Was reading this article on CNN and thinking about the Straight Dope and how we all do this…when someone says something that’s obviously false, our overwhelming reaction here is to fact check, then go into excruciating detail, usually well cited, as to why what was being falsely claimed is false.
CNN is making a case here, and I think I agree, that this very reaction might be playing right into Trump’s hands. I’m unsure whether Trump the bozo understands this and it was all part of his master plan (:dubious:), but not all the folks who are working for and with him are as clueless. Even in the case of Trump himself, while I think he’s an idiot and pretty clueless, he IS a master at media manipulation and well versed in using that forum to modify and shape the reality he wants the world to be.
In the case of the article, CNN is making the case that Trump is basically trolling the media specifically to get a fact checking reaction that will then get folks thinking about all those Muslim attacks (notice, as CNN points out, that there was no mention of attacks done by non-Muslims in that time period, despite the fact that there were several?) so that he (or the folks orchestrating this stuff) can shift the message and perception? I think this is the strategy…Trump basically bables some stuff that’s obviously horseshit and then they use that to still try and get their message and spin out there.
Not sure what the media can do about this, either. Not like they can’t fact check something so obviously false, especially when it tries to put them in a bad light wrt their coverage of these things. Hopefully more media outlets will catch on to what is being said between the lines and point out stuff like:
For debate, what do you all think? Is this what’s happening? If so, what can/should the media do about it?
It’s an excellent point. If I had to bet money, I’d bet it was Bannon rather than Trump who came up with it—but Trump will be greatly enjoying watching the cable shows replay footage of their coverage of the attacks, nonetheless.
We should be concerned about the groundwork Bannon and Flynn are laying for an upcoming “Islamic terrorist attack”–already they have their “blame the judges” line out and in play. Do we want to rely on the dubious proposition that Trump, Bannon, and Flynn have integrity (and therefore wouldn’t create a false flag incident), given how much they stand to benefit from an incident?
Thats an interesting take by CNN and I think they’re right. If this is a deliberate policy by the White House then it’s a clever move. One niggle with your post though. Trump may be many things but a clueless idiot he isn’t and it’s just such underestimations of Trump that have been of huge benefit to him. Clueless idiots don’t get to become masters of media manipulation however hard they try.
I think he’s clueless about many things. Doesn’t mean he’s clueless about everything. I think he’s an idiot in the same way. And I don’t underestimate him. By the same token, though, I don’t want to make him out to be some evil genius either.
At any rate, I was struck once again by this article where Trump is claiming that the murder rate is at a 47 year high. It seems to me to be exactly the same thing…it’s obviously false and easily debunked, but by doing so it draws attention to those murders and brings the focus where Trump et al seem to want it. It’s really very similar to what he and his merry band seem to have done in the article linked in the OP.
There are an unfortunate number of people out there who are famous for being famous. Do you think Kim Kardashian, Paris Hilton and Snooki (to name a few) are genius media manipulators?
How are they shifting perception with this? The only people lapping it up are those who already eschew facts and prefer to cling to their beliefs no matter how provably wrong they are (e.g. insistence Trump won the popular vote).
Trump is not gaining others to his side with this. In fact I think people are getting ever more on their guard about it and instantly wanting to double-check most anything that comes out of his or his administration’s mouth.
I have also seen (admittedly anecdotal) evidence on various boards that a lot of diehard conservatives are refusing to defend Trump and just sort of clam-up when their liberal daughter or friend calls them out on some new absurdity.
Then add in the field day comedy shows like SNL and late night chat shows are having with this. Practically writes itself.
On top of that most reporters are exceptionally skeptical of what the administration is telling them and immediately goes digging for facts nor are they scrambling for access. They really don’t want a bullshit soundbite from Kellyanne Conway anymore and don’t care if she takes them out of her Rolodex.
So his true believers will continue and fine…let them. They are a lost cause anyway. We only need to peel off the edges. Trump barely eked out an electoral victory. Liberals do not need much.
