Media Bias

We’ve seen how Facebook openly favors liberal news outlets; now we can see the unconscious bias against conservative outlets that media moguls have.

Facebook at least has started paying lip service to (and may actually be serious about) correcting its own bias.  The company held an allegedly off-the-record meeting with a dozen or so publishing executives (allegedly because of the leaks of the meeting’s contents by participants).  BuzzFeed‘s Editor in Chief Ben Smith, though, objected to the presence of “six conservative-leaning publications among the dozen or so outlets” present.  Apparently, actual balance between conservatives and liberals is biased representation.

Mr Smith said that the number of conservative publications in attendance indicated that Facebook had bought into the idea, promoted primarily by conservatives, that mainstream outlets such as the New York Times are liberal and should be counterbalanced by right-leaning opinion outlets, said people familiar with his remarks.

As if the NYT is a bastion of conservatism and needs no counterbalance.  Or, as if liberalism itself needs no counterbalance.

Then he attacked the journalistic standards of The Daily Caller, a conservative outlet that was represented at the meeting.  Lacking coherent argument, the liberal Smith stooped to character assassination, this time of a competitor.  He’s not alone in the character assassination; Lydia Polgreen, HuffPost Editor in Chief, in a canonical example of a pot complaining about a kettle, echoed Smith’s plaint.

It’s bad enough that the NLMSM is biased.  It’s bordering on dangerous when the NLMSM can no longer discriminate bias from balance.

Misunderstood

A 13-year-old Huntsville girl was beheaded after she witnessed her grandmother assaulted with a knife and left to die on the ground in a cemetery, court testimony revealed.

A child.

The butchers were members of the Sinaloa cartel; apparently, they were disgruntled with the grandmother’s handling of a drug delivery.  It’s also…interesting…that the thugs chose to take the child along with the grandmother to the site where murder occurred, supposedly just to remonstrate with her before “[t]he argument escalated.”

These are the beasts that the Progressive-Democrats insist are not animals, just misunderstood yout’s.

An Award, or Two

Recall Congressman Steve Cohen’s (D, TN) performance during last week’s House hearings with Peter Strzok, during which Cohen said Strzok deserved a Purple Heart for the questions he was being asked.  This, of course, is outrageous, deprecating as it does the decoration for servicemen who are wounded or killed in combat defending the right of guys like Cohen to be stupidly insulting.

As Sean Higgins, an Air Force veteran, put it,

How do you compare someone getting wounded in combat to someone getting in trouble for message he sent?

Indeed.

Cohen, on hearing the outrage (and not before) expressed regret for his comparison.

I regret mentioning the Purple Heart medal at yesterday’s hearing. My intent was to speak metaphorically to make a broader point about attacks against the FBI and Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation into a Russian attack on our country[.]

This is nonsense.  Cohen is an experienced politician; words are his stock in trade.  He knew exactly what he was “mentioning;” it plainly was a carefully planned slur against his Republican colleagues.  Were he regretful, he would have walked back his comment before the risk of political damage from it arose.

On the other hand, both Strzok and Cohen do deserve awards.  Strzok should get an Oscar for his performance as Starring Witness with his carefully staged outrage over his being called—gently—to answer for his shameful behavior as an FBI agent pretending to investigate Hillary Clinton’s (D) email escapades and Trump-Russia collusion.

Cohen deserves an Oscar for Best Supporting Politician for his staged “outrage” over the questioning of Strzok.

Voters should remember Cohen’s acting this fall.

An Example of Irrationality

Here’s Donald Trump decrying Germany’s willingness make itself dependent on Russian energy supplies by pushing for Nordstream 2, which will mean that Germany will get 60% of its natural gas from Russia, to go with the 40% of its oil imports that already are from Russia.  Aside from becoming so dependent on an enemy for its energy, Germany will be paying Russia billions of euros for the privilege.

I have to say, I think it’s very sad when Germany makes a massive oil and gas deal with Russia, where you’re supposed to be guarding against Russia, and Germany goes out and pays billions and billions of dollars a year to Russia.

The Progressive-Democrats went hysterical over Trump’s remark.  Here’s House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D, CA) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D, NY) in a joint statement:

President Trump’s brazen insults and denigration of one of America’s most steadfast allies, Germany, is an embarrassment.  His behavior this morning is another profoundly disturbing signal that the President is more loyal to President Putin than to our NATO allies.

Because not wanting billions of euros to go to Russia in return for dependency on Russian good offices is somehow being loyal to Putin.

Sure.

Not Far Wrong

In an interview with the British newspaper The Sun, President Donald Trump said that Prime Minister Theresa May’s Brexit “blueprint” for Brexit would likely kill any opportunity for special trade deals with the US.  A critical part of that blueprint would have Great Britain

stick[ing] to a common ­rulebook with Brussels on goods and agricultural produce in a bid to keep customs borders open with the EU.

The EU’s trade rulebook, not just on goods and ag products, but covering all trade, explicitly blocks nations from entering into unilateral trade deals with non-EU nations.  Trade deals with non-EU nations can only be EU trade deals.  Sticking to the EU’s trade rulebook, then, would make it impossible for Great Britain to enter into its own deals with other nations—including with the US.

If they do a deal like that, we would be dealing with the European Union instead of dealing with the UK, so it will probably kill the deal.

If they do that, then their trade deal with the US will probably not be made.

Trump isn’t far wrong on that.

At a joint news conference the day after the Sun interview, though, May said that

the leaders had agreed to pursue an “ambitious” trade deal between the two nations that “works for both countries right across the economies.”

That would seem encouraging for Great Britain, implying as it does that May’s blueprint doesn’t, or will be modified to not, include a commitment to the EU’s trade rulebook.