Why Young Men of Color Are Joining White-Supremacist Groups

This one is hard to say much about because it involved ongoing litigation and the article you linked to states: "NPR spokesperson Isabel Lara told Current in a statement that NPR “stands behind David Folkenflik’s reporting. Millions of Americans trust NPR to provide accurate information about the world and their communities every day; we take this responsibility very seriously.”

The article doesn't seem to be definitive proof or admission of wrongdoing of anything but rather allegations in an ongoing litigation.

Honestly I never really considered NPR to be the mainstream media but I suppose they could be. This link is an interesting story that I want to know more about but I'm not sure it's applicable to our conversation. If I'm missing something on this one please let me know.

I think what’s noted in this article is probably a very fair criticism of the media coverage this incident received. I only use the word probably because I don’t know exactly what was said on air on any of these networks, but I remember hearing about this several places when it occurred and the story I read had a pretty misleading headline. When I read the actual story the full context was provided and at the time I remember thinking the headline was misleading. Of the many many things I think Trump can be criticized for regarding immigrants, this incident is not among them.

I think there are 3 things that everyone (left, right, center) could take from this:

1) It’s not only fair to criticize reporting like this, it’s important. We need to rely on the media to keep the government accountable. Items that they can rightly be called out on (like this) makes it that much harder for journalists that try to report honestly. Just like the media needs to keep the government in check, the people need to keep the media in check.
2) No one should be getting all of their information from any one source. We all should be using a variety of sources to form our world view. The devil is in the details so don’t rely solely on headlines (or worse memes) to draw a conclusion.
3) Be skeptical. If something sounds too extreme to be true (whether it’s good or bad) chances are it’s not. Or at least it’s most likely not the full truth you’re hearing. This is especially true with quotes. It usually takes less than a minute to fact check a quote from a politician. I’ve unfollowed a couple Instagram pages (after calling them out) that continued to post blatantly false memes about Trump because I honestly believe nothing harms a cause more than spreading lies.

The Daily Caller link you provided lists 10 items so I’ll be here all day if I were to break down each one exhaustively but I will go through my thoughts on each of them and think it’s important to distinguish a few things first. All media is ultimately the work of humans and by extension they will get things wrong. Items the media can get wrong fall into one of (at least) four categories:

1) Accurate reporting on items that later turn out to be false. For example I’ve seen the media take shit on these boards for predicting Hillary Clinton would win the election. But they were simply reporting accurately on what the available polls at the time were telling them. Trump shocked the world and won the election but the media didn’t lie about what the polls were predicting. The polls they were reporting on were simply wrong. I would include in this properly vetted sources that turn out to be wrong. The network is using a source in good faith but there will never be 100% accuracy from anyone.

2) Honest mistakes. More acceptable in broadcast journalism than in print (where everything should be checked and double checked) but when you’re broadcasting live, you are going to make mistakes. This is the most unfortunate consequence of the 24 hour a day news cycle we live in. What also has to be considered is what remedy the news outlet took to acknowledge their mistake.

3) Shoddy reporting. Reporting where there isn’t an intent to deceive but sources weren’t properly vetted and items weren’t thoroughly checked. IMO this is almost (but not quite) as bad as outright lying.

4) Wrong information with the intent to deceive (lying). This is the toughest to prove. I think the previous example about Trump’s animal remark would actually fit into this category. Using an accurate quote while leaving out key context info is deceitful and the media needs to be better than this.

Anyway, on to the list (continued in next post):

Item 1: CNN Accuses Don Jr. Of Wikileaks Collusion
My thoughts: I rate this as a combo of honest mistake and accurate reporting on faulty sources. If you scroll up on this thread I requested verifiable lies that “MNM outlets printed or broadcast over the past few months that they didn't offer an apology or retraction for”. The Daily Caller linked to a CNN article and in that CNN article it was noted: “CNN originally reported the email was released September 4 -- 10 days earlier -- based on accounts from two sources who had seen the email. The new details appear to show that the sender was relying on publicly available information. The new information indicates that the communication is less significant than CNN initially reported.”
CNN was wrong and acknowledged as much.

Item 2: 2. ABC Tanks Stock Market With Fake Flynn News
My verdict: I’m not sure if this is an honest mistake or a lie but ABC not only acknowledged the error, they suspended the journalist. Their statement as reported in the Daily Caller: ““It is vital we get the story right and retain the trust we have built with our audience –- these are our core principles. We fell far short of that yesterday. Effective immediately, Brian Ross will be suspended for four weeks without pay,” the network said in its statement.”

Item 3: The Mooch is NOT Under Investigation
My verdict: Shoddy reporting plain and simple. If the Daily Caller is to be believed CNN relied on a single source. But again CNN not only apologized, there were 3 CNN employees who resigned over this. Wouldn't this suggest they hold their researchers to a high standard? On a side note it’s not a very popular opinion on the left side of the aisle but damned if I don’t just really like Anthony Scaramucci. As abrasive as he was during his short stint in the White House he is one of the best and most rational Trump surrogates that shows up on talk shows in his defense.

