That the press has become quite unnerved over the tight presidential race is apparent in the Associated Press's coverage of Republican nominee Donald Trump's Monday campaign rally in Asheville, North Carolina.
John Hinderaker at Powerline alertly noted that reporters for both Breitbart and AP prepared dispatches on the event, enabling a quite telling comparison of the two efforts. The headline at his post says it all about how they compare: "Reality Versus the Associated Press."
We are so fortunate to have expert psychoanalyst Judy Woodruff on call at PBS. (That's sarcasm, folks.)
Friday evening, Woodruff, apparently because whatever evidence there is of ISIS involvement in Thursday's terrorist massacre in Nice, France is in her view insufficiently direct, speculated that "It could have been the act of one person disgruntled, upset with his life."
For over two weeks now, the press has insisted, based on almost no evidence, that many UK citizens who voted to leave the European Union weren't all that informed, didn't appreciate the implications of their vote, and now regret their decision. Two examples signify the press's desperation to cling to this meme. The first is their contention that post-referendum UK-based Internet search requests for basic information on the EU are coming entirely or mostly from "Leave" voters. There is no good reason to believe that. The second is their treatment of the obviously bogus, heavily-pranked, easily-beaten petition for a second EU referendum as if it's something real, when it obviously is not. These efforts are so over the top that they may strike some readers as psychologically troubled "Remain" supporters having a tough time adjusting to reality. Well, it turns out that this is a far from minor problem among "Remain" supporters.
They should have known better, but it was apparently too good to check. Following the lead of the apparently shellshocked BBC, the Associated Press on Friday night included an item in its "The Latest" timeline on Great Britain's Thursday vote to leave the European Union about how "So many users are signing a petition for a re-run of Britain's referendum on European Union membership that they've crashed the House of Commons website hosting the document."
Then, for good measure, the wire service devoted a separate stand-alone report on the petition's attainment of "more than 1.6 million names" as "a measure of the extraordinary divisiveness of Thursday's vote to leave the 28-nation bloc." Sunday, the eponymously named Louise Mensch at the news, opinion, and commentary website Heat Street exposed the petition effort as a prank (HT Instapundit; bolds are mine throughout this post):
Shocking the whole world, the British people voted on June 23, to leave the European Union — a move nicknamed Brexit. Unexpectedly, the Leave voters won 52 to 48 percent. Although there was much anger at the decision, there were also plenty of voices cheering on the British on June 24. That chorus included CNBC On Air Editor Rick Santelli who acknowledged there would be economic ramifications, but cheered the UK for having the “backbone” to change direction and head “down the right road.”
On Friday the Morning Joe crew marveled over Brexit as the people of the UK spoke loud and clear: they want out of the European Union. Panelist after panelist on the morning show expressed shock and concern over the UK’s decision to go it alone. Economist Steve Rattner, on the other hand, stuck out like a sore thumb as he painted a rosier picture of the UK’s seismic decision.
Hundreds of British actors and celebrities are clamoring for Great Britain to remain part of the European Union when the nation votes this week. That’s in direct opposition to the view of many conservatives on both sides of the pond. Either result could have major economic consequences. UK citizens will vote June 23 on the contentious “Brexit” referendum. Putting their high-profiles to use, 282 people involved in Britain’s creative industries signed a letter in May arguing many of their “projects” would not have been possible without “vital EU funding” or “collaborating across borders,” according to a website urging people vote “REMAIN.”
Two weeks ago, yours truly posted on a very inadequate March 26 U.S.-distributed Associated Press story out of Glasgow the previous day (since expired) about the murder of Asad Shah. Despite the fact that far more information was known at the time, the wire service would only acknowledge that "the killing of a Muslim shopkeeper who wished Christians a happy Easter is being investigated as 'religiously prejudiced,'" and (four paragrahs in) that "The suspect, who police say is Muslim, has not been identified or charged." AP has not done a follow-up story, even though far more beyond what it failed to originally report is now known.
In a Washington Post "WorldViews" blog post on Friday, Max Bearak attempted to bring readers up to date, in the process exposing — but from all appearances acquiescing to — Orwellian attempts by the dominant Muslim community to disavow their religion's association with Shah's murder and to distance themselves from their hostility towards other faiths.
Those who have noticed that the Associated Press, even to this day, tends to be sympathetic towards leftist causes, leftist protesters, leftist and totalitarian governments, and even terrorists in its coverage of domestic and world events won't be surprised by what follows. Others who still believe that the AP has always at least tried to be a paragon of objectivity will be stunned.
The UK Guardian addresses evidence found by a German historian who claims that AP, alone among international news agencies, was allowed to remain in Germany after Adolf Hitler rose to power because it was willing to cooperate with his Nazi regime (HT Times of Israel):
Media outlets around the world are reporting that Faycal Cheffou has been arrested for his alleged involvement with last week's terrorist attacks in Belgium.
Media outlets around the world are reporting that Faycal Cheffou was a journalist — except for the Associated Press.
Perhaps it would be understandable if U.S. media outlets chose not to cover the death of Asad Shah in Scotland. After all, it occurred overseas, and only one person has died.
But the Associated Press did decide to cover the story and post it at its subscribers' U.S. news sites. As such, the AP has a duty to reveal what is known at the time its reports appear. Thus far, it has failed miserably. It is painfully obvious why that failure has occurred, namely because Asad Shah's death inconveniently answers the following question: "Why don't we hear more outrage from moderate Muslims over those who invoke Islam to justify terrorism and persecution, thereby, according to popular perception, highjacking their supposedly inherently peaceful religion?"
Warning of imminent danger from man-made climate change wasn’t enough for climate alarmists. Now, a new study has warned of 10,000 years of destruction or more if action isn’t taken against fossil fuels.
Left-wing site Common Dreams and The Guardian promoted the study published in Nature Climate Change saying that policy actions “in the next couple of years will have ‘profound impacts on global climate, ecosystems and human societies’ for the next 10,000 years and beyond ...”