Those people are fantastically successful at the thing they’ve chosen to do, and they continue to defeat the competition (there are a lot of people who’d love to be famous for being famous). They might be morons about many things, but they are incredibly savvy about this. Trump is similar. He’s not a mastermind genius, but he’s very good at gaining attention and framing the story.
I agree the media should be calling out the obvious falsehoods like not covering terrorist attacks (except when it only involves a couple of deaths in an Islamic 3rd world country).
Don’t give Trump a free pass to peddle his propaganda and wishful thinking as fact. There is not acceptable “alternative fact” universe.
In fact, I think the media should make huge sarcastic headlines when Trump goes with an obvious truth. “Trump actually was factually correct today on statement x, world reaction surprised.”
Not really buying these " Trump is playing 3 dimensional chess and doesn’t even know it" stories. I know its in vogue to rag on the great unwashed masses but I don’t think anyone believes San Bernardino wasn’t covered correctly or ignored. Simply, they are still worried about it.
I was thinking about this just this morning. I think Trump is a master at trolling (even genius, if you want) and media manipulation; he has gotten where he is as a result. I don’t think it’s some sort of master plan, though; I think he just likes seeing his name in the news and doesn’t mind saying something dumb to get it. It’s like a 10-year-old boy shoving a stick down an ant hole just to see them scurry.
The problem is that it obviously works and there’s not much we can do to stop it. We could try to ignore him but you can’t ignore the office of the president.
A few years back there was an article somewhere* about how scientists should debate with anti-evolutionists about evolution. The gist of it was that scientists tend to use facts to support their arguments, but anti-evolutionists were mostly afraid that scientists were going to kill their god. There were guidelines about how to debate anti-evolutionists on their own weird playing field.
We need something like that for the pro-Trumpists.
Not even then. It has already cost them their livelihoods.
It is arguable that most conservatives vote against their economic well being in favor of social policies (stop the gays, stop abortion, stop Muslims, etc.).
They will be promised more prosperity…more coal jobs, more steel jobs, more manufacturing jobs, stop immigrants from taking their jobs but no politician can deliver on those promises. They never have and never will (dem or rep). Globalization has seen to it.
Reps just keep telling them that the source of their woes are gays and Mexicans and black people and Muslims…anyone to point a finger at.
You’d think they’d have wised up to it by now but nope…it’s a game of musical chairs and each hopes he/she can stay in the game till the last chair.
Perhaps but liberals will at least take a stab at a social safety net and try to get some retraining done into other industries like solar or wind installations and fund infrastructure projects.
Reps will make sure their house is foreclosed on when they miss the first payment and pilfer their retirement funds and end their health insurance and, if possible, have at their social security.
On this particular subject (terrorist reporting), there’s an answer to this question that everybody is missing again.
What if it were actually a Bad Thing to have over-extensive reporting and scaremongering of terrorist attacks?
The media again fall over themselves proving how extensively they have covered the terrorist attacks. Did anybody realize or argue that perhaps a civilized society shouldn’t have widespread scaremongering over terrorist acts?
Terrorist acts are spectacular and bring in the “clicks and ratings” the media crave. (Fact of life.) But extensive reporting will also cause a segment of the population to start obsessing over them and distort their worldview. (Bad Thing.) Most importantly, it is a big factor in encouraging and inspiring further attacks by people attracted to these things. (Very Bad Thing.)
So maybe there shouldn’t be extensive reporting on terrorist attacks. Maybe the media should argue this is a bad thing, it attracts more attacks and turns us into terrorists ourselves.
It seems there actually exist “media” that get it.
My answer to this more general question is, “the media” should not immediately jump to “Hey, that’s false” or “Oooh! A tweet! Shiny!” but try to develop and articulate a vision of the things that are important to report.
Which is of course a rather hopeless situation with Trump and the American media. Trump provides the spectacle, clicks and ratings which today’s media lives on.