"Trump Attacks Senator on Twitter" and "President Responds to Blumenthal's Criticism.."
Which one do you think was the big headline on top, and which one was the small sub-headline underneath it?
If you want to convey a headline that accurately summarizes the story, you would use the second one on top. If, however, you want to convey a negative meme about our president, without regard to the truth, you would put the first one on top, and ignore the fact that the incident was a retaliation, not an instigation. Given that many people never bother to read the actual story, what do you think happens when they only read the headline? If you guess that they would come away with an image of a combative, irrational leader, I think you would be right, even though this was not the case here. Oh, and by the way, Senator Blumenthal didn't just "criticize" Mr. Trump, he accused him repeatedly in print and on air of having spurious and nefarious motives for firing FBI Director Comey, without any evidence whatsoever. Mr. Trump, in retaliation, brought up Mr. Blumenthal's repeated statements during his 2010 election campaign that he had "served in Viet Nam" when in fact he didn't, but the good people of Connecticut elected him anyway. Seems they don't care if someone lies just to get votes, as long as he's a Democrat. Just so you know, the screaming headline was the first one, and the small sub-headline was the second one. And yet, the media insist that they are not biased.
