This is just one example of the continual stream of poor journalism related to US presidential candidate Donald Trump. I do not have an opinion on Trump and I do not defend him. However, when I dig a little deeper than just skimming the news, I consistently find that journalists are unethical or extremely incompetent when reporting him. And nearly every time this results painting a more damning picture of him.
Exhibit one
This is the only US government “comment” on the theft of documents from the Democratic National Convention in 2016:
A U.S. official involved in the investigation said that the classified information collected on the hack so far “indicated beyond a reasonable doubt that it originated in Russia.”
The FBI has made no official statement regarding findings from its investigation into the hack according to a search of their newsroom
Exhibit two
This is what Donald Trump said at the first 2016 presidential debate:
I don’t think anybody knows it was Russia that broke into the DNC.
How would you fairly and accurately make a report of the above statement? How would you explain it to the public and add insightful analysis?
“Journalism”
Here is how The Economist reported it:
… [he] reckons that the FBI is mistaken when it suggests that Russian hackers targeted the Democratic National Committee’s computers.
What The Economist did was:
- Attributed a comment on deep background from “a U.S. official” to the FBI without supporting documentation
- Used a deep background comment it assumes originated with the FBI to represent a “suggestion” of DNC attack attribution
- Attributed a “[nobody] knows” comment as finding fault (“FBI is mistaken”) with an organization that did not release a statement
The Economist’s reporting here is disingenuous at best.
▧
Comments
There are no comments yet.
Please discuss this topic anywhere and let me know any great comments or media coverage I should link here.