Here’s How the Media Are Lying Right Now: Elon Musk ‘Transparency’ Edition

[Valletta]

When discussing digital news, Twitter stands out as the largest social media platform in the world, with 611 million users. In comparison, The New York Times has a total of 11 million users. The influence of Twitter is significant, particularly given that its owner operates twitter from Oval Office.

Another digital news platform, Truth Social, has over 7 million users and its founder is the current president of the United States.

Those digital platforms are different, they are not news organizations or really considered media.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

Those digital platforms are different, they are not news organizations or really considered media.

Fair enough.

I'm not sure I understand your point. Are you suggesting that media outlets NY Times or AP should cease operations?

 

[Valletta]

Fair enough.

I'm not sure I understand your point. Are you suggesting that media outlets NY Times or AP should cease operations?

They need a lot of improvement. It's too bad, the national media rejected having a panel of their own journalists take complaints about stories. That would be a start. I remember the first time I ever complained about the facts being wrong, the reporter told me I "missed the spirit of the story."

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

They need a lot of improvement. It's too bad, the national media rejected having a panel of their own journalists take complaints about stories. That would be a start. I remember the first time I ever complained about the facts being wrong, the reporter told me I "missed the spirit of the story."

I am one of those rare conservatives who believe in the free market. If people think the New York Times is not doing its job, they should start their own publication instead of complaining. Many conservatives have recognized the lack of conservative voices in the media and have responded by launching cable news, digital publications, podcasts, etc. Today, there are plenty of conservative news outlets.

As I have posted before, twenty years ago the balance of news outlets, whether cable news or radio news, podcasts tilted toward Democrats and liberals. Today, it is more balanced. There is no reason to complain about media coverage, as both sides now have adequate representation.

The issue with the American news media over the past 40 years is that every outlet has become a money-making organization serving specific consumers. We do not need left-leaning or right-leaning media. Instead, we need media that present the news objectively and allow the American people to decide for themselves. We do not need Rachel Maddow to tell us how bad President Trump is or Sean Hannity to tell us how great he is. Simply present the news and let us determine whether it is good or bad.

I watched President Trump's interview today, and he lied at least three times in less than five minutes. I don't need MSNBC to explain his lies or Fox News to praise his press conference; I understood it just by listening.

 

[Valletta]

There is no reason to complain about media coverage, as both sides now have adequate representation.

There's plenty to complain about, particularly the lack of investigative journalism and the heavy slanting of facts to support chosen narratives. While here and there we see good stories, too few are willing to take on the corrupt establishment.

 

[A2SG]

No, they didn't cover it properly. That means they failed to provide the truth according to journalistic standards.

Yeah, I heard you. They didn't provide your preferred narrative.

Some do, though. Keep in mind, there's plenty of media outlets out there, not all of them will align with your preferred stance on any particular issue...but some will. Pick and choose, and you'll get the news you prefer.

Here's the thing, and something a lot of people misunderstand about the media: it's a business. Media outlets, whether newspapers, broadcast, cable or internet, are in business to make money. Very, very few are operating as a public service, or under some high minded goal. Maybe they couch their goals in such language, but in the end, if they don't meet their bottom line revenue, they will cease to exist.

Most of us assume journalists all hold themselves to a high standard of truth and factual reporting, and in a lot of cases, specific, individual journalists do attempt to do that. But the goal of management of most media outlets, moreso the larger it becomes, is to make money. Factual reporting is less of a priority. Sensational stories are more popular, and thus sell more papers (or the equivalent), so they are prioritized by management.

As far as investigative journalism goes, it takes time to adequately research and investigate a story, and that time costs money. For many large media outlets, it simply isn't cost effective, so they don't do it. Why allow a reporter to spend months investigating the misappropriation of funds for a local municipality and uncover the details...only to have the story gain no traction whatsoever, and no new advertisers will come to your paper. Not every investigative story is a Watergate...even if the reporter feels like it would be while working on it.

