Depressing.
It’s clear even in this quote below that the media addresses only 1 piece of the evidence presented.
"On the first full day of the Trump administration, White House press secretary Sean Spicer admonished the news media for reporting that the crowd that witnessed Trump’s inauguration was smaller than other recent inauguration crowds, claiming, “This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration — period — both in person and around the globe.”
It’s very clear that he said it was the most people to watch in person AND around the globe. If he didn’t mean physical people, he would have said “around the globe” only and stressed that during the conference. These are people who are supposed to be professional speakers, we’re supposed to believe that their phrasing is very important.
It is the media’s job to report the truth, not disquise the truth to make it look like a lie, I don’t think I misread the article.
It’s also the media’s job to point out that the guy who’s supposed to be telling them the truth is telling them lies about easily observable things.
They make the assumption that he’s lying without bringing any of their facts about “around the globe” and the only part of the numbers they used were the photo of the mall as proof.
You’re saying the Washington correspondents for every major news outlet weren’t looking out their windows or actually at the Inauguration and could PHYSICALLY SEE that it wasn’t the biggest crowd ever?
My problem was, it was only half of the story, I mean even I can see the physical crowd.
This hatred or complete misunderstanding of journalism is probably the scariest part of this new world we live in now.
Well, maybe you could become a writer, and use your abilities for the actual truth instead of these places printing half-truths like they’re the gods-honest, hand on the holy book gospel.