Mea culpa. However, the story did lack substance using language that was not specific. There was no content to present possible differing interpretations and view points. I stand by the criticism that there is very likely a reason such a story has not, to my knowledge, been covered by more substantial news organizations.
Mea culpa. However, the story did lack substance using language that was not specific. There was no content to present possible differing interpretations and view points. I stand by the criticism that there is very likely a reason such a story has not, to my knowledge, been covered by more substantial news organizations.
I also think there is a reason, but probably not the reason you're thinking. I haven't seen any reporting, or even any comment from the people in the story, that disputes the reported facts. They're putting a spin on it, to be sure (Yes, we bought the $6 million mansion, but it was for a really good reason!), but they're not disputing the facts, to my knowledge.
Another example:
How many people following main stream outlets thought it was remotely possible Kyle Rittenhouse would be acquitted? Everyone makes editorial decisions, what they choose and choose not to cover, and how they cover it. Everyone has subscribers and advertisers to answer to. The MSM knows its audience.
I'm not trying to argue they're as bad as outlets like the NY Post or Fox News, because I absolutely don't think they are, but they're not perfect, and they do leave their audience less informed than they could be from time to time.
Reporters can be very frustrated by the editorial decisions. I know cause I’ve worked there and sometimes tore out my hair in frustration. But there’s more than different points of view in play now. The right has been building professional blind outrage at the other. The left have screamers, too, but they are not as organized or well funded…. Or we’ll armed. L'And they don’t want to kill people for disagreeing with them like the red hats.
Mea culpa. However, the story did lack substance using language that was not specific. There was no content to present possible differing interpretations and view points. I stand by the criticism that there is very likely a reason such a story has not, to my knowledge, been covered by more substantial news organizations.
I also think there is a reason, but probably not the reason you're thinking. I haven't seen any reporting, or even any comment from the people in the story, that disputes the reported facts. They're putting a spin on it, to be sure (Yes, we bought the $6 million mansion, but it was for a really good reason!), but they're not disputing the facts, to my knowledge.
Another example:
How many people following main stream outlets thought it was remotely possible Kyle Rittenhouse would be acquitted? Everyone makes editorial decisions, what they choose and choose not to cover, and how they cover it. Everyone has subscribers and advertisers to answer to. The MSM knows its audience.
I'm not trying to argue they're as bad as outlets like the NY Post or Fox News, because I absolutely don't think they are, but they're not perfect, and they do leave their audience less informed than they could be from time to time.
Reporters can be very frustrated by the editorial decisions. I know cause I’ve worked there and sometimes tore out my hair in frustration. But there’s more than different points of view in play now. The right has been building professional blind outrage at the other. The left have screamers, too, but they are not as organized or well funded…. Or we’ll armed. L'And they don’t want to kill people for disagreeing with them like the red hats.