Lamestream Media Double Standards and Fake News

[Anonymous]

We all know the msm and social media is owned by prog money. They exist to further their paymasters' agenda and not report news.





Here's How NYT Covered Kamala Harris Versus How They Covered Mike Pence

https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/12/the-new-york-times-kamala-harris-mike-pence-coverage/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=jrE9rqFVWVWN86uGifwUz3M5sx76dc.YhQn4X2ys">https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/12/the- ... .YhQn4X2ys">https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/12/the-new-york-times-kamala-harris-mike-pence-coverage/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=jrE9rqFVWVWN86uGifwUz3M5sx76dc.YhQn4X2ys

The New York Times' front page coverage of running-mate announcements differed in a few ways from 2016 to 2020.



The newspaper covered President Donald Trump's pick of Vice President Mike Pence on July 16, 2016 for print. The Times opted not to feature Pence as a main part of the front page, instead putting a small portion of the article about the news in the bottom right hand corner.



Featured more prominently that day included news about a coup in Turkey, an update on Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and an article about the man behind an attack in France. Pence garnered one of the smallest sections of the front page.



August 12, 2020 saw yet another NYT article about a running mate – this time announcing former Vice President Joe Biden's choice of Democratic California Sen. Kamala Harris. Notably, the NYT dedicated its entire front page exclusively to multiple articles about Harris.



The paper's banner for Harris announced the news: "Harris Joins Biden Ticket, Achieving A First." A photograph of Harris looking into the distance with her arms crossed was prominently featured alongside the paper's main article, titled: "Political Warrior Shaped By Life In 2 Worlds."



The two other articles that snagged Wednesday's front page slot were also about Harris: "Pick Seen as Safe but Energizing," one read. "Woman of Color in No. 2 Slot of Major Party," the other article was headlined.



In 2016, the lone front page article about Pence was headlined: "Man In The News: Michael Richard Pence. Unbending Conservative." This article painted Pence as a man "deeply and proudly out of sync with his times" who "is slow to bend" despite changing times.



The article continued on to suggest Pence was often a man who lost. Not only that, Pence had "struggled to carve out a national reputation beyond his polarizing pursuit of socially conservative causes," according to the newspaper.



"By the time he was elected to Congress in 2000, after two failed tries, Mr. Pence had missed the Republican revolution led by Newt Gingrich and his scrappy, fiscally conservative acolytes who stormed Washington in 1994," the 2016 article read. "Nobody, it seemed, had told Mr. Pence that the rebellion was over. He arrived in the House determined to slash federal spending and shrink the role of government."



"Showing up late, by many accounts, was his fate as governor, too."



The NYT article on Pence points out his other losses, calling a radio show he hosted "his tether to voters across Indiana and a springboard into the world of national conservatives." This talk show, according to the paper, "paved the way for his eventual victory in a 2000 race for Congress."



The 2016 article on Pence points out his failings as well as some controversies, such as abortion laws he has backed. Another controversy, according to the NYT, was his 2015 religious exceptions law.



"After offending gays across the country, enduring a backlash from the state's business community and undergoing a painfully awkward nationally televised interview in which he struggled to explain the law's on-the-ground impact, Mr. Pence acknowledged only that he could have better handled the TV encounter," the article pointed out.



Comparatively, the NYT's main article about Harris appears to be more positive. Harris, according to this article in The Times, "brings to the race a far more vigorous campaign style than Mr. Biden's, including a gift for capturing moments of raw political electricity on the debate stage and elsewhere, and a personal identity and family story that many find inspiring."



"A pragmatic moderate who spent most of her career as a prosecutor, Ms. Harris was seen throughout the vice-presidential search as among the safest choices available to Mr. Biden," the NYT article reads. "She has been a reliable ally of the Democratic establishment, with flexible policy priorities that largely mirror Mr. Biden's, and her supporters argued that she could reinforce Mr. Biden's appeal to Black voters and women without stirring particularly vehement opposition on the right or left."



The Times did note various instances where Harris, during her own presidential run, called out Biden over some of his past policies – particularly one moment during a debate regarding his past work on busing.