So, if you're going to do investigative journalism, you want to ensure your work will make the biggest splash possible when it is reported...so it does actually generate profits as a result. Budget improprieties? Yawn. But if Elon Musk does something shady that doesn't show up on the DOGE website...well, that will get clicks!

-- A2SG, "get clicks" is, of course, the modern equivalent of selling papers.....

 

[essentialsaltes]

And yet still, reporters and cable news talkers suggested Musk might be hiding something.

CNN Made FOIA Request About DOGE—Only to Learn FOIA Staff Was Fired​

When CNN put in a Freedom of Information Act request with the Office of Personnel Management for information related to security clearances for billionaire Elon Musk and other personnel at the so-called Department of Government Efficiency who have been allowed access to sensitive or classified government networks, the outlet got an unexpected response.​

"Good luck with that, they just fired the whole privacy team," an OPM email address wrote back, according to Tuesday reporting from CNN. An OPM official told the outlet that the federal government's human resources agency did not layoff the entire privacy team, but did not comment further on the matter.​

According to CNN, OPM's privacy team "is tasked with ensuring the agency's data privacy practices meet legal requirements and protect the trust of the public." Members of the agency's communications staff and employees who handle FOIA requests were also terminated, per CNN, which cited two unnamed sources.​

 

[Valletta]

Yes, they are firing people. You can bet if people interfere or sabotage audit efforts they will be fired. The American people are going to find out what the Democrats did with taxpayer money, like it or not. I am confident the economy can be saved.

 

[Pommer]

They need a lot of improvement. It's too bad, the national media rejected having a panel of their own journalists take complaints about stories. That would be a start. I remember the first time I ever complained about the facts being wrong, the reporter told me I "missed the spirit of the story."

Maybe we should have the government (Trump) write an Executive Order to create the Department of Truth to vet which news media are kosher?

 

[Valletta]

Maybe we should have the government (Trump) write an Executive Order to create the Department of Truth to vet which news media are kosher?

A problem is that a substantial portion of the major media is essentially a wing of the Democratic Party. Trump has that 20 billion dollar lawsuit against CBS. As I've said, the national media has rejected a fact-checking group of their own. It could so easily be set up, have a rotating commission of Associated Press, MSNBC, ABC, CNN, journalists. As you know, conservatives were very much against that Mary Poppins woman and her truth ministry, against the gag order against Trump and the censorship by social media of Trump and conservatives. I am so glad Trump and Musk are pushing transparency and are so open to questions. I see the judiciary is not stopping:

A Mississippi judge ordered a newspaper to remove an editorial. Press advocates are outraged​

A Mississippi judge ordered a newspaper to remove an editorial. Press advocates are outraged

A Mississippi judge ordered a newspaper to remove an editorial criticizing the mayor and city leaders after the officials sued, sparking complaints from press advocates that it violates the First Amendment. Chancery Judge Crystal Wise Martin issued the restraining order against the Clarksdale...

www.yahoo.com

 

[Valletta]

Oh, I see. Your objection isn't that they didn't cover it, but that they didn’t cover it according to the narrative you prefer. Got it.

Hey, there is always Fox News. They definitely cover any issue the way Trump wants it covered.

-- A2SG, not like the media is one thing, ya know...there's some media outlet or another covering every different narrative these days...

They were flat out lying when the claimed Border Patrol was whipping migrants. And they stuck with that fake story for a long time.

 

[A2SG]

They were flat out lying when the claimed Border Patrol was whipping migrants. And they stuck with that fake story for a long time.

What's your evidence for that never happening? I'm not saying it did happen, nor am I saying it didn't happen. I don't know. But you are now claiming it didn't, so I have to ask, what do you base that assumption on?

-- A2SG, cuz if one agent whipped one migrant, and a reporter was there to see it...it wasn't a lie.....

 

[Valletta]

What's your evidence for that never happening? I'm not saying it did happen, nor am I saying it didn't happen. I don't know. But you are now claiming it didn't, so I have to ask, what do you base that assumption on?

