>>>your quoting numbers doesn't mean anything without it. The only fact in this story is that context was provided, but you chose to ignore it in your first post.
>
>Disagree. The numbers have significant evidence value if they're reproducible and accurate.

John,
My point is that data by itself is meaningless without an analisys and a conclusion. Also, I think the logic of the analisys is simple: Trump has little fiddelity for the facts, and when he didn't like the coverage, he has criticized the media directly in very unsavory terms. It is this opinion (what else could it be?) that is leading to the conclusion that the negativity in the media may have something to do with it. At this point, we'd have to argue whether the opinion about Trump's (lack of) fiddelity for the facts is founded, but I'm afraid we won't see the end of it.
*