Journalist Accidentally Admits That Media Are More COVID Vaccine Activists Than Journalists - This Is Why The Majority Of Americans Hate The Media

By Susan Duclos - All News PipeLine

There is a reason the MSM in America continues to spiral downward in a freefall in regards to Americans trusting the media, and that is because the "professional" media, and large media outlets have stopped following the ethical guidelines that are supposed to guide their reporting in favor of being activists.

USA Today recently published a very interesting "discussion" between an activist journalist and her brother about vaccine hesitancy.

Of course she doesn't describe herself as an activist, and still calls herself a journalist, but within the question, answer and responses we see her admit that her opinion about what is "best" is what she is trying to push, without equal time to the other side of the issue, and that to effect change and convince people to get the COVID vaccine, "journalists" like her are "giving it everything we have."

In "giving it everything" she has, she avoids some of her brother's main objections and concerns by citing the "experts" such as those at the CDC who have flipped flopped on a number of "facts" in the past two years, but never actually addresses his specific concerns.

Lets start with the media and the lack of trust the American public has in them.

MAJORITY DISTRUSTS THE MEDIA

As most ANP regulars know, we do not put much stock in actual "numbers" from polling, since those numbers are often dependent on the way a question is phrased, what organization is doing the polling (left leaning or right leaning), and the demographic make up of the respondents, just to name a few ways polling numbers can be manipulated.

With that said, what we do find useful abut polling is patterns and trends, where multiple polling groups show the same pattern of behavior or thinking from respondents.

When it comes to trust or confidence in the establishment "professional" media, every poll conducted from every organization, all have the same pattern.....the majority of Americans really, really, don't truth the media.  

In June 2021, the Poynter Institute, which generally leans far left, explained that the "US ranks last among 46 countries in trust in media," according to the Reuter's Institute report, and that "Just 29% of people surveyed in the U.S. said they trust the news, compared to 45% in Canada and 54% in Brazil."

The annual digital news report from the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at Oxford also found some improvement in trust in nearly all the countries surveyed — probably thanks to COVID-19 coverage — but not in the U.S. where the low rating was flat year to year.

One explanation, though not necessarily the only one, is the extreme political polarization in the U.S. This study, like many others, found extremely high levels of distrust — 75% of those who identify as being on the right thought coverage of their views is unfair.

Emphasis mine because later in the piece when we show the brother/sister lopsided "discussion (her views and citations of so-call experts took up more than 90 percent of the piece), which proves the American right is absolutely correct about the coverage of their views.

 July 14, 2021, Fox News reported that a "new Gallup poll shows consistent distrust in media," with "Only 16 percent of respondents said they had a lot of confidence in television news."

July 26, 2021, a I&I/TIPP poll finds that trust in media is in a freefall, especially among conservatives.

In our most recent sounding of public opinion, the I&I/TIPP Traditional Media Trust Index stood at 51 as recently as March, a level indicating a slightly positive view of the traditional media. However, it has declined sharply since then, falling to 42.8 in July, a 16.1% decline from March, and down 8.5% from June’s 46.8 reading.

As stated earlier in the article, the numbers vary, but the pattern is clear. The media is distrusted.

With good reason.

Topping off the list of things people distrust the media on, is COVID. MSN via The Hill shows that "As delta variant surges, trust in the media plummets."

That is because the media isn't "informing" the public of all available information regarding COVID and vaccinations, but instead they are acting as activists for the Biden administration.

(ANP EMERGENCY FUNDRAISER: Due to renewed censorship by 'big tech' upon ANP articles, we'll be running an emergency fundraising drive over the next month or so until we catch up on upcoming expenses. We also want to thank everybody who has donated to ANP over the years. With donations and ad revenue all that keep ANP online, if you're able, please consider donating to ANP to help keep us in this fight for America's future at this absolutely critical time in US history. During a time of systematic, 'big tech' censorship and widespread institutional corruption, truth-seeking media and alternative views are crucial, and EVERY little bit helps more than you could know!)

