The L.A. Times came under fire for a tweet seeming to praise Fidel Castro when the news came out last night of the murderous dictator’s death.
Here’s what they deleted:
Let's never forget that time the @latimes deleted a tweet calling Fidel Castro a charismatic icon. So charismatic that people fled #Cuba… pic.twitter.com/xRbpZ7rppW
— Tim Young (@TimRunsHisMouth) November 26, 2016
A yes, a “charismatic figure” that slaughtered and murdered those who didn’t find him charismatic. Great writing there, Times.
They deleted, rewrote it and reposted, explaining:
We recently deleted a tweet that miscast the tone of the story. We will reissue an updated tweet shortly.
— Los Angeles Times (@latimes) November 26, 2016
Here’s their new tweet:
Former Cuban ruler Fidel Castro dead at 90 https://t.co/v5GwEvRwuo pic.twitter.com/x2zvvQLkJo
— Los Angeles Times (@latimes) November 26, 2016
Of course they’re not the only media outlet that is having trouble with the death of their hero:
Compare the ledes for the NYTimes obits of Castro and Pinochet: pic.twitter.com/eUADJbYJnO
— Jamie Weinstein (@Jamie_Weinstein) November 26, 2016
Here’s an idiotic comparison from the New York Times:
Fidel Castro had held onto power longer than any other living national leader except Queen Elizabeth II https://t.co/LLHwoQR0rL pic.twitter.com/M1R07cvekF
— The New York Times (@nytimes) November 26, 2016
As I noted, that’s like praising a rapist for outlasting a husband – you don’t compare someone doing something by force to those doing it with consent. But seizing power by gunpoint is all the same to the New York Times as long as its anti-American.
And just now:
A charismatic and commanding presence, Mr. Castro won over the masses by preaching an end to social inequities https://t.co/1D2Z86cSSv pic.twitter.com/EbjCZ6jUnW
— The Boston Globe (@BostonGlobe) November 26, 2016
At least they’re exposing their true colors.