Fake News, No. News Through the Lens of Partisanship, Seems So
Donald Trump's Chief of Staff, retired General John F. Kelly delivered some scathing criticism of Florida Congresswoman Frederica Wilson this past Thursday (10/19/2017) as he addressed reporters at the White House.
"I'll end with this: In October -- April, rather, of 2015, I was still on active duty, and I went to the dedication of the new FBI field office in Miami. And it was dedicated to two men who were killed in a firefight in Miami against drug traffickers in 1986 -- a guy by the name of Grogan and Duke. Grogan almost retired, 53 years old; Duke, I think less than a year on the job. Anyways, they got in a gunfight and they were killed. Three other FBI agents were there, were wounded, and now retired. So we go down -- Jim Comey gave an absolutely brilliant memorial speech to those fallen men and to all of the men and women of the FBI who serve our country so well, and law enforcement so well.
There were family members there. Some of the children that were there were three or four years old when their dads were killed on that street in Miami-Dade. Three of the men that survived the fight were there, and gave a rendition of how brave those men were and how they gave their lives.
And a congresswoman stood up, and in the long tradition of empty barrels making the most noise, stood up there and all of that and talked about how she was instrumental in getting the funding for that building, and how she took care of her constituents because she got the money, and she just called up President Obama, and on that phone call he gave the money -- the $20 million -- to build the building. And she sat down, and we were stunned. Stunned that she had done it. Even for someone that is that empty a barrel, we were stunned."
There is a small problem with this criticism. That's not what she said. You can listen to her remarks for yourself.
So we have a president claiming a member of the House fabricated a claim regarding his phone call to the widow of Army SGT La David Johnson, a claim that is actually supported by others. The Liar-in-Chief claims he has proof, but clearly there is none.
Meanwhile we have a retired general officer who has been charged with fabricating his own remarks regarding a speech by that same member of the House, and there is a video proving his claims were completely erroneous.
So how is the media covering all of this?
CNN published an opinion piece by a law professor titled "John Kelly Shows His True Colors" in which she wrote: "If women were sacred, Kelly would not have referred to an elected member of Congress, a black woman, as an "empty barrel" -- an insult to Frederica Wilson's intelligence that was far out of line for someone who claims not to want to politicize this situation further. Neither would he have lied about what Wilson said at a dedication ceremony of an FBI building in 2015."
The Washington Post editorial board published an editorial saying General Kelly owes Representative Wilson an apology.
MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell tweeted, "Kelly is a better fit for Trump than media thought. He too invents lies to attack and insult women."
Over at the Fox News Channel, on their show "The Five" one of today's talking heads defended General Kelly. When confronted with the fact that the video proved Kelly's comments regarding Wilson's speech were untrue, he pivoted to the same defense that Sarah Huckabee Sanders used to defend Donald Trump's lies about phone calls he claimed to have received from the President of Mexico and the leader of the Boy Scouts. This talking head claimed that General Kelly must have been referring to conversations he overheard Representative Wilson having following her speech.
Sorry dude, but General Kelly was specific in making reference to Representative Wilson's speech, not conversations.
The lens of partisanship that our major media outlets are using to present the news of the day to us is giving some limited credence to the claims of the Liar-in-Chief regarding "Fake News." It isn't that there are blatant falsehoods being published; rather we are being subjected to an ever increasing partisan slant to even hard news coverage.
As noted in this blog before, there is a marked difference between what a news outlet publishes and labels as opinion, news and commentary and just news. The problem is they are blurring those lines more and more these days.
Lest you think my critique of what they are doing is limited to the conservative side of the media aisle, think again. At the moment there is a story on the Los Angeles Times website related to the Harvey Weinstein imbroglio. Titled "Here's a look at 27 newsmakers accused of sexual harassment, assault or related behavior" this piece names more than two dozen people of note who are so accused.
Donald Trump is one of the 27, as are former Fox News people Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reilly and Eric Bolling. The Weinstein Brothers, Harvey and Bob are listed, as are Roman Polanski, R. Kelly and of course, Bill Cosby.
But there is no mention of William Jefferson Clinton. How can you list famous folk accused of sexual assault, include the current Oval Office occupant and not mention the man who enjoyed what might have been the most famous act of oral copulation in world history?? It is reprehensible to give that man a pass by omitting his name from that list.
