Posted on 10/22/2018 4:22:36 AM PDT by thirdgradeteacher
When leftists bully the media, they turn on you too.
Bullying the media consists of contradicting them on any matter, much like hurting the feelings of sheltered and unsheltered snowflake constitutes ‘bullying’.
Interesting bit about the two stories the paper refused to run. The paper should have printed the facts and trusted its readers to decide if that info was meaningful to them. Instead the paper chose to spike the stories.
Nuff said.
The actual location of this article is Santa Clarita (SoCal), NOT Santa Clara (NorCal).
If you could correct the posting source text, that would be helpful.
The media, who regularly destroy the lives of those who do not agree with their leftist agenda, is being bullied? The drive by destruction the media regularly preforms never is corrected when it’s errors are discovered. Oh no, it’s onto the next destruction.
“However, a Democratic political agitator associated with the Hill campaign, masquerading as a concerned citizen, has done everything he could to try to unfairly discredit The Signal. He has lied, misrepresented and conflated facts in order to relentlessly attack this paper, the publisher, his family and the editor. This is such a hotly contested race that Hill’s advocates contacted left-leaning publications to attack us with unfounded accusations and material intentionally taken out of context. “
How ‘odd’, the national media and DNC aren’t rallying against these partisan attacks on the free press.
While it’s still rather ridiculous for newspaper editors/reporters to climb on some self-important high horse and assume anyone should care about who/what they ‘endorse’,
after actually skimming the linked article, the paper deserves credit for ‘endorsing’ the (R) candidate and clearly explaining why.
In the Kaliforniastan gulag, that’s not liable to win them any popularity contests.
Having skimmed the article I would suggest that you should have excerpted something to give more of the flavor of the editorial - such as,Don't bully the mediaWhile we are not saying Katie Hill or her campaign personally did these things, they were done by her supporters in her name and for her benefit and by one political agitator in particular.As toHill’s campaign knew it was happening. They knew the accusations were not true or fair. They knew it was a smear campaign based on lies and misleading statements. They could have stopped it, but chose not to, for political gain.
it’s plain that the paper in question is not MSM. How could it be endorsing an incumbent Republican congressman if it were?The reason it’s not MSM is because it’s local, and not associated with a wire service. The reality is that “the MSM” is basically the Associated Press and its member news outlets.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.