-- A2SG, cuz if one agent whipped one migrant, and a reporter was there to see it...it wasn't a lie.....

Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas denied Monday that Border Patrol agents used whips to prevent Haitian migrants from crossing the Rio Grande to reach an encampment set up under a Texas bridge where thousands of other migrants have gathered. . .
However, Mayorkas and Border Patrol Chief Raul Ortiz told reporters in Del Rio, Texas Monday that they saw nothing obviously wrong with how the agents acted based on initial viewings of the images and footage. Mayorkas explained that agents use long reins — not whips — to control their horses, while Ortiz cited the difficulty in distinguishing migrants from smugglers as people move back and forth near the river.

Caught in a Lie: Border Patrol Agents Never Whipped Migrants

A little over a year ago, border patrol agents were accused of whipping Hattian migrants as they crossed the border into Del Rio, Texas. But as it turns out, as many already had suspected, no whipping actually occurred and Heritage has the proof. This week, Mike Howell, Director of Heritage’s...

www.heritage.org

Howell said the Heritage Foundation sued to get the documents that told what went on behind the scenes.
“One such communication that we found was an email from his top press staffer, a woman by the name of Marsha Espinosa. She had forwarded to Mayorkas an article. In this article was a comment from the photographer that was there, the one source that was neither border patrol or a Haitian, illegal alien. The photographer said there was no whipping, ‘I saw no whipping,’” Howell said.

x.com

x.com

 

[A2SG]

Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas denied Monday that Border Patrol agents used whips to prevent Haitian migrants from crossing the Rio Grande to reach an encampment set up under a Texas bridge where thousands of other migrants have gathered. . .
However, Mayorkas and Border Patrol Chief Raul Ortiz told reporters in Del Rio, Texas Monday that they saw nothing obviously wrong with how the agents acted based on initial viewings of the images and footage. Mayorkas explained that agents use long reins — not whips — to control their horses, while Ortiz cited the difficulty in distinguishing migrants from smugglers as people move back and forth near the river.

Caught in a Lie: Border Patrol Agents Never Whipped Migrants

A little over a year ago, border patrol agents were accused of whipping Hattian migrants as they crossed the border into Del Rio, Texas. But as it turns out, as many already had suspected, no whipping actually occurred and Heritage has the proof. This week, Mike Howell, Director of Heritage’s...

www.heritage.org

Howell said the Heritage Foundation sued to get the documents that told what went on behind the scenes.
“One such communication that we found was an email from his top press staffer, a woman by the name of Marsha Espinosa. She had forwarded to Mayorkas an article. In this article was a comment from the photographer that was there, the one source that was neither border patrol or a Haitian, illegal alien. The photographer said there was no whipping, ‘I saw no whipping,’” Howell said.

x.com

x.com

Okay, from what you've provided here, it sounds like there were some pictures that appeared to show migrants being whipped, that, later, a photographer (unclear if it's the same one who took the photos in question) claimed that what appeared to be beating wasn't actually beating at all. This correction was reported on, and, apparently, one of the agents accused of beating not only was cleared of the charge, but was later given an achievement award.

That about sum it up?

Okay, so this seems to indicate that the initial report was mistaken. Now, I haven't seen the photographs in question, so I have no idea where the idea came from that the agents were beating the migrants, but it must have seemed that way, since quite a few people took it that way, so the mistake seems like it was an understandable one. But, it does appear to have been a mistake, one that has been corrected and there are reports of that correction.

Now, I don't know if there were subsequent reports on this incident that came after the correction, or if those reporting on it knew of the correction, so I can't comment further. But in order to call these subsequent reports "flat out lying," you'd have to show that they knew it was a mistake and reported on it anyway. Can you do that? After all, viewing the photos themselves apparently sure seemed to show that.

I'll be honest, I have no idea how widely this incident was reported, either before or after the correction was made. I never heard it before today, but it's possible it just escaped my radar.