The Times' largely praised-filled article on Harris adds that her history as district attorney of San Francisco may be an issue with some on the left. It also points out a moment when Democratic Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard demanded an apology from Harris over how many people she prosecuted "for marijuana infractions."



Despite her history, The Times suggests Harris "likely" will "be embraced" by black voters. Largely, this article paints Harris as a forward-thinking woman who has made history, but could be a future president herself – a stark difference from its 2016 portrayal of Pence, who was reported as a man who often lost as he remained stuck behind the times.

[cc]

https://www.theepochtimes.com/86-percent-of-americans-believe-news-media-is-biased-major-poll-finds_3460707.html">86 Percent of Americans Believe News Media Is Biased, Major Poll Finds



A growing number of Americans view the news media as biased even as majorities continue to believe that an independent press is essential to a functional democracy.



A major trust-in-media poll of 20,000 Americans by Gallup and The Knight Foundation found that 86 percent of the people surveyed in December 2019 believed that the media is biased, up from 62 percent in 2007.



"Most Americans have lost confidence in the media to deliver the news objectively," Sam Gill, Knight's senior vice president at The Knight Foundation, said in a statement. "This is corrosive for our democracy."

[Anonymous]

We all know the msm and social media is owned by prog money. They exist to further their paymasters' agenda and not report news.





Here's How NYT Covered Kamala Harris Versus How They Covered Mike Pence

https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/12/the-new-york-times-kamala-harris-mike-pence-coverage/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=jrE9rqFVWVWN86uGifwUz3M5sx76dc.YhQn4X2ys">https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/12/the- ... .YhQn4X2ys">https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/12/the-new-york-times-kamala-harris-mike-pence-coverage/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=jrE9rqFVWVWN86uGifwUz3M5sx76dc.YhQn4X2ys

The New York Times' front page coverage of running-mate announcements differed in a few ways from 2016 to 2020.



The newspaper covered President Donald Trump's pick of Vice President Mike Pence on July 16, 2016 for print. The Times opted not to feature Pence as a main part of the front page, instead putting a small portion of the article about the news in the bottom right hand corner.



Featured more prominently that day included news about a coup in Turkey, an update on Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and an article about the man behind an attack in France. Pence garnered one of the smallest sections of the front page.



August 12, 2020 saw yet another NYT article about a running mate – this time announcing former Vice President Joe Biden's choice of Democratic California Sen. Kamala Harris. Notably, the NYT dedicated its entire front page exclusively to multiple articles about Harris.



The paper's banner for Harris announced the news: "Harris Joins Biden Ticket, Achieving A First." A photograph of Harris looking into the distance with her arms crossed was prominently featured alongside the paper's main article, titled: "Political Warrior Shaped By Life In 2 Worlds."



The two other articles that snagged Wednesday's front page slot were also about Harris: "Pick Seen as Safe but Energizing," one read. "Woman of Color in No. 2 Slot of Major Party," the other article was headlined.



In 2016, the lone front page article about Pence was headlined: "Man In The News: Michael Richard Pence. Unbending Conservative." This article painted Pence as a man "deeply and proudly out of sync with his times" who "is slow to bend" despite changing times.



The article continued on to suggest Pence was often a man who lost. Not only that, Pence had "struggled to carve out a national reputation beyond his polarizing pursuit of socially conservative causes," according to the newspaper.



"By the time he was elected to Congress in 2000, after two failed tries, Mr. Pence had missed the Republican revolution led by Newt Gingrich and his scrappy, fiscally conservative acolytes who stormed Washington in 1994," the 2016 article read. "Nobody, it seemed, had told Mr. Pence that the rebellion was over. He arrived in the House determined to slash federal spending and shrink the role of government."



"Showing up late, by many accounts, was his fate as governor, too."



The NYT article on Pence points out his other losses, calling a radio show he hosted "his tether to voters across Indiana and a springboard into the world of national conservatives." This talk show, according to the paper, "paved the way for his eventual victory in a 2000 race for Congress."



The 2016 article on Pence points out his failings as well as some controversies, such as abortion laws he has backed. Another controversy, according to the NYT, was his 2015 religious exceptions law.



"After offending gays across the country, enduring a backlash from the state's business community and undergoing a painfully awkward nationally televised interview in which he struggled to explain the law's on-the-ground impact, Mr. Pence acknowledged only that he could have better handled the TV encounter," the article pointed out.



