April 16, 2019

I already wrote about the spectrum of bias in press coverage of the Mueller report.  But of course, that’s hardly the only story for which you have to “consider the source” before believing it. 

For instance, a story about the Administration’s environmental policies appeared in (which I would never mistake for a legitimate, unbiased news source) with a provocative headline claiming that a Trump official declared that “Science is a Democrat thing.”  It’s such a load of garbage (complete with quotes from a group that poses as a nonpartisan pro-science organization but isn’t) that I’m not going to increase their click count by linking to it.  But here’s a sample:


“Rep. Alan Lowenthal, D-Calif., citing the inspector general's report into the matter, said that a Trump appointee named Landon ‘Tucker’ Davis had offered a likelier explanation for why a study that was more than halfway done was abruptly shut down: In Davis' words, ‘Science was a Democrat thing.’"

Commentary continues below advertisement

Salon didn’t bother to explain what position of influence Davis might hold, or why they would not only use such a questionable quote from a partisan, third-hand source, but treat it as headline news.  There was a link in that paragraph that readers who didn’t follow it might assume points to more information verifying the quote.  Instead, it was a link to a typically dry letter from a deputy inspector general, saying that Trump officials explained that the study was canceled because after spending more than half of the million-dollar-plus budget, they felt it hadn’t produced results that were likely to justify further costs. The “Science is a Democrat thing” quote didn’t appear in it at all.


So I guess “journalism” isn’t a Salon thing.


I also think that after hearing that people can change genders just by deciding to, that there’s no biological difference between men and women, and that fetuses only become babies 15 to 20 minutes after they’re born, we can agree that science isn’t a Democrat thing, either.   


Instead of linking to Salon, I think I’ll link you to this article by a science writer who is hardly a Trump supporter, but who is honest enough to realize what damage is done by partisan “journalists” who claim that Trump is “at war with science,” when that’s not true and it misleads the public.  There are some areas in which Trump has increased funding, and others in which cutbacks are just part of a general reduction in non-defense spending and staffing.  Meanwhile, Obama defunded science projects and suppressed access to scientific information, and the press painted him as a champion of science.


But then, truth just isn’t a modern journalism thing.


Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

Comments 1-4 of 4

  • Alan Doud

    04/17/2019 06:54 AM

    This is what I call "Grasping At Straws." California's democrats are so scientific that they think banning straws will save the world while plastic bottles, bags, cups, packaging and all the other crap still gets tossed in the ocean and dumps remains alright. That is like trying to save the forest by banning toothpicks I think this sums up democratic science and thinking. Makes me wonder if they have friends in the paper straw industry. One told me, "Well we have to start somewhere." Pick up that dust speck and leave the rest to take care of itself. Recently I read Trump signed a bill to clean up our oceans.

  • Robert McFate

    04/16/2019 02:57 PM

    Huck; You are to kind calling the lamestream media "the press". Call them what they are, the propaganda arm of the DemonRAT party.

  • Theresa Carver

    04/16/2019 02:42 PM

    But the Dems ARE the party of science....Science Fiction....i.e. innumerable genders; Acoording to science, there are only 2. Can't fool DNA. Darwinism...i.e....where is the scientific analysis or proof....There is no me once how a spider could 'evolve' 7 types of webbing WITHOUT becoming extinct first. Web to catch prey, web to wrap prey, etc. Trapdoor and Bell spiders. And then there is Global Warming/Climate Change/12 Years Left......the math doesn't add up since they are using 'assumptions' in their calculations that only make sense if you are certain of the outcome.

  • Keith Kennedy

    04/16/2019 01:20 PM

    While not concerning this particular story, on April 16th under the article spinning you use the word Democratic when referring to a Democrat contender for President. The words Democrat and Democratic are not really synonymous. While the U .S. is a Democratic Republic we have two political parties: Democrats and Republican. The whole country is Democratic but the politician you referring to is a Democrat. A minor correction but one I felt needed to be said. Other than that I enjoy reading your column everyday. Thank You.