It’s not really about fake news (Highlight: President Elect Donald Trump born in Pakistan). Rather, it’s about the media attempting to rectify their image after their 2016 election cycle hustle having gone wrong.

Media outlets had been in lockstep with the Clinton campaign for the entirety of the Presidential race: and while it was glaringly blatant to many, the Press refused to confirm it. When the evidence is bright and clear, most of the audience doesn’t really need a confession – and unsurprisingly, most of them already understand the situation: according to GallUp’s poll, only 32% of Americans trust the 4th estate – an all-time low in the poll, which began in 1972 (1).

Try as they might, they’re not going to get very far with this ‘Image Rectification Program’ – especially since WikiLeaks has kindly handed us a spectacular list of reporters and Mainstream Media powerhouses that worked with candidate Clinton behind-the-scenes: Haim Saban of Univision, John Harwood of CNBC (The New York Times), Maggie Haberman of The New York Times and Politico, Donna Brazille of CNN and the DNC, and Roland Martin of TV-One (2).

On October 10, an email was released that showed Brazile tipping off the Clinton campaign to an outreach campaign being conducted by the Sanders campaign. Brazile defended herself on Twitter claiming she also sent the Sanders campaign “advice,” but did not release or cite any examples. (3)

If that isn’t enough, the Press states that the bias against Trump was a result of the President-Elect’s own character (4). Shabby results arise from shabby abilities – in this case, the shabby reporting resulted from shabby journalists and reporters -  and not from an external variable. Quality journalism provides viewers/readers with objective pieces that individuals can then form their own opinions from. Feeding only one opinion to the masses repetitively is indoctrination, and people are going to start noticing the Orwellian tactics sooner or later.

On a special note: The New York Times’s reply to accusations of media bias, which can be found here (5), includes an interesting section. “We believe we reported on both candidates fairly during the presidential campaign. You can rely on The New York Times to bring the same fairness, the same level of scrutiny, the same independence to our coverage of the new president and his team. (5)” There is no section taking responsibility for their biased reporting. 

Image Source:

Works Cited:


Published by Cat Regrets