Comparatively, the NYT's main article about Harris appears to be more positive. Harris, according to this article in The Times, "brings to the race a far more vigorous campaign style than Mr. Biden's, including a gift for capturing moments of raw political electricity on the debate stage and elsewhere, and a personal identity and family story that many find inspiring."



"A pragmatic moderate who spent most of her career as a prosecutor, Ms. Harris was seen throughout the vice-presidential search as among the safest choices available to Mr. Biden," the NYT article reads. "She has been a reliable ally of the Democratic establishment, with flexible policy priorities that largely mirror Mr. Biden's, and her supporters argued that she could reinforce Mr. Biden's appeal to Black voters and women without stirring particularly vehement opposition on the right or left."



The Times did note various instances where Harris, during her own presidential run, called out Biden over some of his past policies – particularly one moment during a debate regarding his past work on busing.



The Times' largely praised-filled article on Harris adds that her history as district attorney of San Francisco may be an issue with some on the left. It also points out a moment when Democratic Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard demanded an apology from Harris over how many people she prosecuted "for marijuana infractions."



Despite her history, The Times suggests Harris "likely" will "be embraced" by black voters. Largely, this article paints Harris as a forward-thinking woman who has made history, but could be a future president herself – a stark difference from its 2016 portrayal of Pence, who was reported as a man who often lost as he remained stuck behind the times.

What did you expect from the NYT? Balanced coverage?? ac_lmfao

[Anonymous]

https://www.theepochtimes.com/86-percent-of-americans-believe-news-media-is-biased-major-poll-finds_3460707.html">86 Percent of Americans Believe News Media Is Biased, Major Poll Finds



A growing number of Americans view the news media as biased even as majorities continue to believe that an independent press is essential to a functional democracy.



A major trust-in-media poll of 20,000 Americans by Gallup and The Knight Foundation found that 86 percent of the people surveyed in December 2019 believed that the media is biased, up from 62 percent in 2007.



"Most Americans have lost confidence in the media to deliver the news objectively," Sam Gill, Knight's senior vice president at The Knight Foundation, said in a statement. "This is corrosive for our democracy."

That is true, but they still influence the unwashed masses.

[cc]

https://www.blazingcatfur.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Corporate-SJWs.jpg">

[Anonymous]

https://www.blazingcatfur.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Corporate-SJWs.jpg">

They probably will.

[Anonymous]

We all know the msm and social media is owned by prog money. They exist to further their paymasters' agenda and not report news.





Here's How NYT Covered Kamala Harris Versus How They Covered Mike Pence

https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/12/the-new-york-times-kamala-harris-mike-pence-coverage/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=jrE9rqFVWVWN86uGifwUz3M5sx76dc.YhQn4X2ys">https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/12/the- ... .YhQn4X2ys">https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/12/the-new-york-times-kamala-harris-mike-pence-coverage/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=jrE9rqFVWVWN86uGifwUz3M5sx76dc.YhQn4X2ys

The New York Times' front page coverage of running-mate announcements differed in a few ways from 2016 to 2020.



The newspaper covered President Donald Trump's pick of Vice President Mike Pence on July 16, 2016 for print. The Times opted not to feature Pence as a main part of the front page, instead putting a small portion of the article about the news in the bottom right hand corner.



Featured more prominently that day included news about a coup in Turkey, an update on Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and an article about the man behind an attack in France. Pence garnered one of the smallest sections of the front page.



August 12, 2020 saw yet another NYT article about a running mate – this time announcing former Vice President Joe Biden's choice of Democratic California Sen. Kamala Harris. Notably, the NYT dedicated its entire front page exclusively to multiple articles about Harris.



The paper's banner for Harris announced the news: "Harris Joins Biden Ticket, Achieving A First." A photograph of Harris looking into the distance with her arms crossed was prominently featured alongside the paper's main article, titled: "Political Warrior Shaped By Life In 2 Worlds."



The two other articles that snagged Wednesday's front page slot were also about Harris: "Pick Seen as Safe but Energizing," one read. "Woman of Color in No. 2 Slot of Major Party," the other article was headlined.



In 2016, the lone front page article about Pence was headlined: "Man In The News: Michael Richard Pence. Unbending Conservative." This article painted Pence as a man "deeply and proudly out of sync with his times" who "is slow to bend" despite changing times.



The article continued on to suggest Pence was often a man who lost. Not only that, Pence had "struggled to carve out a national reputation beyond his polarizing pursuit of socially conservative causes," according to the newspaper.



"By the time he was elected to Congress in 2000, after two failed tries, Mr. Pence had missed the Republican revolution led by Newt Gingrich and his scrappy, fiscally conservative acolytes who stormed Washington in 1994," the 2016 article read. "Nobody, it seemed, had told Mr. Pence that the rebellion was over. He arrived in the House determined to slash federal spending and shrink the role of government."



"Showing up late, by many accounts, was his fate as governor, too."



The NYT article on Pence points out his other losses, calling a radio show he hosted "his tether to voters across Indiana and a springboard into the world of national conservatives." This talk show, according to the paper, "paved the way for his eventual victory in a 2000 race for Congress."



The 2016 article on Pence points out his failings as well as some controversies, such as abortion laws he has backed. Another controversy, according to the NYT, was his 2015 religious exceptions law.



"After offending gays across the country, enduring a backlash from the state's business community and undergoing a painfully awkward nationally televised interview in which he struggled to explain the law's on-the-ground impact, Mr. Pence acknowledged only that he could have better handled the TV encounter," the article pointed out.



Comparatively, the NYT's main article about Harris appears to be more positive. Harris, according to this article in The Times, "brings to the race a far more vigorous campaign style than Mr. Biden's, including a gift for capturing moments of raw political electricity on the debate stage and elsewhere, and a personal identity and family story that many find inspiring."



"A pragmatic moderate who spent most of her career as a prosecutor, Ms. Harris was seen throughout the vice-presidential search as among the safest choices available to Mr. Biden," the NYT article reads. "She has been a reliable ally of the Democratic establishment, with flexible policy priorities that largely mirror Mr. Biden's, and her supporters argued that she could reinforce Mr. Biden's appeal to Black voters and women without stirring particularly vehement opposition on the right or left."



The Times did note various instances where Harris, during her own presidential run, called out Biden over some of his past policies – particularly one moment during a debate regarding his past work on busing.



The Times' largely praised-filled article on Harris adds that her history as district attorney of San Francisco may be an issue with some on the left. It also points out a moment when Democratic Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard demanded an apology from Harris over how many people she prosecuted "for marijuana infractions."



Despite her history, The Times suggests Harris "likely" will "be embraced" by black voters. Largely, this article paints Harris as a forward-thinking woman who has made history, but could be a future president herself – a stark difference from its 2016 portrayal of Pence, who was reported as a man who often lost as he remained stuck behind the times.

I never read anything from that rag.

[Anonymous]

Fact-Checkers Fall Flat For Kamala's Big Speech

https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/13/fact-checkers-fall-flat-kamala-harris-speech-joe-biden/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=het8oOFIAwqNDTNIBHzdvP.svh6OR8iAa5DsfzMN">https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/13/fact ... iAa5DsfzMN">https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/13/fact-checkers-fall-flat-kamala-harris-speech-joe-biden/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=het8oOFIAwqNDTNIBHzdvP.svh6OR8iAa5DsfzMN

Democratic California Sen. Kamala Harris made a misleading claim about Ebola during her first speech Wednesday as former Vice President Joe Biden's running mate, but fact-checkers did not report on it.



Harris and Biden appeared together for the first time publicly as a team Wednesday in Delaware – and both pushed misleading statements throughout the day. Despite consistently calling out President Donald Trump for similar lies, reporters remained silent on the content of Kamala's speech.



Harris claimed Ebola was a "pandemic" before noting that it only killed two people in America. The World Health Organization did not label Ebola as a "pandemic."



Ebola is also "not easily transmittable" and "was largely isolated to the region where it emerged," according to Five Thirty Eight. A few critics, some of whom are doctors, did call Harris out – but legacy news publications remained mute.

