Some are full bore advocacy journalists.

Others think they are being “fair”, but their world view is in the Acela corridor / coastal bubble, and it reflects that.

Yet, others just found a niche that works for them.

And, yes, “They (probably most) believe they are fighting the good fight.”
.

However, what matters is that their employers earn money by providing a product.

That product is still selling, as there is an audience for it, a demand for it.

The reporters are there and get paid by their employers ONLY because they provide the content that fulfills that employers’ niche demand.

Turns out, that niche is rather broad in size, and leans left, in the case of the msm.

Big Maq, you’re giving the msm too much credit for selfish ambition.

No, the msm reports as they do, because they are true believers in the progressive/leftist agenda and don’t see any contradiction in what they’re doing.

They would report the same fake news regardless of whether there is an audience for it or not. I would suggest the readership of the NYT and the viewership of CNN as proof.

They believe they are fighting the good fight.

When I was in journalism school in the early 70’s (before Watergate), there was already a raging debate whether or not a reported could be truly unbiased in their reporting. The solution was advocacy journalism.

It was more prevalent in the TV side than the print side. Then, of course, Woodward and Bernstein happened and then everyone wanted to be a crusader.

mia culpa…

but most important..
what time was the pictures taken?

i have not been able to determine because on a cloudy day you can start taking pics when they start arriving, and ignore the rest…

its not hard to take pics, and select from the group the one in which people are arriving, or one in which they are leaving early due to rain…

only way to check is to get other photos from other people and examine as shadows wont tell you on a cloudy day.

and the reason its important is that everything else they could compare to make a dent, was not valid or would dent anything given how incompetent they have been and always are.

there are two ways to do things. one is to actually have the competence on some level and work it (trump despite what people think) and to do it the leftest way, which is to be good not at the task or the thing, but to be good in the game of smear, and promote, and all that.

you can paint a target on a wall, and be a sharpshooter
(trump)
you can shoot at a wall and paint targets around the holes
(marxists)

the marxists cant ever be competent because cheating negates the ability, and the focus, and all the work needed to be competent, and the acceptance of not being competent or knowing where you stand. if you can game others, why bother with substance.

ergo, obama cant brag about giving money back to the treasury for the changing of the guard, but trump gave back 20%… soooo… lead off with my crowd is bigger than your crowd… which is a meaningless measure..

[meanwhile, the white feminists are about to lose out as they are now seen as the losers who marched and didnt help blacks and race groups, and those groups are now pointing out if you get rid of them, you get rid of those evil white men too… the eye is turning to the women, and funny funny, those who would have defended them and have for eons, are too busy to bother given whats been done to them. but its getting noisy given the fact that they didnt have kids, and the replacements hate them for their color because if white males made it all suck, white women made white men, and white feminists are hated for duplicity, and their white privelege… its all on the web now if you know where to read.

I see “white feminism” as a specific set of single-issue, non-intersectional, superficial feminist practices. It is the feminism we understand as mainstream; the feminism obsessed with body hair, and high heels and makeup, and changing your married name. It is the feminism you probably first learned. “White feminism” is the feminism that doesn’t understand western privilege, or cultural context. It is the feminism that doesn’t consider race as a factor in the struggle for equality. – C young

from blacksphere
White Feminists love killing black babies
The real war on women is the white Liberal feminists getting even with black women.
These feminist frauds act as if they want choice in their bodies, but their real agenda is to denigrate black women, women whom they still resent for the past acts of their lecherous, slave-owning, rapist Democrat husbands / Slave women were at the whim of their masters, so one can only imagine the sexual deviance by these Democrat men, as they brutalized their chattel. Many white women sat idly by as their men “had their way” with the help. Once the slaves were free, the attention of these now thoroughly lecherous men were turned back onto their women. Imagine for a bit how these gentile white women would take to the demands of their men who had been with slave women who had no choice but to do whatever their masters wanted. – by Kevin Jackson

ANGRY UPSET FEMINIST SAYS SHE WANTS TO KILL WHITE PEOPLE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEdhxiQ1wRU

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

gonna be interesting given that they have gone off the deep end in desperation of the revolution being snatched from what they thought was theirs…

The author of that article you linked to knows very little about Bush, his history, or his presidency. The author’s piece has little more depth than a bumper sticker and merely repeats various internet memes of the left about Bush.

Bush’s path was hardly easy, and he was hardly given everything. See this. Bush was also a jet pilot (piece of cake, right?), successful governor of Texas, and campaigned hard for the presidency that he won.

But this presumes that people would believe the government sourced document.

It is a chicken / egg scenario. We get the government we have, because that is what we choose (actively or passively), and don’t expect better behavior.

The msm publishes the kind of reports they do, from the point of view that they do, because there is an audience buying what they are publishing.

In the same way, Breitbart is a valuable internet property because there are many who continue to read their content.

People are self-selecting their “truth”.

Similarly, the behavior we see in the WH is just a devolution to that expectation level.

In my dream world, a press secretary would answer questions with “yes”, “no”, or “I’ll get back to you”, and two hours after the event there would be a published list of answers, each one with a citation to a government document.

I did read that article too.

Unfortunately, off the top of my head, not one body comes to mind that has widely held trust to be “fair” (a loaded word itself, perhaps – many probably would think fair = agrees with me).

Maybe if I think about it more, but wonder can anyone come up with one?

Supreme Court? Didn’t think so.

All seem tainted by a large segment of the population, for one reason or another.
.

It seems many (all?) of us contribute(d) to it by engaging in the blue vs red team dynamic rather than calling b.s. on “our own” team when needed.

This whole bit about the size of the inauguration crowd is just one example of that game and how petty things have become.
.

The unfortunate thing for Conway is her “alternative facts” comment. Reminds me of pelosi’s comment wrt needing to vote for obamacare to know what’s in it. It will endure.

Perhaps a Freudian slip of sorts, but it speaks to the game, and demonstrates why trust is nearly eliminated.

The left / msm will continue to quote her, while exaggerating their own “facts” (lies?), meanwhile, there will be those on “our side” that will continue to ignore trump’s exaggerations (lies?), justifying it as somehow “fighting back” the left, as if that is the path to resolution and restoration.