REPORTER PROVES SHE IS AN ACTIVIST, NOT A JOURNALIST

Moving along to the sister/brother lopsided "discussion," the "reporter" not only shows her own bias, but begins the essay by informing the audience that "Today, our front page encourages people to get the COVID-19 vaccine. I agree completely with the message because overwhelming evidence shows vaccines save lives, but wonder if it will make a difference."

She, and according to her claim about the front page, USA Today itself, admits to pushing for an agenda, because they "agree" with the message, and then takes it a step further to acknowledge using her position as a writer to convince people to do as she wants.

Her attempt to show how "wrong" her brother is, and how right she is, includes her questions, his answers and then her responses to those answers, where in many cases she completely avoids addressing his actual concerns.

For example, the first thing she addresses is her brother's concern about "long-term effects years down the road."

Of course there is no record of long term effects because the vaccines have only been in use, under an Emergency Use Rule, (not FDA approved), for nearly two years.

So, instead of addressing a very serious concern, she babbles about the results of studies done short term, using ALOT of people.

I pointed out that all three U.S. vaccines went through rigorous clinical trials. Moderna was tested on 30,000 people, Pfizer on nearly 44,000, Johnson and Johnson on more than 39,000. Side effects, including pain at the injection site, headache, fatigue and nausea, were mild to moderate and resolved within a few days.

And since then, about 165 million Americans (about 50%) have been fully vaccinated. Long-term side effects “are extremely unlikely,” according to the CDC, because historically vaccine monitoring has shown side effects appear within six weeks. 

Extremely unlikely because of other vaccine data. The pièce de résistance here is that she cites the CDC when claiming it is "extremely unlikely."

From masks and the importance or lack of importance (depending on what month it is!!!) of wearing them to how death rates were previously tallied and the mistakes made with the numbers and lockdown advice, there is every reason to doubt the CDC, yet journalists are citing them without the context of how often they have lied, or been wrong.

The results: draconian guidelines and hysterical warnings based on horrifically bad models and science. In early March, Fauci and Birx told President Trump that more than 2 million people would die in the United States without taking extraordinary measures.

In this context, the question shouldn’t be, “What have the CDC officials been right about?” It should be, “What haven’t the CDC and other public and health officials been wrong about?”

They’ve been wrong about the models. They’ve been wrong about the lockdowns. They’ve been wrong about the distance the particles travel in the air. They’ve been wrong about the transmission of the virus from asymptomatic individuals. They’ve been wrong about the spread of the virus on surfaces. They’ve been wrong about the infection fatality rate. They’ve been wrong about the dangers of the virus to children and young adults. They’ve been wrong about the use of face masks. They’ve been wrong in their abilities to protect individuals in long-term care facilities. They’ve been wrong in the way they’ve counted COVID-19 deaths. They’ve been wrong in how they’ve classified COVID-19 cases.

Last example before moving on, shows that the so-called journalist thinks the lack of trust her brother has in the CDC, the "experts," and the Biden administration, "his problem." That is also the portion of her essay where she admits fully, if accidentally, that "professional journalists" are just there to inform the public, in a balanced and objective manner, but they believe it is their job to "make a difference" in how people think abut the issue, and act, stating "We're giving it everything we have."

Also, experts have said the longer the virus spreads, the more likely it can mutate and come back into the entire population, making vaccines less effective, endangering lives again.

My brother says he's not sure that's true.

On Tuesday, the CDC's Walensky said it is, telling reporters, "For the amount of virus circulating in this country right now largely among unvaccinated people, the largest concern that we in public health and science are worried about is that the virus …(becomes) a very transmissible virus that has the potential to evade our vaccines in terms of how it protects us from severe disease and death."  

Still, he said, "How many things have they been wrong on?"  

And that, in the end, is his biggest problem. Trust. 

"It's hard to believe anything," he said. "There is so much information out there, and so much bad information out there. There is so much distrust. For me, I try to read everything I can, pray for wisdom, and make the choice I feel is best for myself and my family.”

