Because he and his mom are more in tune with reality and many in the journalism and media world who are out of touch with reality. They are so used to creating and controlling the narrative these days that when what they write or report on backfires on them they are caught off guard and think that the right combination of words can just make it go away.
Even this latest disaster of an explanation last night by Carol Hunter shows just how incompetent she is as a chief editor to think that lame ass editorial would calm things down and not just dump more gas on their PR dumpster fire. I always wonder why when you have a situation like this why you don't just pull in a random group of strangers off the street as a focus group and run an idea off them before you go live with it if you are concerned about public perception. I would bet you had they just pulled in 10 random people off the street yesterday and had them read that editorial they published last night they would have gotten the same kind of bad feedback they got as soon as it was published. They may not have liked or agreed with what they heard but they could have used that to craft a better statement or better yet do what they should have done days ago as soon as they story broke was apologize, admit it was a poor choice, and take ownership and responsibility for that instead of basically defending it twice now without any sign of remorse for what they did.
Last edited:
