The Media is the Message > CBS’ “Face the Nation” edits Kristi Noem comments to make Garcia look better and the government look worse

 

Kristi Noem accuses CBS of ‘shamefully’ editing her interview on Kilmar Abrego Garcia to ‘whitewash’ MS-13 gang affiliation

By 

Diana Nerozzi

Published Sep. 1, 2025, 4:55 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON — Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem went on a tirade against CBS News on Sunday over allegations the network edited her interview about alleged MS-13 gang member Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an illegal migrant that theTrump administration deported to El Salvador earlier this year.

Noem was on CBS’ “Face the Nation” discussing Abrego Garcia Sunday morning, she said on X, but noticed by afternoon that the footage had been clipped to remove part of her answer.

“This individual was a known human smuggler, a MS-13 gang member, an individual who was a wife beater, and someone who was so perverted that he solicited nude photos from minors, and even his fellow human traffickers told him to knock it off, he was so sick in what he was doing and how he was treating small children,” the DHS chief said in the full, unaired clip.

3

Noem claimed a portion of her interview was cut from CBS.

AP

3

Comparison of Kristi Noem’s uncut and CBS-aired interview segments.

X/@Sec_Noem

“So he needs to never be in the United States of America and our administration is making sure we’re doing all that we can to bring him to justice,” she added.

“Secretary Noem’s “Face The Nation” interview was edited for time and met all CBS News standards,” a CBS rep told The Post. “The entire interview is publicly available on YouTube, and the full transcript was posted early Sunday morning at CBSNews.com

Noem wrote on X, “This morning, I joined CBS to report the facts about Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Instead, CBS shamefully edited the interview to whitewash the truth about this MS-13 gang member and the threat he poses to American public safety.”

A US federal immigration judge ruled in 2019 that Abrego Garcia couldn’t be deported to El Salvador due to threats from local gangs — but the Trump administration flew him along with hundreds of other alleged gang members out of the country to a megaprison in the Central American nation earlier this year.

3

Kilmar Abrego Garcia speaks during a rally and prayer vigil for him before he enters a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) field office on August 25, 2025 in Baltimore, Maryland.

Getty Images

The Trump administration claimed he was a member of the violent MS-13 gang — a US-designated foreign terrorist organization — based on a determination during that 2019 court proceeding.

Abrego Garcia and his defense attorneys have denied the allegation.

Democrats visited with and advocated for Abrego Garcia, saying he was “wrongfully” removed to El Salvador and kept there for weeks first at the notorious prison CECOT and then at a lower-security facility.

The purported Salvadoran gangbanger was eventually brought back to the US in June and charged with human smuggling, but released briefly before that trial only to be apprehended again by ICE on Aug. 25

He now faces the possibility of being deported to Uganda after having declined to plead guilty to the smuggling charges as part of an agreement that would send him to Costa Rica instead.

Abrego Garcia’s lawyers are still working on getting him asylum in the US. His first attempt in 2019 was denied, but if this one is approved, it could put him on a pathway to a green card and American citizenship.

=============================================================================================

The Media is the Message > CBC's fact-checker got it wrong! Surprise! No Surprise!

 

CBC ‘fact-checker’ gets his facts wrong

May 07, 2025 | APPEARED IN THE TORONTO SUN

By: Jake Fuss

At all times, during an election period and beyond, the media must report accurate information and, when necessary, correct the record. For example, following the English-language federal leaders’ debate on April 17, CBC reporter Jonathon Gatehouse appeared on CBC News and “fact-checked” a statement by Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre who had referenced a study published by the Fraser Institute. Unfortunately, during the segment, Gatehouse got his facts wrong.

The study (of which I’m a co-author) found that in 2023 the total tax bill (income taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, fuel taxes, etc.) for the average Canadian family equaled 43.0 per cent of its annual income—more than it spent on food, clothing and housing combined, and significantly higher than the 33.5 per cent it paid in 1961. Put differently, taxes represent the number one expense for the average family today.

In response, Gatehouse made two false statements.

