https://x.com/jonesville/status/2021834203818864927?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
Back in the '80s when I got my Bachelors degree in this stuff, one of the Intro to Reporting class lessons revolved around reporters accurately reporting what happened. Clearly Sky News (again that is the "source", not X) has failed to instill that in their reporters.
https://x.com/journalismseen/status/2021812038842872121?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/feb/11/tumbler-ridge-canada-shooting-school-mark-carney
"‘Canadian police have identified the suspect as an 18-year old woman with a history of mental health problems’
This is a very serious lie about a shattering event. It’s not a point-scoring exercise to say so: it’s not stigmatising to notice and explain the lie.
Journalist convention is to explain the bones of the story in the first four paragraphs. This developed from the understanding that people don’t always read down: they may click, but they don’t scroll. Engagement tapers.
Not only that, at this point, the facts that the killer was a man (contra earlier reports) who ‘identified’ as trans (previously dismissed as speculation) are the newest lines, a fresh top.
The defies all natural editorial instincts to bury in the tenth paragraph the newest line and the explanation that its first sentence is untrue. It will know by its own data that a percentage of readers will just bounce off after reading the lie, and increasing numbers drop off by a third or half of the way down. Certainly before reaching the truth. Which turns out to be not so sacred after all.
The madness of this slavish, unquestioning devotion to the lie is puzzling and very worrying. There’s a defiance with which the paper sacrifices itself to the service of identity affirmation.
Telling these devoted outlets that they’re wrong has a cantilever effect. It just bolsters their self-righteousness.
But choosing to comply with the false claims of a child killer, and assuming virtue in doing so, should never not shock us. Is there nothing that will jolt these editors out of such servility? We saw it too with the Canadian police: the complacency with which the spokesman pronoun corrected a reporter who used accurate language.
Sky News and Reuter have also been perpetuating the unqualified lie overnight, hours after being proved wrong.
It seems that while there are enough people with money who want them to do it, that’s all that counts. Not principle, or the instincts that led them into the profession. Enough people to pay them to prioritise a murderer over his child victims.
Reason, and appeals to professionalism and conscience, are likely misplaced. A man killed children, and if you’re ready to doff your cap and obey his demands, what difference does it make when someone points out that a long time ago you promised to tell the truth. None at all."
(Again, The Guardian is seems to meet Dan's arbitrary criteria for "real journalism")
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-02-12/canadian-shooter-identified-in-school-attack/106333992
(This isn't the ABC network in the US, but seems to be an outlet that meets Dan's criteria for "real journalism")
https://x.com/msmelchen/status/2021685835075113455?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
Reuters (again "real journalists") jumping on the BS bandwagon too.
https://x.com/captive_dreamer/status/2021710447385452623?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
Because having the Canadian police respecting the pronouns of a dead murderer who was "mentally ill" seems like the number one priority.
1 comment:
I'm sick of people who are afraid to speak the truth about men pretending to be women. The gunman was a MAN and not a woman. Period. The LEFT made up this lie and are indoctrinating our children in school to accept this lie. They fail biology when they think a man can become a woman.
Post a Comment