The L.A. Times is about as objective as any major newspaper in any metropolitan area and anyone who reads them are probably already very dead set in their ways as leftist. This is true for any big city newspaper that isn't based out of Florida or Texas.
While we do not expect objectivity from the L.A. Times this thing they did where they intentionally used a bad image to create a situation that does not exist, it unbelievably unethical as far as journalism is concerned.
If you are unfamiliar with the story Larry Elder is a black man who is running for governor or California and will likely win but this can only happen in Gavin Newsome is recalled in a special recall election that is taking place in California very soon. This is a hot-topic issue in California because of multiple reasons but the main one being that Larry Elder is a Republican and we all know how much California loves Republicans. Normally, the media would probably be trying to label Larry as "racist" and they have actually tried, but this can't stick because Larry is black.
The above image is a montage that was made by The Post Millennial but it shows most of the the pieces of the puzzle. The first being that the L.A. Times describes an event that actually did happen but then they used a photo to try to create the illusion that Larry Elder is actually assaulting someone when he definitely was not.
The assault happened in the image that appears on the right where a woman wearing a gorilla mask tried to hit Elder with and egg and missed despite being extremely close to him. She is almost certainly some sort of Antifa type and therefore lacks fundamental hand / eye coordination.
When the LA times was scrutinized for their intentionally misleading headline / photo combo they changed it and scrubbed the original from the internet. People had already screencapped it by this point but pay attention to the difference in wording as far as the headline is concerned.
The original article attempts to paint a picture that Elder is actually the one being investigated for the altercation and doesn't even show the person in the monkey mask who is the guilty party. The next article they ran reluctantly shows the monkey mask person off to the side but then changes the story to be about a "hostile reception" when the reception other than a couple of people was anything but hostile.
The lengths the media will go to in order to get their way is just unbelievable and this is why anyone with a hint of brain activity that isn't completely overcome with partisan politics doesn't pay their "conclusions" much mind. If there are statistics involved, they manipulate the dates or which data they use to suit their desired conclusion; if there are sources, they will only use the ones that suit their desired conclusion or simply make the sources up; if there are images or video they will doctor them to suit their desired conclusion.
This isn't just true of liberal media but they are certainly a lot more guilty of it these days than conservative ones are. This attempt at a hit piece on Larry Elder is just horrible and even the L.A. Times knows this and that is why they changed it so quickly. The fact that they put it out there in the first place kind of says a lot about what they think of the people of L.A. They think they are stupid enough to fall for an image that doesn't have anything to do with the story they are telling. They think you are dumb.
The opposite can be true if you simply decide to think for yourself because it is the L.A. Times and other publications that have taken their partisanship to a totally new level of....