Politifact, CNN fact-checker Daniel Dale, Snopes and The Washington Post did not appear to fact-check Harris.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EfQINViX0AEh768?format=jpg&name=360x360">

One of Biden's statements that day also went unchecked. On Twitter Wednesday evening, the former vice president claimed that Trump called white supremacists after the 2017 Charlottesville attack "very fine people."



CNN's Jake Tapper previously noted this was not what Trump said. Reporters remained silent about Biden's tweet Wednesday.



"He's not saying that the neo-Nazis and white supremacists are very fine people," Tapper noted in 2019 after telling a panel that Trump did condemn the extremist groups during that same speech. "But he is saying people protesting alongside those neo-Nazis and white supremacists are very fine people."



The fact-checkers also remained silent on Biden's tweet.

[Anonymous]

American media is such a joke.

[Anonymous]

The democRATs want to prosecute Trump over the Obama-Clinton cooked up Trump-Russia collusion bullshit once they control all three branches of Washington. The msm won't report evidence of the abuse of power with the former administration and the justice department.



Major Development In Durham Probe Ignored During CNN, MSNBC Primetime Coverage

https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/15/cnn-msnbc-kevin-clinesmith-john-durham/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=l7N8svpYVw2NiIZaagQl_89IjxP1tnXv5Kpp7BA9">https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/15/cnn- ... Xv5Kpp7BA9">https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/15/cnn-msnbc-kevin-clinesmith-john-durham/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=l7N8svpYVw2NiIZaagQl_89IjxP1tnXv5Kpp7BA9

CNN and MSNBC devoted little coverage Friday and Saturday to the first development in U.S. Attorney John Durham's investigation of the origins of the Trump-Russia probe.



Kevin Clinesmith, a former FBI lawyer, is expected to plead guilty to altering an email regarding former Trump aide Carter Page's past association with the CIA.



CNN and MSNBC employ at least three former FBI and CIA officials as analysts, though none appeared on air to discuss the Clinesmith case.

MSNBC host Chuck Todd questioned whether the Durham probe was aimed at "creating confusion."

[Anonymous]

The democRATs have better writers of fiction than Netflix.



WSJ Editorial Board Condemns 'Evidence-Free Conspiracy Theory' About USPS Being Pushed By Democratic Leadership

https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/18/wsj-editorial-board-condemns-conspiracy-theory-usps-nancy-pelosi-democratic-leaders/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=j.sxpv5SF1CNAhpDyWpRN6ZDQTsJOrPX51FFPMip">https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/18/wsj- ... PX51FFPMip">https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/18/wsj-editorial-board-condemns-conspiracy-theory-usps-nancy-pelosi-democratic-leaders/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=j.sxpv5SF1CNAhpDyWpRN6ZDQTsJOrPX51FFPMip

The Wall Street Journal editorial board condemned House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic leaders Monday evening for embracing a "conspiracy theory" claiming President Donald Trump "is strangling the USPS to hack the November election."





The conspiracy claims that the Trump administration is tampering with post collection boxes in an effort to suppress votes leading up to the 2020 election. The allegations have been thoroughly debunked, but this has not stopped some from continuing to push the topic.



"Mrs. Pelosi is trying to put on a political show, starring Democrats as the saviors of the post office," the editorial board wrote after providing evidence that the claims don't hold water.



"This is a made-for-TV phony political crisis. The USPS has long-term challenges, but enough money to last into 2021. Mr. DeJoy says there's 'ample capacity to deliver all election mail.' Some states have startlingly lax ballot deadlines, but nobody can pretend with a straight face that it's the post office's fault. Democrats have also scheduled a hearing for next Monday so they can yell at Mr. DeJoy in person. How long before Rep. Adam Schiff says it's another Russia-Donald Trump conspiracy to steal the election?"



The editorial board wrote that "Democrats should be deeply embarrassed that their leadership has embraced such claims." The editorial quoted former long-time USPS workers and others involved in the postal service. All pointed out various facts that debunk the conspiracy theory.



The WSJ's editorial board even noted that while former Vice President Joe Biden claimed that the postal service is "literally" using "tractor trailers" to pick up mailboxes, the reality is far from this claim.





"The USPS says it has nearly 142,000 boxes across the country, which are adjusted as volume and costs dictate," according to the WSJ. "In August 2016, the USPS's Inspector General said that 'the number of collection boxes declined by more than 12,000 in the past 5 years.'"



