Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News

Drudge Retort

User Info


Subscribe to OCUser's blog Subscribe


Special Features

Wednesday, January 22, 2020

President Donald Trump downplayed injuries that US troops suffered when Iran launched a barrage of missiles at American forces in Iraq earlier this month. read more

Tuesday, January 21, 2020

I encountered an example of some horrible journalism this morning.

Over the years I been following the Flint water crisis, basically because my wife and I are from Michigan and my wife used to actually live in Flint and she still has a few cousins living there.

Anyway, this morning it was reported that the US Supreme Court has cleared the way for the residents of Flint to sue the city and state over their handling of the water crisis, however, depending on which headline you read, you might get two totally different ideas about what actually happened and what it meant.

Wednesday, January 15, 2020

A Michigan state senator is under fire after he reportedly told a young female reporter that a group of high school boys touring the state Capitol could "have a lot of fun" with her if she stuck around. read more

Monday, January 13, 2020

The White House of President Donald Trump came under fire Sunday after a tweet that critics are already slamming as the "dumbest" lie of 2020. read more

Sunday, January 12, 2020

Attacking Nancy Pelosi and making up more threats to our embassies out of whole cloth weren't the only crazy things to come out of Trump's mouth during his softball interview with Fox's Laura Ingraham Friday night. Trump also told Ingraham that both Saudi Arabia and South Korea have deposited money into a "bank account" in exchange for more U.S. troops. Who this supposed "bank account" belongs to, he did not say.

Trump was rightfully taken to task on Twitter for the exchange by former Republican Rep. Justin Amash and others, who went after Trump for treating our troops like mercenaries, and would like to know, as I would, just where this money he's talking about was deposited.


I worked 11 years for McDonnell Douglas and they were always proud of producing some of the most well engineered aircraft in the world. I had already left the company when they were acquired by Boeing in 1997, but I now get a pension check every month from Boeing. In fact, I get monthly pension checks from THREE different companies that I NEVER worked for.

As for what Boeing inherited from McDonnell Douglas, one thing was a logo. Boeing never really had a logo, just their name in block letters. When they acquired MDC, to the chagrin of all the old Boeing people who had competed against them, they adopted a new corporate logo based on the the old McDonnell Douglas logo, which had been based on the Douglas Aircraft Company logo when they were acquired in 1967 by the McDonnell Aircraft Corporation. The rumors I heard was that a lot of people in Seattle were very unhappy about that, mostly because it WAS based on the old Douglas logo, the company that they considered to be their real competitor, as they never considered McAir as one since they built mostly military aircraft.

As for the gist of this article, I'm not sure they got it quite right. I would say that the commercial airline group at Douglas in Long Beach never had that much influence over the new company, but rather it was the military side of the business, which was dominated by the McAir crowd in Saint Louis, that came-out on top.

Anyway, I don't really care about any of this, as long as that pension checks shows-up in my bank account the first of every month ;-)


Here is the headline from the first article a I read:

Supreme Court allows lawsuit against Flint city officials to advance

And here's the second headline:

Supreme Court won't take case prompted by Flint water crisis

The Supreme Court has declined to take a case stemming from the 2014 water crisis in Flint, Michigan

See what I mean? Now read the two articles...

Link to the first:


Link to the second:


In the first article, you've got the whole story in the first two paragraphs. In the second article, you have to read all the way to the very last word and even then, it's so poorly written that many people still might not get the point of what happened.

This is terrible journalism, as it appears that the intention was to NOT provide the reader with an account of what actually happened, but yet doing so in a way that could later be defended as being accurate, if EVERY word had been read. When you see something like this, you can't help but ask what the editorial intent of this media outlet was and WHO it is that they consider as their TRUE audience.

Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable