Big day today in print media

[s0me0nesmind1]

Ooo oooh can I play this "WHATABOUT!" card I have laying around????

What about Sinclair doing a coordinated Pro-Trump seance across their stations all at once?

How is that Pro-Trump ? Considering it's talking about fake news being spread on social media, I would think that would be a finger point to pro-russians putting up fake articles and spreading them? Doesn't sound very Pro-trump to me?

 

[MomentsofSanity]

How is that Pro-Trump ? Considering it's talking about fake news being spread on social media, I would think that would be a finger point to pro-russians putting up fake articles and spreading them? Doesn't sound very Pro-trump to me?

Incorrect. They said the words "social media" in the first line. Then went on to talk solely about the media. Your attempt to spin is bullshit.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER #1: The sharing of bias and false news has become all too common on social media.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER #2: On social media. And more alarming, some media outlets publish these same fake...

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER #3: Publish these same fake stories without checking facts first.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER #4: Unfortunately, some members of the media use their...

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER #5: Use their platforms to push their own personal bias and agenda to control...

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER #5 AND UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER #6: To control exactly what people think.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER #7: And this is extremely dangerous to our democracy.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER #5: This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER #4: This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.

 

[fskimospy]

How is that Pro-Trump ? Considering it's talking about fake news being spread on social media, I would think that would be a finger point to pro-russians putting up fake articles and spreading them? Doesn't sound very Pro-trump to me?

If you listen to the whole thing it is very clearly taking about the mainstream media and is basically parroting right wing talking points about media bias. Total propaganda.

Ironically, Sinclair is a great example of media bias as it routinely forces its stations to air right wing opinion pieces dressed up like news reporting.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Incorrect. They said the words "social media" in the first line. Then went on to talk solely about the media. Your attempt to spin is bullshit.

I'm not attempting to spin anything fucktard - I was asking a question. Take that buttplug out for half a second and you might not be so angry.

If you listen to the whole thing it is very clearly taking about the mainstream media and is basically parroting right wing talking points about media bias. Total propaganda.

Ironically, Sinclair is a great example of media bias as it routinely forces its stations to air right wing opinion pieces dressed up like news reporting.

Yeah I watched the whole video, I never really got the sense that they were intending for it to be the MSM /shrug. Just not the picture I got from it.

 

[glenn1]

Glenn, the President didn’t say one particularly scam news paper is the enemy of the people, he said the Press is the enemy of the people. The Press wasn’t defined. I’m assuming to the President that is any outlet or person that gives him coverage he does not like.
The P&L statement of that business is irrelevant in these terms.

Irrelevant? Old-school print journalism is barely relevant as a going economic concern and as important to most people as a paper phone book. Trump is actually flattering them with undeserved criticism that outstates their importance by orders of magnitude. It would be akin to Trump saying "brick and mortar retailers of DVD rentals are the enemy of the people," most people are barely aware that print journalism still exists any more than if there's still a Blockbuster location within 500 miles of them. Your local newspaper is the functional equivalent of the K-Mart that most people haven't stepped foot into in decades and don't even remember still exists.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Irrelevant? Old-school print journalism is barely relevant as a going economic concern and as important to most people as a paper phone book. Trump is actually flattering them with undeserved criticism that outstates their importance by orders of magnitude. It would be akin to Trump saying "brick and mortar retailers of DVD rentals are the enemy of the people," most people are barely aware that print journalism still exists any more than if there's still a Blockbuster location within 500 miles of them. Your local newspaper is the functional equivalent of the K-Mart that most people haven't stepped foot into in decades and don't even remember still exists.

Alright so it’s okay for the President to censor news he doesn’t like. I know you don’t believe that, again I fail to see weather it’s a profitable or unprofitable or growing or declining business has anything to do with this discussion.

 

[Moonbeam]

Hat's off to you bud. Your argument is ironclad and reeks of intelligence! Exactly what I expected!

Remember this thread the next time you're laying in bed in the morning afraid to get out of it because you fear that Trump is going to take over the media Pravda style.

You are so right. I don't have any fear at all that Trump will take over Fox News. I worship Trump of my own free will. No Collusion!

