REAL journalistic integrity… would you know it if you saw it? Would CNN?
We’ve got two stories here. One is put forward by hacks working backward from their assumptions, sell ‘the sizzle’ and then (somewhere later in the story, when half of the readers have moved on to something else) add the details that exonerate. See? It’s not REALLY a lie. The information is in there. (Like the politically damning story they bury on the back page to protect their Democratic allies.)
Here’s the first one:
Phone records and intercepted calls show that members of Donald J. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and other Trump associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election, according to four current and former American officials.
American law enforcement and intelligence agencies intercepted the communications around the same time they were discovering evidence that Russia was trying to disrupt the presidential election by hacking into the Democratic National Committee, three of the officials said. The intelligence agencies then sought to learn whether the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russians on the hacking or other efforts to influence the election.
The officials interviewed in recent weeks said that, so far, they had seen no evidence of such cooperation.
Read more: New York Times
Whoops! No evidence of such cooperation. Nevermind. No story here.
Here’s the second one:
Wall Street Journal editor in chief Gerard Baker told his reporters Monday the paper would not abandon objectivity in its coverage of President Donald Trump, and directed them to find work somewhere else if they want to adopt a more oppositional tone.
“It’s a little irritating when I read that we have been soft on Donald Trump,” he told his reporters and editors, a source at the newsroom meeting told The New York Times. Baker held the meeting ostensibly to have a casual conversation on the editorial direction of the paper, but it was held on the heels of reports the newsroom is in turmoil over the Trump coverage.
The Trump coverage is “neutral to the point of being absurd,” one source inside the newsroom recently told Politico. Criticism peaked when Baker sent a memo to staff instructing reporters and editors to tone down the use of “loaded” language in coverage of Trump’s immigration ban.
Baker strongly defended his paper’s coverage as objective in the meeting, going so far as to read from a list of past WSJ headlines compiled to refute the criticism. He suggested it is other outlets such as The New York Times that have abandoned fair reporting standards and objectivity — not The Wall Street Journal — and that those standards aren’t going anywhere. –Wall Street Journal — Read more: DailyCaller
Actually, if you read the whole Daily Caller piece, the NYT editor actually tries to JUSTIFY his oppositional tone.
Maybe we should start calling the WSJ the ‘newspaper of record’. And calling the NYT a wholly-owned Subsidiary of Soros Inc.