278
Donald Trump rally video shows mass "walking out" during speech
(www.newsweek.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 May 2024
278 points (95.7% liked)
politics
19088 readers
3414 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This about sums it up. They're all still going to vote for him. They know he's a rambling senior citizen without scruples or even a plan, and they will support him regardless because they are as stupid as he is.
Yeah seriously. As much as I would love to think his fans were walking out on him, that is not the case.
Are there no ethical standards for journalism?
The article states pretty explicitly that this is not unusual. Twice. That line they quoted is a direct line from the article:
And again:
The whole premise of the article is stated right up front. Trump claimed an audience of 100,000, but the evidence shows that audience didn't hang around for him, undercutting the claim.
Feels like before you complain about journalism ethics you should at least commit to actually reading the articles so you know what you're complaining about.
just wanted to add, according to the article the location can fit about 20000 people. 100000 lol - even the police lies less about crowd sizes at demonstrations, a factor of 5 is brazen.
I think the headline and first few sentences of the article are purposely misleading. They bank on their audiences only reading the headline or a portion of the article in order to make people jump to conclusions, instead of putting the conclusion or main point in the headline.
Be real; what is the first thing you think of when you read that headline? I think most people would assume people are walking out because he said or did something to make them walk out. Not because of the weather. It’s really news worthy that people left a rally because it was cold? C’mon now.
Yes- it’s on audiences to critically think about what they read, but journalism like this certainly doesn’t help. And they know this.
Obviously subjective, but to me that is unethical journalism.
THE ALGORITHM REQUIRES ENGAGEMENT THE ALGORITHM REQUIRES ENGAGEMENT THE ALGORITHM REQUIRES ENGAGEMENT THE ALGORITHM REQUIRES ENGAGEMENT THE ALGORITHM REQUIRES ENGAGEMENT THE ALGORITHM REQUIRES ENGAGEMENT THE ALGORITHM REQUIRES ENGAGEMENT
Ethi-what for whatsthatnow?
There's no profit in ethical standards.
Are you just getting caught up? This ship sadly sailed a while ago. More importantly, Newsweek got you to click, so from their perspective the job is done.
it's newsweek.
The point of the article is to challenge Trump's claims about the audience size during his speech, not to suggest he's losing support. Mostly just to catch him in more lies.
Waste of energy. He's been lying about his popularity for quite a long time now.
Both the headline and the first sentence imply that people are walking out on Trump while he's speaking, as though that is a significant, coordinated event. The overestimated crowd figures are a secondary point in the article, probably because that also isn't news. Future biographers and historians will have "Trump exaggerated the size of [something]" as autocomplete.
Or, they are as hate-filled as he is. Or both...