Slanted: How the News Media Taught Us to Love Censorship and Hate Journalism by Sharyl Attkisson

Author:Sharyl Attkisson [Attkisson, Sharyl]
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9780062974693
Google: xyRczQEACAAJ
Publisher: HarperCollins Publishers
Published: 2020-07-15T20:31:19.939593+00:00

One notable exception to the media outlets casually throwing around the “L” word is National Public Radio (NPR). When it came to Trump’s allegation about illegal immigrants voting, NPR did not call it a “lie” but said there is “no credible evidence of widespread voter fraud.”

That brings up a second set of news phrases the media invented and deployed specifically against Trump: “no credible evidence,” “no evidence,” and “without evidence.”

“Without Evidence”

As a news journalist, I do not recall uttering or hearing the phrase “without evidence” when reporting on anybody or anything over the course of about thirty-five years. Until we covered Trump.

To show how suddenly and starkly the terminology emerged as part of the lexicon of journalists, I conducted a Google search using the words “Trump without evidence.” It returned 179 million results. I then did the same search for “Obama without evidence,” and none—zero—of the top results involved the media calling out Obama for claims “without evidence.” In fact, searching for “Obama without evidence” returned primarily stories about, you guessed it, Trump having no evidence for his claims.

At first glance, it might seem as though phrases such as “without evidence” and “no credible evidence” are more fact based and responsible than tossing around accusations of “lies.” But they can be just as problematic.

First, who decides what “evidence” is “credible”?

Second, absence of evidence does not necessarily mean a claim is discredited. After all, there was “no evidence” that polio could be transmitted via water—until there was. There was “no evidence” that some cholesterol is good for your health—until there was.

Third, “without evidence” is an invented concept for the purpose of slanting reporting. Throughout time, few newsmakers presented “evidence” when making statements. It was never expected that each comment or speech would be accompanied by a set of footnotes and citations. Until Trump. Now “without evidence” is commonly invoked in a one-sided fashion, usually against Trump and his supporters and typically when the media want to call them into question or disparage them.

This trend has helped ensure the media’s downward spiral when it comes to the public trust.

Here are a few examples along with my notes. Remember, these phrases did not exist within newsspeak in any meaningful way prior to the press creating them to use against Trump. But you can see that once the word went out, everyone seemed to fall in line and pick up the jargon as if fulfilling orders from a Grand Poobah of Propaganda.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.