Many significant stories deserving thoughtful processing and analysis (not that we necessarily offer it but as regards the populace in general) are lost to us because there is only so much time in the day. Other publications are able to analyze a host of topics because of the size of their stable of writers. But there is also the serious factor that one story walks on another, whatever the biases of the editors. Some of it the result of the rush to publish but for the general public much of what they see is actually the result of biased manipulation by the dominant media — largely liberal and protective of Democrat, big government (the swamp’s) interests.
Matters that work against smaller government interests are highlighted, and extended. Reports that work against liberal interests, reports, scandals, what have you, or things favorable toward Republicans or Trump, if reported at all, are given short shrift, covered with careful rebuttal, editorialized, bumped as quick as possible to get off the news. There are exceptions but they relate to the pecados and peccadillos that interest the dominant liberal press. Even those we suspect are bump stories to avoid covering things favorable to conservatism.
In fairness “a lot of things happen” every day and the busy public only has so much time to learn what is going on but newspapers and broadcast media initially control what sees any extensive light of the day.
But alas it is also true that we miss important stories from assiduous conservative outlets, or run out of time to comment. We are evaluating methodologies to bring to our readers attention more of what we feel are the most important items of the day that we observe scanning here and there.
Yesterday’s shortcoming by us includes failing to emphasize, bring home, the latest bias regarding “Russiagate” and the campaign to get Trump. ABC is rightfully embarrassed by their decision to publish inflammatory falsity by their own reporter Brian Ross. Other of the usual suspects feasted on the story ravenously. It reflected their typical rush to get Trump. Many retracted but to say “to their credit” is not rated unless the same breathlessness was employed, to the effect “Trump Did Not order Flynn to contact the Russians during the campaign.” Did as many people see the corrections they did offer — doubtful. Professional journalists should be analyzing this bias scandal far more than it is receiving. R Mall