WaPoop Won’t Return Fake Pulitzer, ‘Stands By’ Russia Reporting – IOTW Report

WaPoop Won’t Return Fake Pulitzer, ‘Stands By’ Russia Reporting

Thursday, 18 May 2023, 11:00 MJA Uncategorized 14

Breitbart:

Both the far-left New York Times and Washington Post refuse to return Pulitzers for spreading the lie former President Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 presidential election.

Would Hitler return a fake Pulitzer?

Now that the Monday release of the Durham Report has debunked every facet of the Russia Collusion allegation and proved the whole thing was a politically-motivated smear campaign invented by Hillary Clinton, blessed by Barack Obama, and furthered by the FBI, there have been numerous calls for these left-wing outlets to return their fake Pulitzers.

Why should someone be rewarded for spreading a hoax? the thinking goes. Well, I will and have argued that these corporate news outlets knew all along it was a hoax.

Of course, they did.

The corporate media knew it was being lied to by the FBI and wanted to be lied to by the FBI.

In other words, the media’s goal had nothing to do with the truth and everything to do with coordinating a coup with the FBI against a legally-elected American president. more

14 Comments on WaPoop Won’t Return Fake Pulitzer, ‘Stands By’ Russia Reporting

  6. New York Times Statement About 1932 Pulitzer Prize Awarded to Walter Duranty
    Duranty, one of the most famous correspondents of his day, won the prize for 13 articles written in 1931 analyzing the Soviet Union under Stalin. Times correspondents and others have since largely discredited his coverage.

    Duranty’s cabled dispatches had to pass Soviet censorship, and Stalin’s propaganda machine was powerful and omnipresent. Duranty’s analyses relied on official sources as his primary source of information, accounting for the most significant flaw in his coverage – his consistent underestimation of Stalin’s brutality.

    Describing the Communist plan to “liquidate” the five million kulaks, relatively well-off farmers opposed to the Soviet collectivization of agriculture, Duranty wrote in 1931, for example: “Must all of them and their families be physically abolished? Of course not – they must be ‘liquidated’ or melted in the hot fire of exile and labor into the proletarian mass.”

    Taking Soviet propaganda at face value this way was completely misleading, as talking with ordinary Russians might have revealed even at the time. Duranty’s prize-winning articles quoted not a single one – only Stalin, who forced farmers all over the Soviet Union into collective farms and sent those who resisted to concentration camps. Collectivization was the main cause of a famine that killed millions of people in Ukraine, the Soviet breadbasket, in 1932 and 1933 – two years after Duranty won his prize.

    Even then, Duranty dismissed more diligent writers’ reports that people were starving. “Conditions are bad, but there is no famine,” he wrote in a dispatch from Moscow in March of 1933 describing the “mess” of collectivization. “But – to put it brutally – you can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs.”

    Some of Duranty’s editors criticized his reporting as tendentious, but The Times kept him as a correspondent until 1941. Since the 1980’s, the paper has been publicly acknowledging his failures. Ukrainian-American and other organizations have repeatedly called on the Pulitzer Prize Board to cancel Duranty’s prize and The Times to return it, mainly on the ground of his later failure to report the famine.

    The Pulitzer board has twice declined to withdraw the award, most recently in November 2003, finding “no clear and convincing evidence of deliberate deception” in the 1931 reporting that won the prize, and The Times does not have the award in its possession.

    3

Comments are closed.

iOTWreport.com ©2024 ----- iOTWreport is not responsible for the content of comments. All opinions in comments are solely the commenter's.