Wsj why we lie

Many of them have been independently investigated and disproven; many more were thrown out by Pennsylvania courts. Trump is still claiming, for instance, that there is something suspicious about the number of absentee ballots cast, when in fact those numbers have always made perfect sense.

Any functional opinion page would have at least vetted these claims—the Journal certainly has the resources to do so. Failing that, the Journal could have explained why it decided to run the letter and, given the prominence of its author and his tendency to lie as easily as breathing, included the facts involved.

Instead, it did nothing—just spat some pure, high-test balderdash on its pages for clicks. The quality divide between these two arms of The Wall Street Journal is perennially remarked upon; its reporters have encouragingly managed to maintain a crackerjack operation and a sterling reputation in spite of the obstacles its editorial division throws in their way.

The NY transport department said the Trump Org. Upon further review, it mostly looked like any other ballot. It was marked with a number identifying it as being from the Rock Lake Community Center precinct. It was laid out identically to official A decision could come within the next few days from the Republican congressman.

There will be riots, there will be fire and there will Close this content. Read full article. More content below. Donald Trump. Josephine Harvey. In this article:. Story continues. Our goal is to create a safe and engaging place for users to connect over interests and passions.

In order to improve our community experience, we are temporarily suspending article commenting. Former Journal staffers said the letter fell far short of the publication's standards.

And some current staffers expressed frustration on condition of anonymity. The Journal's opinion operation is separate from the newsroom — and sometimes downright oppositional toward the news side. But both are part of Rupert Murdoch's cherished newspaper, which is a key part of the News Corp portfolio. Several Journal reporters grumbled about the letter after it came out on Wednesday, but none were surprised it was published, given the Opinion section's right-wing and contrarian bent.

Read More. It is especially striking since the Journal's newsroom has been lauded for its extensive coverage of Facebook misinformation. Whistleblower Frances Haugen shared documents with the Journal that formed the basis of the Facebook Files series. Yet the Opinion section is providing a forum for the same sort of bogus content — in this case, election denialism — that Facebook FB has been criticized over.

It violates their trust and tarnishes your brand," said Ken Herts, a veteran Journal executive, wrote on Twitter. Herts was responding to a former deputy managing editor of the Journal, Bill Grueskin, who wrote , "Why didn't the editorial page fact-check it, or delete the most egregious lies?

Good question!