Jeffrey Epstein Pitched His Own Narrative and Mainstream Media Published It


from The Mind Unleashed:

As independent media journalists and outlets reporting on all things Jeffrey Epstein continue to find themselves under the microscope, some important revelations about mainstream media’s reporting of the convicted pedophile have come to light, thanks to the New York Times.

The double standard by which social media platforms, fact checkers, and news consumers alike judge independent versus mainstream media is, in short, incredibly unfair. Every time information about the ills of mainstream media surface, it is important to take note and adjust the lens through which one consumes mainstream media accordingly.

This latest revelation regarding the less than transparent side of mainstream media involves outlets like ForbesNational Review and HuffPost and Epstein’s attempt to improve his public image after his stint in the Palm County Jail back in 2009 after he plead guilty to two prostitution charges for soliciting a minor in Florida in 2008 in an attempt to avoid federal charges related to sexually abusing underage girls.

His efforts resulted in the publishing of multiple puff pieces casting the deceased financier as an intelligent and selfless businessman with a passion for science. And while Epstein was indeed a philanthropist, these articles failed to mention his criminal past or current controversies.

While all three articles referenced have been deleted since the report, the New York Times included quotes from each:

“The article, posted in 2013, praised him as “one of the largest backers of cutting-edge science around the world” while making no mention of his criminal past. The National Review piece, from the same year, called him “a smart businessman” with a “passion for cutting-edge science.” The HuffPost article, from 2017, credited Mr. Epstein for “taking action to help a number of scientists thrive during the ‘Trump Era’,” a time of ‘anti-science policies and budget cuts’.”

The New York Times notes the little known method employed by corporate online publishers in which a contributor not typically associated with the outlet writes for little or no pay with little to no input from the outlet’s editors.

Read More @