The 'Fake News' narrative
Ever since Donald Trump’s election we’ve been bombarded with stories about “fake news.” As best as I can tell, “fake news” is news or information that runs against the current cheerleading by the media for Democrats and progressive politics. For instance, no one called CBS a purveyor of “fake news” when Dan Rather used blatantly obvious bogus documents to try to torpedo George Bush in 2004. No one has called NBC a “fake news” source because of Brian Williams. No one has called Politico “fake news” even though one of their reporters, Josh Gerstein, regularly reported stuff on Clinton’s email travails that was obvious false and declared to be false by even the superficial FBI investigation. “Fake news” did not include the puffery on Obamacare nor does it cover the monthly news stories about job creation that are half-truths at best. Nope. None of that counts because none of that fits the narrative.Check out the link at the top to see what was actually said in the interview. The right is quickly turning the "fake news" charge around on the mainstream media as a description of their media bias.
On Tuesday, Donald Trump met with New York Times reporters. During that meeting the subject of anthropogenic global warming came up. This is how the media reported the story.
The overall media take on the story was that Trump was backtracking on his campaign positions on climate change. In fact, based on the news coverage of the meeting, I followed suit. (You can find examples of how the meeting was spun here and here.) Now the transcript is out and it shows a remarkably different meeting than the one portrayed.
Why, then, if the news coverage of Trump’s interview differs markedly from what was actually said is it not treated as “fake news?” Simple reason. The news coverage supports the liberal orthodoxy and it serves a second purpose of trying to drive a wedge between Trump and his supporters....