There is no denying partisanship is filtering the lens of news coverage by all media. Sadly, there is no easy answer to this problem until the audience demands objective news coverage.
"I'll end with this: In October -- April, rather, of 2015, I was still on active duty, and I went to the dedication of the new FBI field office in Miami. And it was dedicated to two men who were killed in a firefight in Miami against drug traffickers in 1986 -- a guy by the name of Grogan and Duke. Grogan almost retired, 53 years old; Duke, I think less than a year on the job. Anyways, they got in a gunfight and they were killed. Three other FBI agents were there, were wounded, and now retired. So we go down -- Jim Comey gave an absolutely brilliant memorial speech to those fallen men and to all of the men and women of the FBI who serve our country so well, and law enforcement so well.
There were family members there. Some of the children that were there were three or four years old when their dads were killed on that street in Miami-Dade. Three of the men that survived the fight were there, and gave a rendition of how brave those men were and how they gave their lives.
And a congresswoman stood up, and in the long tradition of empty barrels making the most noise, stood up there and all of that and talked about how she was instrumental in getting the funding for that building, and how she took care of her constituents because she got the money, and she just called up President Obama, and on that phone call he gave the money -- the $20 million -- to build the building. And she sat down, and we were stunned. Stunned that she had done it. Even for someone that is that empty a barrel, we were stunned."
There is a small problem with this criticism. That's not what she said. You can listen to her remarks for yourself.
So we have a president claiming a member of the House fabricated a claim regarding his phone call to the widow of Army SGT La David Johnson, a claim that is actually supported by others. The Liar-in-Chief claims he has proof, but clearly there is none.
Meanwhile we have a retired general officer who has been charged with fabricating his own remarks regarding a speech by that same member of the House, and there is a video proving his claims were completely erroneous.
So how is the media covering all of this?
CNN published an opinion piece by a law professor titled "John Kelly Shows His True Colors" in which she wrote: "If women were sacred, Kelly would not have referred to an elected member of Congress, a black woman, as an "empty barrel" -- an insult to Frederica Wilson's intelligence that was far out of line for someone who claims not to want to politicize this situation further. Neither would he have lied about what Wilson said at a dedication ceremony of an FBI building in 2015."
The Washington Post editorial board published an editorial saying General Kelly owes Representative Wilson an apology.
MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell tweeted, "Kelly is a better fit for Trump than media thought. He too invents lies to attack and insult women."
Over at the Fox News Channel, on their show "The Five" one of today's talking heads defended General Kelly. When confronted with the fact that the video proved Kelly's comments regarding Wilson's speech were untrue, he pivoted to the same defense that Sarah Huckabee Sanders used to defend Donald Trump's lies about phone calls he claimed to have received from the President of Mexico and the leader of the Boy Scouts. This talking head claimed that General Kelly must have been referring to conversations he overheard Representative Wilson having following her speech.
Sorry dude, but General Kelly was specific in making reference to Representative Wilson's speech, not conversations.
The lens of partisanship that our major media outlets are using to present the news of the day to us is giving some limited credence to the claims of the Liar-in-Chief regarding "Fake News." It isn't that there are blatant falsehoods being published; rather we are being subjected to an ever increasing partisan slant to even hard news coverage.
As noted in this blog before, there is a marked difference between what a news outlet publishes and labels as opinion, news and commentary and just news. The problem is they are blurring those lines more and more these days.
Lest you think my critique of what they are doing is limited to the conservative side of the media aisle, think again. At the moment there is a story on the Los Angeles Times website related to the Harvey Weinstein imbroglio. Titled "Here's a look at 27 newsmakers accused of sexual harassment, assault or related behavior" this piece names more than two dozen people of note who are so accused.
Donald Trump is one of the 27, as are former Fox News people Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reilly and Eric Bolling. The Weinstein Brothers, Harvey and Bob are listed, as are Roman Polanski, R. Kelly and of course, Bill Cosby.
But there is no mention of William Jefferson Clinton. How can you list famous folk accused of sexual assault, include the current Oval Office occupant and not mention the man who enjoyed what might have been the most famous act of oral copulation in world history?? It is reprehensible to give that man a pass by omitting his name from that list.
There is no denying partisanship is filtering the lens of news coverage by all media. Sadly, there is no easy answer to this problem until the audience demands objective news coverage.
posted by me at 9:11 PM
<< Home