Why is the media silent?Obama the murderer? Nah...
There are two distinct reasons that The New York Times, NBC, The Associated Press and the rest of the Democrat Party's public relations arm have chosen to ignore the story.
• Barack Obama is President
• The Israelis didn't kill anyone.
In either case, civilian deaths are boo-ring.
Don't you get it, peons?
The media-slash-government decides what's newsworthy -- and why. So just keep your mouth shut and go about your business, if you know what's good for you.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Leftist Media Bias of the Day
Doug Ross alerts us to the new media rule book for coverage of a wartime atrocity Did you know there were over 100 civilian deaths from a single Obama bombing raid gone bad?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Interesting. I actually knew about this -- it WAS all over the news briefly, I guess last week, shortly after it happened. I know this because it was one of the largest boxes (a couple of them, actually, with different headlines) over on Newsmap. Since the size of the boxes on NM ties to the number of outlets carrying the piece, that means that it was, at one point, a "big" story.
It has, of course, since become a non-story, which is... interesting... in itself.
In other words, they didn't just intentionally miss this, they decided to overtly suppress further mention of it... in contrast to Abu Ghirab, which, of course, was the top story of the year for about 12 years running...
100 Dead Civilians... Non-Story.
Terrorists with underpants on head... MAN, that is HEADLINE NEWS.
And now we see the violins inherent in the system.
Amen OBH.
If this happens on Bush's watch -- well we'll just hear about it every day, the way libtards manage to mention Katrina at every opportunity. Never mind that Bush didn't have anything to do with causing an act of God.
Post a Comment