Skewing the Facts for Gannett....
Yellow Journalism on the Hudson (?)
In an amazingling brassy and overt display of journalistic delinquency, Gannett Journal News reporter Jorge FitzGibbon manages to read a clearly worded Manhattanville poll, where 67 percent of local residents say they have judged IP as posing little or no risk, versus 33 percent wanting it closed, and somehow produce the blatantly deceptive banner headline:
"POLL: PUBLIC WORRIED ABOUT INDIAN POINT"
Are you kidding Mr. Fitzgibbon? I have a copy of the Gannett Code of Journalistic Ethics here on my desk, and I can see at a glance , that you have skewed the facts.
Digging deeper than the headline, we see FitzGibbon intentionally blurring the two opposing sides, coming up with an untrue, unscientific description barely mentioning the pro-nuclear landslide, and claiming deceptively "residents still have worries" Oh yeah, Jorge? Maybe the 33 % on the anti side worry, but the wording of the survey question specifically asks if respondents have concerns, and the 67% majority specifically state that do not have any concerns.
What malicious alchemical formula can you use to turn gold back into non-factual lead, as you have done in taking the facts ....67% for, only 33% against, and coming up with this huge blunder of journalistic arrogance:
"Poll: Public worried" ?
Imagine a 67 to 33 landslide in any election. Let's say--- Obama 67%, Palin 33% in 2012, for instance (or the reverse). Piles of books would be written about the greatest landslide in modern electoral history. Robert F Kennedy would be out of a job---you can't electronically hack a fake 34% discrepancy in Ohio or anywhere else--- the gap is just too large.
And.... add to that 34% gap, the fact that it occurs after seven long years of feverish organizing, letter writing, blogging, and furious emailing, by mock-local groups covertly paid to spread fear by the G.R.A.C.E. foundation, Tamarind foundation, and the antinuke Helene Heilbrunn Lerner foundation, as well as Riverkeeper, Wespac, Ipsec and their duped contributors --- all for naught. Or rather .....all for a very clear minus 34.
Shame, Fitzgibbon.... Shame on you. And shame on Gannett for abetting such malicious unethical "journalism."
Actually journalism is the wrong word. Faux journalism maybe. Agendist Propaganda is coming closer. Maybe it would be more accurate to simply say:
I expect Mr. FitzGibbon to launch into a huffy retort tomorrow, perhaps telling us how corrupt the good nuns over at Manhattanville have become, shilling for Entergy , and publishing false survey reports. It's no more than I would expect from a Goebbels-on-the-Hudson.
Yes, I kind of like that .....
has a Gannett-type ring to it!
Kind of FitzGibbon-esqe !!