I was reading a Vox News article about the Trump Wiretapping claims, and the whole time I was reading I truly felt that I was talking with someone who disliked republicans and Trump. One quote helps portray the sort of language that appeared clearly hostile or negative towards a polls results on republicans and the fact that many believe the possibility Obama did wiretap Trump Tower.
“But these latest poll findings are a reminder of an uncomfortable truth about people: They generally don’t base their opinions on a careful analysis of evidence. And it’s not because they are “stupid” or willfully ignorant. It’s because our brains aren’t great at rationally analyzing facts, especially in fractured, ideologically polarized times.”
The language is much more vague, but I couldn’t help but feel like the last two sentences were a little unnecessary language making it seem harsher than it could have been. The rest of the article took a different approach than interpreting the poll and explaining the whole situation, like Vox usually does. Instead the article started to talk about what makes people believe in lies, which clearly portrayed their views of the wiretapping claims.
In my opinion, good journalists should always stay in the middle of the spectrum of political views. Keeping an open view helps journalists tell the whole story and even come up with more interesting stories.