Crying immigrant girl on Time magazine cover was never separated from her mom, father says

it is as symbolic as these covers

 

Yeah, I think the issue is probably more with Time than with the photographer...maybe. But I definitely dispute you saying the "Times article mistook what happened" or simply calling it an honest "mistake."

It's already been posted, but I'll do it again. Here is the original correction:

Somehow, somewhere in the process, someone invented a dramatic scene where the girl was carried away screaming by U.S. Border Patrol agents. That is not simply "mistaking" or "misstating" (LOL) something. It's simply a planted, fake piece of information that did not happen.

 

I suppose what you are saying is possible. But it is also possible that the “lie” didn’t emerge as a purposeful intent to misinform, but rather resulted from an careless misunderstanding or mixing up of facts. This happens all the time in everyday life. Bias towards trying to add dramatic flair to the story could have led to the writer and editors not properly vetting the story. I fully agree that it is poor journalism, whether intentional or not. Professionals should be held to higher standards than folks unwittingly propagating fake news on Twitter.

 

Not if you understand symbolism.

 

Symbolism aside one is a war rally poster and one is an article in a major mainstream publication

Its not a serious offense on Time"s part because the article is documenting resl events but since its real the picture should be also

 

There was actually some truth behind Rosie the Riveter though, that's the difference. Women really were stepping up and helping keep the war machine rolling....the crying child nonsense is just propaganda intended to be used as lube by those in the far left circle jerk because they think that propaganda is going to buy them votes. It's a pretty cynical political ploy by people that know better.......but who also know that their target audience isn't smart enough to know better.

 

Children really were being separated from their families. It just wasn't that child. So it is a pretty good comparison to Rosie the Riveter.

 

Journalists are supposed to be professionals and fact check their stories before they get printed.
Perhaps this type of news is forgivable if it paints Trump in a bad light.
Most journos would be demoted or fired for this type of biased/false reporting - let alone it making the front cover.
What has become of honest, reliable journalism?

 

Children are "separated from their families" all the time though (it has been policy for 21 years now) and the implication from the propaganda was that harm was coming to the children (and that the girl was an example of that, she's not a cartoon like Rosie) or that Trump was doing it. Both of those are false....and again, the people who push that propaganda know better.....and they know that their target audience isn't smart enough to know better which is why they believe it will be effective.

 

Wrong. It is Trump's policy to separate children.

It's called personal responsibility, Trump has zero.

 

MojoMan missed the point of the TIME cover. (Or, he understood the point just fine and is leveraging the "inaccuracy" angle in an attempt to discredit and deflect.) I do think that it was poor journalism. TIME, like many other old-school news magazines and organizations (Newsweek, etc), is not as good as it used to be. However, pinpoint accuracy isn't always necessary to effectively convey meaning or intent. Powerful, memorable covers are seldom literal.

 

The problem is the point it is trying to get across is an inaccurate one. It's just furthering DNC propaganda....or rather an extension of DNC propaganda.

When the exact same thing was happening over the last 21 years, where was the outrage? If separating families really is this awful, why was it ignored until the DNC needed to use it as propaganda for an upcoming election?

 

Oh, so you are back on this again. See ya.

 

I haven't seen any valid reports of child separation under Obama. Could you provide some references?

 

There was no policy under Obama to separate children except under special circumstances. Under Trump, it was the standard operating procedure. Stop trying to falsely equate the two.

There is almost nothing the Democrats could do before the election that looks worse than the Trump ordered sanctioned cruelty to children.

 

LOL yeah, back on that "reality" thing...you know, the thing that you wish you could make go away so that people would focus on the spin and the propaganda instead.....the thing that you know you aren't capable of refuting so you don't even actually try.

 

I guess your reality is different than what really happens. With almost every single arrest where the suspect is a parent.

 

That's an outright lie. The policy separating families when the parents are being prosecuted goes back 21 years.....so yeah, it existed under Obama it's just that Obama enacted policy where the law was only rarely enforced meaning the number of families separated were relatively few....but they absolutely happened just like they happened under every administration since the law went into effect in the Clinton administration.

The ONLY difference in the Trump administration is that he enacted a policy to enforce the law more often. Nothing else changed.