As I see it, what has occurred is that “The Media” has been used as a term to describe a large range of information sources - everything from true Journalism to Facebook posts, from traditional Newspapers to suspect online clickbait, etc. And, the public has become prejudiced against “The Media” because they lump everything together and attribute the worst offenses of the lowest forms to all participants. It is all strikingly similar to how some people think about “The Blacks” or “The Muslims”, any negative perception gets applied to all.
Consequently, our PEOTUS has found a willing audience pre-disposed to agree with him when he decries “The Media”.
To me, a problem is that because so many people are accustomed to the sneering prejudice against “The Media”, there is no longer a modicum of respect for serious sources of true journalism, or an attempt to differentiate the wheat from the chaff.
This is a very key point. I absolutely think this “fuck em” attitude will outlive Trump and may become a new paradigm for people seeking power in dealing with a media that has been demonstrated have a lot less effective power than previously believed.
My own perception of the media has been changed since Trump’s victory and I see them in a new light. With the halo of assumed authority stripped away a lot of the media opinions I read now comes across as poorly informed childish polemics and the work of hacks pretending to a-thor-itay. It really is like someone ripped the curtain away to some extent.
The way I see it, is if the media points out one teensy weeny little possibly negative depended on how you look at with your head tilted sideways and squinting just right and ignoring everything Republicans do on a regular basis, Hillary is an awful awful horrible horrible evil evil evil evil evil person and you (Republican) can simply never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever possibly forgive her.
Trump? Oh, it’s just media lies, lies lies!
Does anyone really think that if the media had merely pointed out one teensy weeny little possibly negative depended on how you look at with your head tilted sideways and squinting just right that Republicans and conservatives would have turned on him?
I don’t think so. People were determined to hate Democrats and elect a Republican, and a Republican who would “destroy Washington” even better, and their minds distorted reality to make it work.
Sure, Liberals and the media cry “racist!” and “misogynist!” too often but I don’t think that swayed the election. A lot of people decided to tune out and not believe what they wanted, and believe what they did want.
Anyway, Democrats get held to an impossibly high standard that never applies to Republicans, and Democrats will never win an election by stooping to the level of Republicans and conservatives. When they do, they get ignored. Mr. Clinton getting a blowjob and lying about it? High treason! Republican presidents have affairs? We don’t talk about that. Republicans vote against gay rights while having gay sex in bathrooms? None of our business. Trump fools around on his multiple wives and marries an immigrant porn model? Oh, that’s his personal business. Not a problem.
I think the media proclaimed, “THIS is going to be what sinks the Trump campaign!” a few too many times. When the poll numbers kept rising most mainstream media outlets doubled down and said there was no way Trump would win the primaries/general. After being wrong so many times people started to have this perception that the media was there to make predictions, rather than report on trends. And by making a prediction you are in essence throwing your hat in with a particular candidate.
I don’t think public disgust with the media has much to do with Facebook posts or clickbait. The old line media, TV and print, is widely poorly thought of, more so than used to be the case, and the people who think poorly of it are not in general mistakenly applying their poor opinion of internet BS to the traditional media. They think the traditional media are full of it.
I think this is one of a number of points where people generally to the left*are better off facing and addressing weaknesses (doesn’t mean the right has none) rather than denying them. Again the success of Trump (so far) has many explanations, and is still a story in the making (where future illuminating chapters might include the broadly agreed failure of Trump in the actual office). But one aspect is reaction against perceived cultural (almost more than political) bias by ‘Real Journalists’ ™. If constantly calling the media dishonest only resonated with a few people…well it’s like a number of aspects of Trump where many people here still act like some small % of people are on his wavelength, when it’s clearly not so small.
*I realize people quite far to the left sometimes think the ‘MSM’ is the ‘rightist tool of corporations’ and such, but in general the center-left correctly perceives the ‘MSM’ as its friend more than not, so this situation has a partisan aspect.
No, the media slanted its stories heavily anti-Hillary, as well as making mountains out of molehills with her faked scandals.
The media wasn’t anti-Trump, it did its best to prop him up so they could have their precious horse race. But he’s simply such a horrible and incompetent person that even the softened version is awful.
Well lets take CNN for example. I dont know how to link to it but they were covering this Hillary rally. They made it look like it was this big hall filled with thousands of supporters when in truth the numbers were far lower than that and most were just there to see the entertainers Hillary brought in. They did this thru careful editing and camera placement.
You cannot tell me CNN had no bias after seeing that. And “real” media outlet would have pointed out the truth of half filled lecture halls.
You shouldn’t. CNN like all the other MSM was so pro Trump that they didn’t and still haven’t reported on all the brown people Trump has murdered. Or all the women he has imprisoned so he can grab their pussies whenever he wants to and worst of all they still haven’t reported on all the countries Trump is currently nuking.
Conservatives have been attacking “mainstream media” for decades, trying to discredit it as being biased (liberal). Their propaganda is paying off, and you can even see their talking points here in this thread. I really don’t see what the media could have done differently to fight back.
It’s actually called Comet Ping Pong, but why let the facts get in the way of a good social media post?
According to the Washington Post story you linked -
The report says in addition to the weapons, police seized a folding knife, a T-shirt, a hooded sweatshirt and denim blue jeans.
“A hooded sweatshirt”?!?! Doesn’t everyone know how dangerous hooded sweatshirt wearers are? Some of the people who share fake news stories on social media surely know they are spreading fiction. They just like to imagine a world that conforms to their views. Or something.
The media outlets could go back to vetting their stories BEFORE they publish them. Or not.
The media outlets could include the basic Who-What-Why-Where-When in their stories. That would make MSM stories credible. Or not.
There used to be a time when reporters were EXPECTED to verify their stories BEFORE the stories would be published.
“If your mother tells you she loves you, check it out with two independent sources.”
But did the media lose credibility due to their own failure to vet their stories and provide details, or because Conservatives have spent decades nit-picking and attacking them in instances when they did make those mistakes?
Or those owned by Rupert Murdoch, Sheldon Adelson, Carlos Slim, Warren Buffett, the Newhouse Brothers, Michael Bloomburg, Morty Zuckerman, the Cox family, and others of the wretched of the earth ?
And the billionaire owners of the British Press, campaigning for an end to the EU and the Welfare State, and anything else that keeps any money out of their grasping little hands ?
The news media has lost credibility because of THEIR failure to include the basics of good journalism - Who, What, Why, Where, and When - in THEIR stories. That was, and is, THEIR choice.
People from all sides of the political issues have complained about the media outlets inserting their own spin, and biases, into their alleged news stories. If the media outlets would have simply supplied the facts, the vetted facts, and let the viewers make up their own minds, the news media outlets would NOT have lost their credibility. YMMV.
I’m not using your whole quote because I’m not focusing on you specifically, so don’t think I’m trying to put words in your mouth, I’m not. But that sentence I’ve heard of lot of during the campaign - he gets all this free publicity, air-time, etc…,. The horror!
I thought the left was on the side of exposing, highlighting, and examining all sides of the coin, exposing for the ludicrously of the extreme. You did just that with Trump. It backfired in the extreme.