Summarizing the Media’s Horrible Week

It was a horrible week for the mainstream media, one that even the mainstream media had to acknowledge.

While CNN makes lame “honest mistake” excuses, everyone knows the mainstream media had a horrible week. The common feature in these self-inflicted injuries was a desperation to see Donald Trump’s Presidency face a crisis and an overwhelming confidence that he must have done something wrong. If he did something wrong, then the truth should come out any minute.

The media’s gullibility to believe bad news about Trump is not honest. It is delusional.

Wesley Pruden writes at the Washington Times, “Big media’s sad and extremely horrible week.

Trending: Taqiyya: The Muslim Practice of Lying to Protect Islam Is Prevalent across Sects

The Columbia Journalism Review, published in that citadel of journalists educated to be house-broken, correct in politics and steeped in the grand mission of “improving” readers, relieved itself this week of the sad story of “journalism’s terrible, horrible, no good, very bad week.” The recital was enough to break the hardest heart.

The Review set out a refresher of everything that went wrong, and it was quite a list:

Brian Ross’ disaster of a bombshell report that Michael Flynn was prepared to testify that he had been instructed by candidate Donald Trump to open contacts with Russian officials eager to meddle in the election. Later that day, Mr. Ross corrected himself, conceding that it was shortly after the election that the directive was issued. Big difference. He was taken off the beat for four weeks and the president will be off-limits to him.

Reuters and Bloomberg had to correct their dispatches that special counsel Robert Mueller had subpoenaed President Trump’s personal bank records after The Wall Street Journal reported the subpoenas were for “people or entities affiliated” with the president. Not quite the same thing.

CNN, CBS, and MSNBC all breathlessly reported they had discovered an email that proved the Trump campaign got an advance look at emails hacked by WikiLeaks. The story fell apart when it “emerged,” as the London papers typically put it, that the networks got the date of the email wrong, and it was old fake news when the president first saw it.

Read the entire Washington Times piece.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!

Send this to a friend