have posted referring to it. 

 
 
 
Heartland American
6.1.5  Heartland American  replied to  MrFrost @6.1.4    3 weeks ago

Just because I hate it and it has zero redeeming value doesn’t mean that I won’t weaponize it like the left does to point to how biased even to them some liberal rag is.  Note that they rarely call progressive left sites questionable like they do to half of the Christian and conservative internet.  

 
 
 
cjcold
6.1.6  cjcold  replied to  Heartland American @6.1.5    3 weeks ago

But far right wing Christians are always wrong about everything. 

They took the original lie and just ran with it in order to gain control.

 
 
 
Heartland American
6.2  Heartland American  replied to  JohnRussell @6    3 weeks ago

He looks like David Van Zandt?  I disagree.  The NYPost is right on and the NYslimes sucks.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
6.3  seeder  Jasper2529  replied to  JohnRussell @6    3 weeks ago
The premise of this article is beyond stupid. 

The right wing opinion columnist at the conservative NY Post tried to make a "thing" out of it. 

He looks like a dumb ass. 

Thank you for taking the time to post an unbiased opinion on an article that is based on media bias, a topic  you consider a "stupid premise". Further, thank you for character-smearing the article's author.

The news agency was writing a story about 2019.  When they relaxed they were using data from 2015 they aborted the article. Perfectly logical and perfectly reasonable.

Please read the article. There were two news agencies, AFP and Reuters, that deleted their articles rather than issuing apologies and corrections. The seeded article clearly stated:

Then the two agencies retracted the story. Deleted, withdrew, demolished. If they could have used one of those Men in Black memory-zappers on us, they would have. Sheepishly, the two news organizations explained that, you see, the UN data was from 2015 — part of a border crackdown that had begun years earlier.

We all know who the president was in 2015. It wasn’t evil, child-caging monster President Trump. It was that nice, compassionate, child-caging monster President Barack Obama.

Zap. The story made Obama look bad. Hence the story was removed. Not updated or corrected, removed.

AFP and Reuters deleted a story that was, in a narrow sense, true — that a UN study claimed the United States had some 100,000 children in migrant-related detention. The United Nations is horribly biased against America and the West. Still, on the level of lazy, news-release-driven journalism, the locked-up-kids story was minimally valid.

At any rate, what the agencies didn’t seem to like was the story’s changed implication: That Obama, rather than Trump, locked up a lot of children. This is what’s important: Not that AFP and Reuters deleted a story, but that the implication of the story meant everything to them.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.3.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Jasper2529 @6.3    3 weeks ago

I understand the seeded article completely. It doesnt change the fact that the news agencies were using the wrong data and when they realized that they aborted the article. 

You want them to leave up the wrong data just because it makes Obama look bad? 

The article they were writing was supposed to be about 2019, not 2015. 

 
 
 
Jasper2529
6.3.2  seeder  Jasper2529  replied to  JohnRussell @6.3.1    3 weeks ago
I understand the seeded article completely. It doesnt change the fact that the news agencies were using the wrong data and when they realized that they aborted the article. 

If you truly did, you'd admit that AFP and Reuters deleted their articles based upon Left wing bias rather than admit their errors by simply publishing apologies and corrections instead of erasing their footprints.

You want them to leave up the wrong data just because it makes Obama look bad?

I never said that, John, so stop brazenly stating that I am biased.

The article they were writing was supposed to be about 2019, not 2015. 

They deliberately put the blame on Trump when they knew their data was from 2015. And THAT is why both agencies deleted their articles.

 
 
 
Drakkonis
6.3.3  Drakkonis  replied to  JohnRussell @6.3.1    3 weeks ago
You want them to leave up the wrong data just because it makes Obama look bad?

Hell yes!!! Not because I want Obama to look bad but because it's germane to the issue. Like, suddenly Trump changed the whole child detention thing into what it is when in fact, it was already that way. If they were actual journalists interested in presenting the truth so people could make an informed opinion on the subject they would have said "Hey! This whole thing isn't what is currently being presented to the public. There isn't anything really new here. This has been American immigration policy for years!" But in stead of doing that, they killed the story. The only thing I can think of for doing that is that the data didn't say what they wanted it to say. I mean, come on! Everyone was trying to get a pound of flesh off of Trump! Do you think it would not be newsworthy having discovered that Trump actually wasn't doing anything new??? Are you kidding me???

 
 
 
bugsy
6.4  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @6    3 weeks ago
When they realized they were using data from 2015 they aborted the article. Perfectly logical and perfectly reasonable. 

They didn't retract until, "in the words of Schifty Schiff"..."THEY GOT CAUGHT!!!"