"Voter suppression by the Obama Administration?" the WSJ's editorial board wondered in Monday's article, titled "Nancy Pelosi Goes Politically Postal."

[Anonymous]

The Truth About The Post Office Controversy



https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/20/neil-patel-truth-post-office-controversy-donald-trump-coronavirus/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=irE1qOgBCgiNR._k.JbNvKoZ7nj5myrKmwi4hw6">https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/20/neil ... yrKmwi4hw6">https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/20/neil-patel-truth-post-office-controversy-donald-trump-coronavirus/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=irE1qOgBCgiNR._k.JbNvKoZ7nj5myrKmwi4hw6.

Universal mail-in voting is different. With universal mail-in voting, the government would mail ballots to everyone, regardless of whether they request them. Some places even allow for "ballot harvesting," where a third party can collect ballots for many people and file them in bulk. This system has not traditionally been used widely, and it raises legitimate concerns over voter fraud. A 2018 North Carolina congressional election was in fact overturned after a state probe found that a Republican operative illegally collected ballots with forged signatures and filled in votes.



The Postal Service — which is supposed to operate independently based on funding from the postal fees it charges — has been losing money for years. Due to email and other forms of communication, we send about 30% fewer letters each year than we did just a decade ago. To combat this, the Postal Service has been reducing its operating costs. That all makes sense.



Now comes the controversy part. There are three drivers contributing to it. Two are self-inflected by the Republicans, and one — likely the biggest — is being driven pretty disingenuously by the Democrats.



President Donald Trump did not do himself any favors with his comments on the matter. Trump said he opposed more money for the Postal Service because without that money, "You can't have universal mail-in voting, because they're not equipped to have it." The president is not wrong to question universal mail-in voting, but his statement that he was going to unilaterally in effect stop it through a holdup of postal funds only added fire to Democrats' claims that he was against taking steps to have a fair election during the pandemic.



Finally, in the aftermath of the president's misstatement and the Postal Service's mistake in not foreseeing this issue, Democrats, postal unions and their allies in the media have pounced to demagogue this issue into a full-blown election-stealing conspiracy. Claims that mail sorting is being reduced and postboxes are being removed to disenfranchise voters are not backed by the facts. The cuts were in place for years — going back to the Obama years, in fact. But that's not stopping the demagoguery. Pictures of mailboxes with locks on them — found, ironically, to be many years old — are going viral all over social media.



Activists, celebrities, some media outlets and even our leaders who should know better are fueling the fire of this conspiracy theory. They are posting pictures of locked boxes from years ago and trying to stir up a frenzy. They are succeeding, too. In the short term, this may very well work to harm Trump. That job is easier when most of the media is eager to play along. In the long term, this is just another in a series of confidence-reducing scandals that have dominated this era of our politics. The result is that people don't believe anyone anymore. It's amazing that some people still don't understand why the American people have lost so much trust in our leaders and our leading institutions.

[Anonymous]

I was watching Canadian news and they didn't even mention Trump authorizing the use of convalascent plasma. Instead they chose the really important stuff like gossip about what Trump's sister said about him in a recording.

[cc]

Standard M.O.



Media is a huge negative to society

[Anonymous]

Why would anyone believe the media or the so called infectious disease experts.



Trust In The CDC And Media To Deliver Accurate Information About COVID Tumbles, Poll Shows

https://dailycaller.com/2020/09/06/centers-for-disease-control-trust-trump-poll/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=1bNjsupUBQ6N1POQXVfoiqc55sAyGGmXRLOGUSJf">https://dailycaller.com/2020/09/06/cent ... mXRLOGUSJf">https://dailycaller.com/2020/09/06/centers-for-disease-control-trust-trump-poll/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=1bNjsupUBQ6N1POQXVfoiqc55sAyGGmXRLOGUSJf

Roughly 54% of voters trust the CDC for reliable information about the virus, a 30 percentage point drop from March, when 86% of voters said the same thing, the CBS poll showed. Fewer voters also trust the national media to provide good information about coronavirus, or COVID, according to the poll, which was conducted between Sept. 2-4 and sampled 2,493 registered voters nationwide.