The Media Industry

Mr. Deez said:
Superb points all the way around. I think you draw the line well. I've heard that there is a conflict in journalism circles about whether a journalist's job is to report both sides of an issue or political race and let the public decide or whether it's to report the "truth" (as the journalist sees it). In the literal sense, I think a journalist should report the truth and call BS on a candidate who tells a falsehood. He or she shouldn't allow something that is factually false to go unchallenged.

However, there are two problems with this mindset in the context of political reporting. First, the modern media doesn't know what a "fact" is anymore. They will deem certain things to be facts that are actually opinions that are simply unquestioned by political elites or just unverifiable. Politifact (or Politifiction as I sometimes call them) is notorious for this.

Second, the media usually applies a double standard in how they report the "truth" and how they characterize a falsehood when they do call one. Hillary wasn't held to anywhere near as high of a standard for honesty as Trump was. Furthermore, when she was caught in a falsehood, it was usually framed as a "misstatement," an "inaccuracy," or an "inconsistency." What term was usually used to describe Trump's alleged false statements? They were routinely called the far more judgmental "lies."
Click to expand...
Deez, there is a term for this: confirmation bias
 
Mr. Deez said:
I've wondered the same thing. They never make any distinctions among black voters. It's pretty much assumed that they all think alike.
Click to expand...

Assuming positive intent, is the minority simply too small? For example, African Americans make up 13% of the voting eligible population. Given their challenges in achieving post-HS education, does it make sense to split that 13%? Whereas Whites make up just under 50%. That's a very large block to not split.
 
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/14/politics/trump-gay-marriage-abortion-supreme-court/index.html

His answers could leave conservatives worried.

Trump indicated he's "fine" with the high court's opinion legalizing same-sex marriage and called it "settled," but committed to appointing justices who want to change the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling affirming abortion rights.

The inconsistency in the question -- what is settled law? -- is sure to concern judicial conservatives who fear he may not live up to his promise to fill the empty Supreme Court seat with someone in the mold of their hero, Justice Antonin Scalia.
Click to expand...
Hahaha. Why in the world would conservatives be worried over these answers?

"Hey Reverend...let me give you 2 scenarios: A) Same-sex marriage is legal and Planned Parenthood gets more funding and late term abortions continue, or B) Same-sex marriage is legal and Roe v Wade is reversed - Reverend which one would you and Jesus prefer?"

Hahaha, yeah CNN you got that one right!!!!

And by the way, Trump has been clear about his empathy for the LGBTQ community from the beginning. Conservatives already knew this. Do they think conservatives are so stupid to forfeit a chance to overturn Roe v Wade because of same sex marriage?

What is settled? Don't strain yourself thinking about it too hard. It means while conservatives have opinions, they don't care about other people's sexual preferences as much you think they do.
 
Last edited:
Seattle Husker said:
Assuming positive intent, is the minority simply too small? For example, African Americans make up 13% of the voting eligible population. Given their challenges in achieving post-HS education, does it make sense to split that 13%? Whereas Whites make up just under 50%. That's a very large block to not split.
Click to expand...

Thirteen percent is a lot of people when we're talking about a large population, particularly when you consider that the black population is pretty concentrated. Also, if you look at the statistics, plenty of them do attend and even graduate from college - enough to be politically relevant in swing states.

Also, I'd be more receptive to this argument if this sort of thing was isolated, but media outlets follow all kinds of guidelines to discuss racial matters in ways that don't assign negative connotations to minorities - essentially self-imposed speech codes. Talking about people in the context of being non-college educated or "poorly educated" obviously has negative connotations.
 
texas_ex2000 said:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/14/politics/trump-gay-marriage-abortion-supreme-court/index.html

Hahaha. Why in the world would conservatives be worried over these answers?

"Hey Reverend...let me give you 2 scenarios: A) Same-sex marriage is legal and Planned Parenthood gets more funding and late term abortions continue, or B) Same-sex marriage is legal and Roe v Wade is reversed - Reverend which one would you and Jesus prefer?"

Hahaha, yeah CNN you got that one right!!!!

And by the way, Trump has been clear about his empathy for the LGBTQ community from the beginning. Conservatives already knew this. Do they think conservatives are so stupid to forfeit a chance to overturn Roe v Wade because of same sex marriage?

What is settled? Don't strain yourself thinking about it too hard. It means while conservatives have opinions, they don't care about other people's sexual preferences as much you think they do.
Click to expand...

More crappy discussion on legal topics from the media with sloppy discussion from legal scholars. Obergefell (same-sex marriage) and Roe (abortion) were very different decisions about very different issues, and frankly both politically and legally Obergefell is MUCH easier to defend than Roe is.
 
Mr. Deez said:
More crappy discussion on legal topics from the media with sloppy discussion from legal scholars. Obergefell (same-sex marriage) and Roe (abortion) were very different decisions about very different issues, and frankly both politically and legally Obergefell is MUCH easier to defend than Roe is.
Click to expand...
There is no defense of Roe v Wade
 
Mr. Deez said:
Thirteen percent is a lot of people when we're talking about a large population, particularly when you consider that the black population is pretty concentrated. Also, if you look at the statistics, plenty of them do attend and even graduate from college - enough to be politically relevant in swing states.

