We call it "bias by placement."
The Washington Post hilariously demonstrated on Sunday just how precisely it can lay out a page to bury uncomfortable copy about the Left. On the front page of the Metro section was an article titled "Women's March to unveil a platform."
Reporter Marissa J. Lang (a new Post recruit) didn't exactly skip over the march organizers being fans and friends with Rev. Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam, but the newspaper's layout organizers precisely tucked away the controversy under what they call the "jump" to an inside page. It looked like this:
At the Jan. 19 march, the organization plans to unveil a federal policy platform it is calling "the Women's Agenda" that will outline a 10-prong call to action for lawmakers. The agenda will pinpoint "realistically achievable" priorities, such as raising the federal minimum wage, addressing reproductive rights and violence against women, and passing the long-dormant Equal Rights Amendment, officials said.
"Once we have this platform, we intend to organize around it, to mobilize around it and . . . we will consider it to be marching orders from our movement," said Rachel O'Leary Carmona, chief operating officer of Women's March Inc. "And we will bring about swift political consequences to those who oppose us."
The focus on creating an actionable doctrine comes as the organization is trying to ramp up support for its march amid
MARCH Continued on C5
accusations of anti-Semitism and ongoing controversies surrounding Women's March leaders' ties to the Nation of Islam and its leader, Louis Farrakhan.
In response, the group has redoubled efforts to reach out to Jewish women and will update its guiding document, known as the "unity principals," [sic] to include explicit support of the Jewish community, O'Leary Carmona said.
"I think anti-Semitism in general and anti-Semitism on the left is a conversation that has gone unspoken for a long time," she said. "And I, for one, am grateful that the Jewish community is willing to step into this dialogue with us."
[Emphasis mine, since this is the only passing mention in the story that these are all leftist groups being discussed.]
Post defenders would note that the article's subhead was "Shift comes ahead of third event and amid anti-Semitism accusations." Are they merely accusations?? Is the anti-Semitism of Louis Farrakhan merely alleged? Are the Farrakhan ties unproven? No.
They also avoided that thorny subject in the inside headline on C-5 (the bottom of C-5): "Women's March organizers pivot to policy in preparation for third D.C. rally." Lang quoted an analyst on "protest movements" that these organizers will probably have trouble going from outsiders on the street to insiders in the halls of Congress.
Lang wrote on these Farrakhan ties back on November 21, and on that occasion, the Post editors placed the article deep inside on page A-20.
