I emailed @matthewkassel asking why his recent piece refers to @ninaturner as "controversial" and a "source of concern" but is neutral in describing DMFI, a SuperPAC running ads against Nina Turner that takes GOP money and whose board member called for burning all of Gaza. 
For context, the piece includes six quotes from people backing @ninaturner's opponent, Shontel Brown, and zero quotes from people backing Nina Turner.
jewishinsider.com/2021/06/shonte…
jewishinsider.com/2021/06/shonte…
He said: "Fair enough, Waleed. Would you like to offer a comment on the ad buy? I can probably update the piece with a quote if you're interested in providing one."
I sent a quote naming DMFI's numerous controversies.
He replied saying they could no longer fit it in the story.
I sent a quote naming DMFI's numerous controversies.
He replied saying they could no longer fit it in the story.
"please provide a quote."
"wait no not that one!"
"wait no not that one!"
I wouldn't usually post about this but it's a clear example of a double standard that paints people of color supportive of Palestinian rights as "controversial" while not saying a word about a "Democratic" group receiving GOP money whose board member called for genocide in Gaza.
It's not about Matt, he tries to be fair. It's implicit bias on what is considered "controversial" by press.
Backing from a group whose board member said all of Gaza should be burned gets no mention. But any comment on Israel from @IlhanMN, @AOC, @JamaalBowmanNY is controversy.
Backing from a group whose board member said all of Gaza should be burned gets no mention. But any comment on Israel from @IlhanMN, @AOC, @JamaalBowmanNY is controversy.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
