This is the second poll like this that I have seen: intentionally worded in a way guaranteed to get a negative response, and then given a headline with a conclusion that cannot be made from that wording.
I am referring to the headline, and first paragraphs of Mark Murray’s article for NBC News.
Let’s start with the headline alone:
Poll: Nearly Half of Americans Take Issue With Netanyahu Speech
What does that tell you? It tells you that almost half the country is against Netanyahu making this speech, doesn’t it? No need to read on, we now know that there is a ton of opposition to Mr. Netanyahu going before congress.
Except…
Here are the first two paragraphs of the article that headline is supposed to reflect:
Nearly half of American voters – 48 percent – say that congressional Republicans should not have invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address Congress on Tuesday without first notifying President Barack Obama, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.
By contrast, 30 percent of those polled believe the invitation was fine, and another 22 percent don’t know enough to say either way.
Wait a minute. That doesn’t American Voters are against Prime Minister Netanyahu being invited to make the speech, or the speech itself. It only says that 48% are against the invitation being made without notifying Barack Obama about it. An entirely different issue.
So why was the headline worded that way – other than to confuse and mislead readers? Give me a hint.
And when you’re through not being able to give me any other reason – because there isn’t one – you can try convincing me that Mark Murray, who happens to be the Senior Political Editor of NBC News, did not know that headline was fraudulent.
Don’t count on making that case either.
I have an idea for Mr. Murray: how about less BS polling analysis about Benjamin Netanyahu, and a little more news content about the millions and millions Hillary Clinton’s foundation got from foreign nations while she was our Secretary of State. Or maybe a few paragraphs on the newly-discovered IRS emails from lois “liar” lerner that were supposedly no longer in existence?
And, finally, two questions:
-Question 1: Why did you do it? Why did you give us a fraudulent headline regarding Netanyahu’s speech, while virtually blacking out real stories about Clinton and lerner?
Is lying about Netanyahu’s speech more fun than telling the truth about Clinton and lerner? Or is it just the usual partisanship?
-Question 2: Why didn’t you directly ask the poll respondents whether or not they supported Prime Minister Netanyahu giving a speech before congress, about what he feels the dangers of making a deal with Iran are? Were you afraid you would get overwhelming approval on that question, and it would embarrass your lord and savior Barack Obama?
I don’t expect an answer to either.