 
 
 
Drakkonis
6.5  Drakkonis  replied to  JohnRussell @6    3 weeks ago
The news agency was writing a story about 2019.  When they realized they were using data from 2015 they aborted the article. Perfectly logical and perfectly reasonable.

You don't appear to get it. If we are to be incensed by the large number of detained children, why is it only an issue if we can pin it on Trump? Why would it not be a big deal if Obama was actually as bad or worse in that category? It quite rightly comes off as, well, we like Obama so we're not going to publish this as it would actually work against the narrative we wish to promote.  

The right wing opinion columnist at the conservative NY Post tried to make a "thing" out of it. He looks like a dumb ass.

That is your opinion and, of course, you get to have one. However, I feel it highlights what's so so wrong with what passes for journalism in this country. You can't believe anything anyone says because you can't trust that they do not have an agenda. Especially the MSM. 

But I'm not surprised by your opinion, though. You, to my mind, are the most biased person I've ever seen in this place. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.5.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Drakkonis @6.5    3 weeks ago

Was the article to be about 2019 or 2015?   Unless I misunderstand what it was, it was to be about 2019.  It sounds like the writer thought they were using 2019 data and when they saw they werent they killed the article. 

If I misunderstand the article , well thats that. Its possible I dont understand it. But if the article was intended to be about now, 2019, it is perfectly understandable that they would abort the whole article. It sounds like the proper thing to do.  Some people evidently want them to use the wrong data but identify it as being from Obama's term.  Except the article isnt about Obama's term. It is about 2019. 

What am I missing? 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.5.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Drakkonis @6.5    3 weeks ago
So the United States has “the world’s highest rate of children in detention.” Is this worth reporting? Maybe, maybe not. Nevertheless, Agence France-Presse, or AFP, and Reuters did report it, attributing the information to a “United Nations study” on migrant children detained at the US-Mexico border. Then the two agencies retracted the story. Deleted, withdrew, demolished. If they could have used one of those Men in Black memory-zappers on us, they would have. Sheepishly, the two news organizations explained that, you see, the UN data was from 2015 — part of a border crackdown that had begun years earlier.

These are the first two paragraphs of the seeded article. 

So the United States has “the world’s highest rate of children in detention.”

Has means now, 2019. The article that was aborted was to be about now, 2019. 

Sheepishly, the two news organizations explained that, you see, the UN data was from 2015

The data that was being used for the story wasnt from 2019.  I guess they could have changed the story to a remembrance of what it was like in 2015, but that isnt what the story was going to be about , so they ended it. 

I have no idea what you, the rest of the "conservatives" on this seed, or the NY Post writer are bitching about. 

It's really incredible. 

As for me being "the most biased person on this forum" , I suggest you read some more of the comments.  Or open your eyes. 

 
 
 
Heartland American
6.5.3  Heartland American  replied to  JohnRussell @6.5.2    3 weeks ago

I agree with the description of the others here on that matter. 

 
 
 
PJ
7  PJ    3 weeks ago

Oh look.....another article about that scary black man.   ......shiver......

 
 
 
Heartland American
7.1  Heartland American  replied to  PJ @7    3 weeks ago

No criticism whatsoever of #44 will be tolerated.  The race hustlers card will be pulled out from under the table. 

 
 
 
MrFrost
7.1.1  MrFrost  replied to  Heartland American @7.1    3 weeks ago
No criticism whatsoever of #44 will be tolerated.

Never read one of Vic articles have you? 

 
 
 
Jasper2529
7.2  seeder  Jasper2529  replied to  PJ @7    3 weeks ago

Knock off the [deleted] comments, PJ. I don't tolerate that BS on my seeds. Only warning.

 
 
 
PJ
7.2.1  PJ  replied to  Jasper2529 @7.2    3 weeks ago

Am I permitted to point out that Obama is black and that some who oppose him were scared of him?

 
 
 
bugsy
7.2.2  bugsy  replied to  PJ @7.2.1    3 weeks ago
ome who oppose him were scared of him?
Who are these "some"? I certainly don't know any. What people were afraid of was being called a racist simply by criticizing Obama's POLICIES, until it was just common to be called a racist simply because....
 
 
 
Jasper2529
7.2.3  seeder  Jasper2529  replied to  PJ @7.2.1    3 weeks ago
Am I permitted to point out that Obama is black and that some who oppose him were scared of him?

As per NT CoC, we are permitted to make on-topic comments. If you provide evidence that this seeded article is founded upon and discusses your premises of racism and fear, your comment will be acceptable.  I'll save you the time - you can't, because it doesn't.

