Media splits on significance of Gabbard's Obama intel: Bias Breakdown

If you're hearing me right now, that means you clicked on our story or video or podcast

And honestly, that's the hardest part, getting you here. Because people are tired of all the noise coming from the news

But you still want to know what's going on in the world around you, right? Well, as you're about to see, that feeling of frustration with the media is justified

Because when we have one news story, we're being told two totally different things

What does she now have? The answer is nothing. There is nothing groundbreaking in what Gabbard put out

If you look at the substance of this, the substance of what's inside, it is significant

Major news outlets are strategically implementing bias into their storytelling to try and stoke a specific reaction from viewers

They're aware of it. So are we. Bias by omission in the media's coverage of Tulsi Gabbard's release

of declassified Russian interference intelligence. That's the focus of today's bias breakdown

Join Straight Arrow News. See the slant. Avoid the bias. When others skew the facts

we give you the truth down the center. Welcome to Bias Breakdown

First, let's talk about the contradicting media narratives being fed here. After Tulsi Gabbard released 2016 Russian election interference intelligence reports

under the Obama administration, right-leaning media called it the uncovering of a massive

scandal, a bombshell report. Tulsi Gabbard releasing a bombshell report. Bombshell report. Tulsi Gabbard is dropping this bombshell

Networks on the right honed in on Obama's request for another intelligence assessment

in December 2016 after his director of national intelligence, James Clapper, found in August and September no evidence of Russian interference or collusion

Gabbard and the administration interpreted Obama's request as a coup against Trump

a sentiment echoed by right networks. When Trump won in 2016, the intel community concluded that Russia didn't have a hand in

his victory. Instead of accepting the inclusion, Obama determined and wanted a new conclusion

Turns out Barack knew the Russia hoax was a hoax all along, but pushed it anyway to

sabotage the Trump presidency. We knew Hillary created the dossier, and now we have proof

that Barack was calling the shots. This assessment in this meeting that was called by Obama

directed senior intel heads to create an assessment limited to just five ysts

only five, ignoring tons of intelligence that would fly in the face of the product that they

wanted. It was a completely different storyline and focus from networks on the left who argued

The later intelligence reports, including one in 2018 by a bipartisan House Intelligence Committee

found some extent of Russia trying to interfere in the election, justifying any calls from the top in 2016 for further investigation Marco Rubio himself said there was irrefutable evidence of Russian meddling in the election I mean the years bipartisan Senate report that came out under Marco Rubio

yes, he was the former chairman, now he's the secretary of state, found that Russia did try and meddle in the 2016 election

This bipartisan Senate report that I alluded to also concluded that Russia did interfere in the 2016 election

Networks on the left downplaying what Gabbert declassified as a distraction and something politically motivated

The latest example of this White House trying to deflect and distract. The fact that it's coming as the White House is trying to turn the page on Epstein is

very important and notable. It's an effort to change the subject. It's an effort to have a new enemy

She is engaging in partisan politics. She is using her bully pulpit to weaponize the intelligence precisely what she has railed

against in the past. Charges against Barack Obama or John Brennan or Jim Comey or anyone else is absurd

Now, depending on what side of the aisle you're on, you're going to personally agree with some of those talking points

But the media is supposed to do more than just feed that political appetite to justify your side is right

But that's the landscape we're in today. Heavily leaning into bias by viewpoint omission

News outlets on the left and right largely only share viewpoints aligning with their political bias

and omit or leave out alternate perspectives. This explains why a lot of the times

you're going to hear Democrats interviewed by left networks. There's absolutely no legs to this

There's no truth to this. Even a former CIA agent said that it was just a bunch of bull

And Tulsi is literally just trying to make sure that she can keep her job and stay relevant

That's what this is all about. And Republicans interviewed by networks on the right

In this case, it's new evidence with President Obama's fingerprints all over this

He took evidence that his intelligence agency said, look, there was no interference

and now he turned that narrative around. The invitation onto these left and right programs is strategic

because these voices don't challenge their preferred narrative. Instead, it gives the narrative another voice, in a way substantiating what they have to say

It's this idea of, you don't have to take my word for it. Let me find someone else with the same view as me and just listen to them

Tulsi Gabbard's trying to work his way back into the good graces of Donald Trump by fabricating this conspiracy theory

December 9th should be a day that will live in infamy because this is a moment when senior members of our government

decided to lie to the American people and to sabotage President Donald Trump who'd just been elected by the American people

It wasn't only viewpoints missing and initial coverage of the story, But the story itself was missing on left networks

another form of bias by omission when his story is getting a lot of national attention

but is missing in news coverage. News outlets on the right were quick to point this out

