A bad 24 hours for journalism standards, by Silvio Canto.
A new woman emerged against Judge Brett Kavanaugh, but even some journalists can’t believe what they are watching. The new woman’s story is based on a corroborating witness who wasn’t at the party. What? Apparently, he heard something about the party after it happened. Again, what? …
No evidence, no corroboration, no testimony under oath.
Caleb Hull put it this way: “Timeline:
- She didn’t know who it was for 35 years
- Kavanaugh was nominated
- She met with Dem lawyer for 6 days to “assess her memories”
- Accused Kavanaugh
- She still isn’t even sure it was him
- All the witnesses deny it
- Kavanaugh denies it
- Other outlets passed on story”
… How can a business continue to be this sloppy? Don’t these news organization have editors or people on staff who double-check this stuff?
The job of a modern journalist is to consider each news event or fact and ask: how does this help the left?