I had no intention of posting today, and certainly not about another front page Star headline after writing about a misleading front page headline Monday. But then again, I had no idea I would encounter this headline when I opened the morning paper:
Trump vows ‘urgent resolve’ after weekend’s mass killings
It’s atop an Associated Press story about the speech Trump read from a teleprompter Monday in response to the country’s two most recent mass killings. The AP story covers what Trump said, but it also notes that this and similar statements he has made in the past fly in the face of his lack of action on gun regulations and his intention to put what he calls the “invasion” of our southern border at the center of his campaign, stirring up hatred and division to drive his supporters to the polls.
The Star headline, unlike the AP article, assumes that Trump’s statement in his speech, “We vow to act with urgent resolve,” actually means something, that if he said it, we can take the man at his word.
As the old saying goes, or kinda goes: Fool the media once, shame on you. Fool the media a thousand times, beginning way back when you said your father loaned you a million dollars which you paid back with interest when he actually gave you $400 million and bailed your ass out time and time again, shame on the media.
Before I wrote this post, I checked to see if the Star just took the headline from its AP feed, at which time the blame goes to the news agency. Nope. I googled the story. In dozens of news outlets, the headline is a variant of “Trump vows action after the shootings, but gives few details.” The last phrase, “but gives few details,” adds the necessary skepticism to Trump’s “vow.” The Star headline traffics in blind faith.
It was definitely a Star exclusive. And, I should add, a print edition exclusive. On the Star’s own website the headline reads, “Trump vows urgent action after the shootings, offers few details.”
That’s twice in two days some creative headline writer at the Star took a reasonably accurate headline and screwed it up, both times on the paper’s big front page story. On Monday, a perfectly good headline had already been written for the online version, but it was changed for the worse. Today, a perfectly good AP headline which virtually every other news outlet used or altered slightly was changed to the point that it misrepresented the contents of the article.
Maybe I shouldn’t worry. After all, I’m a big supporter of the Star, which I think is a quality local paper with many first rate journalists. I start every day with a cup of coffee in my hand and the Star on my lap. Maybe this is just a one-off — actually a two-off — and it won’t happen again.
I certainly hope so. If the Star continues to indulge in this kind of headline writing, the paper and the community will be worse for it.
This article appears in Aug 1-7, 2019.
But you trashed the Star reporter yesterday for trashing TUSD. David, we can’t keep up with you. Could it be the coffee in the morning or is it the Star on your lap? You are ODing on fake news.
E7 Sergeant, you need to reread yesterday’s post. I said the reporter did an excellent job with the story, and the original online headline was accurate. What I criticized was the revised headline. Instead of capturing the sense of the article, it was slanted against Pima County school districts.
My apologies, as it was the agenda of the Star that you criticized. If you ask them it is not about selling papers. That has become nearly impossible. I just wonder how long we can continue to discuss the shortcomings of TUSD, with no apparent improvements. Tucsonans are too forgiving of this failure.
I actually thought the quotes were uncharacteristically sardonic for the star. Ha ha.
Why is it always about the President taking action (Trump, Obama, whoever)?
Always thought that Congress passed laws. Perhaps the house can put the impeachment fetish on hold long enough to actually pass some legislation….
If we want to change our gun laws – and I am certainly not saying that we should not – then congress should act.
I got it – if the house passes something the senate will more likely than not pass it and vice versa…. Maybe our congress can come up with a bi-partisan solution to this horrible issue. Just maybe.
Hey David, It wouldn’t matter what President Trump says, you would turn it into a criticism to bash the President.
It DOESN’T matter what Tchump says, because he has shown himself to be a pathological liar.
The sooner the media stop obsessively reporting his every maniacal tweet, the sooner we can get back to talking about things that really matter, and moreover, hearing from authentic voices who are being drowned out by this pathetic Tchump circus.
“The sooner the media stop obsessively reporting his every maniacal tweet, the sooner we can get back to talking about things that really matter”
That’s funny. The national media has now decided that they need to name heat waves so that voters don’t forget about global warming. Could there not be a direct attempt to affect outcome by continually obsessing? It really takes advantage of the less intelligent people and forces them into a group think mentality.
Socialists don’t want you talking about what really matters. They just want you to hope it finally works somewhere. It is about power, prestige and money. Never forget it.
go2ski perhaps you are unaware of the number of House bills that have gone to the Senate where Mitch McConnell refuses to allow them to be heard. Your Civics lesson for today is that bills that are sponsored in the House must be heard in the Senate and then a Joint committee will work on what changes each chamber will agree to and then it is set for a vote by the Congress (and visa versa). Or, if you prefer to check for yourself: https://kids-clerk.house.gov/grade-school/…
Caroline Anderson – please read my whole post….especially where I said,
“I got it – if the house passes something the senate will more likely than not pass it and vice versa…. Maybe our congress can come up with a bi-partisan solution to this horrible issue. Just maybe.”
You don’t know me but trust me, I know how congress works. Even tho I did not get as precise as you did in your comment. Regardless, thanks for the civics lesson.
Occasionally, there are times when the two parties need to work together to try to solve a burning issue. This is one of those times.