For a reporter or columnist who works for a newspaper where adroitly placed lies, slants, biases and exaggerations are the order of the day to come out swinging against social media based on creditability issues blows through the "irony," stage and directly to the "hypocrisy" stage.
Writing from a platform where "credibility" is the LAST consideration (if it's a consideration at all) while falsely claiming "Integrity of information is the one thing newspapers can promise readers that other new media can’t deliver with the same consistency," is the crux of this matter and the reason for this post.
The local newspaper is no less guilty of falsity, exaggerations, attacks, distortions and the like then the 3rd Reich's main newspaper, the Völkischer Beobachter or the Das Reich (newspaper).
One of the biggest problems I have with the Columbian is it's editor, Lou Brancaccio, literally uses it as a weapon against those he disagrees with... me, Peter VanNortwick, Brent Boger, Lew Waters and about anyone else wise enough to disagree with him.
The paper has lied repeatedly on a wide variety of issues, using bogus polls to try and demonstrate support for the crap pile Lou and his pit yorkie John have been babbling about for years... support that doesn't exist.
And how many times did they repeat the lie that we've got to have loot rail or we wouldn't get a bridge? And when are they going to print the Willamette Week story that exposes the Oregon Supreme Court decision that the entirety of loot rail is a scam and that the bridge is, in effect, a bone thrown to morons like Tim Leavitt to get his support?
When?
Never.
Because this rage... this faint caricature of a REAL newspaper... doesn't want you to know.
And yet, we're lectured by an employee of that same paper that THEY are the arbiters of all information because of their fanciful in philosophy but nonexistent in practice policy that they "promise readers" some sort of "integrity of information."
Please.
That dog... ain't NEVAH gonna hunt.
3 comments:
I have to agree with you on this one. As one of those people who was "butchered", "ambushed" and made to look like a pedophile to the people of Vancouver, I can definitely relate. It does seem a bit "odd" to me that the bastion of truth and unbiased reporting, sometimes referred to as the Columbian, is going to talk about the reliability of any source of information. Things that make you go hmmmm...
The Columbian gave up trying to be a real newspaper many years ago. They can't go out of business soon enough.
The question should be: Are the sources "reliable," IS the information credible and is it a REAL news story? Not the AP fluff-n-stuff and slamming that our local newspaper is known for.... --Jeremy
Post a Comment