@engineer,
You are either the disingenuous one or uninformed. Bernie supporters were watching events very closely through the 2016 election and witnessed multiple events of intentional misreporting, cheating, and bias against our candidate.
Bernie’s policies seek to change the economy that has made billionaires of millionaires, and force them to pay their fair share. They are permeating our news gatekeepers and pollsters with more dirty money than has ever circulated to effect an election.
It’s a big deal. We’re not going to stop pointing it out.
You should at least inform yourself about it rather than insulting someone for mentioning it.
Of course, few newspapers will forego the payoffs to tell the truth, but thankfully, there are some.
https://www.thecanary.co/us/us-analysis/2019/09/19/the-medias-war-with-bernie-sanders-highlights-the-need-to-factcheck-the-factcheckers/
One of the only growing industries in news media right now is factchecking, which promises to differentiate reality from fiction for us in today’s post-truth world of spin and fake news. But factcheckers themselves are not neutral arbiters of truth; like everyone else, they’re individuals and organizations with their own interests and biases. And a case in point is how the media appears intent on trying to factcheck into oblivion everything Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders says, sometimes with comical results.
Billionaire-owned corporate media vs Sanders
The Washington Post (owned by the world’s richest person, Jeff Bezos), for example, claimed that Sanders’s assertion that millions of US residents were working multiple jobs was “misleading” because it was only eight million people, which represented a minority of the workforce, and that many of those extra jobs were part-time. It also gave his statement that six people (one of whom is Bezos) have as much wealth as the bottom half of the world’s population ‘three Pinocchios’ – the designation just below the most egregious lie. This was because, they argued, billionaires’ wealth is tied up in stocks, not money itself, and that most people own essentially nothing. For them, this apparently disproved the Vermont senator’s well-sourced claim.
The Post also attacked the idea that Sanders is supported by ordinary people in an article titled Bernie Sanders Keeps Saying His Average Donation is $27, but His Own Numbers Contradict That. What was the contradiction it found? That the average donation was actually $27.89, not $27. But you’d have to click past the headline and read the article, which the large majority of people do not do, to find that out. And that raises the question: are these constant nickel-and-diming attacks on Sanders a good-faith attempt to reach a broader truth or an attempt to undermine his campaign?
