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

Latest comment: 7 years ago by Pi zero in topic Review of revision 4291344 [Passed]

I'm really trying to be neutral and fair to Spicer and Trump here, but that's hard when the whole event really looks like it is that one-sided. One thing that might help is that if there is a quote from a news organization, included or excluded, that did think Spicer was right, that might balance it all out without creating false equivalence. We don't have to (and shouldn't) give the minority view equal time but if there is one we should say so. Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:02, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Okay, here's Breitbart. It looks like they're not actually defending the decision, just saying that it happened. Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:26, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Source breakdown edit

Most of this comes from the Independent with a few touches here and there from Al Jazeera, marked. I decided to make a point of including the National Review because it is a known conservative news source and I feel that would give the article more credibility. Specific details attributed to NR are marked. Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:11, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

I know not everyone has full access to the New York Times. I thought it was weird that Baquet would use British spelling so I found another quote that used American. I guess the statement was made out loud rather than written down, which would explain why British and American news outlets spelled it different ways. Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:33, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
Spoke too soon. NY Times actually came up with a really plausible reason why Spicer might have made this decision. Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:43, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Review of revision 4291344 [Passed] edit

Return to "Invited or not, news outlets criticize White House decision to pick and choose their peers" page.