First, he falsely claimed the study does not take “inflation into account.” But in fact, the study tracks changes in the tax bill for the average family since 1961 and explicitly adjusts for inflation to provide an apples-to-apples comparison over multiple decades. As shown in the study, after accounting for inflation, the tax bill has grown by $30,227 (or 180.3 per cent) from 1961 to 2023. The study also includes other years of tax data, also adjusted for inflation, to provide additional points of comparison for readers.

Second, Gatehouse falsely claimed the study does not account for carbon rebates. But in fact, it does account for the Canada Carbon Rebate (CCR) when calculating the income of the average Canadian family because the CCR represents a transfer from the federal government to households. (After adding up all the various sources of income including carbon rebates, the study finds the average Canadian family earned an income of $109,235 in 2023.)

Finally, Gatehouse offered his subjective opinion about the study’s calculations, stating that “the problem is, they also included CPP and EI contributions in their calculations. Now, those are effectively down payments on future benefits for when people retire or lose their jobs—not taxes.”

Of course, people can reasonably disagree about the definition of taxes. But Gatehouse clearly veered away from his role as an objective fact-checker and violated CBC’s own journalistic principle to “not promote any particular point of view on matters of public debate.” Many economists argue that CPP and EI contributions are in fact taxes. And our study treats these contributions (which are typically deducted from our paycheques) as payroll taxes because they are mandatory and support government programs. And despite Gatehouse’s claims, the money we pay into the CPP is not a down payment on our own future benefits, but mainly pays for the benefits of current retired workers. The federal government also has no legal obligation to provide any CPP benefits to workers at all, and it can simply increase mandatory CPP contributions without raising CPP benefits.

According to CBC’s journalistic principles, its reporters must “seek out the truth in all matters of public interest” while treating “individuals and organizations with openness and respect.” In his “fact-checking” segment following the federal leaders’ debate, Gatehouse violated both of these principles. Neither the CBC nor Gatehouse contacted anyone at the Fraser Institute to verify his false claims.

Fact-checking remains an important exercise to provide Canadians with accurate information. Evidently, some fact-checkers require fact-checkers of their own.

Was Gatehouse under some pressure to make Poilievre look bad during the debates; was he just incompetent, or did he simply choose to trash Poilievre on his own? What do you think?

=============================================================

The Media is the Message > WaPo's Opinions are changing, apparently

 

Bezos’ WaPo overhaul prompts key editor to quit

The publication is making major changes to its opinion section, and the move has already sparked controversy among readers and staff

Jeff Bezos, owner of the Washington Post, speaks during the New York Times annual DealBook summit, New York City, December 4, 2024. © Getty Images / Michael M. Santiago

The Washington Post is revamping its opinion section to focus on American values, with an emphasis on “personal liberties” and “free markets,” the newspaper’s owner, Jeff Bezos, announced in an email to staff on Wednesday. The move has led to the resignation of opinion editor David Shipley and sparked debate among journalists and readers.

As part of the overhaul, the newspaper will publish daily op-eds supporting the two core pillars outlined by Bezos, while viewpoints opposing them “will be left to be published by others,” he stated.

“I’m confident that free markets and personal liberties are right for America. I also believe these viewpoints are underserved in the current market of ideas and news opinion,” Bezos wrote, adding that traditional opinion sections have become outdated and have lost readership to digital platforms.

He added that the content will now be based on the American principle of “freedom,” which he described as “ethical” and “minimizing coercion.”

READ MORE: Washington Post web traffic plummets nearly 90% – media

Bezos said he offered Shipley the opportunity to “lead this new chapter,” but the editor declined. In an internal email seen by CNN, Shipley explained that his departure came “after reflection on how I can best move forward in the profession I love.”

It would seem to me to be an opportunity to grow as an editor, but I guess he doesn't see it that way.

A number of employees have publicly criticized the changes, including chief economics reporter Jeff Stein, who called the shift a “massive encroachment” and warned that he would quit if Bezos tries to “interfere with the news side.” Philip Bump, a columnist, reacted on Bluesky, writing: an adolescent, vulgar, comment.

Billionaire Elon Musk, the owner of SpaceX and close adviser to US President Donald Trump, praised the move in a post on X: “Bravo, @JeffBezos!”

