When you pick up a newspaper, read an article online, or watch TV news, do you trust what’s being said?  SHOULD you trust it?  The credibility of the media has tanked in recent years.  And not just because the President fights back by talking about “fake news.”  Several surveys reveal that 2/3 of Americans just don’t trust the media to give them accurate, balanced, or objective stories.  Whether you love President Trump or not, 91% of news coverage about him is negative.  91%!  No wonder he tweets!  But it has not caused the public to love the media—they are barely more popular than food poisoning.  As one who has been the target of the news media for nearly 30 years in politics, I’ve come to some simple conclusions:

  1. If you read your own quotes in a story and they make you mad, you weren’t quoted correctly or in proper context.  If it’s YOUR own words, you aren’t mad at the reporter unless your words were twisted, taken out of context or incomplete.
  2. If you read a story about yourself and you can’t detect whether the reporter likes you or not, that’s a good reporter and a good story.
  3. Good journalism isn’t just telling the truth; it’s telling the truth in proportion to all the truth there is.  Simply put, is the story getting the most attention because it really impacts the most people in the most significant way, or just because it amplifies a flaw or a faux pas of the figure in the story? 
  4. Inflection and facial expressions can totally change a story.  For example, I’ll read the same line but each time use a different inflection or facial expression:
Senator Pie-hole said the tax bill would lower taxes.

Senator Pie-hole SAID the tax bill would lower taxes.

Senator Pie-hole said the tax bill would LOWER taxes.

Senator Pie-hole said the TAX BILL would lower taxes.


Commentary continues below advertisement


Just be changing my inflection or facial expression, I change how the story is perceived. 

The media loves to question authority figures, but they HATE to be questioned as to their fairness or objectivity.  Granted, a free press is a vital foundation to our liberty, but a free press that isn’t a professional and responsible press would help destroy our liberty. 

The media has a job and it’s not to give candidates and elected officials a tongue bath of love and approval.  But the difference between reporting news and commenting on the news is that reporting gives you sterile and passionless facts and believes you are smart enough to form your own opinions.  A commentator wants to give you an opinion and steer you only toward the facts that support his or her opinion, which hopefully becomes yours.


Commentary continues below advertisement


The media doesn’t want you to believe politicians at face value.  Fine—you shouldn’t.  But neither should you believe the media at face value either.  Unless of course, we’re talking about the stuff I say.  Then, you can TAKE IT TO THE BANK!

So tonight, we pull back the curtain and let you see the media unmasked.  And here’s a warning—it ain’t a pretty sight.

 

PLEASE LEAVE ME A COMMENT.  I READ THEM!

Leave A Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!
Captcha

Comments 1-5 of 75

  • Clara Herrin

    11/17/2017 07:09 AM

    So true. I was interviewed once a long time ago and when the article on my concert appeared in the paper, the reporter made it appear that I routinely abandoned my family in favor of rehearsals. The truth was that my daughter was 15 years old and quite capable of washing a few dishes to free me up to go to those rehearsals. That article created quite a bitter atmosphere at home that lasted a long time.

  • Paula Edwards

    11/13/2017 07:42 PM

    A reporter tells you the facts; the news. A commentator tells you your opinion.

  • Beth Hurst

    11/13/2017 06:27 PM

    A perfect example of this is the news coverage of the accusations against Roy Moore. It goes like this: "Allegations have been made that Roy Moore made inappropriate sexual advances against a 14 year old when he was 32 and now multiple women have come out with allegations against Moore. A former co-worker tweeted that it was a known fact that he had an affinity for teenage girls".
    If I knew nothing about this story, I would think that he made advances to other 14 year olds when in fact, the other girls were from 16-18, which was perfectly legal and most have said they had their parents approval to date him and their allegations are that "he kissed them". WOW. He kissed them. None of them, including the one who claims she was 14 says that he pushed himself on them and when she said no, he stopped. The other girls he dated should not even be a news story but they are being misrepresented to make him look like a sexual predator and he most certainly was not. He has been married to the same woman for over 30 years and no one has come out with anything against him so it makes me question anything they say knowing they could be misconstruing the truth or slanting it in such a way to paint the picture in the light they want you to see it.

  • Bill Gannon

    11/13/2017 02:39 PM

    Mike,
    I have always appreciated your point of view and we typically agree on the major points of these issues but where the MSM is concerned, I must disagree. Food poisoning is much preferred to the garbage they feed us daily.

    On another note, Jim W. please check the facts before commenting. Feinstein is not trying to ban "machine guns". She is after modern sporting rifles that are semi-automatic and only capable of firing one round each time you pull the trigger, unless it's outfitted with a feature such as a bump stock, or modified illegally in most states. Simple ranch rifles such as the mini-14 would be banned. Why? Because it look frightening to them? Because it has a pistol grip? And the one question the anti-gun crowd cannot seem to answer is what makes them think that the criminals (who are the only ones who typically have the fully automatic weapons anyway) will turn in their weapons?

  • Gary Drummond

    11/13/2017 11:38 AM

    Hang in there, Huck. Keep your newsletter coming. We love you, and Sarah is doing a great job too, we might add! Stand proud.