Jason Pohl Part 2: Incorrect.

When an individual is called out on lies, lies, lies about gun facts, facts, facts, that person tends to choose one of two responses:

1. Research the topic; apologize for errors. (As we’ve seen with Kit O’Connell – way to go!)

2. Commit GunCog! (As we’ve seen with Terilyn Reber. Man, she was so nasty to Joe.)

Quick refresher on definition of GunCog:
When presented with facts, anti-gun people often choose to remain in a state of denial, rather than be open to a new perspective. This often results in their violent rages of yelling, name-calling, and/or throwing a tantrum. #GunCog is basically anti-gun brain fog. By choice.

Yesterday, I called out a reporter, Jason Pohl, for his shoddy reporting. Instead of cleaning up his mess of lies, he committed GunCog, posting this to Twitter…
Jason Pohl posted another lieSaid @pohl_jason:
“Today a self-proclaimed gun enthusiast/redneck/farm boy from Idaho devoted a ~500-word blog post to me because it’s 2017 and why not?”

Reporter Pohl: In the tone of an old Speak & Spell, I say to you, “Incorrect.”

– It’s me (guest blogger Stephanie) who wrote yesterday’s essay.
– I’m not a boy.
– I’m not a gun enthusiast.
– I’m a gun rights (self-defense) enthusiast.
– The reason for my post was to hold a reporter – you – accountable for dishonesty.
– The reason for my post was not “because it’s 2017 and why not?”

Jason, you can do better than this. Correct your reporting errors. From yesterday. And the day before yesterday. And the days, and days, and days before yesterday.

It’s that simple.


(7/13/17 update: I made a few minor grammatical modifications to the above post, for the sake of crystal-clear clarity. – Stephanie)


11 thoughts on “Jason Pohl Part 2: Incorrect.

  1. And I’m pretty sure that bloggers have been holding reporters accountable for …. quite a long time now. **cough**Dan Rather**cough**

    • If I knew Dan Rather’s email, I’d send him the infamous ‘throbbing memo’ gif every chance I got 🙂

  2. It is not terribly difficult to get off your shtick, take a few steps back, and try to be objective. Total objectivity may not be attainable, being that our emotions often get the better of us, but one can certainly seek it. Mainly, that seeking involves sitting still and then watching and listening.

    • Politely disagree. When doing so would utterly annihilate your world-view, it is well-neigh impossible to do so. When the subconscious recognizes the danger, it doesn’t let you admit wrong-think internally, so it must lash out and attack the irritant. Leaning or admitting mistakes is virtually impossible.

      • Yup.
        “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” — Upton Sinclair (in “I, Candidate for Governor: And How I Got Licked”, 1935)

  3. Amusing that he finds a 500 word blog post to be a significant form of devotion. It’s shouldn’t be a surprise given how active he is on Twitter, but still.

  4. No he can’t do better because he doesn’t want to. It is more fun to hate the enemy. Plus like most reporters he is probably stupid, ignorant, and lazy to boot.

  5. Funny how people in a profession that it is utterly dependent on their credibility are so eager to toss that aside for cheap political points or their ideology.

    Jason Pohl does not impress me with his devotion to seeking the truth. He rates a zero on the informed and credible scale. Fake news. Pravda propaganda (too bad he is too young and ignorant to know what that means).

  6. Stephanie: well played!

    (And I notice you didn’t deny the redneck accusation… nice!)

Comments are closed.