 

[glenn1]

Alright so it’s okay for the President to censor news he doesn’t like. I know you don’t believe that, again I fail to see weather it’s a profitable or unprofitable or growing or declining business has anything to do with this discussion.

Please cite your source for that claim of censorship.

 

[fskimospy]

Irrelevant? Old-school print journalism is barely relevant as a going economic concern and as important to most people as a paper phone book. Trump is actually flattering them with undeserved criticism that outstates their importance by orders of magnitude. It would be akin to Trump saying "brick and mortar retailers of DVD rentals are the enemy of the people," most people are barely aware that print journalism still exists any more than if there's still a Blockbuster location within 500 miles of them. Your local newspaper is the functional equivalent of the K-Mart that most people haven't stepped foot into in decades and don't even remember still exists.

1) Trump was referring to all press, not just the printed press.

2) your idea that newspapers and such are barely relevant is laughably wrong unless you are for some reason not counting those papers’ websites, which would make no sense. The proportion of people who get their news from online sources is growing and the most common place they get it from is professional news organizations. (Or friends, who are often sharing professional news organizations) It’s like saying nobody watches TV anymore because everyone streams it.

 

[boomerang]

Hmm might have to buy a few papers today.

Yeah, you should absolutely do that. They're all running the exact same editorial but if buying a few works for you on some level, I say go for it. Set a budget and stick to it.

Boomer, surely some of the Presidents behavior is concerning to you.

I wish he'd quit with some of the tweeting. But I don't expect a leopard to change its spots and certainly not because I desire it. I don't have any desire to control other people.

.Do you really believe the press is an enemy of the state?

Absolutely not. Why are you attributing your thoughts on what you believe to be my thoughts in this manner? Have you quit beating your wife?

Do you really believe the President has kept his promise to “hire the best people”?

Yes. He has certainly made some bad choices as have all presidents. I am able to read information on the turnover of staff of a preceding president and correlate it to the current president. The key here may be that I am reading the information versus reading one-sided information. Additionally, any progressive that truly thinks a president of a political party that represents the opposition to their views is going to hire people that they approve of is delusional - to put it mildly. I didn't expect 0bama to hire anybody I approved of and that's exactly the way it turned out. And there is a difference between bitching about it and obsessing about it. Brennan's past including him voting for a Communist Party candidate. I was not in the least surprised that 0bama made him CIA director. I didn't like it but obsess over it? Nope.

Shouldn’t the press be allowed to report on clownery that was going on at the EPA?

They weren't? They were muzzled? Kept from reporting? How? Additionally, one man's 'clownery' is another man's wisdom. It's all a matter of perception. I don't care if you think anything is 'clownery' and have no interest in changing your mind. Can you say the same for my views?

I've said countless times here that I post for my own amusement. Anyone that reads what I say or responds to what I say should keep that in mind. The notion that I could ever change anyone's mind here never enters the equation. I have seen people accept arguments here that two days later are back posting their original views many, many times. Take this forum for exactly what it is, entertainment.

 

[zinfamous]

The irony behind the OP and other sympathetic useful idiots, is that while the worship at the alter of the 2nd Amendment, they fail to realize that the authors of the Bill of Rights constructed the 1st 10 amendments such that the 2nd is placed expressly as a clear defense for the rights of the 1st amendment. Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion, freedom to assemble. ...and if these rights are threatened, here is our right and authority to defend those rights.

It's rhetorically obvious, and quite intentional.

I wait for the army of useful Trumptards and retarded agents, storming the White House, threatening to defend the 1st with the 2nd...just as Trump requested them to do back in 2015 and 2016.

 

[glenn1]

The irony behind the OP and other sympathetic useful idiots, is that while the worship at the alter of the 2nd Amendment, they fail to realize that the authors of the Bill of Rights constructed the 1st 10 amendments such that the 2nd is placed expressly as a clear defense for the rights of the 1st amendment. Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion, freedom to assemble. ...and if these rights are threatened, here is our right and authority to defend those rights.

It's rhetorically obvious, and quite intentional.

I wait for the army of useful Trumptards and retarded agents, storming the White House, threatening to defend the 1st with the 2nd...just as Trump requested them to do back in 2015 and 2016.