(continued in next post)

Item 4: Bloomberg’s Dirty Deutsche Bank Scoop
My verdict: Most likely an honest mistake and when more information was available the report was corrected. If I were Trump I wouldn’t take too much comfort in the fact that they were subpoenaing the records of those connected to Trump but I agree it was an important correction to make and it was corrected.

Item 5: Sessions Exonerated
My verdict: Accurate reporting. The original article revolves around questions raised regarding Sessions’ contact with Russian officials and while it raises questions regarding his omissions regarding contact, it also fully reports on Sessions’ explanation for said omissions. When more information was available, CNN published that as well (both articles below). We may differ on this opinion but I believe it is right for news organizations to challenge government officials on items such as this, just as it’s right to challenge news organizations on errors. It’s part of keeping them in line.
https://www.cnn.com/2017/12/10/politics/jeff-sessions-fbi-russian-contacts/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2017/12/10/politics/jeff-sessions-fbi-russian-contacts/index.html

Item 6: Russians Aren’t Just Hacking The Election – They’re Hacking Our Power Grid
My verdict: Shoddy reporting. The Washington Post did offer a full article of correction and on the original (now edited) article offered this Editor’s Note: “An earlier version of this story incorrectly said that Russian hackers had penetrated the U.S. electric grid. Authorities say there is no indication of that so far. The computer at Burlington Electric that was hacked was not attached to the grid.”
The Washington Post is better than this and they should be embarrassed that they jumped the gun on this story without knowing all the facts. I don’t see it as them intentionally deceiving the public, but it was very shoddy nonetheless.

(continued in next post)

Item 7: Republicans Funded The Dossier!
Can’t really rate this one because although this article states “A number of news outlets have consistently claimed that Republicans initially paid for the anti-Trump Steele dossier, failing to note that Steele wasn’t even contracted by Fusion GPS until after the GOP donors pulled funding.” When you click on the link which goes to another Daily Caller story, the only media outlet noted is New York Magazine which doesn’t really strike me as mainstream media. The dossier has been covered pretty exhaustively and I’m less concerned with who put it together and more concerned with whether any of the items in it are true.

Item 8: CNN’s Gets Comey Prediction Wildly Wrong
My verdict: Honest mistake based on an incorrect source. Ironically it’s the Washington Post (one of Trump’s favorite targets) that is reporting on the error and the subsequent correction by CNN. CNN was clearly wrong and owned up to it but I don’t think this amounts to intentional deceit.

(continued in next post)

Item 9: The ’17 Intel Agencies’ Lie
My verdict: Open to interpretation but I think it’s probable there was some intentional deceit here. The only article linked to in the Daily Caller does have a correction noted: “Correction: June 29, 2017
A White House Memo article on Monday about President Trump’s deflections and denials about Russia referred incorrectly to the source of an intelligence assessment that said Russia orchestrated hacking attacks during last year’s presidential election. The assessment was made by four intelligence agencies — the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. The assessment was not approved by all 17 organizations in the American intelligence community.”
Basically if someone keeps making an incorrect statement after several sources have pointed out it’s incorrect, plausible deniability is gone and it’s a lie. It’s impossible for me to know who knew what and when in this piece but I think most likely this is disingenuous. Although I would note that it’s not overly reassuring to Trump that the only 4 Intelligence Agencies that weighed in all concur that Russia was doing the hacking. But it certainly doesn’t sound quite as salacious as 17 lol.

(continued in next post)

Item 10. Manafort Notes Are A Nothing Burger
My verdict: Honest mistake based on incorrect sources. When you read the article there are only 2 possibilities: 1) The sources are incorrect or 2) The network is making stuff up. I don’t believe NBC is going to make something like this up so that leaves incorrect sources. The thing about reporting is that it’s always going to rely on sources, often anonymous for its information. News agencies will strive for sources that prove to be reliable. I’m guessing (and it’s only a guess) that when a source provides inaccurate information the news organization will think twice about using them in the future. It's in the best interest of both the source and the network to be accurate. I have no idea if a correction was issued in the future but I do find it disturbing that no correction was noted in the archived article. I would also note that the fact that these notes were a “nothing burger” is ultimately inconsequential to the bigger picture since Manafort is now a convicted felon still awaiting trial on additional charges.

This last one is good example of the checks and balances needed in the media. NBC had an article that turned out to be wrong and Politico was there to call them on it. Not only does this look good for Politico it looks bad for NBC. This (in theory) should lead to better reporting from NBC because they don’t want to be on the receiving end of Politico stories like this.

In closing I would say that while there was definitely some good food for thought in this article, I’d ask you consider the bigger picture. The title of this Daily Caller article is : The Definitive List Of Media Screw-Ups On The Trump-Russia Story

If this is in fact the "definitive list" of media screw ups regarding the Russia Investigation, that is actually very bad news for Trump, because there has been a lot worse revealed over the past year a half than what’s in this article.

Aww come on man, we were just getting to the good stuff with this dude doing my mom and you have to come in with a bunch of boring links, sigh! Haha thanks Burk, I'll look at these links tomorrow morning and give my thoughts.

As an aside, and I mention this only because someone showed me recently and I found it really helpful, that by using the formatting help at the bottom you can post clickable links as opposed to cut and paste web addresses.