Yellow journalism watch: Fox 'News'.com today -- 1/5/19. (Plus additional commentary.)

(Commentary, including reposted material.)

Blogger note: We're going to try a little new feature here for a few days (or so) and see how it goes. This commentary series may subsequently be moved to a slightly larger-audience web outlet if it seems worthwhile...(Link to be provided.) 

 One definition of 'yellow journalism' (source is linked): "the use of cheaply sensational or unscrupulous methods in newspapers, etc. to attract or influence readers"

....................................................................................

Before looking at today's sample foxnews.com article (see further below), a brief observation:

Excerpt from a 1/5/19 CNN news story, as reported:

"President Donald Trump told congressional leaders during a meeting Friday to try to negotiate terms to re-open the government and that he preferred the word "strike" in describing the ongoing government shutdown, a person familiar with the meeting and a Democratic aide told CNN.

Trump also kicked off the meeting with a profanity laden opening salvo lasting more than 15 minutes in which he made it clear that he had no plans to move on from his demand for $5.6 billion to build a border wall, according to a person familiar with the meeting.

Trump also addressed the issue of impeachment, directing his remarks at House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, according to two people familiar with what happened inside the room. Pelosi, in response, told him the meeting was supposed to be about re-opening the government, not impeachment, the people said...."

--- Source link. No affiliation.
.................................................

Comment: As reported, Donald Trump's actions personify the adjectives egotistical (def. link) and arrogant (def. link). To attempt to characterize the Trump-induced government shutdown as a "strike" is demagoguery (and falsification)  to a disgraceful degree.. 

Further: Understanding that Democratic leaders apparently were present at the meeting (in good faith) to discuss -- and perhaps negotiate about -- the Trump government shutdown: Democratic leaders should have either repeatedly interrupted Trump's "profane" 15-minute "opening salvo"/power-play -- when it became apparent, or briefly stepped out of the room, to perhaps force a child-disciplining "timeout" upon the ranting demagogue. (Democratic) congressional leaders are not the president's "underlings". (Or sycophants.) No professional organizational leaders in today's world would be "expected" to sit through such a thing.
..Just walk out....for a few minutes... and let the "baby" complete his tantrum without an adult audience present....

Oh, BTW, Democratic congressional leaders↓:

(Screen-captured partial image. Source link. Aggregated poll adat as of 1/5/19:)

(Continuing:)

↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓

Today's selected article, which was temporarily featured at the top of the foxnews.com webpage at around noon EST. (Note: As with most news outlets, stories change/rotate in and out from the top portion of the foxnews.com page throughout the day:)

(↓Screen-captured partial image. No copyright claimed or assumed:)

Link to the full 1/5/19 article, new window opens: 
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pelosi-interrupted-dhs-boss-nielsen-during-presentation-on-illegal-immigrants-saying-i-reject-your-facts

................................................................................................................................

Comment: In my humble opinion, yeah....this sample (above) cuts a little too close to tabloid-style, "yellow journalism". Main reasons? The over-emphasis upon the "I reject your facts" reported statement, which is likely taken out-of-context, and may not be a complete accounting of the words actually uttered.

Also, especially for a prominently featured news article that includes assertions by multiple parties, there does not appear to be any associated fact-checking portion to the story, or a separate fact-check article published on the same portion of the page. 

Here is an example of the type of fact-checking examination that I would look for -- and expect: 
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/05/politics/dhs-border-control-presentation/index.html

...................................................................................................................................................................






via GIPHY