So, back to my first question. Can professional journalists make a difference? We're giving it everything we have.

Read the rest at USA Today, if you can stomach the holier-than-thou, I AM RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG, tone used by the writer.

This is simply hyperbole, double speak and babbling so much she hopes the audience doesn't realize she is not even truly addressing the issues, she is just citing the claims of others, including those that have been proven wrong time and time again.

SPJ CODE OF ETHICS

It might surprise anyone reading this, but the Society of Professional Journalists, actually does have a "code of ethics," despite appearances to the contrary in the manner we see news reporters act today. 

They have four basic rules with a number of items list for in each rule. Seek Truth and Report it, Minimize Harm, Act Independently (I laughed too!), and Be Accountable and Transparent.

Below we see instructions that some of the biggest names in news, ignore on a daily basis. 

Listing those below.

Seek Truth And Report It:

• Take responsibility for the accuracy of their work. Verify information before releasing it. Use original sources whenever possible

• Remember that neither speed nor format excuses inaccuracy.

• Provide context. Take special care not to misrepresent or oversimplify in promoting, previewing or summarizing a story.

• Diligently seek subjects of news coverage to allow them to respond to criticism or allegations of wrongdoing.

• Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable. Give voice to the voiceless.

• Support the open and civil exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.

• Avoid stereotyping. Journalists should examine the ways their values and experiences may shape their reporting.

• Label advocacy and commentary.

Minimize Harm:

• Balance the public’s need for information against potential harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance or undue intrusiveness.

• Realize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than public figures and others who seek power, influence or attention. Weigh the consequences of publishing or broadcasting personal information.

Act Independently:

• Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived. Disclose unavoidable conflicts.

• Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and avoid political and other outside activities that may compromise integrity or impartiality, or may damage credibility.

Be Accountable And Transparent:

• Explain ethical choices and processes to audiences. Encourage a civil dialogue with the public about journalistic practices, coverage and news content.

• Expose unethical conduct in journalism, including within their organizations.

I could provide multiple examples of the media ignoring each and every one of those, but 1) ANP regulars have seen the coverage here at All News PipeLine of the media malpractice, and; 2) It would take multiple articles just to list them all unless you wish to spend hours just reading one piece.

BOTTOM LINE

The professional media are supposed to report the facts, not determine which facts to report on, and which to hide. 

They are also not supposed to be the arbiters of what is and what is not best for individual Americans, nor to attempt to force Americans one way or another, on any issue. 

Whether it is voter ID, vaccines, abortion, LGBT agenda, gun control, or any of the other number of issues the media actively lobbies for, all things the media supports without offering a counter balance of the "other side" of the argument.

In fact, we have seen, and noted, multiple examples of the media deliberately refusing to offer a counter point, some stating outright that is they do not agree with the journalist, they refuse to have them on their show.

Professional journalism does not exist in America anymore.

This is why more and more Americans are reading Independent Media. At least we in the Independent Media, acknowledge our bias openly, still try to show what each side is arguing, and admit openly when we are are lobbying or participating in activism for any given topic.

ANP EMERGENCY FUNDRAISER: With non-stop censorship and 'big tech' attacks upon independent media, donations from readers are absolutely critical in keeping All News Pipeline online. So if you like stories like this, please consider donating to ANP.
All donations are greatly appreciated and will absolutely be used to keep us in this fight for the future of America.

Thank you and God Bless. Susan and Stefan.

PLEASE HELP KEEP ANP ALIVE BY DONATING USING ONE OF THE FOLLOWING METHODS.

One time donations or monthly, via Paypal or Credit Card:



Or https://www.paypal.me/AllNewsPipeLine

Donate monthly from $1 up by becoming an ANP Patron.



Donate Via Snail Mail

Checks or money orders made payable to Stefan Stanford or Susan Duclos can be sent to:

P.O. Box 575McHenry, MD. 21541