> Dana wrote:
> but nothing there
> supports the label of "fake journalistic propaganda" either.
>

I dunno about that - it's weakly sourced (if it is), and there're
things like this:

"At a recent White House strategy session, internal party pollsters
told the President that his approval rating with Americans continues
to slide and may be irreversible"

I just don't see that happening.  Did the President really attend a
meeting where his team said, "ah, yup, you're hosed.  Nothing we can
do.  Well, see ya."  I doubt it.  I guess I would call if fake
journalistic, but not quite propaganda.

That being said, it's probably like the National Enquirer: it doesn't
always have facts, but the trend is right.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Purchase RoboHelp from House of Fusion, a Macromedia Authorized Affiliate and 
support the CF community.
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=59

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:179984
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to