Media coverage of Trump's inauguration and subsequent reign as president.

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
1

The media, from the day that the donald descended the escalator, has done nothing but to egg the man on, and give him free publicity. It doesn’t matter whether they are making fun of him, criticizing him, or lauding him, it all works out the same way both to him and to his ardent supporters. They lap it all up. Any form of attention is like a drug to them.

The one way the media could treat him that would get under his skin is to simply ignore him. For four years, never uttering the name “Donald Trump”, or any of its derivatives, both positive and negative. If there is a story that is important, and the commander in chief is involved, the media can refer to “the president” without using his name or image.

In fact, the best way I can see for the media to cover the inauguration is to do a cut away. Get Beiber or the Kardashians or something to make some commotion (not at the inauguration, rather on the other side of the country). Snooky could be driving 3 mph over the limit with a tail light out and get pulled over. Immediately, “breaking news” away from the inauguration, (best if it is timed to be an hour or so before the swearing in), and return to the inauguration, already in progress, to watch the small crowd finish filing out.

2

Fantasies.

3

Would you also like a pony?

4

Ayup. I do fantasize about living in a country with responsible leadership and media. The reality is not so depressing as those who staunchly defend that reality.

Do you think that things ever improve because people are happy with the way things are?

Okay, but only if it is a pretty pink princess pony.

Actually, what I would like is to live in a country that does not have a mockery of a president.

Usually, I would prefer that we not have a president so mock-worthy, but given the circumstances, just not being continually reminded by it every time I turn on the TV would be a good start.

5

The role of journalism is to inform people. An intentional campaign by news sources to make sure people are not informed about President Trump is a betrayal of the most basic foundation of representational democracy: that the people ought to know what the fuck is going on in the world.

Other than that, great plan.

6

If you read the OP, you’ll see that I have no problem with talking about stories involving the president, just that they would be referred to as “the president.”

I think by this time, people know his name, if not using his name to refer to the person in the office is a “betrayal of the most basic foundation of representational democracy” then I am not sure what foundations you are talking about.
ETA: And do you think that the media needs to report on his every tweet too? Or would skipping that also chip away at those foundations?

7

You said that stories had to meet some threshold of importance before the news would cover it. My interpretation is that stories like his feud with Meryl Streep would not make the cut. I think the public should know that the President is picking stupid, pointless Twitter fights for no reason whatsoever.

Why should the media cover up his petulance?

8

I’d like to live in a world where the President is simply not powerful enough to be big news. But I don’t live in that world.

9

I agree. And I feel the same way about Congress too.

10

My sincerest hope is that Trump, as president, will get far more media attention than he can handle.

My optimism is soured by the fact that Pence will be the next in line if the orange muppet resigns in a fit of petulance.

11

The only scenario where this could possibly work is one in which all, or at least an overwhelming majority, of media outlets can be convinced to do the same thing, which is about as likely to be effective as calls of “do not feed the troll” are on this message board.

12

I find the premise of the OP kinda funny. There is this underlying assumption that “the media” hates Trump as much as the poster does and is looking for any and all ways to undermine his presidency.

Although I can’t blame the poster for making that assumption since for a lot of “media” it’s probably true. But they can’t follow the poster’s fantasy suggestions without looking like idiots and being undercut by their colleagues who may not share the hatred.

13

There are stories that are important about the office of the president, and what that office is doing. For instance, I hear about President Obama maybe once a week or so, probably less often than that, as he does something that affects people around the country or the globe. I doubt I really need to keep closer track of him, and if I do, there’s always the internet upon which, I can choose to delve deeper.

We get daily and more than daily reports on the president-elect. I can’t avoid them if I want to, if I am wanting to be informed about news at all.

It is getting to the point where the electorate is less informed about the state of things overall, because of all the attention upon the winner of the last presidential election. It crams out time for more relevant news, as well as increasing the chances of people just turning it off. I know I am pretty close to that point.

The media does not need to cover-up his petulance, but they don’t need to cover it 24/7 either. “This just in! Cranky baby needs his diapers changed!”

I don’t know that that is possible. It’s like trying to make a black hole go away by filling it up. He loves the attention, positive or negative. As long as someone is talking about him, he’s won.

Whichever one cuts away from the inauguration, or chooses not to cover it all, will be high on my list for the next four years.

