Continued propagation of 'fake news' may be our collective fault

President Trump has repeatedly railed against 'Fake News'

President Donald Trump may not have coined the phrase "fake news", but it absolutely seems as though the practice has exploded since he took office.

Just last week during his speech in front of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, the President delivered the statement “it wasn’t until I became a politician that I realized how nasty, how mean, how vicious, and how fake the press can be.”

The statement was greeted by a loud chorus of booing. At least it sounded that way to those watching on a popular German news program. 

However, the broadcaster 'ARD' later admitted that it had "boosted" the sound clip to make it appear louder than it actually was, per Chris Tomlinson at Breitbart. When originally heard on CNN, for instance, the booing was moderate, and obviously came from media in the back of the room.

The ARD editor-in-chief then made the following statement as part of his defense for the move:

"By the way, newspapers also make comparisons when they enlarge image sections and may even mark them with a red circle – nobody would come up with the idea of calling this manipulation, but rather journalistic precision."

Journalistic precision? Now there's a new one.

But this statement perfectly sums up the tactics repeatedly used against the President by the former "mainstream" media here in America, which include cherry-picking from quotes and highlighting stories with unflattering photographs.

In a 2017 year-end article, Georgina Rennard with the BBC did a nice job defining "fake news" as follows:

• Completely false information, photos or videos purposefully created and spread to confuse or misinform
• Information, photos or videos manipulated to deceive - or old photographs shared as new
• Satire or parody which means no harm but can fool people

Liberal news outlets such as CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Huffington Post, NPR, and more have consistently been violators. This is particularly so in their coverage of the President, his team, and his programs.

Dan Gainor at Fox News did a nice job breaking down the media's 2017 anti-Trump efforts in a piece characterizing their "round-the-clock journalistic insanity":

"...the media have been claiming Republican politicians are evil, racist, crazy or stupid (or all four) for years. Journalists and their lefty partners in slime are running that game on Trump more aggressively than they ever tried with President Ronald Reagan. None more than CNN. The network’s “Reliable Sources” host Brian Stelter was freaking out about his view of Trump’s mental health back in August. “Is the President of the United States a racist? Is he suffering from some kind of illness? Is he fit for office? And if he's unfit, then what?” He began 2018 with a claim the year was starting off with “madness.”"

Commander-in-Chief, or Chef?

On his local talk radio show this evening, Dom Giordano (1210AM, 6pm show) reported the results of a New York Times poll that stated that 33% of all men would not consider voting for a woman for President, from either party. Not Hillary Clinton. Not Condaleeza Rice. Certainly not Geena Davis. No one who wears a bra, who has or once had a monthly period cycle, who was capable of bearing children. No one with long hair, who wears perfume, who may wear a skirt, etc. No woman. None. Nay, say never. No how, no way. Hmmm. I know we still have the element who thinks women are better off barefoot and pregnant, who see women more as the 'chef' than the 'chief', but it's still hard to believe that we remain such neanderthals. What would such men do if presented with the dilemma as put forth in a new book by Dick Morris that pits Condi vs. Hillary in a theoretical 2008 Presidential matchup? My guess is that we would be back to a good old-fashioned ideological battle, and the sexism would be tossed right out the window. But my concern as a conservative would be our strong base in the South. Could the good ol' boys really vote for a black woman for President of the United States? My guess would be that in the end, the answer would be "yes". I would just love to see them placed in that predicament, where they actually had to confront that part of themselves, and finally get over it. You go girls!