Comments:Invited or not, news outlets criticize White House decision to pick and choose their peers

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.

Start a new discussion


Thread titleRepliesLast modified
Press Exclusion318:37, 5 March 2017

Press Exclusion

The Trump administration is correct in what it is doing to news outlets that parse, edit or simply change what is said. I am sick to death of listening to president Trump say something and then hearing or reading something on the news that is different. If certain press outlets are going to continue this than they are not reporting accurately! What the citizens want is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. If a witness in any court provides anything less than that, they are or can be prosecuted for lying under oath. If some news outlets cannot take that oath, then they should not be "deemed" credible! A blatant example is what is being said about Jeff Sessions in the conversations he had with Russian officials. Time frames were changed or ignored, topics changed, people swapped, all to make Sessions appear to have done something wrong. That is slander in the private sector and subject to lawsuit. In the public sector that is lying to we the people for what I call evil reasons. The white house should not allow liars and parsers into their press room to provide bullets for the lying, parsing press to fire back at them. Freedom of the press is sacred to me and lying by the press is sacrilegious to me. I you re not religious you should be greatly offended that the press "plays" with the words of our President and his team. (talk)15:01, 4 March 2017

The political right worked for generations to create a voter base who would judge whether to believe someone based on how far right they are instead of whether what they say is consistent with reality. They succeeded.

Pi zero (talk)18:18, 4 March 2017

I want news that is not biased so i can make my own decision whether its right or wrong. There are many ways to report news. An author can ad mhis own opinion through what he chooses to put in his piece and steer the reader into the direction he wants and unfortunately what i read and watch on television is just that. No longer do we have journalist depicting what they see its now what the news channels want you to see that matters. Since news is on 24/7 they fill in time by adding their own prejudices and judgements and if you notice most channels all have the same opinion. Say when was the last time you had a room ful of people have the same exact opi ion? Never. So i have ranted and said my piece. I just want our good paying jobs to come back. (talk)18:30, 5 March 2017

"I want news that is not biased so i can make my own decision whether its right or wrong." Yup, that's one of the core principles of Wikinews (and of "old school" journalism).

Some folks these days do seem, though, to badly overestimate the amount of bias in mainstream news, while badly underestimating the level of disingenuity of Trump's output.

Pi zero (talk)18:37, 5 March 2017