Twisted Headline

Here's a headline from Yahoo News:

TERENCE HUNT, AP White House CorrespondentBush slams leak of terror finance story

Think he is talking about Bush financing some "terror" movement? Think again. Here is the kernel of the story:

President Bush on Monday sharply condemned the disclosure of a program to secretly monitor the financial transactions of suspected terrorists....

The url for the story is:

news.yahoo.com...

This is even more substantiation for the "financing some terrorist" slant the headline brings to mind.

Why did this writer not headline the story 'Bush slams leak of terrorist finances story" or some such clarifying statement? Especially since he is the 'White House Correspondent' and therefore would surely be thought to have some clarity on issues.

Why, you ask? Yeah, that is the question isn't it?



please reviewthis thread on how to use 'ex' tags

[edit on 27-6-2006 by masqua]

I cannot believe the conspiracy buffs are ignoring this information....

Oh, I get it! It's because it shows:

1. That news media skews information blatantly
2. In this case, the skew is so obvious it is embarrassing
3. It shows that the skewing of the media is actually harmful to the country.

In order to respond to the information, and the obviousness of it all, one would have to be unbiased oneself.

My, my, my.

Tsk tsk, Curiousity.

Give it a bit for people to read your post and respond.

News services are in business to... sell news. Even my little local paper with a combined readership of 50,000 subscribers skews headlines about local politics or local government to make people impulse buy at the checkout in the convenience stores. It is up to the reader to use critical thinking when reading an article from any news source to discern fact from slant or fiction.

There was another thread recently about incorrect or slanted headlines that, IMO, didn't garner a whole lot of attention either. It just isn't a sexy topic and most people realize that there is a "spin" inherent in most every story.

Originally posted by Curiousity
In order to respond to the information, and the obviousness of it all, one would have to be unbiased oneself.

You should realize that there are no unbiased people. Just because you are a little upset that no one has responded yet to your thread does not give justification to sling innuendo.

I am not jumping on you, just offering you free advice to let your post sit a bit and receive some hits from members. I would think that you will some receive some responses shortly from members that may only read ATS in their free time, and with summer here, that free time is limited.

Cheers,

JDub

[edit on 6/27/2006 by BlueTileSpook]

Is there anyone out there who believes what the agenda driven New York Times writes?

wrong thread, sorry

[edit on 27-6-2006 by curiousity]

he needs to be locked up anyways for war crimes.

Originally posted by Desert Dawg
Is there anyone out there who believes what the agenda driven New York Times writes?

Did you believe the Judith Miller piece about WMD's in Iraq that appeared in the Times?