Shoddy journalism or deliberate misinformation?

Submitted by Jeff (United States), Apr 9, 2017 at 10:37

Concerning the item, "Donations to Geert Wilders":

"Are reported to" implies that you did not (and would not) release this information yourself. The information had to be sleuthed out by intrepid reporters. This carries the strong implication that one has something to hide.

"Some $150,000 of foundation money into his campaign" implies that donor funds, given in good faith for specific, well-defined purposes, were then diverted to a political campaign. This brings to mind words like dishonesty, illegality, malfeasance.

It all sounds very sinister and you are obviously a good-hearted person, Dr. Pipes, because "shoddy journalism" is the most generous characterization possible here.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".