Verry Biased

This article has a lot of bias imbedded in it's discussion of a New York Times article: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/05/business/media/jeffrey-zucker-cnn-trump.html

Right from the first paragraph, the author, Eric Levitz, starts his argument by correlating Trump's rise (and election) to the existence and actions of CNN. But this is correlation, but not causation. I also found the attempts at emotional appeal from statements like, "But when a president with an ardent, white-nationalist following barks, it’s reasonable to fear that someone else might use their teeth", very unnecessary... and it calls back to more correlation without causation. Perhaps this is a false dilemma but it seems we, the people, either let the Justice Department infringe upon the free speech rights of CNN or watch AT&T merge with Time Warner.

The author is clearly not a fan of Donald Trump, and the author generalizes Trump supporters throughout the piece. He often refers to Trump supporters and neo-nazis/white nationalists as one in the same. The most upsetting thing about this piece is the author's misleading conclusion which essentially states that Trump has been President for only 6 months and already we have neo-nazis lurking outside the homes of journalists. This is a prime example of correlation without causation, and the author should work harder to remain objective and logical. With that said, this is a very important story for many reasons: 1) Any major media merger is worth paying close attention to. 2) Using the Justice Department as a way of stifling free speech is a big no no.