Misleading News
This time I get to start my post with two Post stories from different Posts with different politics.
Disney dumps two DEI programs as investors pressure company to ax more woke initiatives: SEC filing
Disney is reportedly pulling back on its diversity, equity and inclusion policies — the latest major company to walk back the woke initiatives amid pressure from activist investors and the Trump administration.
The media giant — which saw its bottom line hurt by the battle over Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” bill — quietly dropped its “Reimagine Tomorrow” program from the DEI section of its 2024 SEC 10-K report, according to a recent regulatory filing (Story in the New York Post)
The article goes on, however:
Although the program’s website is still up and running, Stefan Padfield, director of the Free Enterprise Project for the National Center for Public Policy Research, told Fox News Digital on Monday that its exclusion from the SEC filing could signal change at the Mouse House.
“Disney dropping [Reimagine Tomorrow] from their DEI section could mean they’re walking back their DEI investments, or it could signal they’re hiding them,” Padfield said. “Either they recognize that more litigation is coming, or it could be part of a vibe shift.”
Which is to say that Disney might be dumping two DEI programs, might just be being a little quieter about them. Which is not what the headline claims.
He said he wouldn’t mind if someone shot journalists at his rally
Trump says he doesn’t mind someone shooting at journalists at rally
Donald Trump told a crowd on Sunday that he wouldn’t mind if someone shot at the news media present at his rally here, escalating his violent rhetoric at one of his closing campaign events where he repeatedly veered off-message.
“I have this piece of glass here,” Trump said. “But all we have really over here is the fake news, right? And to get me, somebody would have to shoot through the fake news.
“And I don’t mind that so much,” Trump said. “I don’t mind. I don’t mind.” (Story in the Washington Post)
Assuming that “the fake news” means the reporters — it is hard to see what else it could mean — what Trump said was not that he wouldn’t mind someone shooting at the reporters but that he wouldn’t mind so much being shot if someone shot him through the reporters.
“I don’t much mind dying if my enemies die too” fits his rhetorical style, his heroic self-portrayal but, like much of what he says, shouldn’t be taken too literally.
“Epps was eventually sentenced to probation for his role in the attack on Congress that ensued, a riot linked to nine deaths” Guardian
Contrast that with:
Within 36 hours, five people died: one was shot by Capitol Police, another died of a drug overdose, and three died of natural causes, including a police officer who died of natural causes a day after being assaulted by rioters.(Wikipedia)
Or in other words, one person died due to the riot, a woman shot by a police officer. “Linked to” is conveniently vague.
"Want your head to explode?" a Dec. 4 screenshot on Instagram read. "Trump was impeached for trying to investigate all the crimes that Joe Biden just pardoned Hunter over."
Trump was not impeached for "trying to investigate" Hunter Biden’s alleged crimes. We rate that claim False. (Politifact)
The article goes into some detail on Trump’s second impeachment, which is obviously not what the claim is about. Its account of the first impeachment:
In 2019, he was impeached for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
is followed by stuff on the second impeachment and then:
The 2019 impeachment involved two articles. The first one focused on Trump’s actions pressuring a leader of a foreign nation, Ukraine, to investigate the Bidens — his political opponents — to aid his election. He did so by withholding military aid and denying a White House visit.
There is no mention of Hunter’s role in the Ukraine controversy or of Burisma, the Ukrainian company that paid him about a million dollars as a member of their board despite his having no relevant abilities other than his connection to his father, who was both Vice-President and the member of the administration in charge of interactions with Ukraine.
The article’s description of Hunter’s pardon goes into detail on the crimes he was convicted of but does not mention that the pardon also covered all offenses committed over the previous decade, which would include any related to Hunter’s role with Burisma. The Instagram claim badly oversimplifies the relation between impeachment and pardon but it is not, as Politifact claims, entirely false, and the Politifact article conveniently omits the two facts that show it is not entirely false, the breadth of the pardon and Hunter’s role in what Trump was trying to pressure Ukraine to investigate, which is what he got impeached over.
I cannot rate the Politifact article false, since everything it says is true. The problem is what it does not say. I can rate it deliberately dishonest.
Good News
The article included an email address for the author, something I routinely look for when I want to respond to something I see online but rarely find. I wrote her an email making the points made above. To my surprise she not only responded, she told me that they were revising the piece to mention Burisma and the extended pardon — and they did. I think the post should have conceded that the claim, although not true, was not entirely false, since the pardon did cover the offenses that Trump was impeached for pressuring the Ukrainian government to look into. But the article was not deliberately dishonest, as demonstrated by the author’s willingness to revise it to present a less biased picture.
I considered revising my original draft or removing it entirely but I thought Politifact ought to get positive comments as well as negative when it deserved them, and the incident was encouraging evidence that is still sometimes possible to interact with people online I disagree with to our mutual benefit.
Scientists Discover Explanation for the Unusually Sudden Temperature Rise in 2023
A team from the Alfred Wegener Institute proposes a compelling hypothesis: the Earth’s surface has become less reflective due to a decline in certain types of clouds. This reduction in reflectivity may help explain the additional warming.
“proposes a compelling hypothesis” is not equivalent to “Discover explanation for.”
It’s the Most Indispensable Machine in the World—and It Depends on This Woman
Reading the article, you discover that the machine in question, an extreme ultraviolet lithography machine used to make high end computer chips, is one of several hundred such and not the most advanced, hence that particular machine is not indispensable. The woman in question is “one of the engineers assigned to the fabrication plants—or fabs—where ASML customers manufacture their semiconductors.” She is a 29 year old techie who “apprenticed for nearly a full year” before starting to work on the machine. Judged by the article she is an admirable and productive person, but the particular machine is not indispensable and it does not depend on her.
The headline is a lie, puffery, designed both to get clicks and to glorify women.
Almost all "news" is written by people who don't understand whatever it is they are writing about.
I had read many examples of media lies, but it took one specific instance to really sink it in. A minor crime story had a map of the SF Bay Area and located "Concord" just east of the southern tip of the Bay, while it is actually 50+ miles north. Printed errors I could at least accept various dubious excuses for. But a map? It was clearly a copy of some real map, full of lots of detail unnecessary to the story, not a hand-drawn cartoon or sketch. How does one move a city 50 miles?
That old saying is true, that you only notice errors when you have personal knowledge of the matter, and assume everything else from the same source must be true, couldn't possibly have errors, they wouldn't do that.