4 ms·

I'm curious 1) in what way you think the quote isn't representative of the president's tweet? 2) how you would distill the tweet into one sentence if you were a

I'm curious 1) in what way you think the quote isn't representative of the president's tweet? 2) how you would distill the tweet into one sentence if you were asked to summarize it for an article?

famouslastwords 6y ago
>I'm curious 1) in what way you think the quote isn't representative of the president's tweet? 2) how you would distill the tweet into one sentence if you were asked to summarize it for an article? Regarding 1) The first half of Trump's message was omitted, dropping the context that (if you refer to congresswomen Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar) Mexico and Somalia are objectively societies permeated by crime and corruption. Solely the emotionally charged bits were quoted by the author, therefore distorting the message. 2) USAtoday did a relatively unemotional job of this: "President Donald Trump’s opponents accused him of xenophobia and racism Sunday after he posted tweets calling on an unspecified group of Democratic congresswomen to “go back and help fix” the countries he said they “originally came” from before trying to make legislative changes in the USA."[1] [1]https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/14/trump-tells-congresswomen-go-back-counties-they-came/1728253001/ https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/14/trump... For a while now The Economist has not been suspect of being an objective source of reporting when it comes to political subjects and issues. Just like The Guardian or the BBC, they live on the remains of a good reputation from former days.
aaron695 6y ago
2) I thought about it and I can't. I don't have the written skills. I would have to quote it in whole or a large section. I also think a tweet is toxic because it's short, but a sentence is worse. 1) Their quote is a textbook cliche. It implies he's a hillbilly to stupid to even know what you can and can't say. His wording was not that. I would never have used this tweet in this article. It's too complex.
- klyrs 6y ago
  Whole articles were written about that tweet; it isn't the focus of this article, it's being used to illustrate a point. He's not a "hillbilly" (that's a derogatory sideswipe btw) and he's not stupid, either. The tweet is selected because it's one example of Trump's very long history of racism. His words were written by him, and if they give the impression that he's racist, well, that's the thrust of the article: you chose your own euphemisms, exposing your own biases, but refraining from calling his words and actions racist isn't "objective" in sight of the evidence.

I'm curious 1) in what way you think the quote isn't representative of the president's tweet? 2) how you would distill the tweet into one sentence if you were asked to summarize it for an article?

famouslastwords 6y ago

>I'm curious 1) in what way you think the quote isn't representative of the president's tweet? 2) how you would distill the tweet into one sentence if you were asked to summarize it for an article? Regarding 1) The first half of Trump's message was omitted, dropping the context that (if you refer to congresswomen Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar) Mexico and Somalia are objectively societies permeated by crime and corruption. Solely the emotionally charged bits were quoted by the author, therefore distorting the message. 2) USAtoday did a relatively unemotional job of this: "President Donald Trump’s opponents accused him of xenophobia and racism Sunday after he posted tweets calling on an unspecified group of Democratic congresswomen to “go back and help fix” the countries he said they “originally came” from before trying to make legislative changes in the USA."[1] [1]https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/14/trump-tells-congresswomen-go-back-counties-they-came/1728253001/ https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/14/trump... For a while now The Economist has not been suspect of being an objective source of reporting when it comes to political subjects and issues. Just like The Guardian or the BBC, they live on the remains of a good reputation from former days.

aaron695 6y ago

2) I thought about it and I can't. I don't have the written skills. I would have to quote it in whole or a large section. I also think a tweet is toxic because it's short, but a sentence is worse. 1) Their quote is a textbook cliche. It implies he's a hillbilly to stupid to even know what you can and can't say. His wording was not that. I would never have used this tweet in this article. It's too complex.

klyrs 6y ago
Whole articles were written about that tweet; it isn't the focus of this article, it's being used to illustrate a point. He's not a "hillbilly" (that's a derogatory sideswipe btw) and he's not stupid, either. The tweet is selected because it's one example of Trump's very long history of racism. His words were written by him, and if they give the impression that he's racist, well, that's the thrust of the article: you chose your own euphemisms, exposing your own biases, but refraining from calling his words and actions racist isn't "objective" in sight of the evidence.