In Focus delivers deeper coverage of the political, cultural, and ideological issues shaping America. Published daily by senior writers and experts, these in-depth pieces go beyond the headlines to give readers the full picture. You can find our full list of In Focus pieces here.
C’mon, be honest. When scrolling through social media on your phone or when visiting a site online, how often do you read beyond the headline?
According to a study by Columbia University and Microsoft, only 20% of news consumers read past the headline, albeit not always, while the other 4 out of 5 quickly absorb what they believe is the main crux of a story and move on, almost always. This isn’t exactly surprising in an increasingly ADD and instant-gratification culture, especially during a Trump presidency, where the news cycle moves so fast that there’s no time to stop and consider the historical impact of major and even unprecedented events.
Take the bold bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities, dubbed Operation Midnight Hammer, flawlessly executed by the U.S. military in June 2025, as an example. Going back decades, Republican and Democratic presidents have promised to “do something” about Iran’s nuclear program, yet did essentially nothing. Trump, without any American casualties, took out their capabilities without one American casualty, with a mission that took real brass to greenlight.
But the headlines following Operation Midnight Hammer were profoundly negative, with some questioning if any damage was done to the nuclear sites at all. Meanwhile, others played the fear card by warning of an expanded war in the Middle East and possibly World War III.
None of that happened. But no matter, because legacy media had a negative narrative to push in what should have been one of Trump’s finest hours of any presidency.
CNN headline: Exclusive Early U.S. intel assessment suggests strikes on Iran did not destroy nuclear sites, sources say
Those “sources” were all anonymous, of course, as is the case with any Trump-related “bombshell.” And almost every other news outlet ran with this exclusive and presented it as an absolute fact.
It was later confirmed that the facilities were severely damaged. Iran even confirmed this week that it has no plans to attempt to rebuild the sites that were bombed.
The same situation happened with the capture of narco-terrorist and illegitimate then-Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. Again, this was a highly complex and daring mission for the U.S. military to execute by going into what was essentially a military compound to extract Maduro under heavily armed security.
Much like Iran’s nuclear program, Republican and Democratic U.S. presidents of the past had vowed to “do something” about Maduro, with President Joe Biden even putting a $25 million bounty on his capture. But when Trump finally did something, the reflexive criticism from legacy media was laughable.
- ABC News headline: Maduro warned US willing to wage ‘war for oil’ in 2019 interview
- New York Times headline: Trump’s Attack on Venezuela Is Illegal and Unwise
- USA Today headline: President Trump’s focus on Venezuela’s and push to expand America’s reach steers him further from America’s top concern: the economy
Topline premise: “[Arresting Maduro] risks undercutting Trump’s push to regain Americans’ trust on the economy by handing Democrats a new line for the midterm elections: namely, that Trump and Republicans are fixated on oil and American imperialism rather than on the checking accounts of rank-and-file U.S. citizens.”
In other words, taking Maduro out of power, which was overwhelmingly cheered by every country in the region and the eight million people who fled the country, is supposedly bad for the Red Team… as is freeing up Venezuela’s oil reserves. Again, these are all good developments, even economically, but Trump and the GOP apparently will be hurt because they’re not focusing on the checking accounts of “rank-and-file U.S. citizens.”
There are multiple other examples, but you get the point. Arresting a despot, much like Manuel Noriega was back in 1989, is illegal and a “war” for oil because Maduro once said it could be.
Fast forward to the present day, multiple attacks on ICE agents have occurred in the past 10 days, including one officer who was struck by an SUV driven by 37-year-old activist Renee Nicole Good, who was shot and killed. Per cellphone video from the officer, Good was instructed on multiple occasions to exit her parked vehicle after attempting to block traffic near an ICE staging area, but refused before accelerating into the officer, who, in self-defense, fired his weapon, killing Good.
DHS later confirmed the officer was treated for internal bleeding in his torso. And this is the same officer who had been dragged 100 feet by another illegal he was attempting to apprehend last June, injuring him to the point where 33 stitches were required.
Tensions have soared in Minneapolis despite the facts of what occurred between the ICE agent and Good via video evidence. Legacy media, which thrives on violent protests and division, has portrayed Good as an innocent victim, as have prominent Democrats, who have claimed that she was “just trying to get home” or “was just trying to leave” after ICE approached her vehicle and ordered her to exit her vehicle.
On Wednesday night, there was another shooting where an ICE agent was ambushed by three people, with one swinging a shovel in an effort to hurt or kill the officer. Similar to the Renee Nicole Good situation, the officer acted in self-defense, shooting the attacker in the leg. Both men were sent to the hospital.
Again, these are the facts. But here’s how the New York Times chose to paint the story in its headline:
Breaking News: A federal agent shot an immigrant in the leg in Minneapolis, federal officials said, one week after an ICE officer killed Renee Good in the city.
The omissions here were blatant and intentional. The “immigrant” is here illegally, yet “illegal” is left out of the headline to portray ICE as an agency targeting legal U.S. citizens. There is no mention that the suspect attacked a federal agent with a potentially deadly weapon, which is why the “immigrant” got shot. Additionally, the story fails to mention Renee Good hitting an ICE officer with her SUV, prompting his justified reaction.
The Times would go on to update its piece four times, but still somehow landed on this beauty:
“Federal Agent Shoots Man in Minneapolis, Prompting Tense Protests.”
There are no words.
At the Washington Post, where Democracy, apparently, dies in darkness, the publication decided to wait until the 19th paragraph to share a very crucial tidbit: “As an officer caught up with the suspect, two other people came out of a nearby property and began attacking the officer with a snow shovel and broom handle, according to DHS.
Yes, 19 whole paragraphs into a story, where this information should have been in the opening paragraph.
News organizations have two choices: Push a false narrative through the bias of omission and diminish whatever is left of the media’s credibility, or begin to write accurate headlines and include the most crucial facts.
