> Prev
Next <
From: Joe Cooper <dragon40@removeunseen.is>
Subject: The Media*s Year of Trump Hating
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Joe Cooper <dragon40@removeunseen.is>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.media,alt.news-media,soc.culture.usa,alt.politics.democrats,alt.journalism.criticism,alt.journalism.newspapers
Subject: The Media*s Year of Trump Hating
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 17:16:50 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: Mostly None
Lines: 84
Message-ID: <XnsA86D5E682E384proggiessuck@>
Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 17:16:50 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="1519a967f7ca8eb3e847abd344805844";
logging-data="24896"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/NcjwUtQVaMvL8JMFxFf6t"
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
Cancel-Lock: sha1:RoAmGR2lIN1ZHB6+WFthQWIFm6M=
Print Article
Forward Article
As we approach the first anniversary of Donald Trump's inauguration, it 
is painfully obvious that our "news" providers are a highly agitated 
brigade of the "Resistance." A new Media Research Center study finds that 
from Jan. 20, 2017, through Dec. 31, 2017, the evening news shows on ABC, 
CBS and NBC were overwhelmingly hostile in both content and tone.
The study, co-authored by Rich Noyes and Mike Ciandella, comes with a 
jarring headline: "2017: The Year the Media Went to War Against a 
President." It is indisputable that no president in the history of the 
republic has been visited by such vitriol from the press. It is not to 
say that some of the negative coverage hasn't been deserved. But no man 
this side of Rep. Maxine Waters can defend their overwhelming hostility 
as fairness.
Journalists often talk about President Trump's "war on the media" and 
can't possibly discuss the media's war on President Trump. When the 
president attacks the media, that's an attack on democracy. When the 
media undermine the president, that's the full flowering of democracy.
Removing the statements made by Trump and other politicians, 90 percent 
of evening-news Trump evaluations were negative, and only 10 percent were 
positive. (Neutral statements were not counted.) There were only three 
months in 2017 during which the negative coverage dipped below 90 
percent. For instance, it was 85 percent negative in December, when Trump 
succeeded in getting his tax-cut bill passed.
The numbers don't tell the whole story. The qualitative measurement is 
just as awful. Trump news isn't mildly negative, like "the president's 
message failed to resonate today." The network anchors have felt 
compelled to signal that Trump is so undesirable he should be removed 
from office. Just over a month into the presidency, then-CBS anchorman 
Scott Pelley pressured Democrat Leon Panetta, former CIA director and 
secretary of defense, by saying, "Is it appropriate to ask whether the 
president is having difficulty with rationality?"
The Clinton die-hards couldn't stop reporting on their suspicion that the 
Russians colluded with the Trump campaign to beat Hillary Clinton. The 
Russia probe was the networks' favorite topic last year, resulting in an 
astonishing 20 hours and 34 minutes of coverage, or more than one-fifth 
of all Trump coverage.
Nobody rooted for Trump to succeed and pass legislation as they did for 
former President Barack Obama. In 2009, then-NBC host Matt Lauer badgered 
Republican Party strategist Karl Rove on the stimulus-package vote. He 
complained: "If you add up the House and the Senate, we have what, 219 
Republicans? All but three of them voted against ... this plan. ... Two 
hundred and sixteen Republicans seem to have placed a bet on failure."
That spin didn't happen when House Democrats unanimously voted no on the 
Trump tax cut. Instead, NBC anchor Lester Holt sounded like a Democratic 
National Committee press release when he said: "Unable to repeal and 
replace Obamacare, Republicans are instead trying to undermine it. Is 
this a body blow to Obamacare?"
To the press, repealing anything Obama installed isn't an "achievement." 
It's a disastrous setback. Some of the repeal happened without much media 
protest. Trump's attempts to deregulate the economy barely drew 11 
minutes of coverage. Trump's approval of new oil pipelines drew just over 
seven minutes.
Oversight on their part? In a way, yes. They have other more pressing 
matters on their plates.
They prefer reporting their Gaffe of the Day. Here's another number that 
proves the media's aggression: When the Washington Post reported that 
Trump referred to some immigrants as coming from "s---hole countries," it 
became an intensely negative news story. CNN was the most intense of all. 
In the first full day after this story broke, it put decency aside and 
the word "s---hole" was said on air 195 times, according to Newsbusters 
staff. The cursing also appeared for days on screen.
Those screens, in turn, grace airport terminals, doctors' offices and 
even schools all across America. Millions upon millions of Americans were 
offended. But for CNN, the effort was worth the insult if it could also 
damage the president it despises.

Source: http://bit.ly/2DlIr9x 

"The Marxists, communists and fascists of the Democrat Party have 
launched a strategy of deception, projection, and a new generation of 
brown shirts who fanatically believe that their violence is honorable, 
and necessary, to save America from some kind of a Fourth Reich 
perpetrated by the GOP." (Douglas Gibbs )