By II.studio/shutterstock.com
As you well know, “fact-checking” has become a major thing in recent years. It undoubtedly began with liberal media claiming that former President Donald Trump did nothing but lie his way through nearly every situation. However, it has since become a known fact that those same liberal media heads often twist stories and images to suit their own narrative.
And so, fact-checking has become a norm for just about anything put into headlines these days.
Now, usually, you’d think this means that there is a team of researchers sitting somewhere pouring over every possible detail and any connections they may have. And usually, you’d be right.
However, it seems that media outlets don’t care about the facts so much as just making sure their party’s name or figureheads are tainted.
Enter Reuters.
On Thursday, with the recent signing into law of the socialistic infrastructure bill by Democratic President Joe Biden, some rather curious images and videos were put on social media with so-called proof that Biden isn’t really a legitimate US president.
In both posts Reuters referred to, videos show Biden sitting at a desk signing the bill into law. Kamala is on his right, and a crowd of clapping officials behind him. Affixed to the front of the desk is the presidential seal.
However, the seal is blurred out.
Naturally, some have drawn the conclusion that this means the seal cannot be shown in its fullness because, well, Biden must not actually be the legitimate POTUS.
There are also questions about the videos themselves being fake, as it seems that one lady’s hand literally goes through Biden’s head while she’s clapping.
Reuters addresses the questions, or at least those about the blurred seal, by explaining that federal law prohibits the seal from being in situations where be viewed as a “stamp of approval” of sorts.
“The statute makes it illegal to display the seal or other likeness of it in advertisements, public meetings or telecasts, or any other media that may create a ‘false impression of sponsorship or approval by the Government of the United States or by any department, agency, or instrumentality thereof.”
And to be clear, this is true.
However, what the outlet fails to note or to have even researched is where the supposedly questionable posts came from in the first place. You and Reuters might assume that such a claim came from some conspiracy theorist or group of them, such as the infamous QAnon.
But that’s not the case with these.
Take the video which tries to imply that the whole thing was a fake, for example. Of course, it doesn’t even exist anymore.
And the other, which focused more on the blurred seal, was actually posted by a fairly well-known podcaster and journo, Siraj Hashmi. If you don’t know of Hashmi, let’s just say he’s a bit on the sarcastic side. Proof of this lies in his Twitter bio, which reads “BLM | All Lives Matter | ACAB | Blue Lives Matter | Smash Capitalism | Defeat Communism.”
But even if he wasn’t prone to near-constant jokes, Hashmi is also known to be rather liberally minded. He is the known brains behind “The List,” a collection of trash found on Twitter that is usually arrived from the left. You know, such as one deleted tweet that suggests Kyle Rittenhouse costs America three black lives. In reality, the accused only took two lives, and both were white.
This means that Hashmi’s post is likely nothing more than a sarcastic joke. And most who saw it picked up on that right away.
All except for Reuters, it would seem.
Oh, The Associated Press bought into the joke too, and just like Reuters, they failed to do enough research to notice that their only two sources were 1) unfindable and 2) a complete joke account with the moniker “Comrade Stump,” who is described as a “Sr. Fellow at Center for Libtard Studies.”
I mean, really.
They can’t even fact-check correctly anymore, at least without any certainty. The whole point of fact-checking is to check the facts. And yet, when it comes to making sure their party isn’t dragged in the mud, the facts aren’t even really looked at.
What has happened to sound journalism today?