I recommend that before posting another comment on this seed, you read the seeded article. I will welcome your appropriate comments on its contents, but I will no longer tolerate off-topic attempts which are deliberately posted to sow racial discord and fear-mongering on my seed.

 
 
 
PJ
7.2.4  PJ  replied to  Jasper2529 @7.2.3    3 weeks ago

okay.......So, I disagree that the story was killed based on who the President was/is but because the premise of the story would not be supported by the facts they uncovered.

 
 
 
Heartland American
7.2.5  Heartland American  replied to  PJ @7.2.1    3 weeks ago

No one who opposed Obama over his policies was afraid of him because of his race.  Democrats playing the race card every time anyone opposed anything he did simply made people double down on their criticism of him  since silence after that vile card being deployed from the bottom of the deck meant silence as a result of it being played would be a tacit admission of guilt and we knew we weren’t.  Nothing damaged race relations in this country more than the common use of comments like post #7.  

 
 
 
PJ
7.2.6  PJ  replied to  Heartland American @7.2.5    3 weeks ago

I'm not permitted to discuss race on this article.  It's very telling that Jasper's team is given carte blanche with the topic though.......

 
 
 
KDMichigan
7.3  KDMichigan  replied to  PJ @7    3 weeks ago
Oh look.....another article about that scary black man.  

You were scared of him? 

What was it that scared you?

I myself accepted him as the leftwing pawn he turned out to be but I wasn't scared of him. I would have a tendency to be more scared of Michael Obama. He was the one with more male testosterone that the left fears..

original

 
 
 
PJ
7.3.1  PJ  replied to  KDMichigan @7.3    3 weeks ago

Your comment is off topic.  I'm sure Jasper will be letting you know very soon.

I'm certain @ Jasper2529 isn't just targeting members that aren't in lock and step with him. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
7.4  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  PJ @7    3 weeks ago

Are you suggesting, PJ, that anyone who criticizes what Obama has done is a racist?  So if I criticize Obama for the manner in which he carried out the nuclear deal with Iran or for having stabbed America's only real Middle East ally Israel in the back at the UN at the end of his tenure when he no longer needed Jewish money and votes, I, a white man who has been happily married to a Buddhist Chinese woman for almost 11 years and living comfortably in a country that is almost entirely populated by Chinese people for more than 13 years, am a RACIST?

 
 
 
PJ
7.4.1  PJ  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.4    3 weeks ago

Your comment is off topic.  I'm sure Jasper will be letting you know very soon. 

 
 
 
MUVA
7.4.2  MUVA  replied to  PJ @7.4.1    3 weeks ago

Just a question is Obama black because you said I'm not all black and I'm also mixed race?

 
 
 
PJ
7.4.3  PJ  replied to  MUVA @7.4.2    3 weeks ago

I'm not permitted to answer your question.  I've been told that if I speak about race then my comment is off topic.  Funny that those on Jasper's team haven't received the same warning...

 
 
 
MUVA
7.4.4  MUVA  replied to  PJ @7.4.3    3 weeks ago

It's ok I know the answer it was rhetorical question.  

 
 
 
PJ
7.4.5  PJ  replied to  MUVA @7.4.4    3 weeks ago

I'm not permitted to discuss race on this thread.  Otherwise I would be happy to answer your question.  But apparently you and others on Jasper's team can openly discuss race without nary a warning or friendly reminder to stick to the topic.

 
 
 
Kathleen
8  Kathleen    3 weeks ago

I the media’s eyes, Obama could do no wrong....

 
 
 
MrFrost
9  MrFrost    3 weeks ago

If you watch nothing but fox fake news, Obama never did anything right in 8 years. Hell, they even spent the better part of a year whining that he wore a tan suit. Nothing but a bunch of ignorant lying bottom feeders working at fox news. 

 
 
 
KDMichigan
9.1  KDMichigan  replied to  MrFrost @9    3 weeks ago
If you watch nothing but fox fake news, Obama never did anything right in 8 years.

Or you could drink the left wing Kool-Aid and think he never did anything wrong.

they even spent the better part of a year whining that he wore a tan suit. 

No the leftwing media fed their sheep that story for a year instead of talking about issues that really mattered.

 Nothing but a bunch of ignorant lying bottom feeders working at fox news. 

256

 
 
 
bbl-1
10  bbl-1    3 weeks ago

Obama the villain?  Yeah, especially when he said he believed Putin before he believed US INTEL.

Whoops, that was Trump.  My bad.

 
 
 
Goodtime Charlie
10.1  Goodtime Charlie  replied to  bbl-1 @10    3 weeks ago

Obama: "This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility." Medvedev: "I understand. I transmit this information to Vladimir. I understand."

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Ed-NavDoc


29 visitors