• TheDoozer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        9 days ago

        Unless he was diagnosed as a pathological liar, they should not. Not that he isn’t, because he is, but as a news organization they should only provide the facts, quotes, and unbiased contextual information. That is what we should expect from the news. It should not be “left-leaning” or “right-leaning,” because they shouldn’t tell us what we should think about what they are reporting.

        They should report that some of his former (and possibly current, if it’s accurate) aids and expected cabinet members wrote, participated, or supported Project 2025. They should report what Trump’s response was when asked about it, as well as including the factual context of how many people directly surrounding him that were openly involved (to give the lie to him “not knowing”).

        We need news to stop giving opinion. Period. They should strive to be as unbiased as possible, including reporting on events based on newsworthy-ness, not trying to be “fair” to the candidates by reporting on both in an equally negative way regardless of the severity of their respective news (e.g. Obama’s tan suit vs. Trump’s children in cages.)

    • Aviandelight @mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 days ago

      The election coverage I saw on AP this week confirms that they are compromised as well. They are dead to me.

    • LillyPip@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      9 days ago

      This was likely true.

      Trump didn’t need to know about it, and (since by all accounts, he’s functionally illiterate) he certainly never read it. Project 2025 is the brainchild of the same groups who chose Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Cavanaugh. Trump likely knew very little about them, too.

      Trump was chosen because he’s easy to manipulate and is too incurious to care much about actual governance, so he won’t get in their way. All they need is for him to sign whatever they put in front of him between rounds of golf.

      Trump likely didn’t know much about Project 2025 – but that absolutely did not mean it wasn’t the plan all along.

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      What am I missing here? Two sentences telling us his claims isn’t the complete failure of journalism y’all seem to be insinuating it is…

      • TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        Its more of selectively picking what he’s said, also not including the previous versions

        “The Reagan administration implemented nearly half of the ideas included in the first edition by the end of his first year in office, while the Trump administration embraced nearly 64% of the 2016 edition’s policy solutions after one year,” the Heritage Foundation said in a press release announcing Project 2025.

        Back when Project 2025 was just getting started, Trump spoke at the Heritage Foundation’s annual leadership conference on April 21, 2022, and appeared to refer to the project, saying, “This is a great group, and they’re going to lay the groundwork and detail plans for exactly what our movement will do and what your movement will do when the American people give us a colossal mandate to save America. And that’s coming.”

        But Trump has since pivoted sharply against the plan. “I know nothing about Project 2025,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on July 5. “I have no idea who is behind it. I disagree with some of the things they’re saying and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal. Anything they do, I wish them luck, but I have nothing to do with them.”

        sause So only including the part where he distanced himself from it is very sketchy.

      • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        Those two sentences would be a lot less horrible if they weren’t prefaced with “THE FACTS:”.