Fake news, CNN, oh, suddenly no longer believes that this story is worth their time

Real U intelligence from career officials isn worth reporting Okay those are called editorial decisions That also called well bias

Ignoring the story as it damages the Obama deep state after devoting endless coverage to it

when the details damaged President Trump. That is how fake the news really is

La la la la la, we don't want to hear this, we don't want to hear this, no, no, no, no, no, change the subject

And they think they're journalists at CNN. The day Tulsi Gabbard entered the White House briefing room to discuss the declassified documents

some mainstream networks didn't mention it in their primetime broadcast. On July 23rd, ABC World News with David Muir had no coverage

Their A-block was devoted to the Epstein files. Attorney General Pam Bondi and her deputy Todd Blanche told President Trump back in May

that his name appears in the Jeffrey Epstein files multiple times. NBC News with Tom Yamas had no coverage

They also led with stories examining Trump's relationship with Epstein. Breaking tonight, the bombshell new report tying the president to the Epstein files

CBS News also emphasized news reports over Epstein, but did make a brief 30-second mention of Gabbard in the press briefing at the end of its Epstein segment

The reporter saying the White House was trying to change the subject with Gabbard's appearance

The White House tried again to redirect focus onto a different subject, In this case, how the Obama administration investigated potential Russian interference in the 2016 elections

While CBS did mention it, burying Tulsi Gabbard's press comments at the end of its Epstein story is another form of media bias called bias by placement

When a story or viewpoint is mentioned at the end of a story, it makes that information seem less important or valid

Left and right media are really at war right now over control, not just of the narrative, but of the news cycle

What is newsworthy and what isn't? We saw the same sort of story omission on Epstein by Fox News, a decision that was even criticized by Newsmax, another outlet on the right

That was the topic of last week's bias breakdown. You may have noticed the Epstein story was almost nowhere to be found, though, on Fox News

And a lot of TV hosts are terrified of what to say and how to say it because they don't want to lose their audience and they don't want to piss off the White House at the same time

So it becomes a bit of a catch-22. So what you have is the media telling you what you should think is important

That's bias by story omission. The media really believes the stories they're leaving out have no relevance

Instead of it being an editorial decision, it's become a politically motivated one by the media

And that's your bias breakdown. So I just want to take a moment here, if you'll stay with me a little bit longer, to say that I'm feeling really grateful

At the end of every episode, I just give a quick thank you for watching, and then we roll the close

But truly this month marked three years that I have been here at Straight Arrow News And while a lot of my time has been trial and error as you could say that just the typical process when you working for a startup The one thing that I can say that

stayed the same since day one is we have a purpose here and we believe in it. My personal values

align with my companies and I feel so fortunate that I get to say that. I'm passionate about the

news and yeah, politics too. But you know what I value? I value the truth. It hurts to be lied to

Trust is rare in the real world and especially in this media bubble. So this space that's ours

where I can be honest about what I know and then humbly tell you what we don't know

and then you taking the time to listen, I value. Also to me, perspective is valuable

even the ones I disagree with. Because to me, that's a great way to learn

Doesn't mean someone's opinion is going to change my own. And I'm certainly not looking to change opinions here

That's not what we're about. But hearing multiple perspectives, to me, helps to build a better understanding

And the last point that I want to mention is that I was raised in a household where we value respect

which for me is more than just using manners and being polite, although those are important

it's valuing each other and therefore respecting each other. So I can promise you those three things you're going to get from me here

The truth to the utmost of my ability, multiple perspectives without a sense of me trying to persuade you

and respect. Because I think too much of the noise from mainstream media today

sounds like scolding a child. You deserve better. And I want to do better

That's why I'm here. That's why we're here. So truly, thank you so much for listening and being willing to get to know me here

and for choosing us for some of your news consumption. There's a lot of voices out there, but we want to be different

So as always, find us on whatever platform is most convenient for you

We're over on Spotify. Would love to see some more love for Bias Breakdown over there if you have time

And be sure to join in on the conversation that we have in the comments on YouTube

We receive great feedback from y'all and we implement changes based on what y'all like here and what you think we could improve on

And seriously, I love my team members who helped me out with this podcast so much

Ian Kennedy is such a talented person and video editor. He actually used to work with me on Morning Shift when we did the morning show together

And now he's stuck with me again. We moved shifts together and now we're partnered up for this project

So Ian, thank you for always helping me and, you know, making me look good

And Allie Caldwell, she's so willing to help us out on graphics anytime that we need her

Some episodes are heavier lifts than others, but she brings energy and creativity

I'm so grateful for y'all. Three years and counting, let's make a difference

Stay with us because there's more to come. I'll see you next time