Biased Coverage?

Appar­ent­ly there is noth­ing about this fake news that is news at all.

Politi­co is it real or is it just anoth­er fake. 

Warn­ing what you are about to see might be offen­sive to some peo­ple.

The truth shall set you free but biased news cov­er­age could be con­sid­ered a shack­le around your feet.

source. 

Can you imag­ine what it would be like if the free­dom of the press extend­ed to cov­er­ing the truth instead of lies and biased pre­sen­ta­tions of noth­ing?

A so called news sto­ry was pub­lished on the 12th of this month you can read it here if you dare?

source.

Case in point.

When you begin to digest this dri­v­el you begin to see just how twist­ed and messed up some of these so called jour­nal­ists actu­al­ly are…

Sev­en­ty-five years ago, tens of thou­sands of white South­ern­ers respond­ed with agi­tat­ed con­cern when they learned both by word of mouth and in some region­al news­pa­pers that First Lady Eleanor Roo­sevelt was trav­el­ing wide­ly through­out the for­mer Con­fed­er­ate states, qui­et­ly orga­niz­ing black women into secret “Eleanor Clubs.” The club mot­to, “A white woman in the kitchen by 1943,” por­tend­ed a dan­ger­ous inver­sion of the region’s long­stand­ing racial pat­terns.

Look­ing at the miss­ing facts of this par­tic­u­lar fake news sto­ry you have to won­der what are they think­ing?

Then you see a lit­tle lat­er in the sto­ry what they are think­ing and it is both alarm­ing and seri­ous­ly messed up think­ing.

The inter­net is a faster and wider dis­tri­b­u­tion chan­nel than any­thing that was remote­ly imag­in­able in 1942. Once her­ald­ed as a pow­er­ful agent of democ­ra­ti­za­tion, in more recent months, it has pro­vid­ed a pow­er­ful plat­form for pur­vey­ors of rumors, hate speech and fake news. But an empir­i­cal study that appeared recent­ly in the Colum­bia Jour­nal­ism Review 

sug­gests that the inter­net has not infect­ed Amer­i­cans equal­ly or indis­crim­i­nate­ly with fake news.

Attacks a group of peo­ple here?

Repub­li­cans tend to be eas­i­er marks for con­spir­a­cy-laden sites like Bre­it­bart News (which recent­ly claimed, with­out a shred of evi­dence, that for­mer Pres­i­dent Oba­ma tapped then-can­di­date Don­ald Trump’s phone lines) and Infowars (which played a promi­nent role in pro­mul­gat­ing Piz­za­gate); con­verse­ly, Democ­rats tend to absorb both left-lean­ing opin­ion out­lets and main­stream out­lets that adhere to stan­dard fact-check­ing and edi­to­r­i­al qual­i­ty stan­dards.

Call­ing Repub­li­cans Racists…

That appar­ent­ly is what this alleged fake news sto­ry is about.

The only prob­lem here is that none of this con­nects to fact…

Then you have this…  source Politico.com

“Just as a par­tic­u­lar sub­set of Amer­i­cans proved unusu­al­ly recep­tive to fake news and con­spir­a­cy in the 1940s, it may be time to acknowl­edge that a par­tic­u­lar sub­set of Amer­i­cans, today, has grown unhinged from real­i­ty.”

Is it true?

Are Repub­li­cans racists ?

Because of how the infor­ma­tion is pre­sent­ed here this arti­cle is pre­ten­tious and inven­tive cer­tain­ly but lacks any basis in fact there­fore it is an alarm­ing thing to read more so when you con­sid­er how “real­is­tic” they attempt­ed to make it sound.

They offer “not a shred of evi­dence” to sup­port this the­o­ry that they bring up cre­at­ing a jux­ta­po­si­tion between south­ern white big­ots in 1942 and white repub­li­cans who look to the inter­net for infor­ma­tion  in 2017 when news orga­ni­za­tions are so biased that in order to receive any oth­er view point the inter­net is the only oth­er source of dif­fer­ing opin­ions.

Appar­ent­ly that is a Racist thing?

They pre­tend that the NSA and oth­er Intel­li­gence Orga­ni­za­tions do not engage in (Intel­li­gence Gath­er­ing) thats what they do if they were not doing that what good would they be?

Please…

So, Who do you believe?

The News Media that “Pre­tend that no wire­tap­ping hap­pened?” Or do you believe that it did hap­pen because there was a war­rant obtained and that it was exe­cut­ed.

Im curi­ous real­ly because when you have peo­ple in the media that deny the obvi­ous in such a par­ti­san way but then get upset about irrel­e­vant news when the sto­ry does not suit their agen­da, what is it that makes the­ses peo­ple believe that they are bring­ing news wor­thy sub­ject mat­ter to the table.

Lets see so wire­tap­ping was hap­pen­ing…

Wash­ing­ton (CNN)A fed­er­al appeals court ruled on Thurs­day that the tele­phone meta­da­ta col­lec­tion pro­gram, under which the Nation­al Secu­ri­ty Agency gath­ers up mil­lions of phone records on an ongo­ing dai­ly basis, is ille­gal under the Patri­ot Act.

The gov­ern­ment has argued it has the pow­er to car­ry for­ward with the pro­gram under a sec­tion of the Patri­ot Act, which expires in June. Law­mak­ers are locked in a debate on whether or how to renew the author­i­ty, which was first passed short­ly after the Sept. 11, 2001 ter­ror attacks on New York and Wash­ing­ton, but has been renewed by both Pres­i­dents Bush and Oba­ma in the inter­ven­ing years.

But now (there is no evi­dence) that Trump was wire­tapped.

Amazing…

Doc­u­ments con­firm­ing the pro­gram’s exis­tence were first revealed in June of 2013 with the leaks by for­mer gov­ern­ment con­trac­tor Edward Snow­den.

But then I guess every­one must be white big­ots with a his­to­ry of white south­ern racists?

The real ques­tion here is a sim­ple one.

Is this free­dom of the press?

Is this what the con­sti­tu­tion pro­tects?

OR is this some­thing very dif­fer­ent than Free­dom of the Press.