… I remember when a “fake but accurate” story cost Dan Rather his job. Now, it’s close to the new normal. David Harsanyi writes over at The Federalist:
“Notionally accurate” sounds a lot like “fake but accurate.” Do reporters covering the White House, some of whom are about to release books about the Trump presidency, believe that notional accuracy is a standard that deserves professional deference or serious attention?
Read the whole thing.
I’d be willing to bet that Trump Derangement Syndrome can cause some “journalists” to happily violate even a notionally accurate standard if doing so advances The Narrative.