Also, I'd be more receptive to this argument if this sort of thing was isolated, but media outlets follow all kinds of guidelines to discuss racial matters in ways that don't assign negative connotations to minorities - essentially self-imposed speech codes. Talking about people in the context of being non-college educated or "poorly educated" obviously has negative connotations.
Click to expand...

Based on those numbers you'd be talking ~2.5% of our population is Educated AA vs. 10.4% is non-college (no bachelors). As of the 2010 census there was 39 million AA's. Not sure how much of those are voter eligible.

Clearly there is a bias to not point out that 80+% of AA's have no college degrees.
 
mchammer said:
There is no defense of Roe v Wade
Click to expand...

If you accept the Left's method of constitutional interpretation, the Constitution essentially turns into a subjective free-for-all. Accordingly, you can defend pretty much anything, including abortion under Roe. The problem is that under such methods, the court system is effectively not bound by the written law but by the court's own policy preferences. It's dangerous.
 
CxRmeIjUcAAKYEE.jpg
 
What the hell? The guy gets dinner with his family. He's with his Secret Service detail. And this indicates "With his Tuesday night actions, the Trump Administration is shaping up to be the least accessible to the public and the press in modern history." Reporters are complaining about how he doesn't understand this affects national security? Maybe the Secret Service doesn't want you morons tweeting protestors where he's having dinner. This article is not an editorial, it's supposed to be a regular report. And there are plenty more of these from the other networks.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/201...d-steak-dinner-incoming-admin-already-n684511

As Trump Leaves Press Behind for Steak Dinner, Incoming Admin Already Showing Lack of Transparency
In a highly unusual move, President-elect Donald Trump on Tuesday night left his Manhattan residence without notifying the reporters covering him or giving any indication of where he was going.

The maneuver seemed to deliberately limit access to the media.

The only way the press eventually ascertained his whereabouts was after a Bloomberg reporter, who happened to be dining at the 21 Club, tweeted a photo of Trump and some of his transition team in the Midtown steakhouse.

Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks later told NBC News. "He is having dinner with his family."

Wife Melania, daughter Ivanka Trump, her husband Jared Kushner, sons Donald Jr. and Eric Trump were all at the restaurant.

This came after Hicks had told his press pool the day had ended, and the only indication of his departure was an unannounced motorcade. Trump's communications team did not respond to emails from the pooler requesting guidance.

With his Tuesday night actions, the Trump Administration is shaping up to be the least accessible to the public and the press in modern history.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
The poor, poor Press. All they do is report accurately on the days events and the character of politicians without a hint of political partisanship, and yet Trump has the unmitigated gall to not tell them where he is going to dinner. What is the world coming to? How will we overcome such mistreatment of honest, hardworking members of the Press?
 
Haha. "Protective pool," "security," "national interest." Like the media is protective of Trump. Haha. The Secret Service knows all the time where he is, and it is a matter that is always and will always be recorded in the official White House and Secret Service record. The press does not need to be told in advance if he wants to have dinner with his family down the block.

How in the world, Rachel Maddow, was national security threatened last night. You know what threatens national security? Un-f'in-secured private e-mail servers used to send and receive classified e-mail.

Rachel, here's something liberals love - being progressive and moving past "traditions." Well, old traditions, especially as they relate to the media, are being thrown away for new ones that better serve the people. A good journalistic 2nd page story might be how Trump's protocol with the press pool will differ from previous administrations, but that might be too legitimate for you guys to do.

They talk to you like children.

 
Last edited:
Joe Fan said:
Where was this attitude the last 8 years?
Click to expand...
I agree. For Trump, the transition is in "chaos". Would the same characterization be made for Hillary? Doubtful.

Media has already been harder in Trump in a week then they were on Obama for 8 years.
 
Seattle Husker said:
My attitude has been consistent through Republican and Democrat administrations. Blatant false stories are abhorrent and I'll continue to rail against them as propaganda rather than reporting.
Click to expand...

What about today's Obama/Merkel presser?
You have not complained about the questions from the US media
The question i heard today was -- "Mr. President, how can we possibly shove our lips any further up your butt?
 
Joe Fan said:
Of course, none of that is true
Trump himself is making all the calls, and the only "leaks" comong out are from folks who have been told they will not be on board.
Hardly chaotic
Click to expand...
I agree. That's what I was saying is that the media characterization of chaos is bs. They would not have said that about Obama or Clinton. Theirs would have been well thought out, organized, etc.
 
Joe Fan said:
Of course, none of that is true
Trump himself is making all the calls, and the only "leaks" comong out are from folks who have been told they will not be on board.
Hardly chaotic
Click to expand...

Appointing Chris Christie to head his transition team then reversing course immediately after election couldn't have been planned. Adding Mike Rogers (and others) onto the National Security transition team, inviting them to meetings then promptly uninviting them and removing them from the transition team wasn't planned either.

The media is likely exaggerating the transition challenges but its certainly not completely orderly compared to previous administrations. That's not a surprise though when loyalty appears to be weighed above all else. Of course, there is weighted loyalty too as Trump's loyalty to Kushner certainly outweighs his loyalty to Christie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top