Yesterday, the Breitbart news site ran a story on a proposed resolution that a Congressman was thinking of submitting for approval by the House. They reproduced the resolution and then proceeded to lambaste the resolution. Now, at this point it does not matter what the resolution was, nor does it matter to which party the Congressman belongs. That is why I have deliberately not included a link to the article. I do not want you to get lost in the politics of the argument. What does matter is this small note at the bottom of the story:
[Ed Note: *******’s letter was sent electronically to Hill Offices. To better present the letter to the public, the text has been copied onto House of Representatives letterhead. The text wasn’t changed or edited in any way.]
I deliberately edited out the Congressman’s name. Now catch what is going on here. The Congressman never sent an official letter to his colleagues. What he sent was an email with a proposed resolution to see how much support there would be. But, asking the opinion of the colleagues was not enough of a controversy for this “news” site. So, they graphically altered the email and made it look as though the Congressman had sent out an official letter on congressional letterhead, which changes the Congressman’s communication to a much higher level of proposal.
If this was not bad enough, the “news” site tries to minimize their alteration of the Congressman’s email to something else by even including an editor’s note that admits the alteration. But, by now the damage has been done. Many people do not read a full story. Thus, many people will miss that small note, and, even if they see it, their thoughts will already have been set by what they saw first. And, what they saw first was a false official letter. So, what do you think their thoughts are going to be? If you answered that they are going to believe a falsehood deliberately perpetrated by a “news” agency, then you are correct!
Such is the state of “news” in this country.
This is a surprise to anyone? There is no major source for accurate or impartial reporting of news for the public, or for that matter, for specific groups. The government is a major contributor to inaccurate news (re: for example, the many non-existent congregational districts which received real money and produced non-existent jobs.)
At least the newspapers are going out of business, a now irrelevant industry.
About those non-existent congressional districts, that is a bigger version of that old Chicago attitude that the dead can still vote. ROFL.
Fr,
All I can say is simply that this “editing” by a “news” site is the a disgrace. If I said anything else, I’d be using more ##*&$#*&$#* than letters.
ROFL?
Well, one may have political views, but one also has to have a sense of humor about politics, especially one’s own politics.
what does ROFL mean?
Rolling On Floor Laughing. It means something you find hilarious.
LOL