Giuliani on voter fraud "I'm exaggerating a bit" - Why is the media so damn horrible?

The headline on CNN's website all evening yesterday was Giuliani saying "I'm exaggerating a bit" in regards to voter fraud.

Full disclosure. I'm definitely more pro-republican then pro-democrat - and have even been a supporter of a majority of Trump policies the past 4 years. But I think he lost this election fair and square and his display the past 2 weeks is embarrassing.

Coming back to the title. I'll admit I saw the headline on CNN and thought to myself "wow - that's bad, even Giuliani knows he's full of BS and admits it". I didn't click on the video though, didn't have time. I assume a ton of people do the same, look at the headlines without always having time to watch every video or read every story in-depth. Well - this morning I actually listened to the clip. In it Giuliani says:

"And Detroit probably had more voters than it had citizens...I'm exaggerating a bit..."

How is this comment in anyway bad? All along they've been pushing the idea that a lot of ineligible (dead people, out of state voters, etc) people voted to increase totals. That comment is 100% fine by me and in-line with that theory - regardless of if you believe it to be true or not. But the way CNN has it, they imply that he's admitting they've been exaggerating their comments and accusations about fraud - which is 100% taken out of context and not what he meant.

CNN's website is HORRIBLE. Always so ridiculously bias. It's not news - it's all opinion based propaganda.

Fox news is just as bad. As are most other outlets.

It's really become such a sad state of affairs. Has it always been this bad?

 

You did this all by yourself. The title said that he exaggerated a bit, which is what he said.

The reason the media hates Trump is that he has relentlessly attacked them for doing their normal job and pointing out the b.s.

 

The unfortunate thing about online news is they create the headline to get more clicks, and then within the article itself you get the full story. Personally, I think reading the news is still better than watching it on TV, but it is always important to read the full article.

Anyway.. yes I agree, CNN's website is horrible, and their TV channel is horrible. I don't like getting my news from an individual source anyway, but I still don't like CNN

 

The title was more inflammatory yesterday i'm pretty sure. They change titles often. And if you look at the video - the CNN anchor who introduces the video also builds it up to be a whole lot more than it is, by his words and tone. The comments by Giuliani are completely taken out of context, and they are implied to be more than they are.

 

Giuliani is a lawyer who is trying to prove voter fraud. Saying that Detroit "probably" had more voters than citizens isn't going to do it in court. He'd have to show reliable numbers that that was actually the case.

Of course, we all know that this is total B$. Just like most things that Trump says when he starts with "A lot of people say...". In other words, he just made stuff up, but because a lot of people supposedly say it, it must be true.

 

So you have an issue with CNN quoting Giuliani’s own words? Hmmm interesting. Well, I don’t read or watch CNN but this seems much ado about nothing.

 

Yes. Because it's very easy to take things out of context and make them appear to be more than they are. Which is exactly what happened here.

 

Guess we'll have to agree to disagree

 

I agree - this definitely won't do in court. But this wasn't court - it was an interview. He was just speaking, and trying to emphasize his point about how more people voted then they should have and said they probably had more voters than citizens, and right away said "im probably exaggerating a bit'.

It's not that different than if you said "My wife is the prettiest woman in our city!". and then said "I'm probably exaggerating a bit - but she's truly beautiful".

He was just trying to get a point across. It's basically a non-story. But CNN blasts a top headline for a full day trying to imply it meant more than it did.

 

LOL - you don't know how to read???

See how easy it is to take quotes out of context?

If you were a famous person (I'm assuming you're not, no offense ) and I made a headline on CNN stating "ECA States in Interview - "Well, I don't read" - you don't think it would send out the wrong impression?

(Not that there's anything wrong with being unable to read - I'm just making a point)

 

In politics appearance is everything.

This is why Trump was so disliked. He actually did a very fine job as president but his optics were pretty horrible.

Yes he was an outsider and that's fine but he also gave the left way too much ammunition to work with.

So he is great at the job but doesn't understand what being a politician is and unfortunately for him you do need to be a politician to be president for more than a term.

Thats the only reason he lost.

 

You don't seem to understand context. His quote wasn't taken out of context. What you said about me was. Therein lies the difference. But whatever. We're not going to disagree on this but feel free to take this down a rabbit hole by yourself. Have a nice day

 

On the headline yes, the media has used "click-bait" headlines long before there were clicks to bait and this isn't an especially bad example of the form. Tabloid headlines routinely state outright lies even in the context of the copy, let alone the facts. You are part of the problem when you assume what the headline means before\without checking the details so it's a learning experience. Think of all the other examples you won't have caught in the past.

That said, while CNN is overselling it, Giuliani's actual statement doesn't reflect well on him. He's a lawyer talking about specific allegations of serious criminal behaviour so I think he has a responsibility not to run with such lazy rhetoric. Notwithstanding the conditional afterthought, it is clear that the false idea of Detroit having more voters than citizens could easily spread and I wouldn't put it past him for that to have been his intention, part of the overall scheme to discredit the election to ether prevent Biden being elected or at least taint his term in office.

 

It's on thing exaggerating your wife's beauty. It is a totally different thing to make claims of Dems stealing the election without any evidence. The latter one is called slander.

BTW: Welcome to the forum.