Yes, because you were a great defender of the 2A, 5A, and other elements of the Bill of Rights when they were under assault and being described as obsolete, or 'dangerous' or whatnot. Even now your side is pretty selective about how you defend or denigrate the 1A, for example you seem to be quite all right with opposing First Amendment rights when it comes to the rich or corporations exercising it.

 

[TheVrolok]

1) Trump was referring to all press, not just the printed press.

2) your idea that newspapers and such are barely relevant is laughably wrong unless you are for some reason not counting those papers’ websites, which would make no sense. The proportion of people who get their news from online sources is growing and the most common place they get it from is professional news organizations. (Or friends, who are often sharing professional news organizations) It’s like saying nobody watches TV anymore because everyone streams it.

Just like the OP, Glenn has obviously not read the actual editorials that were written today as many of them demonstrate just how much of an impact local print news has been in its communities. They're railing against the press, but obviously are not even interested in seeing what it's about. Although that would take some real effort, and they just want to be fed talking points so they can pretend they have something to say.

 

[glenn1]

Just like the OP, Glenn has obviously not read the actual editorials that were written today as many of them demonstrate just how much of an impact local print news has been in its communities. They're railing against the press, but obviously are not even interested in seeing what it's about. Although that would take some real effort, and they just want to be fed talking points so they can pretend they have something to say.

I did read it and found it full of self-important blather. If the press (like Trump) is so thin skinned they can't handle any criticism that's their problem not mine. I'm still waiting for @Fanatical Meat to back up his claim of censorship or anyone else to come up with something more substantial than our dim-bulb POTUS expressing his dislike for the press using ill-chosen words. If anything I think actions like trying to extradict Julian Assange for the crime of committing journalism (which predates Trump) is a bigger threat to the press than anything Trump has done.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Please cite your source for that claim of censorship.

Admittedly I’m speculating but it is a safe speculation to say the first step is to declare the Press an enemy of the People. There are tons of tweets from the President, there are plenty of sources. Here is one from last year

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/17/business/trump-calls-the-news-media-the-enemy-of-the-people.html

 

[fskimospy]

Yes, because you were a great defender of the 2A, 5A, and other elements of the Bill of Rights when they were under assault and being described as obsolete, or 'dangerous' or whatnot.

The second amendment is not under assault. Right wing hysteria about common sense regulation is not to be taken seriously.

Even now your side is pretty selective about how you defend or denigrate the 1A, for example you seem to be quite all right with opposing First Amendment rights when it comes to the rich or corporations exercising it.

That’s because corporations should not have first amendment rights as they are legal fictions and not people but that’s a larger discussion.

 

[TheVrolok]

I did read it and found it full of self-important blather. If the press (like Trump) is so thin skinned they can't handle any criticism that's their problem not mine. I'm still waiting for @Fanatical Meat to back up his claim of censorship or anyone else to come up with something more substantial than our dim-bulb POTUS expressing his dislike for the press using ill-chosen words. If anything I think actions like trying to extradict Julian Assange for the crime of committing journalism (which predates Trump) is a bigger threat to the press than anything Trump has done.

Read "it?" LOL. This literally just proves my point. This is an effort put forth by over 100 papers, it's not a single editorial to read, it's over 100. How ignorant.

 

[fskimospy]

I did read it and found it full of self-important blather. If the press (like Trump) is so thin skinned they can't handle any criticism that's their problem not mine.

They have handled near constant bad faith criticism from conservatives for decades now just fine. It’s different when the government labels you the enemy of the people.

I'm still waiting for @Fanatical Meat to back up his claim of censorship or anyone else to come up with something more substantial than our dim-bulb POTUS expressing his dislike for the press using ill-chosen words. If anything I think actions like trying to extradict Julian Assange for the crime of committing journalism (which predates Trump) is a bigger threat to the press than anything Trump has done.

Trump specifically talked about revoking the licenses of news media that criticizes him.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...bc-tv-licenses-after-story-on-nuclear-buildup

A 43% plurality of Republicans are now okay with the government shutting down news sites it disagrees with.

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/americans-views-media-2018-08-07

 

[glenn1]

Read "it?" LOL. This literally just proves my point. This is an effort put forth by over 100 papers, it's not a single editorial to read, it's over 100. How ignorant.

