When news breaks that makes former President Barack Obama look like the bad guy, mainstream media suddenly finds it not newsworthy, further proving that liberal-controlled media has an anti-conservative agenda.
Not only has the liberal media removed Obama-centric stories that don’t necessarily show the former president in the best light, but social media also targets conservatives, essentially silencing their voices.
That’s exactly what happened when Reuters and Agence France-Presse, or AFP, reported and initially ran a story that, according to a 2015 “United Nations study” on migrant children detained at the US-Mexico border, the US had “the world’s highest rate of children in detention.”
But suddenly, the two agencies retracted the story, the New York Post reports. Why?
No explanation.
However, there’s something worth remembering or paying attention to hear. Who was president in 2015? Barack Obama.
The story made Obama and the Democrats look bad. But was the story updated or corrected? No. It was removed.
The take away from this is that certain news outlets have an agenda, including the two previously mentioned. Plus… Can you say CNN and Washington Post?
Reading stories from these outlets should be considered not from the position of whether they are fake news or not, but rather, are they promoting an agenda – a purposeful narrative?
If you look for it, you’ll find it.
Especially if you compare the way a certain story is reported from a variety of outlets. You can see the spin and the agenda in the headline.
For example, if the story is about Trump – it will always be negative, even if the fact is actually a positive one. They will find one small thing and use it as a way to slant the story in a negative direction, so they can claim to be factual.
The rule of thumb seems to be… If an agenda can’t be pushed, another way of manipulating and narrative is to simply not report certain things.
We need to question all the news stories we read today and look deeper. Certain news outlets pander to their core audience. It’s more about preaching to the choir and giving them what they want.
It’s less about all the news you need to know, and more about simply catering to a certain mindset. The downside of this, of course, is that it presents the world in certain shades of gray rather than true, full-color.
It presents the world as they want you to see it, not necessarily as it is.
Certain news outlets also favor one candidate over another. They will focus entirely on the policies and proposals of their favored candidate, while reporting the gaffes or miscues of another.
In addition, they will literally shield any candidates they favor by ignoring scandals or missteps. If they report on these at all, they will spin it in a way to downplay its significance.
