New pictures harden bad narratives of Biden's border crisis
Florida remains undefeated
Narratives are hardening on the border and it’s bad news for Biden
I’m not quite sure what the Biden strategy on the border was beyond “can’t be worse than Trump, right?”
Well, if pictures of a newly built detention facility from Axios published this morning are any indication we’re rapidly running out of runway on that comparison as well. The makeshift tent is currently housing 400 unaccompanied minors.
The reality is that most Biden voters really don’t care about the border. They cared about the depressing visuals that showed the reality of Trump’s policy: don’t show up because it’s not going easy for you if you do. That meant separation of families and expelling incoming migrants (including children) back into Mexico.
Kids In Cages became a rallying cry. Yet another “if THIS doesn’t disgust you I don’t know what will” line in the sand for Trump opposition.
If upon election day Biden declared the border fixed and changed absolutely zero of Trump’s policies… few supporters would have noticed. It’s simply not a priority for Biden’s city-dwelling power base.
Biden did make changes. One of them is that the United States will not expel unaccompanied children across the border once they’ve crossed. This is in contrast to how they handle adults and families. He’s paying for it.
If Trump’s original sin was kids in cages, Biden’s solution has brought him a tremendous surge of kids and he’s being judged for where he puts them.
Homeland Secretary Mayorkas has become a punching bag on this subject being forced to dual-wield two talking points, either natural winners.
First, don’t come to the United States illegally.
That’s a one-liner Pat Buchannan can be proud of. Not something the healer-and-chief should be talking about more than his COVID recovery efforts.
Second, we will expel single adults and families but not kids.
From a political messaging perspective… why? Amongst the bad options that anyone can come up with trying to think through this problem why is expelling children not the more humane option when the opposite is imprisoning them on American soil?
Each time that Mayorkas throws those out there I simply don’t know if they truly believe that it’s an answer for descriptions like these:
CNN previously reported that children are alternating schedules to make space for one another in confined facilities, some kids haven't seen sunlight in days and others are taking turns showering, often going days without one, according to case managers, attorneys and Border Patrol agents. Bunk beds have been brought in to one of the processing facilities to help accommodate the influx of children, with one agent saying children are also sleeping on plastic cots and mats on the floor and benches.
And that’s CNN!
Like it or not, Biden’s plan is putting more migrant children in detention centers and it’s going to get harder and harder for him to square that circle.
Florida stays undefeated
A former state Senator in Florida was charged with campaign finance violations after it was alleged he paid a friend with the same last name as Democratic candidate to run the same office.
Breaks down like this… The GOP operative knows that there is a tight race between Democrat incumbent Jose Javier Rodriguez and GOP challenger Ilena Garcia. The operative convinces his friend with the last name Rodriguez to run as a spoiler.
The Fake Rodriguez isn’t going to win but could possibly siphon enough votes by mistake.
Garcia won the seat by 32 votes.
Now both the Fake Rodriguez and the operative are facing charges.
Meanwhile… in South Beach over the weekend.
How to read the news: The Washington Post correction
There are two parts to this, the anonymous source and the correction. Let’s start with the anonymous source.
Here is how I was always made to understand how anonymous sources should work. The reporter gets someone that will not put their name on really, really, really good information.
Your first job of a reporter is to tell the source there is no way they can be anonymous.
Your second job is to repeat the first thing you said.
Your third job is to report around that background information and not use the source.
However, if you find that the story desperately needs that source then you go up the chain to get permission from your editor and ultimately the publisher. In general, the idea is that the editor and publisher find out who the person is and they come to a decision on using them.
If it sounds cumbersome, it’s designed to be. In a perfect world you don’t use anonymous sources so when you do the entire leadership of your operation should feel it.
I don’t know if that’s how it works at the Post, but based on my education that’s the plutonic ideal.
In my opinion, anonymous sourcing has become WAY too rampant amongst our lead dogs in the journalism game. If the Times and the Post are using anonymous sourcing for something like this story without hearing the tape themselves it is a massive lapse in ethics.
So let’s get to the correction. Simply put corrections suck.
As a reporter you are constantly reminded about the power imbalance you have. After all, you are shaping reality on issues and the people who are in the middle of them have to depend on your judgement.
This is complicated by the fact that the imbalance means everyone tends to hate journalists making them fussy and defensive. But that’s a story for another newsletter.
You will never be able to issue a correction that has the magnitude of the initial story, no matter how small that story is. This is even more of an problem when the story is massive.
I don’t have much of an issue on this correction because at least it got out there. In general, they tend to come and go with little notice.
Short newsletter this week as I am moving!
The good news is that after the movers come on Monday I’ll have a lot more time on my hands without furniture or a studio!
-Justin