467
Trump holds seemingly pointless press conference filled with false claims
(www.independent.co.uk)
this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2024
467 points (97.0% liked)
News
23598 readers
3133 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Why are journalists allergic to the word "lie"?
Because lying means the liar knows they are lying. Stating a falsehood means you don't have to have the intent of lying.
This comes down to libel. Journalists would like not to get sued because they think someone is lying instead of just claiming things they believe in, misguided as it is.
"Not a single person died Jan 6" this was an easily confirmable lie he told yesterday. Still, crickets.
Are you sure he's not just so completely:
that he actually knows that was a falsehood when he said it?
To call something a lie, you basically have to be inside the person's head. You have to know not only the action, but the intent. That's, really, really hard to prove in a way that satisfies the (legitimate and necessary) requirements of journalistic ethics.
When they sue you for libel, they will have to prove that you knew you were lying and still went ahead with it, in order to damage or disparage the other party.
This goes the same for Trump: can you prove he knows he's lying?
Edit: in other, better words:
He certainly knew at one point someone had died. Is there exceptions for dementia?
Edit - and I'm not trying to be a smart ass, it's disgusting and I'm really sick of "oh media can't say like it is". It's cowardly and enabling.
Finally, someone who isn't afraid to shovel shit
It doesn't play well in lawsuits. They need the cushion that weasel-words provide.
They are cowardly. What I want to know is why they aren't running, "of fuck this candidate is old old," articles any longer.
In a way, you can say it is lazy journalism:
The journalist can say he lied, then state factual data -- but then real life happens and someone points out this action is subjective, biased and is attacking some person. Maybe the journalist also needs cred power for people to believe his stance.
So to address objectivity in journalism, reporters just say what happened. No backtracking. No side references. Maaaaybe also pushed you their job to make sense of what it is.
There's also a factor about sponsorship and money but that's just money talk.