In alt.home.repair, on Thu, 04 Feb 2021 21:58:40 -0600, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Thu, 04 Feb 2021 12:54:49 -0500, micky wrote:

Why do reporters, and this applies just as much when dealing with both
liberals and conservatives, not dig a little deeper than just giving the
interviewee the chance to make a speech?

What you're asking is, why don't they push back when they know something
vague or even untruthful is being said. I think it's as simple as if they
did fact checking in real time, and pushed back as a result, they would
probably find themselves on the outside, looking in, in pretty short order.

Lawmakers don't tend to like it when reporters ask tough questions, in
spite of that being probably the best way to get at the truth. Remember how
Trump used to say, 'That's a nasty question and you're a nasty woman." He
only said out loud what they all probably think when they get a pointed
question.

Well you're right but it's a big flaw in the system. Anyone who really
tries can, with a little practice, learn to give non-answers and stupid
answers and large number of people listeing will believe them. So
reporters in these cases just become master of ceremonies for the
performances of liars etc.

Today in some House hearing, Greene tried more double talk and 11
Republican representatives voted against her. Should have been all 200.
Maybe I'll have links later. Maybe she thought her crummy ansswers
would be good enough.