We have heard a lot about media bias over the years. The media, of course, claims it doesn't exist and they are reporting the facts.
Here's an article for you to read:
https://www.pennlive.com/coronavirus/2021/11/pas-school-mask-mandate-voided-by-divided-commonwealth-court.html
Below is the first paragraph of the article from Matt Miller:
"Pennsylvania’s requirement that teachers and school students and staff must wear masks to guard against COVID-19 is invalid because the official who issued it lacked authority to do so, a sharply divided Commonwealth Court ruled Wednesday."
A "sharply divided" court? As the article continues, nowhere does it mention that the court ruled 4-1 to invalidate the mandate. That doesn't sound like being a "sharply divided" court to me. Where are the rest of the facts?
I emailed the author to get his opinion on what sharply divided means. Needless to say, I have not received a response as of yet. Below is the email I sent.
I just finished reading your article titled, "Pa.’s school mask mandate voided by divided Commonwealth Court"
The first paragraph ends with "a sharply divided Commonwealth Court ruled Wednesday."
Wasn't the vote 4 to 1? How is a 4 to 1 vote sharply divided?
