Hello @sarahabed, please allow me to explain why I downvoted your content and why it is consistent with the mission of promoting free speech.
When you were downvoted by the @hobo.media account at first the post was downvoted to the point of having reduced visibility (a feature of steem). When I realized that the downvote caused reduced visibility I removed the downvote and switched it to a $0.01 downvote (If I recall correctly).
The goal of the downvote was to get your attention. If I disliked your work I would have ignored it completely just as you suggested. On the contrary, I thought your writing style was elegant and had the traditional air of journalism that I love to read.
I don't want to stifle your effort to report news, including news that reveals any negative facts you might find related to US government activities. I wish to encourage you and help you realize the importance for keeping to the old honor code that once existed for journalists.
The Hobo project is created with this single thought as its purpose:
"The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should receive those papers and be capable of reading them." --Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, 1787
However, a very ugly thing has happened to the mainstream media, which has become partisan. The vast majority of people globally are losing their respect for and trust in journalism. This is because journalism is being used as a propaganda tool.
If you join the modern medias in starting out with a bias and a mission even before investigating the facts you will win allies today, but lose the crowd tomorrow. The mainstream medias are losing their audience because they take this position of bias and premeditated message promotion.
What narrative do I agree with?
My motives have been questioned, which is fair, after all, I questioned your motives first.
Do I have a preference for the United States? Very possibly, since I was born there. Anyone reporting news is going to struggle with their background, however, many US residence do a fair job of being unbiased. This is because of the US history of combating the tyranny of a once dominant government.
That unbiased attitude can only be achieved when keeping in mind such thoughts as why the US colonies broke off from their original government. Rather than having a this country vs. that country mindset the founding members of the United States recognized the importance to report on the government, all governments, as a protection against tyranny.
So, by all means Sarah, report on the US government. My intent was simply to urge you to adjust your news reporting a little, and to encourage you to challenge yourself to see if you are remaining unbiased. A journalist should care about being unbiased in their reporting. It should be a strong honor code for them.
I said this to someone else and I will repeat it. I dislike the US government's use of sanctions on other nations. I'm a Bitcoin/Ethereum/Steem fan and I am happy to see nations use cryptocurrencies to ignore US sanctions, because I disagree with the US government or any government assuming the right to use sanctions.
At the same time, the US should not be labelled an economic terrorist for sanctions. The word terrorist is being excessively used as a tool of propaganda both by governments, politicians and medias.
It is the journalist that ought to be the most cautious with their use of words, because accurate use of words in conveying events in the world is their very purpose of existence.