Mediaboss Marketing

If mainstream media truly wishes to repair itsimage with the general public, these outlets must recognize they do not merely suffer from a "bubble" reinforced by overwhelmingly liberal staffing, or from supposedly insufficient outreach to working class communities.

The mainstream's issues are apparentin their content choices, suggesting an intractableproblem. Following decades of allowing the Democratic Party to select the day'snarrative, they possess no measure of professional competence for objectively judging the importance of information.

The media's remarkablydifferent responses to the following two stories offer a definitive example:

2. Per the Washington Free Beacon: "Two high-level Iranian government backers, including a former Islamic Republic official and another accused of lobbying on Tehrans behalf, were hosted at the Obama White House for more than 30 meetings with top officials atkey junctures in the former administrations contested diplomacy with Iran ...

"Sources familiar with the nature of the meetings told the Washington Free Beacon that both Parsi and Mousavian helped the White House craft its pro-Iran messaging and talking points that helped lead to the nuclear agreement with Iran. These efforts were part of a larger pro-Iran deal 'echo chamber' led by senior Obama administration officials who were tasked with misleading Congress about the nature of the deal ..."

Just about every mainstream outlet has covered the Michael Flynn story with multiplearticles: Newsweek, CNN, Daily Beast, CBS News, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and others -- a thorough search returnsdozens of high-profile sources that publishedhighly trafficked pieces.

Several pundits demanded answers, pointing to the calls as further evidence of Donald Trump having aligned himself with Vladimir Putin's dictatorial regime, and having allowed Putin to direct elements of his campaign and his coming presidency. Later, these same outlets announced that an "FBI investigation" into Flynn'scalls and texts had commenced.

But this week, we learn the hysteria about Flynn and the FBI appears to have been unwarranted. The outlets which had previously inflated the story have since backed down.

As you read their follow-up stories below, note the cause of their initial hysteria: you knowof the Mike Flynn story simply due tojournalistic ineptitude -- specifically, the journalists' ignorance of diplomatic practices -- combined with their predetermined acceptance of the Trump/Russia narrative.

Yesterday, per NBC News:

The FBI eavesdropped on telephone calls between President Donald Trump's national security adviser and the Russian ambassador but found nothing improper, a U.S. intelligence official said.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media, said late Monday that there was never a formal "investigation" of the calls in December between retired Army Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn and Sergei Kislyak, Russia's ambassador in Washington.

According to the source, who was confirming a Washington Post report earlier Monday, intelligence officials merely listened in as part of routine eavesdropping on Kislyak.

...

The former official, who requested anonymity to speak about sensitive information, said it was not uncommon for diplomats or other U.S. officials to garner such attention to if they are recorded talking to foreign counterparts. Rarely anything comes of this, however, because U.S. officials have wide latitude in how they communicate as part of their jobs.

Originally posted here:
Media Covers Fake Mike Flynn Story, Ignores Bombshell on Secret Obama/Iran Meetings - PJ Media