Get enough people on board, and the media gets on board as well.

If people flock to the outlets that are not sensationalizing the news, then the news will stop being sensationalized.

14

Yep, and, alas, yep. I really miss the old National Lampoon: they’d be satirizing this guy from hell to breakfast. But we’ve still got Doonesbury and SNL.

15

I’m anxiously awaiting the first time he gets hit with major media/public backlash with no way to spin it to his advantage. I can just imagine the tweetstorm that would follow a 9/11-type disaster (not that I’m awaiting that, or want that to happen. But there’d be no way for him to avoid major scrutiny and criticism).

16

Yeah, all that hate. I must be such a hater, huh.

Or maybe I just am tired of hearing about Trump on every media outlet I see, every single day.

I am not looking to “undermine” the presidency, the way that the republicans fought to undermine the president-elect’s predecessor, as the office of the president is something that needs to be filled by something with some level of stability. I have no hatred of the man, so I do not feel that the media should “share” my hatred either. I just have concerns about the stability of the person that is taking the oath of office of one of the most powerful jobs in the world.

With the media constantly fulfilling his dream of being in the perpetual spotlight, he finds himself saying even more and more outrageous and harmful stuff.

For all of you that keep saying “He’s not even president yet, what can he do?” Well, it’s pretty obvious that he has had a pretty decent impact on our relations with other countries already, and he has taken credit for things that have happened. After Friday, what will your excuse be?

Rather than undermining the presidency, I am trying to improve it. If he is not constantly being echoed and followed by the media, he might actually start thinking before he speaks. Do you consider that to be a bad thing?

If we had elected a heroin addict to office, do you think we should continue to encourage his suppliers, or ask them to cut it out? Do you think that an addiction intervention for our highest office is a matter of “hatred” and “undermining”?

Now, I’m not a huge fan of the man, and if it takes him the little bit of emotional pain of realizing that everyone’s not paying attention to him anymore to grow up and act like an adult, then I will cheer on that pain, but I do not in any way endorse this action do to my “hatred” or wish to “undermine” the office of the president, that interpretation is entirely projected from your own position that disagreement equals hatred.

17

Some of us have not the faintest respect for any president already: a president is just a politician who got lucky.

Still, creating a mystique around Trump as ‘He Who Must Not Be Named’ may enhance his appeal, such as it is, and create strange cults in DC similar to the one at Red Hook.

18

There’s tons of news about celebrities, sports, cars, fashion, guns, technology, and a jillion other things that I just don’t read. Sure, it pops up on my news subscriptions, but I just ignore them. You’re suggesting that you don’t have to be put in the difficult position of having to ignore something. [World’s smallest violin.]

The public is also too distracted with the news reports about celebrities, sports, cars, fashion, guns, technology, and a jillion other things that I just don’t read. And the world is going to hell because other people have bad priorities! They should apologize!

19

And, maybe it’s just perception, but all that other news is covered significantly less in order to make more “Trump Time”.

I know President-elect Obama was not covered in this level of 24/7 coverage, and I doubt that it’ll stop once the inauguration is over.

In any case, I am not issuing a decree, or a command. I am not asking others to issue such. I am just making a suggestion.

Now, my only decree on that suggestion would be that the media that does stop covering trump would be the one getting my eyeballs. The media that continues to cover him would stop getting my eyeballs.

The electorate only has so much time in a day. And they want that info about sports and fashion and such. So, you usually divide a news segment into those different parts, covering different pieces over the course of the broadcast (whether it be a 1/2 hour news cast or a 24 hour news channel). So, they aren’t going to skimp on their sports, their fashion, or their car news because Trump is more in the news, they are going to skimp more on their political news, because that’s the type of news that he is.

So, he is displacing the time and energy of the newscasters to report the political news, and he is displacing the time and patience of the people to watch the political news, which, of course, in the end, leaves them more poorly informed as to the state of their community, their country, and their world, and puts them into a position where they may not make the choices that further their goals.

20

I will agree with you, with one caveat;

It would be nice if the media would only cover the important things about the forthcoming Trump presidency, and would refrain from breathlessly repeating in 36 point font the latest twitter spews from the atrophied brain pan of the Trumpster.

Sure - report the important shit, and leave Trump’s crying and whining about the latest celebrity or Broadway play alone.

And yes, I know this is not likely to happen, and I want a pony too.