Musk’s endorsement triggered debate online, with some arguing that Bezos’ emphasis on ‘freedom’ is an admission that the newspaper has up till now been “out of alignment with good ethics.” Others suggested that the shift is an attempt to align the editorial stance with Trump’s ‘America First’ agenda.

Washington Post executives have downplayed concerns about political bias. In a staff memo obtained by CNN, CEO Will Lewis insisted that the change “is not about siding with any political party,” but rather “being crystal clear about what we stand for as a newspaper.”

Executive editor Matt Murray also sought to reassure staff, saying the newspaper’s independent newsroom “remains unchanged” and that Bezos’ policy shift only affects the opinion section.

Jeff Bezos’ Amazon to donate $1 million to Trump

Bezos’ decision comes at a turbulent time for the Washington Post, which has faced internal challenges and backlash from readers. It recently abandoned its long-standing tradition of endorsing candidates in US presidential elections, prompting three members of its ten-person editorial board to resign. The policy change also reportedly led to more than 250,000 digital subscribers – over 10% of its paying readership – canceling their subscriptions.

================================================================================================

The Media is the Message > CBC's Covid Propaganda based on lies; Tik Tok targetting kids with dangerous challenges - parents of 4 dead kids sue

 

CBC journalist exposes policy to deceive the public about Covid

Here, she (Marianne Klowak) presents her arguments at the National Citizen's Inquiry into Covid responses. It was made necessary because the government refused to call such an inquiry in spite of the billions of dollars wasted and the phenomenal corruption involved. 

Covid_19 response by the government was one giant Liberal slush fund, IMHO.

BlendrNews

@BlendrNews

Former CBC Journalist: "We Betrayed the Public." In regards to COVID: "We were in fact pushing propaganda." "Those who questioned and challenged the narrative were portrayed as dangerous and spreading disinformation." What best describes the CBC?

1:33 / 2:29

11:30 AM · Feb 15, 2025

·

55.2K

Views

British families sue TikTok in U.S. over

Blackout Challenge children deaths

By Doug Cunningham

Four British families Thursday filed a wrongful death suit against TikTok and its owner ByteDance over the self-strangulation deaths of four children who were participating in a TikTok Blackout Challenge. File Photo by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo

Feb. 7 (UPI) -- Four British families Thursday filed a wrongful death suit against TikTok and its owner ByteDance over the self-strangulation deaths of four children who were participating in a TikTok Blackout Challenge.

The U.S.-based Social Media Victims Law Center filed the suit in Delaware Superior Court, on behalf of the families of Isaac Kenevan, 13; Archie Battersbee, 12; Julian "Jools" Sweeney,14; and Maia Walsh, 13.

"TikTok's algorithm purposely targeted these children with dangerous content to increase their engagement time on the platform and drive revenue. It was a clear and deliberate business decision by TikTok that cost these four children their lives," the SMVLC said in a statement.

The suit alleges the deaths were "the forseeable result of ByteDance's engineered addiction-by-design and programming decisions" that pushed children to maximize their TikTok engagement "by any means necessary."

Related

• Trump signs order to create sovereign wealth fund in United States, possibly to buy TikTok
• Trump move to delay TikTok ban stretches executive power
• Supreme Court unanimously upholds TikTok divest or ban law

Sweeney's mother Ellen Roome told the BBC a law debated in Parliament dubbed "Jools' Law" should be passed so parents are allowed to access their children's social media accounts if they die.

She had to sue in the United States before obtaining her son's TikTok data. She said she believed that was morally wrong and TikTok could have simply handed over the data.

"It's no coincidence that three of the four children who died from self-suffocation after being exposed to the dangerous and deadly TikTok Blackout Challenge lived in the same city and that all fit a similar demographic," SMVLC attorney Matthew P. Bergman said in a statement.

He added that TikTok's algorithm "purposely targeted these children with dangerous content to increase their engagement time on the platform and drive revenue."

According to the lawsuit, Maia Walsh's father Liam was able to access her TikTok data after months of trying and said he found TikTok had targeted the 13 year-old with "dangerous challenges and self-harm videos."

====================================================================================