The 2016 Presidential Election brought many people pondering about if the nation’s decision to elect Donald J. Trump over Hillary Clinton. With this decision many people who were against trump filled the streets that night and many others to protest the election. As time went along most of the protesters either accepted the fact that they could not change the outcome or just go tired of the protest and went home. Today is presidents day and because of that many protesters returned to the streets with all of their name calling and chants to return. I found 2 articles by simply google searching “Presidents day protests”. ABC 7 and The Washington examiner were my choices.

The ABC 7 post started off with the voice of the protesters on streets, “Congress needs to wake up” said one and “he did not win the popular vote, President Trump. He does not stand for what America stands” said another. Anyone reading this article or watching the news on this event can clearly tell that the event is anti-trump. The News agency NBC showed clear accounts from people and previously known news about Trump to write this article. By doing this they present the news to the public in the right way. I mean the right way with little to no bias, strictly informing the public. Informing the public is the way news organizations should run their company. Unfortunately this does not always happen like “The Washington Examiner” presented their news on this topic.

When first reading this article on this subject I could already tell that this company is for Trump. They used no quotes from people attending the rallies and basically bashed them for going to the rallies in the first place. Not only do the editors bash the people practicing their constitutionally protected amendments in the article, they even say “Not My President rallies dishonor Presidents Day” in the title of the article. At a point in the article the editor even says,

“It is one thing to protest the policies of a president holding an opposing ideology, but it is another to actively undermine his presidency after a lawful, constitutional election. This is why such protests cross the line.”

This should not have even been brought up because they have a right to protest any reason. This source is obviously upset with the people for protesting the candidate the source thinks was the right choice.

. These two different sources are great examples of how the media plays a hge roll in the consumer’s side of an argument. If a reader were to simply google the topic and choose of the links they can be wrongly informed on the topic. The Washington Examiners post is 100% the editors opinion. Their opinion is valid but an opinion is not a very good way to present the news. With less bias articles posted can stop the media from shaping the consumers opinion on the topic. The news should present the facts and leave the consumer to decide their side on an argument.


One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.