But what's your point here? That the media sometimes makes mistakes? Sure. Everyone does. And there are even some media outlets who lie intentionally. Some have paid out huge judgments based on that. It happens on both sides of the ideological aisle.

-- A2SG, but thanks for providing evidence...it's was educational...

 

[Valletta]

Okay, from what you've provided here, it sounds like there were some pictures that appeared to show migrants being whipped, that, later, a photographer (unclear if it's the same one who took the photos in question) claimed that what appeared to be beating wasn't actually beating at all. This correction was reported on, and, apparently, one of the agents accused of beating not only was cleared of the charge, but was later given an achievement award.

That about sum it up?

Okay, so this seems to indicate that the initial report was mistaken. Now, I haven't seen the photographs in question, so I have no idea where the idea came from that the agents were beating the migrants, but it must have seemed that way, since quite a few people took it that way, so the mistake seems like it was an understandable one. But, it does appear to have been a mistake, one that has been corrected and there are reports of that correction.

Now, I don't know if there were subsequent reports on this incident that came after the correction, or if those reporting on it knew of the correction, so I can't comment further. But in order to call these subsequent reports "flat out lying," you'd have to show that they knew it was a mistake and reported on it anyway. Can you do that? After all, viewing the photos themselves apparently sure seemed to show that.

I'll be honest, I have no idea how widely this incident was reported, either before or after the correction was made. I never heard it before today, but it's possible it just escaped my radar.

But what's your point here? That the media sometimes makes mistakes? Sure. Everyone does. And there are even some media outlets who lie intentionally. Some have paid out huge judgments based on that. It happens on both sides of the ideological aisle.

-- A2SG, but thanks for providing evidence...it's was educational...

It was a big story in the United States. Right away the Biden administration went with the fake story to support their efforts in regard to bringing in illegals. Mayorkas had an email indicating it never happened before he went with the contrived story. I don't mind mistakes, if they quickly correct the mistakes like Elon Musk does that is one thing, but the establishment seems to go with the false story as long as they can get away with it.

Mayorkas knew border agents did not whip migrants before repeating false claims, emails show

Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas was told last year that there was no evidence Border Patrol agents had “whipped” or “strapped” Haitian migrants at the US-Mexico border — hours before…

nypost.com

 

[wing2000]

Sounds like we need a "Ministry of Truth" to hold these news organizations accountable for reporting correctly.

I think the op should apply.

 

[BNR32FAN]

A reporter at the event asked Musk to identify “the checks and balances that are in place to ensure that there is accountability and transparency” with his process, to which Musk replied, “In fact, we post our actions to the DOGE handle on X and to the DOGE website. So all of our actions are maximally transparent.” And yet still, reporters and cable news talkers suggested Musk might be hiding something.

How the Media Are Lying Right Now: Musk 'Transparency' Edition

Ignore the media nagging about 'transparency.' They don't want to see what Elon Musk is doing. They want to stop him.

thefederalist.com

It's what the major media does.

It’s what both sides do, both the republican supporters and the democratic supporters. Not all of them but many of them.

 

[A2SG]

It was a big story in the United States. Right away the Biden administration went with the fake story to support their efforts in regard to bringing in illegals. Mayorkas had an email indicating it never happened before he went with the contrived story. I don't mind mistakes, if they quickly correct the mistakes like Elon Musk does that is one thing, but the establishment seems to go with the false story as long as they can get away with it.

Yup, it happens. Again, remember how Fox News knowingly promoted the false 2020 stolen election narrative and had to pay a huge settlement?

And some stories are just wrong, and are corrected when additional facts come to light. We also have to be careful when noting these corrections as well, as the corrections themselves can sometimes be wrong, or subject to bias. Let's not pretend the Heritage Foundation is an unbiased source.

No one has ever said any media outlet is perfect. Just be careful when painting "the media" as if its a single entity, because it ain't.

-- A2SG, and with so many media outlets available these days, biased sources are more plentiful and rampant than ever....