The Media Industry

Brad Austin said:
At the very least it portrays our new prez to the Arab world as a strong leader to respect. A huge image reversal from the last prez they knew was weak and hollow.
Click to expand...

Positive portrayal of our POTUS is welcome. Let's be clear why they weren't supportive of Obama though. Rightly or wrongly, he was traveling around promoting the Arab Spring which was a direct threat to the strongman power of the Arab elite.

Personally, I think having Kings/Dictators ruling in the ME has it's benefits. These individuals don't remotely ascribe to our fundamental values (freedom) but I'm willing to look the other way in favor of safety/stability. The risk is, we end militarily propping up allies that could become enemies in the future. I don't mind selling our technology to the Saudi's. Heck, the moment they flip to the "enemy" they can no longer get the parts and service they need to maintain their arsenal. Teaching them how to manufacture it is dumb though which seems to be core to the arms deal that was announced.
 
Seattle Husker said:
Positive portrayal of our POTUS is welcome. Let's be clear why they weren't supportive of Obama though. Rightly or wrongly, he was traveling around promoting the Arab Spring which was a direct threat to the strongman power of the Arab elite.

Personally, I think having Kings/Dictators ruling in the ME has it's benefits. These individuals don't remotely ascribe to our fundamental values (freedom) but I'm willing to look the other way in favor of safety/stability. The risk is, we end militarily propping up allies that could become enemies in the future. I don't mind selling our technology to the Saudi's. Heck, the moment they flip to the "enemy" they can no longer get the parts and service they need to maintain their arsenal. Teaching them how to manufacture it is dumb though which seems to be core to the arms deal that was announced.
Click to expand...
In the interest of adding clarity while we are being clear:

During my time in Egypt, I repeatedly encountered similar responses: President Trump is respected and seen as a welcome change to his predecessor. And his first foreign tour represents a longed-for shift in foreign policy from the eight years of the Obama Doctrine, which was viewed in the Middle East as a policy of pandering to the Shia Islamist superpower of Iran at the expense of traditional Sunni allies.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017...-hes-already-winning-more-than-obama-did.html
 
They lost their big stars--O'Reilly and Megyn Kelly, even Gretchen Van Sustern. The latter 2 especially had a decent balance to their reporting Then they even cancelled Red Eye.
So, it's basically the idiots on "The 5", Hannity and Tucker Carlson over and over again during prime time and in to the night. Back to back re-runs.
Although the headlines are trumpeting, "A Return to Truth: Fox Slides to Third", it's nothing more than losing your big draws to your audience, and having no talent to fill the vacuum left behind.
Martha Macallum is pathetic, I almost feel sorry for her as she tries to do her job. She interrupts guests, and makes hard cuts to commercial in the middle of a point. She is in way over her head.
And smarmy Charlie Watters...ugh.
 
Last edited:
Hollandtx said:
Martha Macallum is pathetic, I almost feel sorry for her as she tries to do her job. She interrupts guests, and makes hard cuts to commercial in the middle of a point. She is in way over her head.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I agree with pathetic or in way over her head, but I have been annoyed by the abrupt "I gotta go" also. Why ask a question requiring an in-depth answer when you have 10 seconds left?
 
If you only got CNN or MSNBC for news, you might not even know there was a major terrorist event just a couple of days ago.
 
theiioftx said:
If you only got CNN or MSNBC for news, you might not even know there was a major terrorist event just a couple of days ago.
Click to expand...
When I saw the FoxNews feed when leaving the office yesterday I immediately turned on CNN on Sirius radio and later watched Anderson360 coverage on Sling only to hear wall-to-wall coverage of the Manchester incident.

Here is CNN's site right now. Notice the far left which is always their breaking news area.
CNN 5_24_2017.PNG
 
Seattle Husker said:
When I saw the FoxNews feed when leaving the office yesterday I immediately turned on CNN on Sirius radio and later watched Anderson360 coverage on Sling only to hear wall-to-wall coverage of the Manchester incident.

Here is CNN's site right now. Notice the far left which is always their breaking news area.
CNN 5_24_2017.PNG
Click to expand...
I was speaking of television. Literally every time I flip there it is 100% Russia investigation. Today there has been zero television coverage.
 
theiioftx said:
I was speaking of television. Literally every time I flip there it is 100% Russia investigation. Today there has been zero television coverage.
Click to expand...

I can't speak to the television coverage past Monday evening and I don't have Foxnews in my Sling package. As of this moment, Foxnews.com has also pushed this out of its primary coverage. With that said, it's been 48hrs since the incident and there is anything but a dearth of news with Trump's travels abroad, the controversies raging in D.C., the CBO score of the House version of the AHCA, and the administrations budget proposals. That's a lot of news to deliver to those of us with minimal attention spans. :)
 
Fox News TV has been 75% Manchester and 25% Brennan testimony/Russia today. They have not pushed the real problems of the world aside to push the anti trump agenda like all other news. Even the Harvard study supports this. CNN should lose their rights as journalists.
 
Here is more evidence confirming that ESPN's doubling down on its left wing agenda has hurt the network as an increasing number of Republicans are changing the channel.

Deep Root Analytics saw a giant swing in the network’s audience being more Republican to more Democratic in 2016. In 2015, ESPN’s average audience skewed from 12% (across Early News, Late Fringe, and Overnight coverage) to 21% more Republican than Democratic (Early Morning). In 2016, however, ESPN’s audience became significantly less Republican across every daypart where Daytime was only 2% more R than D. Late Fringe and Overnight programming became 10 and 12% D than R.

The same is true of ESPN’s other networks like ESPN2, ESPN News, ESPN Deportes, and ESPNU

In April, ESPN laid off over 100 of their on-air talent including personalities, analysts, and journalists. Veteran anchor Linda Cohn was one of the few there who seemed to get it

“I felt that the old school viewers were put in a corner and not appreciated with all these other changes,” she said. “And they forgot their core. You can never forget your core and be grateful for your core group.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...blems-linda-cohn-says/?utm_term=.de0410636f33​

Deep-Root-ESPN-Partisanship-Graph-788x1024.png


http://www.deeprootanalytics.com/20...political-in-2016-it-lost-republican-viewers/
 
For the first time in the history of the United States, the former CIA Director, former Nat Sec Adviser and the former UN Ambassador were all subpoenaed by the Congress

Yet the paper of record in DC did not even cover it

Why?

DBP-3jSXUAAPrGd.jpg


DBP-3jnW0AIwvk5.jpg
 
Word is that Sen. Lindsey Graham is pissed because he was told by the Intel Comm that Samantha Powers & Susan Rice "unmasked" his name in incident surveillance.

I guess its always different when it happens to you
 
Joe Fan said:
I guess its always different when it happens to you
Click to expand...

I think they also unmasked Rand Paul who's made a career waving his perma boner for ending illegal surveillance.

Wouldn't want those two fired up and aligned on this one if I was an unmasker.

Though they could've unmasked McCain and leaked pics of him wearing 'I love the Viet Cong' panties and he'd still claim Russia did it. :smile1:
 
This guy makes a good point that I had not thought of as to why the MSM has turned so hard left. The discussion here is about ESPN but I think (and IIRC he says) this is true of all media - that they are so bent on catering to social media (ie Facebook, Twitter, et al), which is HQ'd in Silicon Valley, that they are adopting "San Francisco values", as he puts it, which puts them to the left of their former NY values:

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top