They're running identical editorials, that's the entire point of the OP.

Over 300 newspapers are going to publish the same anti-Trump editorial today.

 

[glenn1]

They have handled near constant bad faith criticism from conservatives for decades now just fine. It’s different when the government labels you the enemy of the people.

Trump specifically talked about revoking the licenses of news media that criticizes him.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...bc-tv-licenses-after-story-on-nuclear-buildup

A 43% plurality of Republicans are now okay with the government shutting down news sites it disagrees with.

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/americans-views-media-2018-08-07

Like the former secretary of state? I guess it's OK to have companies or sectors of the economy be your stated "enemy" but somehow the press gets complete exemption from that risk.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/democratic-debate-which-enemy-are-you-most-proud-of/

Whoops that's not exactly true either: Obama admin - “We’re going to treat them the way we would treat an opponent,” she says. “We don’t need to pretend that this is the way that legitimate news organizations behave.”

https://www.newsweek.com/when-obama-went-war-fox-news-632424

 

[dyna]

The press is currently the last line of defense against the tyranny of this administration. It’s not supposed to be that way. Our other elected leaders are supposed to hold the executive accountable but they have abandoned their loyalty to the constitution for political self preservation and political power.

Don’t believe me that the press is the last line of defense?

Take the border separation policy and how that played out. Trump would have never backed off that morally appalling policy without the free press going to the border and exposing the atrocities of this administration. Without the public outrage and subsequent political consequences, there would likely be thousands more kids torn from their parents.

The only thing keeping the Trump Administration from getting away with wholesale genocide is the accountability the free press provides for the American people.

It’s depressing and sad this is where we are but the Trump supports need to see the implications of Trump’s war on the media.

The media should report facts and not act as a last line of defense for a political party. Your example about border separation was technically even a pre-Trump policy that was not heavily enforced. Trumps failure is that he chose to interpret the policy as written, to force immigration reform, which I think we can all agree needs to happen because of failures resulting in the separation of families, poor accommodations for illegal immigrants/asylum seekers, slow court rulings, in addition immigration problem is only shared by a handful of states but is a national issue and simply that the existing policies/laws are completely unenforceable or just completely ignored. The media could do a lot better at presenting the problem such as the immigration policy rather than fanning the flame of something that always existed. Sure, Trump should not have been so heavy handed but the fact is the media has done NOTHING to solve the problem. What you described is actually a failure of the media not a success.

 

[umbrella39]

Ooo oooh can I play this "WHATABOUT!" card I have laying around????

What about Sinclair doing a coordinated Pro-Trump seance across their stations all at once?

End Of Fucktard's Thread....

 

[fskimospy]

Like the former secretary of state? I guess it's OK to have companies or sectors of the economy be your stated "enemy" but somehow the press gets complete exemption from that risk.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/democratic-debate-which-enemy-are-you-most-proud-of/

Whoops that's not exactly true either: Obama admin - “We’re going to treat them the way we would treat an opponent,” she says. “We don’t need to pretend that this is the way that legitimate news organizations behave.”

https://www.newsweek.com/when-obama-went-war-fox-news-632424

Yes, saying 'I oppose these people' is approximately twenty light years from 'these people are the enemies of America'.

I mean jesus christ. What did you think, the president or Clinton were supposed to say 'I don't oppose anyone!'

 

[Hugo Stiglitz]

Your example about border separation was technically even a pre-Trump policy that was not heavily enforced.

No, Trump made a policy change that actively sought to separate children from their parents crossing as a DETERRENT. Jeff Sessions came out and declared this policy change and the reasoning behind it.

That is all Trump Administration.

Moreover, the FACT that public pressure forced Trump to backtrack to the Obama policy also proves this.

 

[glenn1]

Yes, saying 'I oppose these people' is approximately twenty light years from 'these people are the enemies of America'.

I mean jesus christ. What did you think, the president or Clinton were supposed to say 'I don't oppose anyone!'

Wow he said words that were said in a meaner way than words by his predecessor expressing the same basic sentiment. Do you need a fainting couch? Who knows, maybe next Trump will start calling the press "poopyheads" and then we'll truly know the facism is upon us.