12 December 2016

Can "History News" be "Fake News"?

I'm just asking. You be the judge. Below are the leading stories and images that loaded on the History News Network's homepage this morning. I encourage you to visit the site and read the articles linked below for yourself. But if you'd rather not take the time to read these transparently partisan screeds (and I w0uld certainly understand), let me quickly surmise their content for you: Trump supporters are bigots, Trump (unlike the Clintons) is selling access to power and is an extremist, Trump is a racist, Trump is Nixon reincarnated, Hillary Clinton is a genius and paradigm of virtue, Trump supporters are Nazis. 

I believe that sums it all up rather nicely.
Read here.

Read here.


Read here.


Read here.

Read here.


Read here.

I would further add that Edmund Kozak's observations about "journalists" and the mainstream media in regard to Trump's victory could be applicable to many "historians" who are freaking out as well:
Those who expected the mainstream media to pause and reflect on its own biases following President-Elect Donald Trump’s victory are surely disappointed. It has become inescapably clear that rather than attempt to break free from the ideological echo chamber in which they exist, liberal journalists in the mainstream media are only doubling down on progressive propaganda — descending ever further into self-parody. . . . "I feel like we've been reporting on this all along but … people don't read us," Ioffe noted before attacking "fake news" — progressives' hot new term for anything that challenges their approved ideological narrative. "We're writing about it but, A) people aren't listening and, B) they don't believe us."
See any similarities? It certainly is shaping up to be a very interesting and deliciously entertaining New Year, isn't it? 😊

No comments: