Your librul media

~ susie
FILE - In this file photograph taken Nov. 1, 2007, the masthead of The Washington Post is displayed on the office building, in Washington. The Washington Post Co. is reporting a surge in second-quarter earnings, helped by a big jump in profits at its education division and lower expenses. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak, file)
FILE – In this file photograph taken Nov. 1, 2007, the masthead of The Washington Post is displayed on the office building, in Washington. The Washington Post Co. is reporting a surge in second-quarter earnings, helped by a big jump in profits at its education division and lower expenses. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak, file)

Sure would be nice if they acted like journalists:

Ever since Peter Schweizer’s new attack book Clinton Cash was touted as the must-read tome of the campaign season, a growing number of media organizations, including Politico, BuzzFeed, ABC News, FactCheck.org, and Time, have detailed factual shortcomings in the book. (Media Matters has, too.) Noticeably absent from that fact-checking procession has been The New York Times and the Washington Post, the two newspapers that entered into exclusive editorial agreements with Clinton Cash’s publisher.

The Times’ and Post’s seeming lack of interest in detailing the book’s long list of misstatements certainly raises questions about whether the papers’ exclusive pacts made the dailies reluctant to highlight Clinton Cash’s obvious shortcomings.

After all, if those other media organizations can find the Clinton Cash errors, why can’t the Times and the Post? And even if Times and Post reporters can’t spot the misinformation, why aren’t they at least writing about the key revelations that others are uncovering? Recall that it was the Times that trumpeted Clinton Cash as the “the most anticipated and feared book” of the campaign season. If it’s so important, why isn’t the Times documenting the crucial errors found between the Clinton Cash covers?

By entering into exclusive agreements, both the Times and the Post used Clinton Cash as the basis for larger investigative articles that raised questions about the Clintons’ finances.

Published by susie

2 thoughts on “Your librul media”

  1. The WaPo gave up any claim to being a ‘news’ organization, liberal or otherwise, years ago. I won’t use now even to line my bird cage or to wrap fish. Fire starter is the only appropriate use for this propaganda sheet.

Comments are closed.