Donald Trump (Credit: NPR)
In a rather bizarre twist on the latest controversy surrounding Donald Trump – the one about his claims of seeing New Jersey Muslims cheer the September 11, 2001, terror attacks on America’s soil – the Washington Post’s own factchecker on the story was forced to explain his Pinocchio characterization of the presidential candidate and clarify why he left out a crucial fact: that his very own newspaper actually reported on the alleged cheers.
First, a run–down: Trump raised eyebrows this past week by claiming on several occasions to have seen thousands of Muslims on television cheering the 2001 terror attacks. He first said in Alabama over the weekend that he “watched the World Trade Center go down” on television, and also watched in New Jersey “as thousands of people were cheering as the building was coming down,” CNN reported. The next day, he then said on “This Week” on ABC “there were people that were cheering on the other side of New Jersey where you have large Arab populations … as the World Trade Center came down.”
Trump called the reports “well covered at the time,” CNN said. But various media outlets came out swinging, saying Trump’s assertions weren’t true.
The Washington Post’s factchecker, Glenn Kessler, gave the statement “four Pinocchios,” its highest rating for “whoppers,” and slammed Trump with a mock: “This is a bit like writing about the hole in the doughnut – how can you write about nothing?”
But not so fast.
As Mediaite’s Joe Concha found: The media actually did report on Muslim cheers. And not just any media – the Washington Post itself.
On September 18, 2001, the Washington Post reported: “In Jersey City, within hours of two jetliners’ plowing into the World Trade Center, law enforcement authorities detained and quesitoned a number of people who were allegedly seen celebrating the attacks and holding tailgate style parties on rooftops while they watched the devastation on the other side of the river.”
Yet Kessler’s piece, entitled “Trump’s outrageous claim that ‘thousands’ of New Jersey Muslims celebrated the 9/11 attacks,” failed to mention that bit.
As Mediate wrote: “Kessler goes through in condescendoing fashion hos wrong Trump was on the claim, stating, ‘There were some reports of celebrations overseas, in Muslim countries, but nothing that we can find involving the Arab populations of New Jersey.’ But then, in the irony of ironies, the fact–checker is forced to add [an] update to his original factcheck after readers spent about 30 seconds on Google and factchecked him.”
Kessler’s update was lengthy, and didn’t exactly apologize.
It read: “Some readers have tweeted to The Fact Checker a Washington Post article from Sept. 18, 2001, as evidence of Trump’s claim. The article, which appeared on page 6, described FBI probes in northern New Jersey after the attacks, saying in the 15th paragraph that ‘law enforcement authorities detained and questioned a number of people who were allegedly seen celebrating the attacks and holding tailgate style parties on rooftops while they watched the devastation on the other side of the river.’ Of course, ‘a number of people’ obviously does not equal ‘thosuands’ – and ‘allegedly’ indicates there is no video footage or other proof that celebrations actually took place. Recall that Trump claimed he saw this on television – and that it was ‘well covered at the time.’ This newspaper article appeared days later.”
Can the Republican Party save itself? Richard Viguerie has the prescription in “Takeover.”
Kessler’s update also specified the reporters who wrote the 2001 story couldn’t recall being able to confirm the gatherings of hundreds of cheering Muslims. He then went on in additional updates to debunk several other reportings of Muslim cheering in the streets, post 9/11, and concluded yet again: “We looked and looked – and could find absolutely no evidence to support [Trump’s] claim.”
But as Mediaite’s Concha wrote: Leaving out the fact that the Washington Post itself reported on the alleged Muslim cheers was suspicious.
“OK, so why weren’t the allegations [reported by the Post reporters] ever confirmed? Because that’s one hell of an allegation to make without at least following up, right? … [N]o one is defending Trump as being completely vidicated here,” Mediaite wrote. “But it’s a whole bowl of wrong that Kessler somehow failed to include the Post’s own story on Muslims celebrating in Jersey City. Even worse, he doens’t apologize for missing something his readers didn’t. It just looks so bad.”
Trump, meanwhile, has insisted on an apology from the Washington Post, in a tweet that read: “Via @washingtonpost 9/18/01. I want an apology! Many people have tweeted that I am right!”
And, as Mediaite’s Concha writes: Trump deserves one.
“He has every right to [an apology],” Concha wrote, before summarizing in blunt fashion: “Trump’s total on the number of Muslims celebrating is way off, that’s a given. But Kessler now looks like as much of a jackass as Trump does with his claim of ‘thousands’ for not doing simple homework. That’s his job and he’s been doing it for years and now is forced to defend himself and the paper after readers did a simple Google search on the matter. Of course … to still give Trump Four Pinocchios … without acknowledging its own original report is effing comical (later reducing to 2-3 would have been more appropriate and an admission of the oversight by Kessler). … Thanks to the Washington Post and its bumbling, stumbling and fumbling, the GOP frontrunner [now] gets an easy out. And maybe somehow even gets another bounce in the polls.”
from PropagandaGuard https://propagandaguard.wordpress.com/2015/11/26/trump-vindicated-wapo-factchecker-outed-for-spin/
from WordPress https://toddmsiebert.wordpress.com/2015/11/26/trump-vindicated-wapo-factchecker-outed-for-spin/
No comments:
Post a Comment