3 Crucial Breakdowns In Journalistic Standards
That Explain The Atlantic’s Trump Political
Hit Piece
The Federalist,
by
Christopher Bedford
Original Article
Posted By: earlybird,
9/8/2020 10:47:20 AM
For Washington staffers and politicos, a day off on Monday creeps into a half-day on Friday (“to beat the traffic”), which seeps into an early Thursday (“packing for the trip”). Among this sizable set of folks stretching from the Hill to its consultants to their non-profits, Labor Day is half-sacred. The lazy, end-of-summer weekend away took a broadside Thursday night, however, when The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg published a badly sourced, difficult-to-confirm, belief-stretching story about President Donald Trump denigrating America’s honored dead at Belleau Woods, France.(Snip) poor sourcing practices, confirmation bias, and an echo chamber’s misleading “confirmations” dominated the cycle.
Reply 1 - Posted by:
earlybird 9/8/2020 10:57:52 AM (No. 534711)
Re OP comment, Bedford goes into considerable detail in discussing how really bad this Atlantic decision to publish was. He tells us how really good ethical journalists and their publishers vet their stories and make publishing go or no go decisions. Pretty stringent. He also reveals the tricks some play to give their stories heft. If we learn to recognize the telltale signs we are not as apt to be concerned by what they put out.
5 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
Bur Oak 9/8/2020 11:25:32 AM (No. 534737)
Unfortunately many people believe bilge water like this because they swim in it by watching CNN, MSNBC, etc. and reading the Daily Kos, Mother Jones, Huffington Post, etc. If you give them alternative sources or a differing view they reject them out of hand without taking a look or using reason because it doesn't conform to their world view.
7 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
Jesuslover54 9/8/2020 11:29:49 AM (No. 534744)
This is NOT a breakdown in standards, it is malicious INTENT.
The old cui bono applies here, right Mrs. jobs?
10 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
reefdiver 9/8/2020 11:33:06 AM (No. 534748)
You know there will be another hit piece every week until the election (possibly 4 more years of attacks).
6 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
ToryWhite 9/8/2020 11:43:23 AM (No. 534756)
Even Bolton says it never happened. Some buyer's remorse there...Bolton didn't get the goods he sold out for, I imagine.
3 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
HotRod 9/8/2020 11:47:52 AM (No. 534761)
The Atlantic should change it's name to ''The East China Sea.'' Who knows how much Chinese money is flowing to that propaganda rag? Subscriptions alone probably doesn't even cover the rent!
3 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
Pearson365 9/8/2020 11:49:22 AM (No. 534763)
“In the case of Goldberg’s Atlantic story, notice none of those cited are primary sources. .........Even more egregiously in the case of Goldberg’s story is that substantial primary sources existed, including both people and documents. They are contradicting the secondary-source rumor-mongering that was the entire lead of the piece. “
Author errs in applying journalistic standards to this crude and baseless smear of Trump. Article was never meant to be a serious piece but simply another in a long line of lies about PDT. We can expect more of these well coordinated leftist smears over the 57 days and for the 51 months left in Trump’s presidency. The irony of this piece that the Atlantic is funded by the radical leftist widow of Steve Jobs, whose creative genius helped destroy the magazine and newspaper sectors while making Americans less informed than ever,
2 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
chance_232 9/8/2020 12:06:53 PM (No. 534779)
Journalistic Standards ceased being "a thing" with the nomination of D Trump. Its the primary reason that I went from being a never Trumper to a supporter. I try to be intellectually honest and found myself on a near daily basis refuting the bilge, false "statements" and comments taken out of context, or where no context was provided.
This was a deliberate hit piece, plain and simple, designed to separate Trump from his supporters. The four "anonymous" sources are nothing more than a cya from a potential libel suit. The fact is that four sources doesnt make a story true if said sources have an agenda and lied about it.
Before Trump coined the phrase "fake news", WE, called it biased and journalistic malpractice.
To call it a lack of Journalistic Standards is laughable, when no standards exist except to defeat republicans generally and Trump specifically.
1 person likes this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
john56 9/8/2020 12:13:48 PM (No. 534789)
Simple. If the story screams "This one will get Trump!" all journalistic standards go out the window.
You'd think by now somebody would have figured that these Acme packaged stories are blowing up quicker than Wile E. Coyote's schemes and Acme packages were to get the Roadrunner.
Beep, Beep!
3 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
edgar 9/8/2020 12:18:00 PM (No. 534800)
FTA via Jonathan Turley, "I just watched Goldberg's interview on CNN and was struck by his response to evidence that the flight to the cemetery was canceled for weather. Both Bolton and Pentagon sources have confirmed that reason, and Goldberg says that that all may be true..." Uh, that is called evidence that proves that it IS true. What Goldberg says has no evidence and therefore is NOT true. He cannot get anyone on record to support it. But hell, CNN and MSNBC don't care either. None of the 'journ-o-lists' has any integrity.
4 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
HerbVA 9/8/2020 12:22:58 PM (No. 534805)
“...an exacerbated communications director...”. Who the hell edits these articles? I surely expect better from The Federalist.
1 person likes this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Vitaman 9/8/2020 12:43:23 PM (No. 534829)
Journalistic Standards is an oxymoron.
4 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
cedar 9/8/2020 12:53:01 PM (No. 534849)
Goldberg and journalists like him are in the same category as the looters and rioters in the streets —- they want to destroy at all costs. In reality, they are all scums!
4 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
droopydog 9/8/2020 1:07:06 PM (No. 534865)
Journalistic standards--how quaint.
By the time this story has been completely debunked, the dims will be 9 or 10 smears down the road and people will still be writing about "journalistic standards".
3 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
starboard 9/8/2020 1:41:24 PM (No. 534903)
The Democrats and their media partners cried wolf a long time ago. They have lost all credibility.
3 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
MissileMan742 9/8/2020 5:32:39 PM (No. 535068)
Back in the '60s celebrity fan magazines would fill their covers with outrageous headlines to suck in readers, only to find an article based on make believe interviews, full of imaginary answers to hypothetical questions. It looks like the writers of those rags have moved on, but their style has stayed the same.
1 person likes this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "earlybird"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
Comments:
Bedford looks at the Atlantic’s anonymously-sourced hit piece from the point of view of a journalist.