Catnip Journalism. Epsiode 239 "Stefanik lied..."
Let me preface this:
When I was just a DU lurker, I saw that DU was full of intelligent people. I saw data scientists, medical professionals, lawyers, educators and just all around smart people.
I spend my day and frankly my whole life around people with 150+ IQ's.
I'm probably on the dumber end of my circle.
Anyways, PLEASE don't take what I'm about to say as:
a) sticking up for the GOP
b) criticizing other DU'ers
3) pushing GOP talking points
But as the Party of smart people, the party that respects science and reality... I really hate it when the MEDIA jumps on a topic and pushed HALF a story.
So Elise Stefanik (Idiot, NY) recently called the last jobs report "We see the worst jobs report in over 20 years," Stefanik said in reference to the April jobs report released last Friday.
And like that, here is the media reaction:
https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/14/politics/stefanik-worse-jobs-report-fact-check/index.html
https://www.rawstory.com/elise-stefanik-served-brutal-cnn-fact-check-after-brazenly-lying-about-bidens-jobs-record/
Headlines like this soon followed:
"Elise Stefanik served brutal CNN fact check after brazenly lying about Bidens job record"
Throngs at home clapped and cheered. Mission accomplished for the Media because they got clicks and users got to rub themselves all over the story like a cat does catnip.
Does it matter if CNN or RawStory were wrong?
Yes or No?
Remember, in debate it's strategic to pick a phrase of an opponent to exploit when the phrase is "non-specific".
Example: The new Ferrari is so damned fast, fastest car ever.
One, it's sloppy to NOT qualify a statement and leave it open ended.
Two, it's not accurate.
So Stefanik says "Worst jobs report in 20 years..."
CNN and others take the statement and INFER that she meant biggest jobs loss, that's what they pointed to in their fact check.
Smart move by CNN... when you frame the debate, when you define language, you control the narrative.
Was this jobs report the worst in 20 years based on the criteria used by CNN? No.
CNN wins, right?
Well, not necessarily.
As a matter of fact, the jobs forecast "miss" was the worst since 1998, 20+ years ago.
SO... Stefanik was stupidly repeating a talking point given to her by an aide but she didn't define the claim in the statement.
If she'd said "Worst jobs miss in 20+ years, she'd be accurate and CNN would have been shut out.
CNN parsed the statement to define the phrase to score a major "fact check" on her...
Cool.
So like I said... I'm not defending anyone, just really sick and tired of the progressive "Catnip Click Bait media" bullshitting us.
I really hope those that probably get this OP as a Jury read it carefully and think about it.
WG
= new reply since forum marked as read
with anything you've written. You've explained yourself quite well, and I agree with what you wrote. In case you need a character reference for "court", I'm available. 
Great post, and just the sort of logic I like to see.
Obviously, I take no issue 
This all being said, there's also the fact that had ES actually SPOKEN the truth, it would've fallen with a thud.
Ergo, it's also fairly obvious that she SOUGHT ... to mislead.
And it's not really our side's job to try to figure out 'what she meant', is it?
The other side does no such thing for us, do they now?
I'd still argue she's full of shit, in the end.
Though I appreciate the point you're making