All media news agencies’ decisions from what to choose to “investigate,” to how they choose to report their “findings,” to the language they use to “report,” to the selection of images and videos they decide to “show,” etc., are biased. Intentionally or not.
So I don’t necessarily trust any of them. My preference (when I’m not being lazy, that is) is to dig deeper. I like to go back to the alleged “sources” where they are provided. (Failure to provide a source is often, itself, a great “tell” that the news/reporting agency is suspect.)
If a news service says that they have uncovered evidence of voting fraud (like very highly suspicious mailed in ballots which show no evidence of ever having been “folded” which would be needed to put them into the proper envelope), then I often try to verify it. Images of the stacked but unfolded “mail in” ballots are a good primary source. Or, if the claim is based on an alleged affidavit of a poll worker, a hyperlink to the sworn affidavit is damn useful.
www.washingtontimes.com
